MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W162074875

A Newton-Krylov solver with a loosely-coupled turbulence model for aerodynamic flows

2006· dissertation· en· W162074875 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Max Blanco

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2006
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicComputational Fluid Dynamics and Aerodynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSolverAerodynamicsTurbulenceNavier–Stokes equationsApplied mathematicsComputational fluid dynamicsMetric (unit)Computer scienceFlow (mathematics)Turbulence modelingMathematicsMathematical optimizationPhysicsMechanicsGeometryEngineeringCompressibility
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Computational solutions of the Navier-Stokes equations have proven to be a useful tool in the design of aircraft. A Newton-Krylov flow solver for unstructured grids is developed in order to demonstrate that a formulation in which the mean-flow and turbulence mechanism equations are loosely coupled can be more economical than a similar fully-coupled formulation. The Favre-averaged Navier-Stokes equations are derived for steady two-dimensional flows, and the turbulence mechanism is described. These equations constitute a model of the physics of aerodynamic flows. The model is validated against experimental data. The objective of this thesis is to examine a means to improve the iterative process by which the solutions are generated. The Newton-Krylov iteration is selected in order to refine the solution, and its features examined. The authors of current Newton-Krylov techniques have fully coupled the turbulence mechanism to the Navier-Stokes equations. A contrast and comparison study made here between the fully-coupled formulation and a loosely-coupled alternative favours the latter. An 'equivalent function evaluation' metric is selected for comparison purposes, and is assessed by means of diverse computers. Published results which use the metric are located, and the present loosely-coupled formulation for unstructured grids is found to be significantly faster in this metric than similar fully-coupled formulations. The advantages of the loosely-coupled formulation with respect to the fully-coupled formulation are stated and future avenues for exploitation of the proposed technology are examined. Appendices consist of: a formalism for the Favre average and consequences of its derivation; a short tract on Taylor series; and an essay on the Frechet differential.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpaceSame topicComputational Fluid Dynamics and AerodynamicsFrench-language works237,207