MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3011482401 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.1344610

Numerical Simulation Of Contrail Ice Particle Growth In The Near Field Of An Aircraft Engine

2018· article· en· W3011482401 on OpenAlexaff
Sébastien Cantin, François Morency, François Garnier

Bibliographic record

VenueEspace ÉTS (ETS) · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIcing and De-icing Technologies
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMeteorologyEnvironmental scienceParticle (ecology)Field (mathematics)Aerospace engineeringGeologyPhysicsEngineeringMathematicsOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Contrails from aircraft may have a direct impact on the Earth’s radiative budget balance. The aim of this study is to examine the formation of contrails in the near field of a realistic configuration based on the CFM56 engine and consequently, on the soot and ice particles evolution. In this work, we focused on a primary exhaust jet laden with soot particles and mixed with a secondary jet (bypass flow) in the cold ambient air. The study has been performed using a 2D axisymmetric CFD calculation based on an URANS (Unsteady Reynolds Average Navier-Stokes) approach. Numerical simulations have been performed using STAR-CCM+, a commercial code for multiphysics. The particles are tracked using the Lagrangian approach. A microphysical model was used to calculate their growth. The results show the evolution of ice crystal sizes throughout the exhaust jets. As an example, the mean particle radius grows up to approximately 0.7 μm 0.5 s downstream in agreement with experimental data.

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)0.001
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.237 · 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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEspace ÉTS (ETS)Same topicIcing and De-icing TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207