Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract An alternative analytical model is proposed for hydrodynamics of incompressible Newtonian fluids with suspended solid particles. Unlike existing single-phase models that do not distinguish the velocity field of suspended particles from the velocity field of host fluid, the present model accounts for the relative shift between the two velocity fields and assumes that its effect can be largely captured by substituting the inertia term of Navier–Stokes equations with the acceleration field of the mass center of the representative unit cell. The proposed model enjoys a relatively concise mathematical formulation. The oscillating flow of a particle–fluid suspension between two flat plates is studied with the present model, and detailed results are presented for Stokes’ second flow problem on the oscillating flow of a suspension half-space induced by an oscillating plate with specific examples of dusty gases and nanofluids. Remarkably, leading-order asymptotic expressions derived by the present model, for the effect of suspended particles on the decay index and wavenumber of the velocity field, are shown to be identical to known results derived based on the widely adopted Saffman model for dusty gases. It is hoped that the present work could offer a relatively simplified and yet reasonably accurate model for hydrodynamic problems of particle–fluid suspensions.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".