MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386067686 · doi:10.11159/htff23.202

The CFD Computation and Validation of Effects of Adaptive Mesh Refinement in Sloshing Simulation in A Narrow Tank

2023· article· en· W4386067686 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Emre Sayak, Sıtkı Uslu

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the World Congress on Mechanical, Chemical, and Material Engineering · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics Simulations and Interactions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSlosh dynamicsComputational fluid dynamicsComputationComputer scienceAdaptive mesh refinementMechanicsAerospace engineeringMarine engineeringComputational sciencePhysicsEngineeringAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Strong and precise computational methods are necessary to discover and understand undesirable effects in tanks where liquids slosh, known as sloshing.Sloshing is important for many industrial applications, such as fuel tanks in ships, aircraft, and other transport vehicles.Numerical methods are commonly used in modelling sloshing behaviour, and adaptive mesh refinement (AMR) technology is an effective method used to increase numerical accuracy in sloshing simulations.The primary objective of this research is to conduct Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) calculations of sloshing phenomena to establish a methodology for observing the undesirable effects on the relevant system and assess the effectiveness of adaptive mesh refinement by comparing the results of surface impact pressures with experimental case results from literature.A 3D model of a rectangular tank partially filled with water is used to simulate the impact pressure caused by roll motion.The roll motion is based on experimental data and occurs at periods close to the tank's internal wave resonance period.The pressure results are observed from a single monitoring point.Numerical studies are performed using Star CCM+ software.The Volume of Fluid (VOF) based Eulerian method is utilised to model the free surface flow.The study demonstrates the ability of AMR to accurately model sloshing behaviour and compares fixed and AMR grids at different levels.Finally, the results of fixed and adaptive cartesian grids are compared and verified with corresponding experimental data.The results showed that the AMR grid provided higher numerical accuracy, lower computational cost and allowed for more accurate modelling of sloshing behaviour.It is emphasised that the importance of AMR for understanding sloshing behaviour and modelling it accurately.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.229
Threshold uncertainty score0.333

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.214 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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 venueProceedings of the World Congress on Mechanical, Chemical, and Material EngineeringSame topicFluid Dynamics Simulations and InteractionsFrench-language works237,207