MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2136802895 · doi:10.1017/s0022112010004763

A numerical investigation of the propulsion of water walkers

2010· article· en· W2136802895 on OpenAlexaff
Peng Gao, James J. Feng

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Fluid Mechanics · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicSurface Modification and Superhydrophobicity
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMechanicsThrustInertiaMaterials scienceDragKinematicsPropulsionVortexCurvatureGeologyPhysicsClassical mechanicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a finite-element simulation of the interfacial flow during propulsion of water walkers such as fishing spiders and water striders. The unsteady stroke of the driving leg is represented by a two-dimensional cylinder moving on a specified trajectory. The interface and the moving contact lines are handled by a diffuse-interface model. We explore the mechanism of thrust generation in terms of the interfacial morphology and flow structures. Results show that the most important component of the thrust is the curvature force related to the deformation of the menisci and the asymmetry of the dimple. For water walkers with thick legs, the pressure force due to the inertia of the water being displaced by the leg is also important. The viscous force is negligible. An extensive parametric study is performed on the effect of leg velocity, stroke depth, leg diameter and surface wettability. The propulsive force is insensitive to the contact angle on the leg. However, the hydrophobicity of the leg helps it detach from the surface during the recovery stroke and thus decreases the resistance. It is also important for averting or delaying penetration of the interface at large rowing velocity and depth. In two dimensions, surface waves are more efficient than vortices in transferring the momentum imparted by the leg to the water.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.209 · 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

Citations57
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Fluid MechanicsSame topicSurface Modification and SuperhydrophobicityFrench-language works237,207