Experimental and CFD Study of a Rectangular S-Bend Passage With and Without Pressure Recovery Effects
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Flow fields in a rectangular S-bend passage were simulated to benchmark the capability of RANS based CFD in modeling such complex flow passages with/without the effects of flow diffusion over a range of Reynolds numbers from 250,000 to 430,000. Numerical results were validated against the experimental data of pressure coefficient, wall static pressure distributions, and outflow velocity contours. Parametric studies were conducted to examine the effects of inlet turbulence properties in conjunction with the use of various turbulence models (k-ε, realizable k-ε and SST k-ω). Improvements in prediction accuracies using detailed computational domains were also examined including (i) lengthened inlet section to simulate upstream flow development, and (ii) addition of downstream flow domain to better simulate flow diffusion to an ambient outlet. Altering model geometry and inlet boundary conditions along with the use of different turbulence models had minimal improvements in the simulation results. The CFD results demonstrated that the S-bend flow features and the increasing trends of pressure magnitudes with higher Reynolds numbers were reasonably simulated. Limitations in predicting the diffusing flow fields were evident with the over predictions of pressure recovery. The study also showed the better reliabilities of the k-ε model for the simulations of S-bend flow fields through the comparisons of outflow velocity profiles.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".