MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Turbulence Modeling of Flows over Circular Spillways

2009· article· en· W2015034560 on OpenAlexaff
Rahim Tadayon, Amruthur S. Ramamurthy

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Irrigation and Drainage Engineering · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydraulic flow and structures
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTurbulenceMechanicsEnvironmental scienceGeologyPhysicsMeteorology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To predict the characteristics of flows over circular spillways, a turbulence model based on the Reynolds stress model (RSM) is presented. Circular spillways are used to regulate water levels in reservoirs. The flow over the spillway is rapidly varied with highly curvilinear streamlines. The isotropic eddy-viscosity models such as k-ε models are based on the Boussinesq eddy viscosity approximation that assumes the components of the turbulence Reynolds stress tensor linearly vary with the mean rate of strain tensor. Hence, they cannot very precisely predict the characteristics of flows over the spillway. On the other hand, the non-isotropic turbulence models such as the turbulence Reynolds stress models (RSM) that calculate all the components of the Reynolds stress tensor can accurately predict the characteristics of these flows. The k-ε models and RSM were applied in the present study to obtain the flow parameters such as the pressure and velocity distributions as well as water surface profiles. The previously published experimental results were used to validate the simulation predictions. For flow over a circular spillway, RSM appears to properly validate the characteristics of the flow under various conditions in the field, without recourse to expensive experimental procedures.

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)0.000
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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.188
Teacher spread0.184 · 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

Citations23
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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