MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2253774944 · doi:10.2172/1050489

Computational Fluid Dynamics of rising droplets

2012· report· en· W2253774944 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Matthew Wagner, Marianne Francois

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Heat Transfer
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersLos Alamos National LaboratoryOffice of ScienceOffice of Nuclear EnergyCanadian Foundation for Dietetic ResearchU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsComputational fluid dynamicsCurvatureMechanicsSmoothingBuoyancyDrop (telecommunication)Convergence (economics)PhysicsMaterials scienceMathematicsGeometryMechanical engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The main goal of this study is to perform simulations of droplet dynamics using Truchas, a LANL-developed computational fluid dynamics (CFD) software, and compare them to a computational study of Hysing et al.[IJNMF, 2009, 60:1259]. Understanding droplet dynamics is of fundamental importance in liquid-liquid extraction, a process used in the nuclear fuel cycle to separate various components. Simulations of a single droplet rising by buoyancy are conducted in two-dimensions. Multiple parametric studies are carried out to ensure the problem set-up is optimized. An Interface Smoothing Length (ISL) study and mesh resolution study are performed to verify convergence of the calculations. ISL is a parameter for the interface curvature calculation. Further, wall effects are investigated and checked against existing correlations. The ISL study found that the optimal ISL value is 2.5{Delta}x, with {Delta}x being the mesh cell spacing. The mesh resolution study found that the optimal mesh resolution is d/h=40, for d=drop diameter and h={Delta}x. In order for wall effects on terminal velocity to be insignificant, a conservative wall width of 9d or a nonconservative wall width of 7d can be used. The percentage difference between Hysing et al.[IJNMF, 2009, 60:1259] and Truchas for the velocity profiles vary from 7.9% to 9.9%. The computed droplet velocity and interface profiles are found in agreement with the study. The CFD calculations are performed on multiple cores, using LANL's Institutional High Performance Computing.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.978
Threshold uncertainty score0.964

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.222 · 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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicFluid Dynamics and Heat TransferFrench-language works237,207