MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4298251259 · doi:10.1615/tsfp7.2190

DIRECT NUMERICAL SIMULATION OF THE GROWTH OF COHERENT FLOW STRUCTURES IN A TRIGGERED TURBULENT SPOT

2011· article· en· W4298251259 on OpenAlexaff
Joshua Brinkerhoff, M. I. Yaras

Bibliographic record

VenueProceeding of Seventh International Symposium on Turbulence and Shear Flow Phenomena · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Turbulent Flows
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFreestreamVortexTurbulenceMechanicsOpticsPhysicsBoundary layerDirect numerical simulationTrailing edgeReynolds number

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hairpin-like coherent flow structures have been identified as the dominant vortical structures in transitional and turbulent boundary layers and free shear layers. To fully characterize the processes occurring within such flows, it is important to study the growth mechanism of the hairpin vortices, particularly at their early stages of development, and the development of the resultant wave packets containing multiples of these flow structures. The formation of an artificially-triggered turbulent spot in isolation provides a suitable test case to study the mechanism through which a hairpin vortex forms in a shear layer and how the formation of one such flow structure may produce a local flow environment that promotes the creation of similar flow structures in sequence. The present study involves direct numerical simulations wherein an isolated turbulent spot is produced through a perturbation in the form of a pulsed jet ejected transversely through a square orifice in the test surface. The simulated spots compare favorably with spots measured experimentally under similar freestream conditions. Two levels of freestream acceleration−one that is nominally zero and another that is above the typical threshold required for relaminarization−are applied to the flow to assess the sensitivity of the hairpin-like vortical structures to freestream acceleration. Hairpin-like vortices near the spot trailing edge are observed to grow primarily through an instability of shear layers created between high- and low-velocity streaks near the spanwise edges of the spot.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.202 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations2
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceeding of Seventh International Symposium on Turbulence and Shear Flow PhenomenaSame topicFluid Dynamics and Turbulent FlowsFrench-language works237,207