Lattice Boltzmann modelling of colloidal suspensions drying in porous media accounting for local nanoparticle effects
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A two-dimensional (2-D) double-distribution lattice Boltzmann method (LBM) is implemented to study isothermal drying of a colloidal suspension considering local nanoparticle effects. The two LBMs solve isothermal two-phase flow and nanoparticle transport, respectively. The three local nanoparticle effects on the fluid dynamics considered in this paper are viscosity increase, surface tension drop and local drying rate reduction. The proposed model is first validated by the study of the drying of a 2-D suspended colloidal droplet for two different Péclet numbers, where the evolution of the diameter squared agrees well with experimental results. The model is further validated looking at drying of a colloid in a 2-D capillary tube with two open ends. Compared with experimental results, the best agreement in terms of deposition profile and drying time is obtained when considering all three nanoparticle effects. Afterwards, we apply the model to investigate the complicated drying of a colloidal suspension in a 2-D porous asphalt, considering all three local nanoparticle effects. The drying dynamics, resultant nanoparticle transport, accumulation and deposition are first analysed for a base case. Then a parametric study is conducted varying the initial nanoparticle concentration, porous medium contact angle, nanoparticle contact angle and nanoparticle diffusion coefficient. The influence of these parameters on drying dynamics, drying rate, deposition process and final deposition configurations is analysed in detail, together with the mutual influence of local nanoparticle behaviour. Finally, a unified relation between the average drying rate and the studied parameters is proposed and verified, covering the full parameter ranges of simulations.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".