MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2044739985 · doi:10.1103/physreve.84.051302

Lift and drag forces on an inclined plow moving over a granular surface

2011· article· en· W2044739985 on OpenAlexaff
Baptiste Percier, Sébastien Manneville, Jim McElwaine, Stephen W. Morris, Nicolas Taberlet

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review E · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGranular flow and fluidized beds
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersEngineering and Physical Sciences Research Council
KeywordsDragMechanicsLift (data mining)Lift-to-drag ratioLift-induced dragZero-lift drag coefficientWedge (geometry)Shear stressParasitic dragHydrostatic equilibriumMaterials sciencePhysicsGeologyClassical mechanicsOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We studied the drag and lift forces acting on an inclined plate while it is dragged on the surface of a granular media, both in experiment and in numerical simulation. In particular, we investigated the influence of the horizontal velocity of the plate and its angle of attack. We show that a steady wedge of grains is moved in front of the plow and that the lift and drag forces are proportional to the weight of this wedge. These constants of proportionality vary with the angle of attack but not (or only weakly) on the velocity. We found a universal effective friction law that accounts for the dependence on all the above-mentioned parameters. The stress and velocity fields are calculated from the numerical simulations and show the existence of a shear band under the wedge and that the pressure is nonhydrostatic. The strongest gradients in stress and shear occur at the base of the plow where the dissipation rate is therefore highest.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.240 · 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

Citations49
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review ESame topicGranular flow and fluidized bedsFrench-language works237,207