Flow over a stepped chute with and without macro-roughness elements
Bibliographic record
Abstract
High-speed two-phase flows over a 30° stepped flume were experimentally investigated using macro-roughness elements. The roughness elements included combinations of steps and horizontal strips. Local values of air concentration, air bubble frequency, and mean chord lengths were measured by a fiber-optical instrumentation system in the air–water flow region. The range of unit discharge of water was varied from 0.06 to 0.20 m2/s. Three step configurations were studied: (i) without macro-roughness elements, (ii) with macro-roughness elements on each step, and (iii) with macro-roughness elements on each second step (AMR configuration). The results were compared in terms of onset flow conditions and internal air–water flow parameters such as local air concentration, mean air bubble chord length distribution, and air bubble frequency in the skimming flow regime. It was observed that the AMR configuration produced the maximum free-surface aeration among the other configurations. This alternative step geometry has potential for less cavitation damage than conventional step geometry because of the greater air entrainment.Key words: stepped chute, air-entrainment, air-water flow properties, macro-roughness elements, skimming flow.
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 | 0.000 | 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".