Effect of structure parameters on solid particle erosion resistance coupled biomimetic anti‐erosion functional surface: A <scp>CFD</scp>‐<scp>DPM</scp> investigation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In this study, the effect of structure parameters on solid particle erosion resistance coupled biomimetic surface was investigated, revealing the optimal structural parameters that minimized erosion. A calculation process of erosion characteristics using computational fluid dynamics (CFD) was developed to simulate the erosion physical process. Results indicated that as the bump diameter and the groove width increased, the erosion rate of the biomimetic surface decreased for a given particle size, but the influence of groove width was greater than that of bump diameter. For a given particle size, as the groove width‐to‐depth ratio increased, the erosion rate of the biomimetic surface decreased initially and then increased, with an optimal value between 2.5 and 3 that yielded the lowest erosion. Additionally, changes in particle collision velocity were primarily governed by the vortex scale and intensity within the groove, while changes in particle collision angle were mainly influenced by the groove scale and angle.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".