MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Upstream history quantification and scale-decomposed energy analysis for weak-to-strong adverse-pressure-gradient turbulent boundary layers

2025· article· en· W4413276328 on OpenAlexafffund
A. Mahajan, Rahul Deshpande, Taygun R. Gungor, Yvan Maciel, Ricardo Vinuesa

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Turbulent Flows
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersH2020 European Research CouncilEuropean Research CouncilNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAlliance de recherche numérique du CanadaUniversity of MelbourneIstanbul Teknik ÜniversitesiPartnership for Advanced Computing in Europe AISBL
KeywordsTurbulenceAdverse pressure gradientScale (ratio)Pressure gradientUpstream (networking)MechanicsBoundary (topology)Materials scienceScale analysis (mathematics)Flow separationPhysicsMathematical analysisMathematicsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present study delineates the effects of pressure gradient history and local disequilibration on the small and large-scale energy in turbulent boundary layers (TBLs) imposed with a broad range of adverse-pressure-gradients (APG). This is made possible by analyzing four published high-fidelity APG TBL databases, which span weak to strong APGs and cover dynamic conditions ranging from near-equilibrium to strong disequilibrium. These databases enable the development of a methodology to understand the effects of PG history and local disequilibration, the latter defined here as the local streamwise rate of change of the pressure force contribution in the force balance. The influence of PG history on TBL statistics is quantified by the accumulated PG parameter ( β ¯ ), proposed previously by Vinuesa et al. (2017) to study integral quantities, which is compared here between cases at matched local PG strength ( β ), Reynolds number ( R e ) and d β / d R e at nominally similar orders of magnitude. Here, β denotes a general umbrella term used for pressure gradient parameters that is estimated using different scaling parameters in this study. While the effects of local disequilibration ( d β / d R e ) are investigated by considering TBL cases at matched β , R e , and fairly matched β ¯ . This enables analysis of accumulated PG history and local disequilibration effects separately, where applicable, to highlight qualitative differences in statistical trends. It is found that β ¯ cannot unambiguously capture history effects when d β / d R e levels are significantly high, as it does not account for the delayed response of the mean flow and turbulence, nor the attenuation of the pressure gradient effect with distance. In two comparisons of APG TBLs under strong non-equilibrium, the values of β ¯ and d β / d R e expressed using Zagarola–Smits scaling were found to be consistent with the trends in mean velocity defect and Reynolds stresses noted previously for weak APG TBLs. While an increase in β ¯ is associated with energization of both the small and large scales in the outer regions of APG TBLs, it affects only the large scales in the near-wall region. This confirms the ability of near-wall small scales to rapidly adjust to changes in PG strength. By attempting to provide a structured parametric methodology to isolate effects of PG history and local disequilibration, this study reports the influence of these effects on turbulent flow statistics across the widest APG strengths documented in the literature. • Matched local beta and Re considered to study PG history and local disequilibration. • Both effects influence weak-to-strong PG boundary layers qualitatively similarly. • PG history energizes both large and small scales in the outer region. • Near-wall small scales adapt to changes in PG quickly, i.e. no disequilibration. • Both small and large scales in the outer layer exhibit disequilibration.

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)0.000
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 score0.391
Threshold uncertainty score0.551

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.214 · 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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Heat and Fluid FlowSame topicFluid Dynamics and Turbulent FlowsFrench-language works237,207