MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1967813663 · doi:10.1063/1.4862672

Numerical simulations of sink-flow boundary layers over rough surfaces

2014· article· en· W1967813663 on OpenAlexafffund
Junlin Yuan, Ugo Piomelli

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics of Fluids · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Turbulent Flows
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersHydro-Québec
KeywordsPhysicsTurbulenceReynolds numberMechanicsBoundary layerDirect numerical simulationSurface finishTurbulence kinetic energySurface roughnessScalingBoundary layer thicknessGeometryClassical mechanicsMaterials scienceThermodynamicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Turbulent sink flows over smooth or rough walls with sand-grain roughness are studied using large-eddy and direct numerical simulations. Mild and strong levels of acceleration are applied, yielding a wide range of Reynolds number (Reθ = 372 − 2748) and cases close to the reverse-transitional state. Flow acceleration and roughness are shown to exert opposite effects on boundary-layer integral parameters, on the Reynolds stresses, budgets of turbulent kinetic energy, and properties of turbulent structures in the vicinity of the rough surface; statistics exhibit similarity when plotted using inner scaling for cases with the same roughness Reynolds number, k+. Acceleration leads to a decrease of k+, while roughness increases it. For cases with higher k+, the low-speed streaks become destabilized, and turbulent structures near the wall are distributed more uniformly in the wall-parallel plane; they are less extended in the streamwise direction, but more densely packed. Higher k+ also causes decorrelation of the outer-layer hairpin packets with the near-wall structures, probably due to the direct impact of random roughness elements on the hairpin legs. Wall-similarity applies for the fully turbulent cases, in which the outer-layer turbulent statistics are affected by acceleration only. It is shown that being in the hydraulically smooth regime is a necessary condition for reverse-transition, supporting the idea that relaminarization starts from the inner region, where roughness effects dominate.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.210 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations66
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysics of FluidsSame topicFluid Dynamics and Turbulent FlowsFrench-language works237,207