Investigation of the imbibition/drainage of two immiscible fluids in capillaries with arbitrary axisymmetric cross-sections: a generalized model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In this work, we investigate the problem of imbibition/drainage of a fluid in capillaries of arbitrary axisymmetric cross-sections filled initially with another immiscible one. The model predicts the location of the meniscus and its speed along the tube length with time. The two immiscible fluids may assume any density and viscosity contrasts. In addition, the axisymmetric profile of the tube maintains a relatively small angle of tangency to warrant that the axial velocity distribution assumes, approximately, a parabolic profile. The driving forces that may be encountered in this system include the capillary force, pressure force, gravitational force and an opposing viscous force. The orientation of the capillary force can be in the direction of the flow (e.g. during imbibition) or opposite to the flow (e.g. during drainage). Likewise, the gravitational force can be in the direction of the flow or opposite to it. In this work we account for all these possibilities. A differential equation is developed that defines the location of the meniscus with time. A fourth-order-accurate Runge–Kutta scheme has been developed to provide solutions for the different scenarios associated with this system. It is shown that the developed model reduces to those appropriate for straight tubes, which builds confidence in the modelling approach. The effects of changing the tangent along the profile of the tube, which influences the calculation of the radius of curvature of the meniscus, is also considered. Unlike the cases of straight capillary tubes, in tubes with arbitrary symmetric profiles, the friction force depends on the variations of the tube profile. Examples of converging/diverging capillary tubes that follow straight and power law profiles are investigated. In addition, the case of sinusoidal profiles has also been considered.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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".