Big Chemical Encyclopedia

Chemical substances, components, reactions, process design ...

Articles Figures Tables About

Spatial modeling issues

In the remainder of this section, we introduce the principal modeling issues related to spatial transport using moment methods. First, we discuss the realizability of the NDF and of moment sets (which are related to the numerical errors discussed above). Second, we introduce the phenomenon of particle trajectory crossing (PTC) that occurs with the inhomogeneous KE (and is exactly captured by the NDF), and describe how it leads to a closure problem in the moment-transport equations. Next, we look at issues related to coupling between spatial and phase-space transport in the GPBE (i.e. due to correlations between velocity and internal coordinates such as particle volume). Finally, we introduce KBFVM for solving the moment-transport equations in connection with QBMM, and briefly discuss how they can be used to ensure realizability as well as to capture PTC and to treat coupled moments. [Pg.330]

The presentation in this paper concentrates on the use of large-scale numerical simulation in unraveling these questions for models of two-dimensional directional solidification in an imposed temperature gradient. The simplest models for transport and interfacial physics in these processes are presented in Section 2 along with a summary of the analytical results for the onset of the cellular instability. The finite-element analyses used in the numerical calculations are described in Section 3. Steady-state and time-dependent results for shallow cell near the onset of the instability are presented in Section 4. The issue of the presence of a fundamental mechanism for wavelength selection for deep cells is discussed in Section 5 in the context of calculations with varying spatial wavelength. [Pg.300]

The issues of selection of the spatial wavelength and the deterministic character of the fine scale features of the microstructure are closely related to similar questions in nonlinear transitions in a host of other physical systems, such as macroscopic models of immiscible displacement in porous media - - the Hele Shaw Problem (15) - and flow transitions in fluid mechanical systems (16). [Pg.300]

Model selection, application and validation are issues of major concern in mathematical soil and groundwater quality modeling. For the model selection, issues of importance are the features (physics, chemistry) of the model its temporal (steady state, dynamic) and spatial (e.g., compartmental approach resolution) the model input data requirements the mathematical techniques employed (finite difference, analytic) monitoring data availability and cost (professional time, computer time). For the model application, issues of importance are the availability of realistic input data (e.g., field hydraulic conductivity, adsorption coefficient) and the existence of monitoring data to verify model predictions. Some of these issues are briefly discussed below. [Pg.62]

To help address these issues, we define a new component for use in conceptual models the units of analysis. These are the lowest levels of biological, spatial, and temporal scale used in the quantitative part of the risk assessment (e.g., individual iterations in a simulation model). They also define the biological, spatial, and temporal units of the measures that will be needed as inputs to the assessment model. [Pg.16]

Besides meeting its assumptions, other problems in the application of SSD in risk assessment to extrapolate from the population level to the community level also exist. First, when use is made of databases (such as ECOTOX USEPA 2001) from which it is difficult to check the validity of the data, one does not know what is modeled. In practice, a combination of differences between laboratories, between endpoints, between test durations, between test conditions, between genotypes, between phenotypes, and eventually between species is modeled. Another issue is the ambiguous integration of SSD with exposure distribution to calculate risk (Verdonck et al. 2003). They showed that, in order to be able to set threshold levels using probabilistic risk assessment and interpret the risk associated with a given exposure concentration distribution and SSD, the spatial and temporal interpretations of the exposure concentration distribution must be known. [Pg.121]


See other pages where Spatial modeling issues is mentioned: [Pg.329]    [Pg.331]    [Pg.333]    [Pg.335]    [Pg.337]    [Pg.339]    [Pg.329]    [Pg.331]    [Pg.333]    [Pg.335]    [Pg.337]    [Pg.339]    [Pg.211]    [Pg.405]    [Pg.238]    [Pg.329]    [Pg.890]    [Pg.10]    [Pg.170]    [Pg.351]    [Pg.59]    [Pg.334]    [Pg.523]    [Pg.275]    [Pg.211]    [Pg.380]    [Pg.287]    [Pg.397]    [Pg.248]    [Pg.266]    [Pg.323]    [Pg.36]    [Pg.6]    [Pg.58]    [Pg.66]    [Pg.166]    [Pg.437]    [Pg.153]    [Pg.78]    [Pg.252]    [Pg.71]    [Pg.97]    [Pg.412]    [Pg.427]    [Pg.294]    [Pg.239]    [Pg.245]    [Pg.539]    [Pg.52]   


SEARCH



Overview of spatial modeling issues

Spatial issues

Spatial modeling issues realizability

© 2024 chempedia.info