Numerical analysis of coupled Kelvin–Helmholtz and Rayleigh–Taylor instability on inclined walls
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The front tracking method was used to study the 2D Kelvin–Helmholtz (K–H) instability on an inclined wall for three-component immiscible fluids. Coupled effects between K–H instability and Rayleigh–Taylor (R–T) instability were studied by analyzing the effect of inclination angle, Atwood number (At), and Richardson number (Ri) on interface evolution. The results show that the coupling of R–T instability has an important influence on the development of K–H instability. The R–T instability first affects the lower interface and then the upper interface at different inclination angles, and it is also observed that the critical time of the coupled effect is earlier with an inclined wall. The R–T instability promotes the development of upper and lower interfaces at different At numbers. In addition, the billow height increases with the increase in At number and the influence of R–T instability on the upper interface can be neglected when the dimensionless time is less than critical time t = 0.6. The R–T instability has little effect on the different surface tension in terms of Richardson number (Riσ).
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".