INCOMPLETE SIMILARITY OF A PLANE TURBULENT WALL JET
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Incomplete similarity for a plane turbulent wall jet is reported in this paper. Typically, a wall jet is divided into two regions: an inner layer and an outer layer. The degree to which these two layers reach equilibrium with each other, and produce a self-similar velocity profile remains an open question. In this paper, the theory of Barenblatt et al. (2005), which proposes incomplete similarity, is used to analyse the mean velocity field of a turbulent wall jet based on a new set of laser Doppler anemometry (LDA) measurements. The experiments were carried out in a water tank. The fluid was discharged with a velocity of U0 = 1.21 m/s through a rectangular slot with a height of H = 6 mm. The Reynolds number of the wall jet, based on the jet exit velocity and the slot height, was approximately Re = 7500. The similarity in both the inner and outer regions of the wall jet flow was studied in the nominally fully developed region of the jet, i.e. x/H > 30. The outer and inner half-widths are shown to develop differently in the streamwise direction when scaled with the jet slot width. Using outer scales, a good collapse of the experimental data can be seen in the outer region, while the profiles deviate from each other near the wall. In contrast, using the inner scales collapses the mean velocity profile in the inner region of the wall jet, but not in the outer region.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".