Bubbly Cavitating Flow Through a Converging Nozzle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the present work, the bubbly cavitating flow phenomena after passing through the converging nozzle is numerically investigated. The dynamic of the cavitating bubbles is modeled by the use of the mass and momentum phase's equations, which are coupled with the Rayleigh-Plesset equation of the N bubbles dynamics. However, assuming that the same initial conditions of all bubbles are identical and that all bubbles are equi-distant from each other simplifies the governing equations. Equation set is numerically resolved by the use of a fourth order Runge-Kutta scheme. The numerical resolution of the previous equations set let us found that the bubble radius distribution, fluid velocity and fluid pressure change dramatically with upstream void fraction and an instability appeared just after the passing the converging nozzle for both cases one bubble N=1 and two bubbles N=2. Indeed, for the case of one bubble N=1, the flashing flow phenomena occurs for an upstream void fraction s =11.2x10 -3 , which corresponds to a critical bubble radius R c =1.8. Whereas, for bubble number N=2, the same phenomenon occurs for s = 8.9x10 -3 , with R c =2. This difference is due to the bubble interaction. Also, we found that, the bubble number N strongly affect the bubble frequency. However, with increase the bubble number, the maximum size of the bubbles increases and bubble frequency oscillation decrease.
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".