Bibliographic record
Abstract
Evaporation of paint solvents is a significant part of a automobile's environmental footprint. Relationships between evaporation of droplets and application parameters were developed to optimize the spray process and reduce the environmental footprint by reducing paint waste in the booth. A Phase Doppler Anemometer (PDA) was used to calculate the evaporation of spray from a rotary bell atomizer (RBA). The change in volume flux between consecutive planes was found to be significant. The total evaporation when spraying water was 0.93 cm3/s and 0.46 cm3/s between 22.5-30.0 cm and 30.0-37.5 cm axial distances, respectively. Tests were performed to determine the effects on evaporation of water spray for three rotary bell atomizer operational parameters: shaping air flow rate, bell speed and liquid flow rate. Evaporation rate increased with higher flow rate and bell speed, but no statistically significant effects were obtained for shaping air flow rate or interactions between parameters. For clearcoat sprays, evaporation increased with increasing bell speed and increase of flow rate from 100 to 200 cm3/s. The combination of higher electrostatic potential and lower flow rate decreased the mean particle diameter. Particle mean velocity increased with increasing bell speed and flow rate. The trend of mean diameter decreasing with an increasing bell speed that was found in water and clearcoat, was also found for basecoat. However, the measurements with basecoat had a low statistical viability, and were deemed unsuitable for calculating the flux through parallel planes, which is required for calculating the evaporation. A model was proposed by combining two existing models from the literature; and the RBA nozzle parameter, K1, and the evaporation rate, K, were calculated for water and clearcoat at 24°C. K1 was found constant for clearcoat but was flow rate and bell speed dependent for water. The value of K was found to be between 860-1270 μm2/s and 1300-2000 μm2/s for water and clearcoat, respectively. The initial particle diameter for different bell speeds and flow rates can be calculated using this RBA constant and the model. A model for the evaporation of droplets at any axial distance was also development.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".