Free Convective Flow in a Two Enclosure Arrangement With a High Aspect Ratio Side Enclosure Joined to a Large Square Enclosure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract A numerical study of free convective flow in a vertical joined two-enclosure arrangement has been undertaken. In this arrangement, a vertical heated wall kept at a uniform high temperature is contained in a high aspect ratio rectangular side enclosure. This enclosure is separated from a larger square enclosure by a vertical dividing wall which is impermeable but offers no resistance to heat transfer. The vertical wall of the main flow enclosure opposite to the dividing wall is maintained at a uniform lower temperature. All remaining walls in both enclosures are adiabatic. The situation considered is an approximate model of a window exposed to a hot outside environment and covered by a plane blind which in turn is exposed to cooled room. The flow has been assumed to be laminar and two-dimensional and results have been obtained for a Prandtl number of 0.7. The effects of Rayleigh number and the dimensionless width of the side enclosure on the Nusselt number have been investigated. The results show that there is a minimum in the Nusselt number variation with side enclosure width for a fixed Rayleigh number. The effect of Rayleigh number on the conditions under which this minimum occurs and on the value of the minimum Nusselt number has been investigated.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".