Toward High-Order CFD-DEM: Development and Validation
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
CFD-DEM is used to simulate solid–fluid systems. DEM models the motion of discrete particles while CFD models the dynamics of the fluid phase. Coupling both necessitates the calculation of the void fraction and the solid–fluid forces resulting in a computationally expensive method. Additionally, evaluating volume-averaged quantities locally restricts particle to cell size ratios limiting the accuracy of the CFD. To mitigate these limitations, we develop a unified finite element CFD-DEM solver which integrates the CFD and DEM solvers into a single software resulting in faster and cheaper coupling between the solvers. It supports dynamically load-balanced parallelization. This allows for more efficient simulations as load balancing ensures the even distribution of workloads among processors; thus, exploiting available resources efficiently. Our solver supports high order schemes; thus, allowing the use of larger elements enhancing the validity and stability of the void fraction schemes while achieving better accuracy. We verify and validate our CFD-DEM solver with a large array of test cases: particle sedimentation, a fluidized bed, the Rayleigh Taylor instability, and a spouted bed.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it