MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2772930130 · doi:10.1115/1.4038661

Laminar to Turbulent Buoyant Vortex Ring Regime in Terms of Reynolds Number, Bond Number, and Weber Number

2017· article· en· W2772930130 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Fluids Engineering · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Vibration Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReynolds numberLaminar flowTurbulenceVortex ringVortexPhysicsMechanicsRing (chemistry)Classical mechanicsChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

When buoyant vortex rings form, azimuthal disturbances occur on their surface. When the magnitude of the disturbance is sufficiently high, the ring will become turbulent. This paper establishes conditions for categorization of a buoyant vortex ring as laminar, transitional, or turbulent. The transition regime of enclosed-air buoyant vortex rings rising in still water was examined experimentally via two high-speed cameras. Sequences of the recorded pictures were analyzed using matlab. Key observations were summarized as follows: for Reynolds number lower than 14,000, Bond number below 30, and Weber number below 50, the vortex ring could not be produced. A transition regime was observed for Reynolds numbers between 40,000 and 70,000, Bond numbers between 120 and 280, and Weber number between 400 and 800. Below this range, only laminar vortex rings were observed, and above, only turbulent vortex rings.

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.

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 score0.352
Threshold uncertainty score0.831

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.226 · 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