MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414548506 · doi:10.1017/jfm.2025.10657

Destabilisation of leading-edge shear layer behind wall-mounted long prisms

2025· article· en· W4414548506 on OpenAlexafffund
Shubham Goswami, Arman Hemmati

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Fluid Mechanics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Vibration Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAlliance de recherche numérique du CanadaAlberta Innovates
KeywordsDestabilisationReynolds numberWakeTurbulenceVortexKinetic energyInstabilityFlow (mathematics)Shear (geology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This numerical investigation focuses on the mechanisms, flow topology and onset of Kelvin–Helmholtz instabilities (KHIs), that drive the leading-edge shear-layer destabilisation in the wake of wall-mounted long prisms. Large-eddy simulations are performed at ${\textit{Re}} = 2.5\times 10^3, 5\times 10^3$ and $1\times 10^4$ for prisms with a range of aspect ratio ( AR , height-to-width) between $0.25$ and $1.5$ , and depth ratios ( DR , length-to-width) of $1{-}4$ . Results show that shear-layer instabilities enhance flow irregularity and modulate spanwise vortex structures. The onset of KHI is strongly influenced by depth ratio, such that long prisms ( ${\textit{DR}}= 4$ ) experience earlier initiation compared with shorter ones ( ${\textit{DR}}= 1$ ). At higher Reynolds numbers, the onset of KHI shifts upstream towards the leading-edge, intensifying turbulence kinetic energy and increasing flow irregularity, especially for long prisms. The results further show that in this configuration, energy transfer from the secondary recirculation region contributes to the destabilisation of the leading-edge shear layer by reinforcing low-frequency modes. A feedback mechanism is identified wherein energetic flow structures propagate upstream through reverse boundary-layer flow, re-energising the leading-edge shear layer. Quantification using probability density functions reveals rare, intense upstream energy convection events, driven by this feedback mechanism. These facilitate the destabilisation process regardless of Reynolds number. This study provides a comprehensive understanding of the destabilisation mechanisms for leading-edge shear layers in the wake of wall-mounted long prisms.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.617
Threshold uncertainty score0.451

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Fluid MechanicsSame topicFluid Dynamics and Vibration AnalysisFrench-language works237,207