Passage of a rising bubble through a liquid‐liquid interface: A flow map for different regimes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The passage of a rising air bubble through a stratified horizontal interface between two Newtonian liquids is studied numerically. A ternary phase‐field model has been utilized for capturing the interface between three immiscible fluids. According to the previous studies, the density, viscosity, and surface tension of the two liquids, in addition to the bubble diameter, are the effective parameters of bubble interaction with the interface. By changing these variables, three main flow patterns are identified in numerical simulations. Penetration flow regime is observed when the bubble enters the upper liquid alone and does not raise the lower liquid. Entrainment flow regime occurs when the bubble lifts some of the heavier liquid to the lighter liquid but still rises alone. If the bubble holds a film of the denser liquid when it rises in the upper liquid, envelopment flow regime takes place. A flow regime map is represented to distinguish the aforementioned flow patterns using Weber and Morton numbers and determine regime transition criteria based on these two dimensionless parameters. For Weber numbers lower than 30, or Morton numbers higher than 1.7 × 10 −2 , the penetration regime is observed. On the contrary, when the Weber number is higher than 65 and the Morton number is lower than 7 × 10 −5 , the envelopment regime occurs. The entrainment pattern happens between these ranges and two additional limiting relations of 320 Mo 0.18 < We < 1500 Mo 0.23 .
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".