Comparative Evaluation of Single/Twin Round and Elliptic Jets Using Particle Image Velocimetry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Twin round and elliptic jets with nozzle spacing of S/d = 2.8 are investigated and the results are compared with those obtained from single jets. The measurements were performed at Re = 10000 using particle image velocimetry. The results show that the twin elliptic jets merge and combine faster than the round jets. However, the twin elliptic jets have lower spreading than their corresponding single jet but in the round jets it is opposite. The vortical structures obtained using swirling strength analysis are more intense in the elliptic jets compared with the round jets; consistent with their higher spreading. In the shear layers, the velocity skewness is considerably positive due to the diffusion of high-speed jet fluid towards the ambient. On the other hand, the streamwise skewness on the centerline is negative because of the entrainment of low-speed ambient fluid; resulting in centerline velocity decay. In addition, the joint and weighted joint probability density functions are used to understand the dominant events which contribute into the mixing of the jets with their surrounding fluid.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".