MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2758493259 · doi:10.1017/jfm.2017.372

Direct numerical simulation of turbulent slope flows up to Grashof number

2017· article· en· W2758493259 on OpenAlexaff
Marco G. Giometto, Gabriel G. Katul, Jiannong Fang, M. B. Parlange

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Fluid Mechanics · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Turbulent Flows
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGrashof numberTurbulencePrandtl numberPhysicsTurbulence kinetic energyBoundary layerMechanicsFroude numberDirect numerical simulationReynolds numberGeometryNusselt numberFlow (mathematics)MathematicsConvection

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Stably stratified turbulent flows over an unbounded, smooth, planar sloping surface at high Grashof numbers are examined using direct numerical simulations (DNS). Four sloping angles ( $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}=15^{\circ },30^{\circ },60^{\circ }$ and $90^{\circ }$ ) and three Grashof numbers ( $\mathit{Gr}=5\times 10^{10},1\times 10^{11}$ and $2.1\times 10^{11}$ ) are considered. Variations in mean flow, second-order statistics and budgets of mean- (MKE) and turbulent-kinetic energy (TKE) are evaluated as a function of $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}$ and $Gr$ at fixed molecular Prandtl number $(Pr=1)$ . Dynamic and energy identities are highlighted, which diagnose the convergence of the averaging operation applied to the DNS results. Turbulent anabatic (upward moving warm fluid along the slope) and katabatic (downward moving cold fluid along the slope) regimes are identical for the vertical wall set-up (up to the sign of the along-slope velocity), but undergo a different transition in the mechanisms sustaining turbulence as the sloping angle decreases, resulting in stark differences at low $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}$ . In addition, budget equations show how MKE is fed into the system through the imposed surface buoyancy, and turbulent fluctuations redistribute it from the low-level jet (LLJ) nose towards the boundary and outer flow regions. Analysis of the TKE budget equation suggests a subdivision of the boundary layer of anabatic and katabatic flows into four distinct thermodynamical regions: (i) an outer layer, corresponding approximately to the return flow region, where turbulent transport is the main source of TKE and balances dissipation; (ii) an intermediate layer, bounded below by the LLJ and capped above by the outer layer, where the sum of shear and buoyant production overcomes dissipation, and where turbulent and pressure transport terms are a sink of TKE; (iii) a buffer layer, located at $5\lessapprox z^{+}\lessapprox 30$ , where TKE is provided by turbulent and pressure transport terms, to balance viscous diffusion and dissipation; and (iv) a laminar sublayer, corresponding to $z^{+}\lessapprox 5$ , where the influence of viscosity is significant. $(\cdot )^{+}$ denotes a quantity rescaled in inner units. Interestingly, a zone of global backscatter (energy transfer from the turbulent eddies to the mean flow) is consistently found in a thin layer below the LLJ in both anabatic and katabatic regimes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.239
Threshold uncertainty score0.662

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations24
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Fluid MechanicsSame topicFluid Dynamics and Turbulent FlowsFrench-language works237,207