Evidence of Faradaic Reactions in Electrostatic Atomizers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Any rational theory of electrostatic atomizers (EAs) would require a detailed understanding of the nature of the polarized layer near the electrode, since this is the source of the electric charge carried by the jets issued from the EAs. The polarized layer either is driven out as the electrically-driven Smoluchowski flow and/or entrained by the viscous shear imposed by the bulk flow. The standard Gouy-Chapman theory of polarized diffuse layers implies zero electric current passing across the layer, which is impossible to reconcile with the fact that there are leak currents in the EAs. Here, we show that the electric current through the EA is controlled by faradaic reactions at the electrodes. The experiments were conducted with stainless steel or brass pin-like cathodes and three different anode (the conical nozzle) materials, which were copper, stainless steel, and brass. The different electrode materials resulted in different spray, leakage, and total currents in all the cases. Accordingly, it is shown that the total electric current generated by EAs can be controlled by the cathode and anode materials, i.e., by faradaic reactions on them. This lays the foundation for a more detailed understanding and description of the operation of EAs.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".