Steady Flow of Power Law Fluids across a Circular Cylinder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The momentum equations describing the steady cross‐flow of power law fluids past an unconfined circular cylinder have been solved numerically using a semi‐implicit finite volume method. The numerical results highlighting the roles of Reynolds number and power law index on the global and detailed flow characteristics have been presented over wide ranges of conditions as 5 ≤ Re ≤ 40 and 0.6 ≤ n ≤ 2. The shear‐thinning behaviour (n < 1) of the fluid decreases the size of recirculation zone and also delays the separation; on the other hand, the shear‐thickening fluids (n > 1) show the opposite behaviour. Furthermore, while the wake size shows non‐monotonous variation with the power law index, but it does not seem to influence the values of drag coefficient. The stagnation pressure coefficient and drag coefficient also show a complex dependence on the power law index and Reynolds number. In addition, the pressure coefficient, vorticity and viscosity distributions on the surface of the cylinder have also been presented to gain further physical insights into the detailed flow kinematics.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".