MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2079350485 · doi:10.1115/1.1798055

Two-equation Turbulence Modeling of Pulsatile Flow in a Stenosed Tube

2004· article· en· W2079350485 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biomechanical Engineering · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCoronary Interventions and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsRobarts Clinical TrialsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPulsatile flowTurbulenceMechanicsLaminar flowFlow (mathematics)InletMean flowMaterials sciencePhysicsGeologyMedicineCardiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The study of pulsatile flow in stenosed vessels is of particular importance because of its significance in relation to blood flow in human pathophysiology. To date, however, there have been few comprehensive publications detailing systematic numerical simulations of turbulent pulsatile flow through stenotic tubes evaluated against comparable experiments. In this paper, two-equation turbulence modeling has been explored for sinusoidally pulsatile flow in 75% and 90% area reduction stenosed vessels, which undergoes a transition from laminar to turbulent flow as well as relaminarization. Wilcox's standard k-omega model and a transitional variant of the same model are employed for the numerical simulations. Steady flow through the stenosed tubes was considered first to establish the grid resolution and the correct inlet conditions on the basis of comprehensive comparisons of the detailed velocity and turbulence fields to experimental data. Inlet conditions based on Womersley flow were imposed at the inlet for all pulsatile cases and the results were compared to experimental data from the literature. In general, the transitional version of the k-omega model is shown to give a better overall representation of both steady and pulsatile flow. The standard model consistently over predicts turbulence at and downstream of the stenosis, which leads to premature recovery of the flow. While the transitional model often under-predicts the magnitude of the turbulence, the trends are well-described and the velocity field is superior to that predicted using the standard model. On the basis of this study, there appears to be some promise for simulating physiological pulsatile flows using a relatively simple two-equation turbulence model.

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.

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 score0.281
Threshold uncertainty score0.256

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.245 · 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