MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2328610755 · doi:10.2514/6.2012-2852

A Parametric Study of High Reynolds Number Grid-Generated Turbulence

2012· article· en· W2328610755 on OpenAlexafffund
R. Jason Hearst, Philippe Lavoie

Bibliographic record

Venue42nd AIAA Fluid Dynamics Conference and Exhibit · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Turbulent Flows
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaGovernment of Ontario
KeywordsTurbulenceReynolds numberParametric statisticsReynolds decompositionGridComputer scienceMagnetic Reynolds numberReynolds stress equation modelStatistical physicsK-epsilon turbulence modelPhysicsMechanicsMathematicsK-omega turbulence modelReynolds equationGeometryStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An active grid is used to generate high-intensity homogeneous isotropic turbulence (HIT) with large integral length scales. The grid is designed such that the motion of adjacent wings may be decoupled allowing for the transient blockage of the grid to take on a more random form than attainable by previous grids. The grid produces high Reynolds number turbulence that is a reasonable approximation of HIT. Based on an exhaustive parametric study conducted with this new grid, the three primary factors that inuence the turbulence produced by the grid are the mean rotational velocity of the wings, , the mean ow velocity, U, and the wing geometry. A maximum Reynolds number of Re = 426 was obtained and the largest integral length scales measured were Lux= 7:16M (or 57 cm). Variations in Lux were found to be dominated by the low frequency energy produced by certain grid settings, typically with low values of .

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

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 communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.202 · 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

Citations3
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue42nd AIAA Fluid Dynamics Conference and ExhibitSame topicFluid Dynamics and Turbulent FlowsFrench-language works237,207