Clarefc
Welcome! edit
Hello, Clarefc, and welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Ian and I work with the Wiki Education Foundation; I help support students who are editing as part of a class assignment.
I hope you enjoy editing here. If you haven't already done so, please check out the student training library, which introduces you to editing and Wikipedia's core principles. You may also want to check out the Teahouse, a community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to helping new users. Below are some resources to help you get started editing.
Handouts
|
|---|
Additional Resources
|
|
If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 04:58, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
Peer Review edit
Things that were done well:
1. The introduction is descriptive but concise: I get a quick look into the broad definition (the ratio of...), the kind of scenarios the Grashof number is applied to and where it came from (Franz Grashof)
2. The article is broken down into appropriate sections that I feel fully cover what one might seek to know about the number, and these sections are well-organized (e.g. makes sense to put the definition first, the derivation is probably less important than how it is used in conjunction with other dimensionless numbers)
3. There’s a notice at the top of the article that says “article may be too technical for most readers to understand”, but I think the language used throughout the article is clear and straight forward! The article is also unbiased (sounds very encyclopedic!)
4. Derivations can be difficult to explain, especially through written communication, but I thought it was easy to follow (I like the formatting with the variable definitions in a list, and the explanations before and after the equations).
Things to improve: (These are all minor, nitpicky changes!)
1. I’d put a “Momentum/Heat Transfer” heading under “Definition” because in the contents, it looks like you only talk about mass transfer, and as people start to read the first part of the section, they might be expecting that
2. “…and therefore the fluid rises” sounds a little funny to me. Maybe change to “due to an increase in temperature, causing the fluid to rise”?
3. When I read “The Grashof number is a way to quantify the opposing forces” I feel like I’ll get two values for each force from the number, so maybe make a comment revisiting the fact that it’s a ratio.
4. You give a range for vertical flat plates, do you have ranges for the pipes or bluff bodies? If so, maybe you could make a little table with the formula, ranges, and significance, for easy reference.
5. The History section is very short right now, making it seem unnecessary. I’d cut this out or add something about the work that led to its development.
6. Relationship to Other Dimensionless Numbers: Maybe add a formula in the text to show Gr*Pr and Gr/Re^2 for quick reference? It’s easy to understand as it’s written, but that could help for quick reference again.
7. Add citations to the derivation sections!
8. There are four references at the bottom that aren’t numbered; do these go to any specific statements/sections?
Takeaways for my article:
1. My variables for equations are stated in the text, but I think it’s easier to see as a list, like you have!
2. I also like how your equations break up the large chunks of text, so instead of adding a full description and then an equation, I’ll briefly introduce aspects of an equation, provide it, and then follow up with further explanation of how it’s used or manipulated.
Great job!
AmandaLevenson (talk) 23:10, 14 February 2017 (UTC)