MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210548594 · doi:10.1063/5.0079563

On the non-circular hydraulic jump for an impinging inclined jet

2022· article· en· W4210548594 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics of Fluids · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHeat Transfer Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHydraulic jumpPhysicsLaminar flowMechanicsBoundary layerRotational symmetryJet (fluid)InertiaFlow (mathematics)External flowAzimuthOpen-channel flowClassical mechanicsOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

When a laminar inclined circular jet impinges on a horizontal surface, it forms a non-circular hydraulic jump resulting from the non-axisymmetric flow. In this study, we develop an integral approach in the boundary-layer (near impingement) and thin-film regions to theoretically analyze the flow field and the hydraulic jumps structure. We particularly explore the interplay among inertia, gravity, viscosity, and the effective inclination angle on the non-axisymmetric flow. The boundary-layer height exhibits an azimuthal dependence at a strong gravity level only; however, the thin film thickness as well as the hydraulic jump profile shows a strong non-axisymmetric behavior at all gravity levels. In contrast to the existing literature, the present study accounts for the presence of the boundary layer near impingement and the azimuthal flow. We demonstrate that the azimuthal flow component cannot be neglected in the presence of gravity. The theory is validated against existing experimental results for the inclined jet of water.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.454
Threshold uncertainty score0.489

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.219 · 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