MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412032560 · doi:10.11159/jffhmt.2025.025

Coherent Dynamics of Liquid Jet Breakup in Annular Crossflow

2025· article· en· W4412032560 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Deepak Kumar, Abhijit Kushari

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Fluid Flow Heat and Mass Transfer · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Turbulent Flows
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBreakupMechanicsJet (fluid)Dynamics (music)PhysicsOpticsClassical mechanicsMaterials scienceAcoustics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The primary breakup characteristics of a liquid jet injected radially into an annular air crossflow are experimentally investigated under atmospheric conditions at a fixed air Mach number of 0.12.The liquid injection velocity is varied from 1.417 m/s to 7.084 m/s through a 1 mm orifice, yielding liquid-to-air momentum flux ratios in the range of 1 to 25. High-speed imaging at 3000 frames per second is employed to capture the transient spray dynamics, and a dataset of 3000 images is analyzed using Proper Orthogonal Decomposition to extract coherent flow structures and quantify the energy content of dominant modes.The results indicate that at low , the breakup process is governed by strong shear-layer instabilities, leading to early transition to turbulence.In contrast, higher q values exhibit a delayed onset of turbulence, dominated by persistent vortex roll-up and jet penetration.The POD energy spectra reveal that the first ten modes capture the most significant coherent structures, while temporal coefficients demonstrate a clear transition from crossflow-driven to selfexcited turbulent breakup as liquid to air momentum flux ratio 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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.004
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.197 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Fluid Flow Heat and Mass TransferSame topicFluid Dynamics and Turbulent FlowsFrench-language works237,207