A Numerical Study of the Effect of Inlet Vent Position and Size on the Velocity and Temperature Distributions in a Smaller Naturally Ventilated Theater in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many smaller churches and similar buildings in Canada have been converted into small theaters. Such theatres are often not fitted with an air-conditioning system. For performances in the fall these theaters sometimes rely on buoyancy driven natural ventilation to moderate the indoor air temperature. Such ventilation systems usually involve near floor inlet vents and a roof level air discharge system. A preliminary numerical study of the effect of inlet vent position and size on the performance of such a system has been undertaken. A simple model of a typical theater building of the type considered has been used. The heat generated by the audience has been represented by a uniform heat flux distributed over the audience area. Inlet vents have been assumed to be located low on the side walls of the theater and the air-flow leaving the theatre has been assumed to be through vents at the top of a chimney system. The flow has been assumed to be steady and symmetrical about the vertical center-line through the building. The Boussinesq approach has been adopted. The standard k-epsilon turbulence model has been used. The solution has been obtained using the commercial CFD solver ANSYS FLUENT©.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".