Natural Ventilation in Workshop with Different Horizontal Arrangement of Heat Source
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The natural ventilation in a heating workshop with different horizontal arrangement of heat source was numerically simulated based on computational fluid dynamics (CFD) method. Realizable k- turbulent model was used to calculate the air flow and temperature distribution. Simulation results showed that the horizontal arrangement of the heat source in the workshop influenced heavily the air flow and temperature distribution. When the heat source was placed at the workshop centre, the heat distribution factor was minimal, the average air temperature at operation zone was lowest and the hot air exhausting velocity was highest, the air flow field and temperature distribution was reasonable for the natural ventilation. When the heat source was placed to be close to the air inlet opening, the fresh air would travel a short path and directly rise to exit and the fresh air did not reach to the right part of the workshop, leading to a possible accumulation of pollutant emission there. When the heat source was placed at the right side of the workshop, the benefit would be that the possible pollutant could be taken away by the air flow, however, the ventilation rate decreased.
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".