MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2067340693 · doi:10.1115/fedsm2014-21280

Roughness Effect Downstream of Flow Over a Forward Facing Step

2014· article· en· W2067340693 on OpenAlexaff
Yaw Y. Afriyie, Ebenezer E. Essel, Eric Thacher, Mark F. Tachie

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Turbulent Flows
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFreestreamTurbulence kinetic energyParticle image velocimetryReynolds numberTurbulenceMechanicsReynolds stressShear stressSurface roughnessSurface finishMaterials scienceKinetic energyShear velocityOpticsGeometryPhysicsClassical mechanicsMathematicsComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents results of an experimental research conducted to study roughness effects downstream of a forward facing step (FFS). A rough surface and a hydraulically smooth surface were used as a rough-FFS and a smooth-FFS, respectively. The upstream condition was kept smooth. Particle image velocimetry (PIV) technique was used for the velocity measurements. The Reynolds number based on the step height (h) and freestream velocity of the approach flow was kept constant at 8685. The results show that the mean reattachment length for the smooth-FFS (SM-SM) is 1.9h. Roughness reduced the peak values of the streamwise mean velocity, Reynolds shear stress and turbulent kinetic energy by 3%, 45% and 16.7% respectively in the recirculation region. In the early redevelopment region, roughness also reduced the peak values of turbulent kinetic energy and the Reynolds shear stress by 41% and 22% respectively.

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)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.002
GPT teacher head0.181
Teacher spread0.179 · 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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicFluid Dynamics and Turbulent Flows→French-language works237,207→