MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2951832891 · doi:10.1108/hff-09-2018-0490

Liquid drop breakup in homogeneous isotropic turbulence

2019· article· en· W2951832891 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Numerical Methods for Heat &amp Fluid Flow · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicLattice Boltzmann Simulation Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBreakupDrop (telecommunication)TurbulenceVortexLattice Boltzmann methodsMechanicsHomogeneous isotropic turbulencePhysicsTurbulence kinetic energyStatistical physicsDirect numerical simulationMaterials scienceClassical mechanicsComputer scienceReynolds number

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose This paper aims to demonstrate the capabilities of a diffuse interface free energy lattice Boltzmann method to perform direct numerical simulations of liquid–liquid dispersions in a well-controlled turbulent environment. The goal of this research study is to develop numerical techniques that can visualize and quantify drop interaction with the turbulent vortices. The obtained information will be used for the development of sub-models of drop breakup for multi-scale simulations. Design/methodology/approach A pure binary liquid system is considered that is subject to fully developed statistically stationary turbulent flow field in a cubic fully periodic box with the edge size of 300 lattice units. Three turbulent flow fields with varying energy input are examined and their coherent structures are visualized using a normalized Q-criterion. The evolution of the liquid–liquid interface is tracked as a function of time. The detailed explanation of the numerical method is provided with a highlight on a choice of the numerical parameters. Findings Drop breakup mechanisms differ depending on energy input. Drops break due to interaction with the vortices. Quantification of turbulent structures shows that the size of vortices increases with the decrease of energy input. Drop interacts simultaneously with multiple vortices of the size comparable to or smaller than the drop size. Vortices of the size smaller than the drop size disturb drop interface and pinch off the satellites. Vortices of the size comparable to the drop size tend to elongate the drop and tear it apart producing daughter drops and satellites. Addition of the second phase enhances turbulent dissipation at the high wavenumbers. To obtain physically realistic two-phase energy spectra, the multiple-relaxation-time collision operator should be used. Originality/value Detailed information of drop breakup in the turbulent flow field is crucial for the development of drop breakup sub-models that are necessary for multi-scale numerical simulations. The improvement of numerical methods that can provide these data and produce reliable results is important. This work made one step towards a better understanding of how drops interact with the turbulent vortices.

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.

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)0.001
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.339
Threshold uncertainty score0.766

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.327 · 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