MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Flow and Pollutant Dispersion Model in a 2D Urban Street Canyons Using Computational Fluid Dynamics

2018· article· en· W2797181623 on OpenAlexaff
Zahra Jandaghian

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWind and Air Flow Studies
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTurbulenceCanyonMeteorologyComputational fluid dynamicsEnvironmental sciencePollutantDispersion (optics)MechanicsDimensionless quantityTurbulence modelingWind speedWind directionFluentReynolds-averaged Navier–Stokes equationsGeologyPhysicsGeomorphologyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A two-dimensional model is used to simulate temperature distribution, wind speed and pollutants dispersion within an isolated two-dimensional street canyon using SIMPLE algorithm in ANSYS Fluent version 16.2. The simulation is based on the Reynolds-averaged Navier–Stokes equations coupled with a series of standard, RNG and realizable k-ε turbulence models. Simulation domain consisted of a street canyon with two buildings enclosing a street with the aspect ratio of 1. The wind is assumed to be perpendicular to the direction of the street and the source of the pollution is assumed to be liner. The results showed that the RNG k-ε turbulence model is the most optimum model by comparing with the calculated data under different wind speed patterns and pollutant dispersion model. The improvement of turbulent viscosity term of the RNG k-ε turbulence model provides a more accurate and reliable numerical solution for the present study regarding to the pollution dispersion in a street canyon. The simulation results also showed that the dimensionless pollutant concentrations, P, is larger on the leeward side of the buildings and decrease exponentially from floor to top of the upstream buildings. Furthermore, the results showed that the pollutant concentrations on the leeward side of building are more than that on the windward side due to the pollutant transportation of vortex circulation.

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)0.000
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 score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.057

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.125
GPT teacher head0.460
Teacher spread0.335 · 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

Citations16
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)Same topicWind and Air Flow StudiesFrench-language works237,207