MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

An Improved Method to Determine Particle Dispersion Width for Efficient Modeling of Turbulent Two-Phase Flows

2000· article· en· W2091794291 on OpenAlexaff
Xi-Qing Chen, J. Friedman, Xianguo Li, Metin Renksizbulut

Bibliographic record

VenueParticle & Particle Systems Characterization · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicParticle Dynamics in Fluid Flows
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan UniversityUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTurbulenceSauter mean diameterMechanicsDispersion (optics)Lagrangian particle trackingMean flowFlow (mathematics)Large eddy simulationEulerian pathJet (fluid)Computational fluid dynamicsStatistical physicsMathematicsPhysicsApplied mathematicsLagrangianThermodynamicsOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An improved approach is presented for the hybrid Eulerian-Lagrangian modeling of turbulent two-phase flows. The hybrid model consists of a nonlinear k–ε model for the fluid flow and an efficient Lagrangian trajectory model for the particulate flow. The improved approach avoids an empirical correlation required to determine the dispersion width for the existing Stochastic-Probabilistic Efficiency Enhanced Dispersion (SPEED) model. The improved SPEED model is validated using experimental data for a poly-dispersed water spray interacting with a turbulent annular air jet behind a bluff-body. Numerical results for the number-mean and Sauter-mean droplet diameters, as well as mean and fluctuating droplet velocities are compared with the experimental data and with the predictions of other dispersion models. It is demonstrated that higher computational efficiency and smoother profiles of Sauter-mean diameter can be obtained with the improved stochastic-probabilistic model than with the eddy-interaction 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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.269 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueParticle & Particle Systems CharacterizationSame topicParticle Dynamics in Fluid FlowsFrench-language works237,207