MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407925004 · doi:10.37934/arfmts.127.2.203233

Numerical Simulations of Base Pressure and Its Control in a Suddenly Expanded Duct at Mach 1.6 using Quarter Circular Ribs

2025· article· en· W4407925004 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sayed Ahmed Imran Bellary, Ambareen Khan, Mohammad Nishat Akhtar, Dabir Shahab, Sher Afghan Khan, Khizar Ahmed Pathan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Research in Fluid Mechanics and Thermal Sciences · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPlasma and Flow Control in Aerodynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMach numberQuarter (Canadian coin)Duct (anatomy)Rib cageBase (topology)MechanicsGeologyPhysicsEngineeringMathematicsStructural engineeringAnatomyHistoryMedicineMathematical analysisArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The turbulent flow in a separated region is still a fundamental area of research due to the advent of space shuttles and high-performance military aircraft, and turbulent flow in transonic and supersonic flow is a thrust area for researchers. Whenever the flow experiences an abrupt increase in the area of the enlarged duct, the flow gets significant relief to separate and expand. When the shear layer comes out, it gets divided into two regions: main flow and separated flow. The divided stream line gets reattached with the duct and forms a recirculation zone where the pressure is lower than ambient pressure, resulting in significant drag. This study focuses on base pressure control through quarter-circle rib as a passive control mechanism. Accordingly, a comprehensive numerical simulation was carried out at screech-prone Mach number M = 1.6 for various radii 1 mm, 2 mm, 3 mm, and 4 mm for duct lengths in the range from L = 1D to 6D and nozzle pressure ratios from 3 to 11. Results indicate that for the same range of the rib radius, duct lengths, and level of expansion, there is a progressive increase in the base pressure when rib locations are moved downstream from 0.5D to 3D. The maximum rise in the base pressure is achieved when the rib is located at 66 mm from the base region. A rib with a radius of 1 mm is inadequate for the entire range of rib placement in the present study except when the rib is 11 mm from the base. It can be concluded that a rib of a 1.5 mm radius will be sufficient to neutralize the suction created due to the flow separation. The user can decide on the rib dimension, location, and nozzle pressure ratio based on their requirements.

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 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)0.002
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.453
Threshold uncertainty score0.287

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.290 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Advanced Research in Fluid Mechanics and Thermal SciencesSame topicPlasma and Flow Control in AerodynamicsFrench-language works237,207