Bubble Size Reduction Using Mesh Bubble Breakers in Two-Phase Vertical Co-Flow
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bubble breakers have been shown to reduce the bubble size and hence increasing the bubble surface-to-volume ratio facilitating higher mass transfer. We report on an experimental study investigating the effect of mesh-type bubble breaker on two-phase co-flow in a vertical column. A range of gas-liquid flow rates ratios (GLR) has been considered that covers the two-phase regimes from bubbly flow to slug flow. A vertical glass tube was used as the experimental apparatus which provides full optical access. A high speed imaging system was used to capture the flow dynamics for bubble characterization. The results show that the bubble size generated by the mesh bubble breaker is greatly affected by the pore size. For a bubbly flow regime, the initial bubble size was reduced by approximately 60%–70% for a pore size of 1mm and by about 45%–50% for a pore size of 4mm. It is found that the transition from bubbly flow to slug flow can be affected by the mesh bubble breaker. The results show that in general, the mesh bubble breaker increases the GLR limit for the transition from bubbly to slug flow.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".