Coalescence of rigid droplets in a stirred dispersion-II. Band-limited force fluctuations

The coalescence of nearly rigid liquid droplets in a turbulent flow field is viewed as the drainage of a thin film of liquid under the action of a stochastic force representing the effect of turbulence. The force squeezing the drop pair is modelled as a correlated random function of time. The drops are assumed to coalesce once the film thickness becomes smaller than a critical thickness while they are regarded as separated if their distance of separation is larger than a prescribed distance. A semi-analytical solution is derived to determine the coalescence efficiency. The veracity of the solution procedure is established via a Monte-Carlo solution scheme. The model predicts a reversing trend of the dependence of the coalescence efficiency on the drop radii, the film liquid viscosity and the turbulence energy dissipation per unit mass, as the relative fluctuation increases. However, the dependence on physical parameters is weak (especially at high relative fluctuation) so that for the smallest droplets (which are nearly rigid) the coalescence efficiency may be treated as an empirical constant. The predictions of this model are compared with those of a white-noise force model. The results of this paper and those in Muralidhar and Ramkrishna (1986, Ind. Engng Chem. Fundam. 25, 554-56) suggest that dynamic drop deformation is the key factor that influences the coalescence efficiency.

How should biologists engage with controversial mathematical theory?

Mathematics is beautiful and precise and often necessary to understand complex biological phenomena. And yet biologists cannot always hope to fully understand the mathematical foundations of the theory they are using or testing. How then should biologists behave when mathematicians themselves are in dispute? Using the on-going controversy over Hamilton's rule as an example, I argue that biologists should be free to treat mathematical theory with a healthy dose of agnosticism. In doing so biologists should equip themselves with a disclaimer that publicly admits that they cannot entirely attest to the veracity of the mathematics underlying the theory they are using or testing. The disclaimer will only help if it is accompanied by three responsibilities - stay bipartisan in a dispute among mathematicians, stay vigilant and help expose dissent among mathematicians, and make the biology larger than the mathematics. I must emphasize that my goal here is not to take sides in the on-going dispute over the mathematical validity of Hamilton's rule, indeed my goal is to argue that we should refrain from taking sides.

Peristaltic pump-based low range pressure sensor calibration system

Peristaltic pumps were normally used to pump liquids in several chemical and biological applications. In the present study, a peristaltic pump was used to pressurize the chamber (positive as well negative pressures) using atmospheric air. In the present paper, we discuss the development and performance study of an automatic pressurization system to calibrate low range (millibar) pressure sensors. The system includes a peristaltic pump, calibrated pressure sensor (master sensor), pressure chamber, and the control electronics. An in-house developed peristaltic pump was used to pressurize the chamber. A closed loop control system has been developed to detect and adjust the pressure leaks in the chamber. The complete system has been integrated into a portable product. The system performance has been studied for a step response and steady state errors. The system is portable, free from oil contaminants, and consumes less power compared to existing pressure calibration systems. The veracity of the system was verified by calibrating an unknown diaphragm based pressure sensor and the results obtained were satisfactory. (C) 2015 AIP Publishing LLC.