Numerical simulations of granular materials flow around obstacles: The role of the interstitial gas
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A two-fluid model was used to determine the influence of the gas phase on granular flow interaction with obstacles. The governing equations of two-dimensional, two-phase flow were solved numerically using a finite-volume-based numerical code. The numerical results are qualitatively compared to experimental observations from various sources, and good agreement is found. Several cases were tested in order to examine the role of the velocities of both phases, solid volume fraction, particle diameter, and gravity. The results show that under certain conditions, particularly for dilute flows, a bow granular shock wave clearly forms in the front of the obstacle. Alternatively, for dense flows, granular shock waves were not observed. Based on the present observations, it appears that the formation and the shape of the bow granular shock wave are influenced by the interaction between the solid and gas phases and the gravity force. The results indicate that the common assumptions of neglecting both the gravity and the influence of the gas phase on the granular flow, may be appropriate only in the vicinity of the obstacle, where granular creeping flow takes place.
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".