Air-bubble entrainment by translating turbulent jets in stagnant water
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents an experimental study on air-bubble entrainment in quiescent water by translating circular turbulent jets. The jet diameters, plunging heights, impact velocities, and translating velocities were varied during the experiments to investigate their relative effect on the bubble characteristics. The experimental observations reveal that the jet translation affects the air bubble entrainment mechanism and the distribution of bubble size. A rotating cavity forms around the plunging jet due to the translation of the jet. Depending on the translating velocity, the air bubble emanates from the cusp of the cavity and the downstream water surface meniscus with the jet. The bubble swarm produced by the translating jet exhibits vortex shedding with Strouhal numbers between 0.22 and 0.27, comparable to a circular cylinder in cross-flow. The peak of the bubble size distribution varies between 0.5 and 1.5 mm, while the Sauter mean diameter varies between 1.8 and 2.8 mm. The maximum penetration depth of bubbles is found to be a function of the jet impact to translating velocity ratio, and the Capillary number of the air–water interface. The spatial distribution of bubbles along the plume cross section exhibits Gaussian distributions. Finally, the terminal rising velocity of the bubbles shows no obvious effect of the jet translation.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".