Numerical Simulation of the Natural Ventilation in Workshop with Different Air Inlet Openings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The authors numerically simulated the natural ventilation in an industrial workshop with heat sources by computational fluid dynamics (CFD) method when the height of air inlet opening was set different values. The flow and temperature fields in the workshop were simulated by realizable k-e turbulent model combined with a Discrete Ordinate (DO) radiation. Results showed the height of air inlet opening strongly influenced the flow and temperature fields in the workshop. When the height of air inlet opening increased, the natural ventilation was improved and more fresh air flowed into the workshop. When the height of air inlet opening increased from 1.7 meters to 3 meters, the temperature in the operation zone of the workshop dropped. When the height of air inlet opening increased from 2.7 meters to 3.7 meters, the temperature in operation zone did not change much, while the temperature in the upper zone of the workshop dropped. The heat distribution factor decreased first with the height of air inlet opening and then increased again. When the height of air inlet opening was 3 meters, the heat distribution factor was minimal.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".