Effects of oncoming flow conditions on the flow upstream of a forward-facing step subject to a thin boundary layer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The influence of the oncoming flow on intrinsic flow dynamics of a forward-facing step (FFS) is investigated using planar, two-component particle image velocimetry (PIV) and direct numerical simulations (DNS) for thin ( δ / H < 1 ) laminar and turbulent boundary layers (LBL & TBL). Transition of the upstream separation region between steady and unsteady behaviour is shown to be sensitive to weak freestream disturbances above a critical Reynolds number (Re). Unsteady behaviour of the upstream separation, for oncoming TBLs, is characterised by the intermittent large-scale ejection of fluid over the step. Steady behaviour is observed for oncoming LBLs below a critical Re or disturbance-free. It is characterised by a low-frequency oscillation of the separating shear layer below f ∗ = f H / U ∞ ≈ 0 . 03 and the recirculation region exhibits a natural instability around f ∗ ≈ 0 . 15 . Above a critical Re, this instability can be amplified by very small freestream disturbances and the behaviour of the upstream recirculation region becomes transitional-unsteady . The dynamics in this state – between steady and unsteady – exhibit intermittent ejections along with enhanced convective dynamics due to the formation of larger-scale motions at the unsteady laminar separation point. Unlike immersed steps ( δ / H > 2 ), scales from the oncoming boundary layer are not imprinted on the separation region, requiring a more complex description relating the oncoming flow to the recirculation dynamics about the step.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".