MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2595879464 · doi:10.2298/tsci160110072l

Analytical modelling of dry-jet wet spinning

2017· article· en· W2595879464 on OpenAlexafffund
Hong-Yan Liu, Zhimin Li, Yan-Ju Yao, Frank Ko

Bibliographic record

VenueThermal Science · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicTextile materials and evaluations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaJiangsu Planned Projects for Postdoctoral Research FundsPriority Academic Program Development of Jiangsu Higher Education InstitutionsChina Scholarship CouncilChina Postdoctoral Science FoundationChina National Textile and Apparel CouncilNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsSpinningMaterials scienceMechanicsJet (fluid)ComputationFiberFlow (mathematics)Computer simulationComposite materialPhysicsComputer scienceAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper introduces an analytical method for the analysis and design of a dry-jet wet spinning system. The 1-D mass conservation equation is used, and velocity distribution is assumed to derive a simple relationship among various spinning parameters. The effect of spinneret mass flow rate, solution density, spinneret structure including velocity and air-gap length, and drawing velocity on the dry-jet wet spinning was simulated using the proposed analytical model. Theoretical prediction of fiber diameter is obtained, which depends upon spinning conditions, solution properties, and spinneret structure. The theoretical results were verified by comparing experimental data with the numerical solution. It was found obviously that the theoretical prediction has comparable accuracy as that by numerical computation. The analytical model can be useful for preliminary design of a spinning process for fabrication of fibers with controllable diameter by adjusting parameters in spinning conditions.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.116
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThermal ScienceSame topicTextile materials and evaluationsFrench-language works237,207