MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2028649630 · doi:10.1063/1.1410386

Large eddy simulation of turbulent flow in a square annular duct

2001· article· en· W2028649630 on OpenAlexaff
Hongyi Xu, A. Pollard

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics of Fluids · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Turbulent Flows
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTurbulencePhysicsMechanicsLarge eddy simulationReynolds numberDuct (anatomy)VortexPrandtl numberSecondary flowReynolds stressPipe flowGeometryMathematicsConvection

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The fully developed turbulent flow in a straight square annular duct is simulated using large eddy simulation (LES). The flow Reynolds number is 200 based on the mean friction velocity and half the hydraulic diameter of the annular duct. A grid refinement study is carried out using 130×66×66 (0.57 million) and 130×130×130 (2.2 million) control volumes, respectively. The mean flow field and the turbulent statistics are compared with existing experimental and numerical data for square duct flow. Acceptable agreement is obtained. A universal relation between the mean streamwise velocity and the distance away from a concave 90° corner along the corner bisector is derived by curve-fitting the results from both LES in a square annular duct and direct numerical simulation in a square duct. The results from the present investigation exhibit the distinctive secondary flow of Prandtl second kind, which consist of a chain of counter-rotating vortex pairs around both convex and concave 90° corners in the annular duct. Mechanisms responsible for the generation of the secondary flow are interrogated by analyzing the anisotropy of the Reynolds stress distributions.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.584

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.218 · 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

Citations26
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysics of FluidsSame topicFluid Dynamics and Turbulent FlowsFrench-language works237,207