Breakup of an isolated surface-adhering water droplet by an impinging jet flow
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The study explored the depinning and breakup of a single surface-mounted droplet exposed to an impinging slot jet flow. Distilled water droplets of 50, 100, 200, 300, 400, 500, and 600 μl were tested on an anodized aluminum substrate in the impinging slot jet facility whose velocity was ramped from zero to 20 m/s at a range of accelerations. The breakup process comprised three distinctive consecutive stages: depinning, necking, and breakup. An aggregate analysis of the data from the present investigation and the results of previous studies is used to deduce that the Weber number at which depinning occurs was roughly constant for all tested conditions, whereas the Weber number at breakup followed a power-law relationship with the Ohnesorge number. The observed power law relation for surface-mounted droplets is similar to the trend reported earlier for critical conditions demarcating breakup regimes for free-falling droplets. During breakup, it was observed that larger originating droplets shed larger percentages of their volumes into secondary droplets, with higher flow accelerations exacerbating this effect. The majority of the formed secondary droplets had a higher critical depinning Weber number compared to the critical breakup Weber number. Consequently, for applications requiring the complete removal of surface-deposited droplets, it is beneficial to utilize shear flows at lower accelerations and maximum Weber numbers below critical breakup conditions.
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".