MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2039061693 · doi:10.1063/1.4825033

Numerical simulations of spatially developing, accelerating boundary layers

2013· article· en· W2039061693 on OpenAlexafffund
Ugo Piomelli, Junlin Yuan

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics of Fluids · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Turbulent Flows
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsPhysicsTurbulenceMechanicsBoundary layerPressure gradientReynolds stressLaminar flowVortexFlow visualizationDirect numerical simulationReynolds numberFlow separationClassical mechanicsFlow (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present the results of direct and large-eddy simulations of spatially developing boundary layers subjected to favorable pressure gradient, strong enough to cause reversion of the flow towards a quasi-laminar state. The numerical results compare well with experimental data. Visualization of the flow structures shows the well-known stabilization of the streaks, the re-orientation of outer layer vortices in the streamwise direction, and the appearance of turbulent spots in the re-transition region. Both instantaneous visualizations and turbulent statistics highlight the significant damping of wall-normal and spanwise fluctuations. The fast component of the pressure fluctuations appears to be the main driver of this process, contributing to reduce pressure fluctuations and, as a consequence, the energy redistribution term in the Reynolds stress budgets. The streamwise stresses, in whose budget a separate production term plays a role, do not decay but remain frozen at their upstream value. The decrease of wall-normal and spanwise fluctuations appears to be the main cause of the inner-layer stabilization, by disrupting the generation and subsequent growth of streaks, consistent with various models of the turbulence-generation cycle proposed in the literature. The outer layer seems to play a passive role in this process. The stretching and reorientation of the outer-layer vortices results in a more orderly and organized structure; since fewer ejections occur, the inner layer does not break this re-organization, which is maintained until re-transition begins.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.213 · 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

Citations71
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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