MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2032850763 · doi:10.1139/p07-164

Turbulent boundary layer over a deep cavity: friction coefficient and streamwise velocity components

2007· article· en· W2032850763 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
M. El Hassan, L. Labraga, Laurent Keirsbulck

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Physics · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Turbulent Flows
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsParticle image velocimetryBoundary layerFlatness (cosmology)VelocimetryTurbulenceMechanicsDrag coefficientOpticsParticle tracking velocimetryParasitic dragDragFlow separationLaser Doppler velocimetryClassical mechanicsAstrophysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Deep cavities are present in car vehicles in numerous forms. Although drag downstream cavities have interested many authors, this aspect was never treated for particularly deep cavities. The objective of the present investigation is to study the effect of a deep cavity, characterized by its length-to-depth ratio L/H = 0.2, on both the skin friction coefficient and the statistic components of the streamwise velocity. Laser Doppler velocimetry (LDV) was used for the mean velocity and its statistic components measurements. Results obtained by other authors allowed a comparison between shallow and deep cavity configurations. The main conclusion is that with the same flow conditions, the drag increase downstream from the cavity is less important compared to the square cavity. A localized skewness coefficient decrease and a flatness coefficient increase could be related to intermittence ejection of flow from the downstream part of the cavity. This hypothesis was confirmed thanks to particle image velocimetry (PIV) measurements. PACS No.: 47.27.nb

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.189 · 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

Citations4
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of PhysicsSame topicFluid Dynamics and Turbulent FlowsFrench-language works237,207