MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2528653807 · doi:10.11159/ffhmt16.143

Water Droplet Motion on an Inclining Surface

2016· article· en· W2528653807 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Thomas Maurer, Axel Mebus, Uwe Janoske

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the ... International Conference on Fluid Flow, Heat and Mass Transfer · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicSurface Modification and Superhydrophobicity
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSurface (topology)Motion (physics)Computer scienceGeologyComputer visionGeometryMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Droplet motion induced by external forces such as mechanical vibrations, shear flows or gravitational forces has a major importance in many industrial applications.The present study introduces a setup for a tilting plane experiment, which enables investigations of the droplet behaviour due to the balance between surface tension and gravitational force.Furthermore, droplet motion measurements on a tilting acrylic glass surface are presented.The main aspect of this study is the influence of the droplet volume and the angular velocity of the inclining plane on the droplet detachment.To quantify this influence, different moving regimes are detected and specified.Further, flow maps due to the rotational velocity are obtained.The results show that the inclination angle needed to initiate drop motions decreases when the droplet volume increases.In addition to that, the droplet motion is initiated at a smaller inclination angle if the angular velocity decreases.This behaviour has no influence when rotational velocity increases above a certain threshold.The study concludes that the detachment of water droplets on a tilting acrylic surface can be forced and amplified if either the droplet volume is increased or the angular velocity of the surface is decreased.

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)0.000
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 score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Citations9
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the ... International Conference on Fluid Flow, Heat and Mass TransferSame topicSurface Modification and SuperhydrophobicityFrench-language works237,207