Experiments and Large-Eddy Simulations of Lobed and Swirling Turbulent Thermal Jets for HVAC's Applications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The mixing improvement by passive control is of wide practical interest. The lobed diffuser, which mixes the primary and secondary streams with high efficiency, has been widely used for heat and mass transfer in the field of fluid engineering. In addition, the jets through lobed generate streamwise vortices, which mix the ambient air and the jet fluid more effectively. The main objective of the present work is to develop new air diffusers for heating, ventilation, air conditioning (HVAC) systems using different jet geometries, in order to improve the users’ thermal comfort. Three free jets of air diffusers emitted from a tubular lobed, with six and five lobes, and from a swirl nozzle have been both studied experimentally and numerically. All diffusers have the same throat diameter. It turns out that the results obtained with the LES/WALE and LES/K-ET turbulence models are respectively in good agreement with the experimental results of the lobed and swirling jets. These results indicate that the best mixture is obtained using the six-lobed nozzle with respect to the five-lobed nozzle and the swirling nozzle. In addition, the importance of the jet type on the mixing capacity is highlighted.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".