Parametric Study of the Frequency of Bubble Formation at a Single Orifice With Liquid Cross-Flow
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
The bubble formation frequency from a single-orifice nozzle subjected to the effects of a crossflowing liquid was investigated using high-speed shadowgraphy, combined with image analysis and signal processing techniques. The effects of the nozzle dimensions, orientation within the conduit, liquid cross-flow velocity, and gas mass flow rate were evaluated. Water and air were the working fluids. Existing expressions in the literature were compared to the experimental values obtained. The expressions showed modest agreement with the experimental mean average frequency magnitude. It was found that increasing the gas injection diameter could decrease the bubbling frequency approximately 12% until reaching a certain value (0.52 mm). Further increasing the nozzle dimensions increase the frequency by around 20%. Bubbling frequency is more sensitive to the liquid velocity where changes up to 63% occurred when the velocity was raised from 3.1 to 4.3 m/s. Increasing gas mass flow rates decreased the gas jet breakup frequency in all cases. This phenomenon was primarily attributed to changes in the bubbling mode from discrete bubbling to pulsating and jetting modes. The nozzle orientation plays a role in modifying the bubbling frequency, having a higher magnitude when oriented against gravity.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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