MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2972700428 · doi:10.1108/hff-09-2018-0534

Eulerian–Lagrangian CFD model for prediction of heat transfer between aircraft deicing liquid sprays and a surface

2019· article· en· W2972700428 on OpenAlexaff
Sami Ernez, François Morency

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Numerical Methods for Heat &amp Fluid Flow · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIcing and De-icing Technologies
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSplashMechanicsHeat transferMaterials scienceNozzleComputational fluid dynamicsSpray nozzleEvaporationTurbulenceSpray characteristicsMeteorologyThermodynamicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose The aim of this paper is to present a Eulerian–Lagrangian model of aircraft ground deicing that avoids the scale’s dispersion problem caused by the great distance between the spray nozzle and the surface to be deiced. Verification is done using the case of a hot particle liquid spray impinging on a horizontal flat plate. The impinged particles flow outwards radially from the impingement zone and form a hot film wall. The computed wall heat distribution is verified. In the end, an inclination spray’s angle study is presented. Design/methodology/approach The problem is divided into two regions. First, a 3D region is created for the evolution of the Lagrangian particles spray. A second 2D region is provided for the formation of a liquid film. The two regions exchange mass, momentum and energy through an interface. Heat losses are modelled through particles and liquid-film cooling and evaporation, particles splash and heat transfer to a fixed temperature plate. Findings For a chamber pressure of 1 bar, the predicted spray penetration is within 10 per cent of the experimental results. For this study case, the heat transfer is maximized with an inclination angle of approximately 30° of the spray. Originality/value The model presented makes it possible to simulate the impingement and heat transfer of a large-scale liquid spray with a reasonable computational cost. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this model is a first attempt of the computational fluid dynamics simulation of ground deicing.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.289 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations12
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Numerical Methods for Heat &amp Fluid FlowSame topicIcing and De-icing TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207