Effects of surface roughness on a separating turbulent boundary layer
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Separating turbulent boundary layers over smooth and rough flat plates are studied by large-eddy simulations. A suction–blowing velocity distribution imposed at the top boundary of the computation domain produces an adverse-to-favourable pressure gradient and creates a closed separation bubble. The Reynolds number based on the momentum thickness and the free-stream velocity before the pressure gradient begins is 2500. Virtual sand grain roughness in the fully rough regime is modelled by an immersed boundary method. Compared with a smooth-wall case, streamline detachment occurs earlier and the separation region is substantially larger for the rough-wall case, due to the momentum deficit caused by the roughness. The adverse pressure gradient decreases the form drag, so that the point where the wall stress vanishes does not coincide with the detachment of the flow from the surface. A thin reversed-flow region is formed below the roughness crest; the presence of recirculation regions behind each roughness element also affects the intermittency of the near-wall flow, so that upstream of the detachment point the flow can be reversed half of the time, but its average velocity can still be positive. The separated shear layer exhibits higher turbulent kinetic energy (TKE) in the rough-wall case, the growth of the TKE there begins earlier relative to the separation point, and the peak TKE occurs close to the separation point. The momentum deficit caused by the roughness, again, plays a critical role in these changes.
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 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 it