A TWO-FLUID MODEL OF TURBULENT LIQUID-SOLID FLOW IN A HORIZONTAL CHANNEL
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper reports a prediction of fully-developed turbulent liquid-solid flow in a horizontal channel using a two-fluid model. The liquid phase is water while the solids phase consists of sand particles. The experimental measurements of Daniel (1965) of the mean mixture velocity and mean concentration are used to evaluate the numerical results. The two-fluid model of Bolio et al. (1995), originally developed for dilute gas-solid flows, was used to simulate the horizontal channel flow. The liquid-phase stresses were calculated using a low Reynolds number k− ε turbulence model, modified to include the effects of the particle phase. The solids-phase stresses were computed from a constitutive model based on the kinetic theory of granular flow; it includes a transport equation for the granular temperature, which represents the solids velocity fluctuations. Predictions are reported for fully-developed liquid-solid flows with mean bulk solids concentrations as high as 20 percent. Comparing the numerical predictions with the experimental data, it was observed that the mixture velocity profiles were in reasonable agreement, whereas the simulations failed to reproduce specific features of the measured concentration profiles, such as the location of the peak value. The simulations indicate that as the concentration in the lower region of the duct increases, the turbulence and related transport is almost completely suppressed. Further improvements in modeling, such as including the interstitial fluid effects while computing the solids-phase stress, are needed to improve the predictive capability of the two-fluid models for these relatively dense liquid-solid flows.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".