Two-phase flow in a mini-size impacting tee junction with a rectangular cross-section
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An experimental study was conducted in order to investigate the two-phase-flow phenomena in a mini-size, horizontal impacting tee junction. The test section was machined in an acrylic block with a rectangular cross-section of 1.87-mm height × 20-mm width on the inlet and outlet sides. Air-water mixtures at 200 kPa (abs) and room temperature were used as the test fluids. Four flow regimes were identified visually: bubbly, plug, churn, and annular over the ranges of gas and liquid superficial velocities of 0.04 ≤ JG ≤ 10 m/s and 0.02 ≤ JL ≤ 0.7 m/s, respectively, and a flow regime map was developed. The present flow-regime map was compared with several experimental maps. It is thought from those comparisons that the channel height has a more significant role in determining the flow-regime boundaries than the hydraulic diameter. The two-phase fully-developed pressure gradient was measured in the inlet and the outlet sides of the junction for six different inlet conditions and various mass splits at the junction. Comparisons were conducted between the present data and former correlations. The correlations that agreed best with the present data were identified. Five single-phase test sets were performed. In each set of experiments, the pressure distribution was measured for the whole range of the mass split ratio, Wi/W1. The pressure drop at the junction at each value of Wi/W1 was calculated. Values of the pressure-loss coefficient, , were calculated at various Wi/W1 and inlet Reynolds number. The pressure-loss coefficient was strongly dependent on the inlet Reynolds number in the laminar region, while the results for the turbulent region were almost coincident. Numerical simulations of single-phase flow in an impacting tee junction of identical dimensions to that of the present test-section were performed to confirm the results of the experiments. Phase-redistribution experiments were conducted covering all four inlet flow regimes and models were proposed for predicting the experimental data. Good agreement in terms of magnitude and trend was obtained between the present experimental data and the proposed model. New correlations were developed for the single- and two-phase pressure drop in the junction.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".