MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2086029748 · doi:10.1115/imece2005-82410

Large Eddy Simulation of a Three Dimensional Buoyant Jet

2005· article· en· W2086029748 on OpenAlexaff
Mysore G. Satish, F. Ma, M. R. Islam

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWind and Air Flow Studies
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMechanicsJet (fluid)AdvectionTurbulenceLarge eddy simulationPhysicsBuoyancyThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study is related to the numerical simulations of a three dimensional buoyant jet. The governing equations of the fluid are solved with the help of a buoyancy-extended large eddy simulation (LES) numerical model. In addition, the dynamic procedure is used to evaluate the Smagorinsky model coefficient. The finite difference formulations of the governing equations are split into three parts related to advection, dispersion and propagation. The advection part is solved by the QUICKEST scheme. The dispersion part is solved by the central difference method and the propagation part is solved implicitly by using the Gauss-Seidel iteration method. The initial turbulence of the buoyant jet from the orifice is accounted for by introducing random disturbances to the flowing parameters. Ensemble averaged relationships for the buoyant jet trajectory; jet sizes and concentration dilution are presented. The salient characteristics of the buoyant jet are captured, including variability among different realizations of the buoyant jet, the development of protuberances, the horseshoe cross sectional shape and the hollow trough along the upper surface of the jet. The protuberance characteristic and the asymmetric shape of the jet from the present study are compared with the results from the conventional κ-ε model. The horseshoe cross sectional shape and the trough or bifurcation characteristics are investigated by studying the inner structures of the flow field. These quantitative relationships and qualitative observations are found to be in good agreement with experimental results from an earlier investigation.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.174
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

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)0.0040.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.223 · 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.

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

Citations2
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicWind and Air Flow StudiesFrench-language works237,207