MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389516674 · doi:10.1115/1.4064218

Validation and Assessment of a Hybrid VOF-Lagrangian Numerical Methodology for Turbulent Liquid Fuel Jets in High-Speed Crossflow

2023· article· en· W4389516674 on OpenAlexaff
Malika Zghal, Pierre Gauthier, Xiaoxiao Sun, Charith J. Wijesinghe, Vishal Sethi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicCombustion and flame dynamics
Canadian institutionsSiemens (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVolume of fluid methodTurbulenceLagrangianMechanicsComputational fluid dynamicsAerospace engineeringPhysicsEngineeringFlow (mathematics)Theoretical physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract For gas turbine combustors, injecting liquid fuel in crossflow can achieve superior mixing characteristics to improve performance and reduce emissions. Robust numerical design tools are needed to accelerate the development of low-emissions technologies. Atomization modeling is often facilitated by using the Lagrangian approach rather than the more complex and computationally expensive Volume-of-Fluid (VOF) approach. However, most Lagrangian breakup models rely on empirical constants that must be fully calibrated for jets in crossflow and representative conditions. A hybrid approach could deliver a better compromise between accuracy and computational cost. This study proposes and validates a novel numerical methodology for coupling the VOF and Lagrangian approaches using a stochastic breakup model with Adaptive Mesh Refinements for turbulent liquid fuel jets in crossflow under more representative gas turbine conditions. The predictions were validated in the near and far-field regions using datasets at high pressures (1–8 bar), Weber numbers (720–1172), and momentum flux ratios (6–33). The predictive capabilities and computational cost were also compared to the Lagrangian approach coupled with large eddy simulations (LES) and with the unsteady Reynolds-Averaged Navier–Stokes (RANS) methodology previously developed and validated by the authors. The effect of different VOF-Lagrangian transition criteria on the computational cost was also assessed and recommendations were provided for further improvements. The overall LES predictions were significantly improved by the proposed hybrid methodology. Although it tends to underpredict the spray trajectory and Sauter Mean Diameter compared to the URANS methodology, it better captures the diameter in the wake region and the droplet velocities.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.124
Threshold uncertainty score0.471

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.269 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and PowerSame topicCombustion and flame dynamicsFrench-language works237,207