MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415773572 · doi:10.59957/jctm.v60.i6.2025.20

NUMERICAL ANALYSIS OF MICROMIXING IN CONCEPTUAL COMBUSTOR

2025· article· W4415773572 on OpenAlexaff
Jayeshkumar R. Parekh, Digvijay Kulashreshtha, Vijay Dhiman

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Chemical Technology and Metallurgy · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldEngineering
TopicCombustion and flame dynamics
Canadian institutionsThompson Rivers University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicromixingCombustorCombustionMixing (physics)TurbulenceComputational fluid dynamicsJet (fluid)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

When a jet is introduced into a crossflow, a key fluid dynamic phenomenon known as micromixing improves fluid mixing. In order to encourage hydrogen's mixing with air prior to burning in a diffusion flame, hydrogen is delivered perpendicularly into an airstream in this study. The purpose of the combustor design is to shed light on the behavior of micromixing and how it affects combustion properties. The micromixing process is examined and its impact on flow dynamics assessed using ANSYS Fluent. In order to maximize micromixing efficiency in both cold flow and combustion scenarios, the combustor geometry was specially designed. According to simulation data, there is better mixing in the combustor's center, which raises the temperature during combustion. Analysis of velocity and turbulence also shows how vortex generation and jet penetration contribute to improved micromixing. Better fuel-air mixing enhances combustion performance and stability, according to the study. Advanced cooling techniques will be investigated in future studies to control temperature distribution and avoid thermal hotspots. Additionally, optimization of injection parameters and combustor modifications will be considered to further enhance micromixing and overall combustion efficiency.

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 score0.549
Threshold uncertainty score0.918

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.227 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Chemical Technology and MetallurgySame topicCombustion and flame dynamicsFrench-language works237,207