MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

An Analysis of CFD-DEM with Coarse Graining for Turbulent Particle-Laden Jet Flows

2023· preprint· en· W4383554993 on OpenAlexaff
Dustin Steven Weaver, Sanja Mišković

Bibliographic record

VenuePreprints.org · 2023
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicParticle Dynamics in Fluid Flows
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGranularityMechanicsComputational fluid dynamicsTurbulenceStokes numberReynolds numberJet (fluid)PhysicsCFD-DEMScalingNozzleFlow (mathematics)Particle (ecology)Statistical physicsMathematicsComputer scienceThermodynamicsGeometryGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents the results of simulations of particle-laden air-solid jet flow in long straight tubes using CFD-DEM, along with an analysis of coarse-graining. Although previous studies have used CFD-DEM for similar flows, these have typically been in a dilute flow regime where uncoupled simulations are accurate. However, fully coupled simulations can introduce issues, necessitating validation studies to ensure that all coupling parameters are effectively used and that the physics is accurately represented. This paper validates the simulations against two different experimental studies, with fluid Reynolds numbers between 10,000 and 40,000 and Stokes numbers between 5.6 and 50. Interestingly, the profiles of mean particle velocity exhibit fewer discrepancies as the Stokes number increases but more discrepancies for the root mean square velocity compared to the experiments. Particle number flux is consistent with the experiments after the nozzle exit. Coarse-graining is also applied to the same simulations, achieving relatively accurate results. However, as expected, scaling of contact collision frequencies, forces, and stresses cannot be achieved, meaning that coarse-graining may be useful for comparing designs or operating parameters on an industrial scale but falls short when measuring the total energy dissipation of one experiment.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.159
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.130
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePreprints.orgSame topicParticle Dynamics in Fluid FlowsFrench-language works237,207