MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3160244796 · doi:10.1115/1.4051149

On the Motion of Single and Twin Oblique Particle Clouds in Stagnant Water

2021· article· en· W3160244796 on OpenAlexafffund
Mahsa Janati, Amir H. Azimi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Fluids Engineering · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicParticle Dynamics in Fluid Flows
Canadian institutionsLakehead University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsOblique caseParticle (ecology)Particle image velocimetryMechanicsCentroidPhysicsNozzleGeologyGeometryMathematicsTurbulence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The evolution of single and twin oblique particle clouds in stagnant water was investigated using a series of laboratory experiments and the effects of controlling parameters such as sand mass and nozzle spacing were studied. The time variations of particle cloud properties such as frontal position, horizontal and vertical centroids, cloud width, and frontal velocity were measured using image analysis and particle image velocimetry (PIV) techniques. The entrainment coefficients were extracted from the measurements. It was found that the main vortex motion of the frontal heads altered after the collision and a new integrated frontal head was formed. The effects of release angle and particle interactions were studied by comparing the time histories of maximum centerline velocities. It was found that the centerline velocity of twin oblique particle clouds in comparison with twin vertical particle clouds increased with increasing nozzle spacing. The time history of the ratio of horizontal to vertical centroids in oblique particle clouds determined the potential location of sand particles and a practical model was developed to determine the size and location of particle clouds with time. The time histories of normalized cloud width indicated a significant change after the frontal head collision. The particle interactions due to frontal head collision in twin oblique particle clouds significantly increased the cloud width until particle clouds reached the swarm phase. The time at which twin oblique particle clouds reached the swarm phase was recorded and a linear model was proposed to link the time to reach the swarm phase with the cloud aspect ratio and nozzle spacing.

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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.186 · 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

Citations8
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Fluids EngineeringSame topicParticle Dynamics in Fluid FlowsFrench-language works237,207