Investigation on backflow phenomenon in the aerostatic journal bearing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this work, the backflow phenomenon exhibited in the gas journal bearings is investigated. The effect of operational parameters such as eccentricity ratio ɛ, axial velocity of the bearing v z , misalignment angles [Formula: see text] and [Formula: see text] on the backflow behavior, and load force and axial friction force of the bearing are studied numerically. The differential transformation method and finite difference method are utilized to solve the dimensionless Reynolds equations required in the analysis. The performance parameters such as pressure distribution, gas flow rate, load force, and axial friction force are examined in the numerical simulations. The investigation reveals that when the bearing is operated in normal working zone, the load force F increases significantly with an increase in eccentricity ɛ; however, F may only increase slightly when the bearing operates in the backflow zone. It is suggested that the pressure P s should be set greater than 5.0, P c smaller than or equal to 3.0 to avoid the backflow behavior. The axial friction force [Formula: see text] is largely determined by the pressure [Formula: see text], and increases as pressure P c increases.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".