Motion and interaction of in‐line bubbles in quiescent non‐aqueous solutions of hydrocarbon resin
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Hydrocarbon resin (HR) is an essential fine chemical. The preparation and application process of HR involves lots of gas–liquid heterogeneous reactions, and the bubbly flow behavior influences them significantly. Using high‐speed photography and digital image processing techniques, the motion and interaction of in‐line bubbles in non‐aqueous solutions of HR are examined in this article. The results show a critical gas flow rate that can change the bubbling regime. It can be observed that viscosity features prominently in changing the shape of bubbles and their motion. As the viscosity increases, the bubbles are more prone to coalescence, and the bubble coalescence process gradually changes from connected slip‐rising coalescence to connected‐rising coalescence. The viscosity transition region between non‐coalescent and coalescent systems in non‐aqueous solutions of HR occurs at 3.6–9.2 mPa·s. Further, a force analysis shows that in paired bubbles, the leading bubble can be viewed as an individual bubble unaffected by trailing bubble before the two bubbles collide, but in the wake of the leading bubble, the drag force on the trailing bubble decreases and the added mass force increases.
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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".