MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2733840865 · doi:10.1063/1.4985715

Large-eddy simulation of turbulent flow and structures in a square duct roughened with perpendicular and V-shaped ribs

2017· article· en· W2733840865 on OpenAlexafffund
Xingjun Fang, Zixuan Yang, Bing-Chen Wang, Mark F. Tachie, Donald J. Bergstrom

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics of Fluids · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Turbulent Flows
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaWestern Canada Research Grid
KeywordsTurbulencePhysicsVortexRib cageMechanicsPerpendicularLarge eddy simulationMean flowDuct (anatomy)GeometryOpen-channel flowStructural engineeringAnatomyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, highly disturbed turbulent flows confined within a square duct with uniformly spaced V-shaped ribs mounted on one wall are investigated using large-eddy simulation (LES). Two V-shaped (60° and 45°) rib cases are studied in comparison with the perpendicular (90°) rib case. The LES results are validated against a set of water-channel measurement data newly acquired by the authors. The effects of different shaped ribs on turbulent flow are systematically studied in terms of the mean velocity field, turbulence statistics, and coherent structures. The results show that strong secondary flows in the pattern of a pair of large symmetrical streamwise-elongated vortices exist in all three rib cases. The impacts of rib geometry on turbulent coherent structures are investigated using vortex identifiers, temporal autocorrections, spatial two-point autocorrelations, and velocity spectra.

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)0.000
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.220 · 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

Citations38
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysics of FluidsSame topicFluid Dynamics and Turbulent FlowsFrench-language works237,207