Experimental studies of vortices shed from cylinders with a step-change in diameter
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The interactions of vortices shed from two coaxially joined cylinders with a diameter ratio of 0.51 have been studied in a water channel, at Reynolds numbers, based on the large cylinder diameter, between 63 and 1100. Spectral and wavelet analyses of streamwise velocity measurements have identified the formation of three distinct spanwise vortex-shedding cells away from the far ends of the two cylinders, including a low-frequency cell, which appeared in a cyclic manner near the step and behind the large cylinder. Analysis of flow-visualization images has identified two distinct types of vortex connection at cell boundaries: some vortices in a cell of lower frequency connected across the boundary to counterparts in the cell of higher frequency, while others formed a half-loop to connect to a vortex shed from the opposite side of the cylinder in the same cell. Additional cross-boundary vortex connections balanced the total vortex strengths. The interactions of two types of streamwise vortices, identified as edge vortices and junction vortices, with spanwise vortices have also been documented.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".