In-situ synchrotron X-ray imaging of ultrasound (US)-generated bubbles: Influence of US frequency on microbubble cavitation for membrane fouling remediation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Gaining an in-depth understanding of the characteristics and dynamics of ultrasound (US)--generated bubbles is crucial to effectively remediate membrane fouling. The goal of present study is to conduct in-situ visualization of US-generated microbubbles in water to examine the influence of US frequency on the dynamics of microbubbles. This study utilized synchrotron in-line phase contrast imaging (In-line PCI) available at the biomedical imaging and therapy (BMIT) beamlines at the Canadian Light Source (CLS) to enhance the contrast of liquid/air interfaces at different US frequencies of 20, 28 and 40 KHz at 60 Watts. A high-speed camera was used to capture 2,000 frames per second of the bubble cavitation generated in water under the ultrasound influence. Key parameters at the polychromatic beamlines were optimized to maximize the phase contrast of gas/liquid of the microbubbles with a minimum size of 5.5 µm. ImageJ software was used to analyze the bubble characteristics and their behavior under the US exposure including the microbubble number, size, and fraction of the total area occupied by the bubbles at each US frequency. Furthermore, the bubble characteristics over the US exposure time and at different distances from the transducer were studied. The qualitative and quantitative data analyses showed that the microbubble number or size did not change over time; however, it was observed that most bubbles were created at the middle of the frames and close to the US field. The number of bubbles created under the US exposure increased with the frequency from 20 kHz to 40 kHz (about 4.6 times). However, larger bubbles were generated at 20 kHz such that the average bubble radius at 20 kHz was about 6.8 times of that at 40 kHz. Microbubble movement/traveling through water was monitored, and it was observed that the bubble velocity increased as the frequency was increased from 20 kHz to 40 kHz. The small bubbles moved faster, and the majority of them traveled upward towards the US transducer location. The growth pattern (a correlation between the mean growth ratio and the exposure time) of bubbles at 20 kHz and 60 W was obtained by tracking the oscillation of 22 representative microbubbles over the 700 ms of imaging. The mean growth ratio model was also obtained.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".