MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4293116014 · doi:10.11159/htff22.133

Numerical Study of Cavitation Bubble Collapse under VariousConditions

2022· article· en· W4293116014 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Van‐Tu Nguyen, Thanh-Hoang Phan, Donghyun Kim, Warn-Gyu Park

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the World Congress on Mechanical, Chemical, and Material Engineering · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicUltrasound and Cavitation Phenomena
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCavitationBubbleMechanicsMaterials scienceGeologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cavitation bubble plays an important role in applications in diverse fields of science and technology such as naval structure engineering, biosciences, and biomedical technology.The cavitation bubble collapses violently, and in different conditions, the collapse of the cavitation bubble produces high-speed jets of liquid bubbles moving in different directions [1,2].This in turn generates high local energy and high-pressure waves and high temperature [3,4].Multiple events of cavitation bubble collapse that produce high pressure over time can cause detrimental effects on the mechanical components.This in turn generates high local energy and impacts the surface with high-pressure waves that can erode the metals [5].Conversely, this energy was observed as useful for the hydrodynamic cavitation process in cleaning technology or in industrial applications such as wastewater treatment and biofuel production [6].Bubble collapse leads to the re-entrant jet formation, concentrated pressures, shear, and lift forces on the dirt particle or biomass, and high impulsive loads on a layer of materials.In the other approaches, cavitation bubbles can be intentionally generated by using acoustic waves or laser technologies to take advantage of local high-energy and microjets for application to biosciences, and biomedical technology such as needlefree injection devices, tissue engineering, and lithotripsy [7].In this study, we numerically simulate the cavity bubble expansion and its spherical and non-spherical collapse under various conditions.We shall compare different numerical models for this problem with the advantages and disadvantages of each model.We shall discuss the bubble dynamics as well as the high-speed jet, the presence of a shock wave, drastically varying pressure, and temperature fields which are induced during the bubble expansion and collapse of the bubble in different conditions such as near a wall and/or free surface, and under shear flows.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.206 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the World Congress on Mechanical, Chemical, and Material EngineeringSame topicUltrasound and Cavitation PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207