Gabor Janiga

Prof. Dr. Gabor Janiga

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

21Years (2006-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 January 2011 in Energy Conversion and Management
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
MMMohamed Mohamed
Mohamed Mohamed
GJGabor Janiga
Gabor Janiga
EPE. Pap
E. Pap
DTDominique Thévenin
Dominique Thévenin

1 November 2010 in Renewable Energy
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
MMMohamed Mohamed
Mohamed Mohamed
GJGabor Janiga
Gabor Janiga
EPE. Pap
E. Pap
DTDominique Thévenin
Dominique Thévenin

1 July 2006 in International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
RHRenan Hilbert
Renan Hilbert
GJGabor Janiga
Gabor Janiga
RBRomain Baron
Romain Baron
DTDominique Thévenin
Dominique Thévenin

1 December 2020 in Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
MFMojtaba Fathi
Mojtaba Fathi
IRIsaac Bernabe Perez Raya
Isaac Bernabe Perez Raya
ABAhmadreza Baghaie
Ahmadreza Baghaie
PBPhilipp Berg
Philipp Berg
GJGabor Janiga
Gabor Janiga
RDRoshan D'Souza
Roshan D'Souza

1 February 2013 in Journal of Biomechanical Engineering
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
DSDavid A. Steinman
David A. Steinman
YHYiemeng Hoi
Yiemeng Hoi
PFPaul Fahy
Paul Fahy
LMLiam Morris
Liam Morris
MWMichael T Walsh
Michael T Walsh
FLFrancis Loth
Francis Loth
Stimulated by a recent controversy regarding pressure drops predicted in a giant aneurysm with a proximal stenosis, the present study sought to assess variability in the prediction of pressures and flow by a wide variety of research groups. In phase I, lumen geometry, flow rates, and fluid properties were specified, leaving each research group to choose their solver, discretization, and solution strategies. Variability was assessed by having each group interpolate their results onto a standardized mesh and centerline. For phase II, a physical model of the geometry was constructed, from which pressure and flow rates were measured. Groups repeated their simulations using a geometry reconstructed from a micro-computed tomography (CT) scan of the physical model with the measured flow rates and fluid properties. Phase I results from 25 groups demonstrated remarkable consistency in the pressure patterns, with the majority predicting peak systolic pressure drops within 8% of each other. Aneurysm sac flow patterns were more variable with only a few groups reporting peak systolic flow instabilities owing to their use of high temporal resolutions. Variability for phase II was comparable, and the median predicted pressure drops were within a few millimeters of mercury of the measured values but only after accounting for submillimeter errors in the reconstruction of the life-sized flow model from micro-CT. In summary, pressure can be predicted with consistency by CFD across a wide range of solvers and solution strategies, but this may not hold true for specific flow patterns or derived quantities. Future challenges are needed and should focus on hemodynamic quantities thought to be of clinical interest.

1 January 2011 in Energy
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
MMMohamed Mohamed
Mohamed Mohamed
GJGabor Janiga
Gabor Janiga
EPE. Pap
E. Pap
DTDominique Thévenin
Dominique Thévenin