Asymmetric Spreading of a Drop upon Impact onto a Surface
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Study of the spreading of an impacting drop onto a surface has gained importance recently due to applications in printing, coating, and icing. Limited studies are conducted to understand asymmetric spreading of a drop seen upon drop impact onto a moving surface; there is no relation to describe such spreading. Here, we experimentally studied the spreading of a drop over a moving surface; such study also provides insights for systems where a drop impacts at an angle relative to a surface, i.e., drop has both normal and tangential velocities relative to the surface. We developed a model that for the first time allows prediction of time evolution for the asymmetric shape of the lamella during spreading. The developed model is demonstrated to be valid for a range of liquids and surface wettabilities as well as drop and surface velocities, making this study a comprehensive examination of the topic. We also found out how surface wettability can affect the recoil of the drop after spreading and explained the role of contact angle hysteresis and receding contact angle in delaying the recoil process.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it