MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1998054280 · doi:10.1017/s0022112005004027

On undercompressive shocks and flooding in countercurrent two-layer flows

2005· article· en· W1998054280 on OpenAlexaff
Tetyana Segin, B. S. Tilley, Lou Kondic

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Fluid Mechanics · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnhanced Oil Recovery Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMechanicsCountercurrent exchangeInertiaCompressibilityPressure gradientLubrication theoryOpen-channel flowPhysicsFlow (mathematics)Classical mechanicsThermodynamicsLubrication

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We consider the countercurrent flow of two incompressible immiscible viscous fluids in an inclined channel. This configuration may lead to the phenomena of ‘flooding’, i.e. the transition from a countercurrent regime to a cocurrent regime. This transition is marked by a variety of transient behaviour, such as the development of large-amplitude waves that impede the flow of one of the fluids to the reversal of the flow of the denser fluid. From a lubrication approximation based on the ratio of the channel height to the downstream disturbance wavelength, we derive a nonlinear system of evolution equations that govern the interfacial shape separating the two fluids and the leading-order pressure. This system, which assumes fluids with disparate density and dynamic viscosity ratios, includes the effects of viscosity stratification, inertia, shear and capillarity. Since the experimental constraints for this effective system are unclear, we consider two ways to drive the flow: either by fixing the volumetric flow rate of the gas phase or by fixing the total pressure drop over a downstream length of the channel. The latter forcing results in a single evolution equation whose dynamics depends non-locally on the interfacial shape. From both of these driven systems, admissible criteria for Lax shocks, undercompressive shocks and rarefaction waves are investigated. These criteria, through a numerical verification, do not depend significantly on the inertial effects within the more dense layer. The choice of the local/non-local constraints appears to play a role in the transient growth of undercompressive shocks, and may relate to the phenomena observed near the onset of flooding.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.330
Threshold uncertainty score0.561

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations31
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Fluid MechanicsSame topicEnhanced Oil Recovery TechniquesFrench-language works237,207