Experimental investigation of coalescence behaviour of bubble pairs forming at capillary orifices submerged in bacterial suspension
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Coalescence behaviour of bubble pairs markedly affected methane bioconversion because methane is usually pumped into a bacterial suspension through an aeration system, forming bubbles at capillary orifices. In the present work, a bioreactor was developed to observe the coalescence behaviour of bubble pairs forming at capillary orifices submerged in bacterial suspension via a visualization experiment. The results indicated that in a bacterial suspension the inrush bubble number decreased and the inrush time shortened, but the contact time was prolonged and the maximum contact area increased compared to those in pure water. Moreover, with an increase in the gas flow rate, the maximum contact area decreased and the contact time shortened, while more trailing bubbles merged into the leading bubble. Furthermore, the increase in the centre distance was conducive to increasing the maximum contact area and prolonging the contact time but the bubble inrush was observed at a centre distance of 0.94 mm. In addition, the larger centre distance enhanced the oscillation amplitude and frequency of the aspect ratio, which had not significantly changed at different gas flow rates. The results of this study will contribute to the optimal design of an aeration system that enhances the performance of the bioreactor.
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 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".