Simulation of the Initial 3-D Instability of an Impacting Drop Vortex Ring
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Computational vortex particle method simulations of a perturbed vortex ring are performed to recreate and understand the instability seen in impacting water drop experiments. Three fundamentally different initial vorticity distributions are used to attempt to trigger a Widnall instability, a Rayleigh centrifugal instability, or a vortex breakdown-type instability. Simulations which simply have a perturbed solitary ring result in an instability similar to that seen experimentally. Waviness of the core which would be expected from a Widnall instability is not visible. Adding an opposite-signed secondary vortex ring or an image vortex ring to the initial conditions, to trigger a Rayleigh or breakdown respectively, does not appear to significantly change the instability from what is seen with a solitary ring. This suggests that a Rayleigh or vortex breakdown-type instability are not likely at work, though tests are not conclusive. Perhaps the opposite-signed secondary vortex was not strong enough or placed appropriately. Elliptical streamlines , as expected, are visible in the core of the solitary ring at early times. Support from the Canadian Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council grant 41747 is gratefully acknowledged.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".