Evaluation of the structure function method to compute turbulent dissipation within boundary layers using numerical simulations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Well‐resolved numerical simulations of turbulent open channel flows are analyzed to evaluate the accuracy of the 2nd order structure function method (SFM) in estimating the rate of dissipation of turbulent kinetic energy within boundary layers. The objective is to assess the variation in the 2/3 Kolmogorov constants due to flow anisotropy with distance from the wall. Comparison of the dissipation calculated directly from the numerical data, with that from the SFM shows that usage of the canonical constants, based on the assumption of local isotropy, can result in considerable error (>50%) in the prediction of dissipation when using the vertical or spanwise velocity components. From the numerically calculated dissipation, optimal Kolmogorov 2/3 constants were obtained and empirical relations, which account for near‐wall effects, were proposed. Usage of the optimal constants will improve estimation of the dissipation rate when the SFM is applied to compute dissipation in geophysical boundary‐layer flows.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".