MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2134027843 · doi:10.2514/6.2001-281

Euler flow solution dependency on control volume shape and orientation

2001· article· en· W2134027843 on OpenAlexaff
S. Thienot, Marcelo Reggio, Juan Abanto, R. Camarero

Bibliographic record

Venue39th Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicComputational Fluid Dynamics and Aerodynamics
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOrientation (vector space)Dependency (UML)Computer scienceFlow (mathematics)Euler's formulaVolume (thermodynamics)Euler anglesGeometryMathematicsArtificial intelligenceMathematical analysisPhysicsThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Behaviour of the numerical solution given by a finite volume method as a function of the shape and orientation of various control volumes is investigated. The study was carried out for the two dimensional Euler equations for inviscid compressible flows solved with Roe's scheme. An object oriented research flow solver (FV+) has been used to handle the construction for a variety of control volume shapes. In particular, cell centered, vertex centered and edge centered control volumes have been studied. The test geometry is a 2-D converging-diverging nozzle which was studied for two different pressure ratios, three types of primary grids each with three types of secondary grids. For each type of primary grid, four levels of refinement have been used. The calculations show significant variations in the solution for different control volume shapes. This affects flow characteristics such as shock location and solution convergence rate. A solution computed with a commercial flow solver is also presented. Work in progress includes extension to 3-D calculation and external flow simulations. Nomenclature U conservative variables H flux vector tti, U2 velocity components nx, ny normal components E specific entalphy M Mach number m number of sides per control volume p density 7 specific heat ratio ft control volume area A£ time step * Research fellow t Professor * Research engineer, NewTech Brake ^ Professor, Associate Fellow ALA A Copyright © 2000 by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc. All rights reserved. Subscripts L R oo left control volume right control volume free-stream value

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 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 score0.116
Threshold uncertainty score0.510

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.204 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations0
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue39th Aerospace Sciences Meeting and ExhibitSame topicComputational Fluid Dynamics and AerodynamicsFrench-language works237,207