MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2312818049 · doi:10.1115/fedsm2005-77438

Observations Regarding the Nature of Oil-Water Phase Inversion and Instability in Laminar Flow Through Circular Tubes Containing Static Mixers

2005· article· en· W2312818049 on OpenAlexaff
Arun Sood, Eric L. Cheluget, U. Karnik

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Mixing
Canadian institutionsNova Chemicals (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLaminar flowMechanicsStatic mixerInstabilityPhase inversionMaterials scienceTwo-phase flowEmulsionPressure dropVolumetric flow rateThermodynamicsTurbulenceFlow (mathematics)ChemistryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Liquid-liquid emulsions will undergo a phase inversion, in which the dispersed phase becomes the continuous phase and vice versa, under certain conditions. A phase inversion is not a smooth transition and an emulsion close to the inversion point may oscillate back and forth between the oil-in-water (O/W) and water-in-oil (W/O) forms, creating flow instabilities that may be detrimental in certain industrial situations. The results of laboratory laminar flow experiments in which an aqueous and an organic liquid phase are emulsified as they flow through a circular tube containing a commercial high-shear static mixer are discussed. As the concentration of the dispersed phase and/or its flow rate is increased, flow instabilities are initiated in the test-section and are measured as fluctuations in pressure drop. The intensity of these fluctuations reaches a maximum as the liquid-liquid system approaches the phase inversion point. Once a stable phase inversion is achieved, the fluctuations subside. This phenomenon was observed over a wide range of viscosity ratios for the two liquid phases, but was absent for low viscosity ratios and low-shear static mixers.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.215 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicFluid Dynamics and MixingFrench-language works237,207