MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2803014219 · doi:10.1139/tcsme-2016-0024

INVESTIGATION OF INLET EFFECTS ON BACKWARD-FACING STEP FLOW PREDICTION

2016· article· en· W2803014219 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mustafa Kemal İşman

Bibliographic record

VenueTransactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical Engineering · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Turbulent Flows
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInletReynolds-averaged Navier–Stokes equationsTurbulenceMechanicsFluentBoundary value problemTurbulence kinetic energyFlow (mathematics)Turbulence modelingComputational fluid dynamicsPhysicsMathematicsEngineeringMathematical analysisMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The turbulent flow over backward-facing step (BFS) is numerically investigated by using FLUENT® code. Both uniform and non-uniform velocity profiles are used as inlet boundary condition. Five different Reynolds averaged Navier–Stokes (RANS) turbulence models are employed. The Std. k–ω model shows the best agreement with the experimental data among the models used under the conditions considered in this study. The results show that using a uniform velocity profile has a negative effect on predictions if the domain is not sufficiently extended upstream from the inlet. To eliminate this effect, the domain should be extended upstream by about 10Dh from the inlet. However, results show that this extension causes absorption effects of inlet parameters such as inlet turbulence intensity.

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)0.001
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.164
Teacher spread0.158 · 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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical EngineeringSame topicFluid Dynamics and Turbulent FlowsFrench-language works237,207