MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Effect of Tank Size and Geometry on the Flow Induced by Circular Bubble Plumes and Water Jets

2008· article· en· W1993579749 on OpenAlexaff
Iran Eduardo Lima Neto, David Z. Zhu, N. Rajaratnam

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Hydraulic Engineering · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Mixing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersMinistério da EducaçãoCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
KeywordsBubbleTurbulenceMechanicsPlumeFlow (mathematics)IsotropyPlane (geometry)Flow visualizationGeometryMaterials scienceGeologyMeteorologyPhysicsOpticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ambient flow field and circulation patterns induced by circular bubble plumes and water jets in tanks of different sizes were studied in rectangular and square water tanks. A nonstationary nature of the flow was observed in all experiments and its dominant oscillation frequency was found to directly relate to the tank size. The flow circulation patterns were similar for bubble plumes and water jets, but changed significantly with tank size and geometry. Strong three-dimensional effects were observed in a rectangular tank, resulting in flow entraining in the longer plane and flow detraining in the shorter plane, especially for the bubble plume tests. A relationship was developed to relate the tank size to the patterns of circulation cells. Nearly isotropic turbulent flow conditions were obtained in all experiments, but the effect of tank size and geometry on the magnitude of the turbulent stresses was more pronounced in the bubble plume tests.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.168
Teacher spread0.165 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations39
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Hydraulic EngineeringSame topicFluid Dynamics and MixingFrench-language works237,207