MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Review of Turbulent Jets and Plumes—A Lagrangian Approach by Joseph H. W. Lee and Vincent H. ChuTurbulent Jets and Plumes—A Lagrangian ApproachKluwer Academic Publishers$135

2006· article· en· W1491560064 on OpenAlexaff
N. Rajaratnam

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Hydraulic Engineering · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydraulic flow and structures
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTurbulenceLagrangianMechanicsReynolds numberPhysicsClassical mechanicsMathematicsTheoretical physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The authors attempt “to give a consistent and unified development of a Lagrangian approach for the prediction of free jets and plumes, including effects of crossflow and ambient density stratification. The authors believe that the integral approach plays a pivotal role in explaining important and practically useful concepts to the engineer and that the subject can best be understood by observation of simple experiments,” and this reviewer shares this view. A practical Lagrangian modeling tool in the form of an interactive virtual reality software VISJET is offered to the readers to solve their problems. The text includes many worked examples and provides problems for the reader to solve. This book is intended for senior undergraduates and first-year graduate students in water and environmental engineering programs. It can also serve as an introduction to environmental fluid mechanics for students in mechanical and chemical engineering as well as earth and environmental sciences. The first chapter provides a general introduction to turbulent jets and plumes, with some pictures of jets and plumes in the environment. Chapter 2 presents a detailed treatment of plane and circular turbulent jets. It develops the integral equations from the Reynolds equations and the continuity equation and shows good correlation of the different scales along with some details of turbulence properties from experiments. On page 28, p / y is wrongly given the order of zero, and it would be logical to add a minus sign on the left-hand side of Eq. 2-30. Chapter 3 deals with turbulent plumes and buoyant jets. It considers in detail the round plume, the relevant equations of motion, as well as integral equations and extends this treatment to plumes with initial momentum buoyant jets . This chapter also introduces a discussion of the

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.415
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.189
Teacher spread0.185 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations1
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Hydraulic EngineeringSame topicHydraulic flow and structuresFrench-language works237,207