MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3159361123 · doi:10.1115/fedsm2020-20263

Effects of Streamwise Aspect Ratio on Turbulent Flows Over Forward-Backward Facing Steps

2020· article· en· W3159361123 on OpenAlexaff
Heath Chalmers, Xingjun Fang, Mark F. Tachie

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Turbulent Flows
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTurbulenceReynolds numberParticle image velocimetryBoundary layerMechanicsAspect ratio (aeronautics)Flow separationPhysicsMean flowBoundary layer thicknessFlow (mathematics)BubbleWater tunnelTurbulence kinetic energyOpticsVortex

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Separated and reattached turbulent flows induced by two-dimensional forward-backward-facing steps with different streamwise lengths submerged in a thick turbulent boundary layer are investigated using a time-resolved particle image velocimetry. The examined aspect ratios of the step range from 1 to 8, and the Reynolds number based on the free-stream velocity and step height is 13 200. The thickness of the oncoming turbulent boundary layer is 6.5 times the step height. The effects of varying aspect ratio of the steps on the mean flow, Reynolds stresses, triple correlations and unsteadiness of turbulent separation bubbles are studied. It was found that the mean flow reattaches over the step for forward-backward facing steps with aspect ratios of 2 and higher. The temporal variation of the first proper orthogonal decomposition (POD) mode and reverse flow area, which is used to examine the flapping motion of separation bubble, shows remarkable synchronization.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.000
Threshold uncertainty score0.001

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.188
Teacher spread0.183 · 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicFluid Dynamics and Turbulent Flows→French-language works237,207→