MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2888830335 · doi:10.1115/gt2018-75314

A Porous Media Function That Mimics the Effect of Discrete Holes

2018· article· en· W2888830335 on OpenAlexaff
D. J. Cerantola, A. M. Birk

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTurbomachinery Performance and Optimization
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMechanicsDuct (anatomy)PorosityGridMaterials scienceRegular polygonGeometryPhysicsMathematicsComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Simulating full-coverage film cooling remains an elusive task for aerodynamicists given the small scale of the holes relative to the duct size where the holes are applied. Source term models were developed to simulate the effect through a perforated surface; however, the documented approaches failed to adequately describe how source term locations within the computational domain were selected. This paper presents a continuous ‘checker-board’ surface function that enables a distributed selection of cells where the source terms are applied; furthermore, the source term strengths applied to cells within a given hole are weighted. A 3:1 aspect ratio S-duct with an 1.5 area ratio exhaust diffuser, and 4% porosity applied to the upstream convex bend was evaluated. Steady-RANS obtained with the realizable k-ε model and source terms derived based on the approach of Andreini et al. (2014) had good pressure distribution, outlet velocity, and coolant mass flow agreement with respect to experiment when the hole diameter was resolved with two nodes. Reducing the computational domain element count by 75% and simulating hole diameters 2.8-times larger with 4% surface porosity gave back pressure and outlet distortion coefficients within grid uncertainty of the finest grid solution; however, local-convex-surface-averaged quantities showed grid dependency.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.238
Threshold uncertainty score0.145

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.188
Teacher spread0.184 · 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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTurbomachinery Performance and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207