MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401781822 · doi:10.1017/jfm.2024.551

On the flow dynamics around a surface-mounted cube and boundary layer effects

2024· article· en· W4401781822 on OpenAlexafffund
Bárbara L. da Silva, David S. Sumner, Donald J. Bergstrom

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Fluid Mechanics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Turbulent Flows
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAlliance de recherche numérique du CanadaUniversity of Saskatchewan
KeywordsBoundary layerFlow (mathematics)MechanicsCube (algebra)Layer (electronics)Surface (topology)Blasius boundary layerDynamics (music)Boundary layer thicknessGeometryMaterials sciencePhysicsMathematicsComposite materialAcoustics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Motivated by contradicting or insufficient information regarding the large-scale flow dynamics around surface-mounted finite-height square prisms of small aspect ratio, the present study investigates the dominant vortex shedding and low-frequency dynamics around a surface-mounted cube. These flow modes were obtained from the spectral proper orthogonal decomposition of large-eddy simulation results, at a Reynolds number of $\textit {Re}=1\times 10^4$ and two different types of boundary layer: a thin and laminar boundary layer with thickness $\delta /D=0.2$ and a thick and turbulent boundary layer with $\delta /D=0.8$ . The main antisymmetric mode pair revealed a new flow pattern with the alternate shedding of streamwise flow structures, indicating a transition from the half-loops of taller prisms to only streamwise strands (i.e. no vertical core) for smaller aspect ratio. The formation process of the streamwise structures is due to a reorientation of the vorticity of the arch vortex in the streamwise direction characteristic of the shed structures. The low-frequency drift mode affected the length of the recirculation region, the strength of vortex shedding, and the near-wall flow field and pressure distribution on the cube's faces, leading to low-frequency variations in the fluctuating drag and normal force coefficients. These large-scale flow dynamics were similar for both boundary layers, but minor differences were identified, related mostly to the occurrence of flow attachment and the formation of a headband vortex for the thicker boundary layer.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.204 · 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

Citations7
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Fluid MechanicsSame topicFluid Dynamics and Turbulent FlowsFrench-language works237,207