MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2135657463 · doi:10.1504/ijhvs.2010.035994

Analysis of transient fluid slosh in partly-filled tanks with and without baffles: Part 1 – model validation

2010· article· en· W2135657463 on OpenAlexafffund
G. Yan, Subhash Rakheja, Kamran Siddiqui

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Heavy Vehicle Systems · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics Simulations and Interactions
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersMinistère des TransportsFonds Québécois de la Recherche sur la Nature et les Technologies
KeywordsSlosh dynamicsVolume of fluid methodAccelerationEngineeringBaffleTransient (computer programming)MechanicsComputational fluid dynamicsFluentRange (aeronautics)Structural engineeringFlow (mathematics)PhysicsAerospace engineeringMechanical engineeringComputer scienceClassical mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fluid slosh in partly-filled tanks is modelled as a two-phase flow, and solved using a Navier-Stokes (NS) solver, while the interface of two fluids is tracked using the VOF technique. The fluid slosh in cleanbore and baffled scale model tanks was further characterised in the laboratory, under different fill levels and excitations. The validity of the slosh model, reduced to the scale model tank, was evaluated using the measured data in terms of fundamental slosh frequency, and transient and steady-state slosh forces and moments over a wide range of conditions such as the tank configuration, fill level and acceleration excitation. The model results showed reasonably good agreements with the measured data, irrespective of tank configuration, fill level and the acceleration excitation. It is concluded that the dynamic fluid slosh model can effectively predict the forces and moments associated with 3-D fluid slosh observed under lateral or longitudinal excitations. The fluid slosh model may thus be integrated to the vehicle model to investigate partly-filled tank vehicle responses and the role of baffles. The slosh forces and moments responses of a full-size tank model were subsequently evaluated using FLUENT software.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.261
Teacher spread0.248 · 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
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

Citations11
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Heavy Vehicle SystemsSame topicFluid Dynamics Simulations and InteractionsFrench-language works237,207