Characterization of the acoustic cavitation in ionic liquids in a horn-type ultrasound reactor
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Most ultrasound-based processes root in empirical approaches. Because nearly all advances have been conducted in aqueous systems, there exists a paucity of information on sonoprocessing in other solvents, particularly ionic liquids (ILs). In this work, we modelled an ultrasonic horn-type sonoreactor and investigated the effects of ultrasound power, sonotrode immersion depth, and solvent’s thermodynamic properties on acoustic cavitation in nine imidazolium-based and three pyrrolidinium-based ILs. The model accounts for bubbles, acoustic impedance mismatch at interfaces, and treats the ILs as incompressible, Newtonian, and saturated with argon. Following a statistical analysis of the simulation results, we determined that viscosity and ultrasound input power are the most significant variables affecting the intensity of the acoustic pressure field (P), the volume of cavitation zones (V), and the magnitude of the maximum acoustic streaming surface velocity (u). V and u increase with the increase of ultrasound input power and the decrease in viscosity, whereas the magnitude of negative P decreases as ultrasound power and viscosity increase. Probe immersion depth positively correlates with V, but its impact on P and u is insignificant. 1-alkyl-3-methylimidazolium-based ILs yielded the largest V and the fastest acoustic jets – 0.77 cm3 and 24.4 m s−1 for 1-ethyl-3-methylimidazolium chloride at 60 W. 1-methyl-3-(3-sulfopropyl)-imidazolium-based ILs generated the smallest V and lowest u – 0.17 cm3 and 1.7 m s−1 for 1-methyl-3-(3-sulfopropyl)-imidazolium p-toluene sulfonate at 20 W. Sonochemiluminescence experiments validated the model.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".