Downwind flow behaviours of cuboid-shaped obstacles: modelling and experiments
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Buildings or fence-like structures are frequently modelled as cuboids in simulations of environmental assessments. Understanding flows around and downwind of typical isolated buildings, in the form of cuboids, provide insightful building disposition strategies, which are particularly useful in the field of urban planning. Fast analytical models or computational numerical models are essential for sensitivity studies of various design parameters that require validation against field/experimental data. The aim of this study is to compare in detail the robustness of analytical perturbation models and the computational fluid dynamics (CFD) k − ε turbulence models for predicting the mean wake velocity defects along the centre line downwind of the cuboids, both in the near- and far-wake regions. Depending on aspect ratios of cuboids, the decay rate of maximum velocity defect behaves differently. Moreover, the CFD code over-predicts the magnitude of maximum defect in comparison with the perturbation models, whereas it over-predicts or under-predicts when compared to actual measurements. A physical explanation has been proposed in this paper. The steady CFD models, requiring less empirical input, are shown to provide satisfactory results for approximate computations of flows in the near- and far-wake regions of cuboid buildings with appropriate settings of inflow profiles and wall function.
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".