Analyzing the Influence of Dean Number on an Accelerated Toroidal: Insights from Particle Imaging Velocimetry Gyroscope (PIVG)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) simulations were utilized in this study to comprehensively explore the fluid dynamics within an accelerated toroidal vessel, specifically those central to Particle Imaging Velocimetry Gyroscope (PIVG) technology. To ensure the robustness of our simulations, we systematically conducted grid convergence studies and quantified uncertainties, affirming the stability, accuracy, and reliability of our computational grid and results. Comprehensive validation against experimental data further confirmed our simulations’ fidelity, emphasizing the model’s fidelity. As the PIVG is set up to address the primary flow through the toroidal pipe, we focused on the interaction between the primary and secondary flows to provide insights into the relevant dynamics of the fluid. In our investigation covering Dean numbers (De) from 10 to 70, we analyzed diverse aspects, including primary flow, secondary flow patterns, pressure distribution, and the interrelation between primary and secondary flows within toroidal structures, offering a comprehensive view across this range. Our research indicated stability and fully developed fluid dynamics within the toroidal pipe under accelerated angular velocity, particularly for low De. Furthermore, we identified an optimal Dean number of 11, which corresponded to ideal dimensions for the toroidal geometry with a curvature radius of 25 mm and a cross-sectional diameter of 5 mm. This study enhances our understanding of toroidal fluid dynamics and highlights the pivotal role of CFD in optimizing toroidal vessel design for advanced navigation technologies.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".