DOE PAGES title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: Classification of machine learning frameworks for data-driven thermal fluid models

Abstract

Thermal fluid processes are inherently multi-physics and multi-scale, involving mass-momentum-energy transport phenomena at multiple scales. Thermal fluid simulation (TFS) is based on solving conservative equations, for which – except for “first-principles” direct numerical simulation – closure relations (CRs) are required to provide microscopic interactions or so-called sub-grid-scale physics. In practice, TFS is realized through reduced-order modeling, and its CRs as low-fidelity models can be informed by observations and data from relevant and adequately evaluated experiments and high-fidelity simulations. This paper is focused on data-driven TFS models, specifically on their development using machine learning (ML). Five ML frameworks are introduced including physics-separated ML (PSML or Type I ML), physics-evaluated ML (PEML or Type II ML), physics-integrated ML (PIML or Type III ML), physics-recovered (PRML or Type IV ML), and physics-discovered ML (PDML or Type V ML). The frameworks vary in their performance for different applications depending on the level of knowledge of governing physics, source, type, amount and quality of available data for training. Notably, outlined for the first time in this paper, Type III models present stringent requirements on modeling, substantial computing resources for training, and high potential in extracting value from “big data” in thermal fluid research. Here themore » current paper demonstrates and investigates ML frameworks in three examples. First, we utilize the heat diffusion equation with a nonlinear conductivity model formulated by convolutional neural networks (CNNs) and feedforward neural networks (FNNs) to illustrate the applications of Type I, Type II, Type III, and Type V ML. The results indicate a preference for Type II ML under deficient data support. Type III ML can effectively utilize field data, potentially generating more robust predictions than Type I and Type II ML. CNN-based closures exhibit more predictability than FNN-based closures, but CNN-based closures require more training data to obtain accurate predictions. Second, we illustrate how to employ Type I ML and Type II ML frameworks for data-driven turbulence modeling using reference works. Third, we demonstrate Type I ML by building a deep FNN-based slip closure for two-phase flow modeling. The results show that deep FNN-based closures exhibit a bounded error in the prediction domain.« less

Authors:
ORCiD logo [1];  [1]
  1. North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC (United States)
Publication Date:
Research Org.:
North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC (United States)
Sponsoring Org.:
USDOE Office of Nuclear Energy (NE); USDOE Office of Nuclear Energy (NE), Nuclear Energy University Program (NEUP)
OSTI Identifier:
1613917
Alternate Identifier(s):
OSTI ID: 1636957
Grant/Contract Number:  
NE0008530; AC05-00OR22725
Resource Type:
Accepted Manuscript
Journal Name:
International Journal of Thermal Sciences
Additional Journal Information:
Journal Volume: 135; Journal Issue: C; Journal ID: ISSN 1290-0729
Publisher:
Elsevier
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
42 ENGINEERING; thermal fluid simulation; closure relations; multiscale modeling; machine learning framework; deep learning; data driven; convolutional neural networks; classification

Citation Formats

Chang, Chih-Wei, and Dinh, Nam T. Classification of machine learning frameworks for data-driven thermal fluid models. United States: N. p., 2018. Web. doi:10.1016/j.ijthermalsci.2018.09.002.
Chang, Chih-Wei, & Dinh, Nam T. Classification of machine learning frameworks for data-driven thermal fluid models. United States. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijthermalsci.2018.09.002
Chang, Chih-Wei, and Dinh, Nam T. Fri . "Classification of machine learning frameworks for data-driven thermal fluid models". United States. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijthermalsci.2018.09.002. https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1613917.
@article{osti_1613917,
title = {Classification of machine learning frameworks for data-driven thermal fluid models},
author = {Chang, Chih-Wei and Dinh, Nam T.},
abstractNote = {Thermal fluid processes are inherently multi-physics and multi-scale, involving mass-momentum-energy transport phenomena at multiple scales. Thermal fluid simulation (TFS) is based on solving conservative equations, for which – except for “first-principles” direct numerical simulation – closure relations (CRs) are required to provide microscopic interactions or so-called sub-grid-scale physics. In practice, TFS is realized through reduced-order modeling, and its CRs as low-fidelity models can be informed by observations and data from relevant and adequately evaluated experiments and high-fidelity simulations. This paper is focused on data-driven TFS models, specifically on their development using machine learning (ML). Five ML frameworks are introduced including physics-separated ML (PSML or Type I ML), physics-evaluated ML (PEML or Type II ML), physics-integrated ML (PIML or Type III ML), physics-recovered (PRML or Type IV ML), and physics-discovered ML (PDML or Type V ML). The frameworks vary in their performance for different applications depending on the level of knowledge of governing physics, source, type, amount and quality of available data for training. Notably, outlined for the first time in this paper, Type III models present stringent requirements on modeling, substantial computing resources for training, and high potential in extracting value from “big data” in thermal fluid research. Here the current paper demonstrates and investigates ML frameworks in three examples. First, we utilize the heat diffusion equation with a nonlinear conductivity model formulated by convolutional neural networks (CNNs) and feedforward neural networks (FNNs) to illustrate the applications of Type I, Type II, Type III, and Type V ML. The results indicate a preference for Type II ML under deficient data support. Type III ML can effectively utilize field data, potentially generating more robust predictions than Type I and Type II ML. CNN-based closures exhibit more predictability than FNN-based closures, but CNN-based closures require more training data to obtain accurate predictions. Second, we illustrate how to employ Type I ML and Type II ML frameworks for data-driven turbulence modeling using reference works. Third, we demonstrate Type I ML by building a deep FNN-based slip closure for two-phase flow modeling. The results show that deep FNN-based closures exhibit a bounded error in the prediction domain.},
doi = {10.1016/j.ijthermalsci.2018.09.002},
journal = {International Journal of Thermal Sciences},
number = C,
volume = 135,
place = {United States},
year = {Fri Oct 12 00:00:00 EDT 2018},
month = {Fri Oct 12 00:00:00 EDT 2018}
}

Journal Article:

Citation Metrics:
Cited by: 46 works
Citation information provided by
Web of Science

Save / Share:

Works referenced in this record:

An information theoretic approach to use high-fidelity codes to calibrate low-fidelity codes
journal, November 2016


Computer simulation of two-phase flow in nuclear reactors
journal, June 1993


Data-driven fluid simulations using regression forests
journal, November 2015

  • Ladický, L'ubor; Jeong, SoHyeon; Solenthaler, Barbara
  • ACM Transactions on Graphics, Vol. 34, Issue 6
  • DOI: 10.1145/2816795.2818129

Discovering governing equations from data by sparse identification of nonlinear dynamical systems
journal, March 2016

  • Brunton, Steven L.; Proctor, Joshua L.; Kutz, J. Nathan
  • Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Vol. 113, Issue 15
  • DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1517384113

Using statistical learning to close two-fluid multiphase flow equations for a simple bubbly system
journal, September 2015

  • Ma, Ming; Lu, Jiacai; Tryggvason, Gretar
  • Physics of Fluids, Vol. 27, Issue 9
  • DOI: 10.1063/1.4930004

Using statistical learning to close two-fluid multiphase flow equations for bubbly flows in vertical channels
journal, October 2016


DNS–Assisted Modeling of Bubbly Flows in Vertical Channels
journal, November 2016

  • Tryggvason, Gretar; Ma, Ming; Lu, Jiacai
  • Nuclear Science and Engineering, Vol. 184, Issue 3
  • DOI: 10.13182/NSE16-10

A paradigm for data-driven predictive modeling using field inversion and machine learning
journal, January 2016


Physics-informed machine learning approach for reconstructing Reynolds stress modeling discrepancies based on DNS data
journal, March 2017


Reynolds averaged turbulence modelling using deep neural networks with embedded invariance
journal, October 2016

  • Ling, Julia; Kurzawski, Andrew; Templeton, Jeremy
  • Journal of Fluid Mechanics, Vol. 807
  • DOI: 10.1017/jfm.2016.615

Subgrid-scale physical parameterization in atmospheric modeling: How can we make it consistent?
journal, June 2016


Using field inversion to quantify functional errors in turbulence closures
journal, April 2016

  • Singh, Anand Pratap; Duraisamy, Karthik
  • Physics of Fluids, Vol. 28, Issue 4
  • DOI: 10.1063/1.4947045

Machine learning strategies for systems with invariance properties
journal, August 2016


Estimation of principal thermal conductivities of layered honeycomb composites using ANN–GA based inverse technique
journal, January 2017


Multilayer feedforward networks are universal approximators
journal, January 1989


Gradient-based learning applied to document recognition
journal, January 1998

  • Lecun, Y.; Bottou, L.; Bengio, Y.
  • Proceedings of the IEEE, Vol. 86, Issue 11
  • DOI: 10.1109/5.726791

Simulation of Two-Phase Flow in Complex Systems
journal, September 2007


Flow boiling of pure fluids: local heat transfer and flow pattern modeling through artificial neural networks
journal, August 2006


Modeling flow boiling heat transfer of pure fluids through artificial neural networks
journal, July 2006


Frictional pressure drop of gas liquid two-phase flow in pipes
journal, December 2008


Development and application of a cubic eddy-viscosity model of turbulence
journal, April 1996


Reynolds Number Effects in Wall-Bounded Turbulent Flows
journal, August 1994

  • Gad-el-Hak, Mohamed; Bandyopadhyay, Promode R.
  • Applied Mechanics Reviews, Vol. 47, Issue 8
  • DOI: 10.1115/1.3111083

Reynolds number dependence of mean flow structure in square duct turbulence
journal, February 2010


Direct numerical simulation of turbulent channel flow up to Reτ=590
journal, April 1999

  • Moser, Robert D.; Kim, John; Mansour, Nagi N.
  • Physics of Fluids, Vol. 11, Issue 4
  • DOI: 10.1063/1.869966

Uncertainty Analysis and Data-Driven Model Advances for a Jet-in-Crossflow
journal, October 2016

  • Ling, Julia; Ruiz, Anthony; Lacaze, Guilhem
  • Journal of Turbomachinery, Vol. 139, Issue 2
  • DOI: 10.1115/1.4034556

Flow topologies and turbulence scales in a jet-in-cross-flow
journal, April 2015

  • Ruiz, A. M.; Lacaze, G.; Oefelein, J. C.
  • Physics of Fluids, Vol. 27, Issue 4
  • DOI: 10.1063/1.4915065

Instability of streaks in wall turbulence with adverse pressure gradient
journal, June 2011

  • Marquillie, Matthieu; Ehrenstein, Uwe; Laval, Jean-Philippe
  • Journal of Fluid Mechanics, Vol. 681
  • DOI: 10.1017/jfm.2011.193

Deep learning in fluid dynamics
journal, January 2017