A Combined Experimental and Numerical Study of Flow Past a Single Step Cylinder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The current study investigates flow past a step cylinder for ReD = 1050 and D/d = 2 using both experimental and numerical methods. The focus of the study is on the vortex shedding and vortex interactions occurring in the step cylinder wake. Flow visualization with hydrogen bubble technique and planar Laser Induced Fluorescence has shown that three distinct spanwise vortex cells form: a single vortex shedding cell in the wake of the small cylinder and two vortex shedding cells in the wake of the large cylinder. Vortex connections form between the spanwise vortices in these cells downstream of the step, and vortex dislocations occur at cell boundaries. Complementary to the experimental tests, an LES-RANS hybrid numerical simulation is used to model the flow development. A comparison of the experimental and numerical results indicates that the numerical approach adequately models vortex dynamics in the wake of a step cylinder and, thus, may be used to analyze time dependent, three-dimensional flow topology which is difficult to characterize quantitatively using experimental methods.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".