Numerical simulation of flows in a circular pipe transversely subjected to a localized impulsive body force with applications to blunt traumatic aortic rupture
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Much debate surrounds the mechanisms responsible for the occurrence of blunt traumatic aortic rupture in car accidents, particularly on the role of the inertial body force experienced by the blood due to the abrupt deceleration. The isolated influence of such body forces acting on even simple fluid flows is a fundamental problem in fluid dynamics that has not been thoroughly investigated. This study numerically investigates the fundamental physical problem, where the pulsatile flow in a straight circular pipe is subjected to a transverse body force on a localized volume of fluid. The body force is applied as a brief rectangular impulse in three distinct cases, namely during the accelerating, peak, and decelerating phases of the pulsatile flow. A dimensionless number, termed the degree of influence of the body force (Ψ), is devised to quantify the relative strength of the body force over the flow inertia. The impact induces counter-rotating cross-stream vortices at the boundaries of the forced section accompanied by complex secondary flow structures. This secondary flow is found to develop slowest for an impact occurring during an accelerating flow and fastest during a decelerating flow. The peak skewness of the velocity field, however, occurred at successively later times for the three respective cases. After the impact, these secondary flows act to restore the unforced state and such dominant spatial structures are revealed by proper orthogonal decomposition of the velocity field. This work presents a new class of problems that requires further theoretical and experimental investigation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".