On the Calibration of Irwin Probes for Flow in Rectangular Ducts With Different Aspect Ratios
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this work, the suitability of pressure probes, commonly known as Irwin probes, to determine the local wall shear stress was evaluated for steady turbulent flow in rectangular ducts. Pressure measurements were conducted in the fully developed flow region of the duct and both the influence of duct aspect ratio (AR) (from 1:1.03 to 1:4.00) and Reynolds number (from 104 to 9 × 104) on the mean characteristics of the flow were analyzed. In addition, the sensitivity of the longitudinal and transversal placement of the Irwin probes was verified. To determine the most appropriate representation of the experimental data, three different characteristic lengths (l*) to describe Darcy's friction coefficient were investigated, namely: hydraulic diameter (Dh), square root of the cross section area (√A), and laminar equivalent diameter (DL). The comparison of the present experimental data for the range of tested Re numbers against the results for turbulent flow in smooth circular tubes indicates similar trends independently of the AR. The selection of the appropriate l* to represent the friction coefficient was found to be dependent on the AR of the duct, and the three tested scales present similar performance. However, the hydraulic diameter, being the commonly employed to compute turbulent flow in rectangular ducts, is the selected characteristic length scale to be used in the present study. A power function-based calibration equation is proposed for the Irwin probes, which is valid for the range of ARs and Reynolds numbers tested.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".