Viscoplastic boundary layers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the limit of a large yield stress, or equivalently at the initiation of motion, viscoplastic flows can develop narrow boundary layers that provide either surfaces of failure between rigid plugs, the lubrication between a plugged flow and a wall or buffers for regions of predominantly plastic deformation. Oldroyd ( Proc. Camb. Phil. Soc. , vol. 43, 1947, pp. 383–395) presented the first theoretical discussion of these viscoplastic boundary layers, offering an asymptotic reduction of the governing equations and a discussion of some model flow problems. However, the complicated nonlinear form of Oldroyd’s boundary-layer equations has evidently precluded further discussion of them. In the current paper, we revisit Oldroyd’s viscoplastic boundary-layer analysis and his canonical examples of a jet-like intrusion and flow past a thin plate. We also consider flow down channels with either sudden expansions or wavy walls. In all these examples, we verify that viscoplastic boundary layers form as envisioned by Oldroyd. For each example, we extract the dependence of the boundary-layer thickness and flow profiles on the dimensionless yield-stress parameter (Bingham number). We find that, while Oldroyd’s boundary-layer theory applies to free viscoplastic shear layers, it does not apply when the boundary layer is adjacent to a wall, as has been observed previously for two-dimensional flow around circular obstructions. Instead, the boundary-layer thickness scales in a different fashion with the Bingham number, as suggested by classical solutions for plane-parallel flows, lubrication theory and, for flow around a plate, by Piau ( J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech. , vol. 102, 2002, pp. 193–218); we rationalize this second scaling and provide an alternative boundary-layer theory.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".