Application of CFD and Phenomenological Models in Studying Interaction of Two Turbulent Plane Jets
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents a numerical and analytical study of structure and flow development in planar (2- dimensional) turbulent jets. The numerical results are used to develop a phenomenological solution, here referred as Bending Model, for twin turbulent plane jets. The effects of nozzle- nozzle spacing and injection angle are emphasized in numerical study. This study includes a wide range of nozzle- nozzle spacing, 4.25, 9 and 18.25 and injection angle between - 20 to 20. In the farfield, the k-e model predicts the velocity of the jet higher than the experimental results; however, the overall performance of k-e model is acceptable in the prediction of velocity field. Mean velocity and static pressure fields are presented. The Bending Model can predict the attachment of two plane jets for a wide range of nozzle-nozzle spacing and injection angle. Based on the model and modified Reichardt's hypothesis, the flow field in the domain is predicted. The results are compared with the numerical simulation of the k-є model and previous experimental results. The results show encouraging agreement with the numerical and experimental results.
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".