MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1872464068 · doi:10.2514/1.j051696

Uncertainty Quantification for the Trailing-Edge Noise of a Controlled-Diffusion Airfoil

2011· article· en· W1872464068 on OpenAlexaff
Julien Christophe, Stéphane Moreau

Bibliographic record

VenueAIAA Journal · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAerodynamics and Acoustics in Jet Flows
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAirfoilReynolds-averaged Navier–Stokes equationsTrailing edgeComputationLaminar flowRobustness (evolution)TurbulenceMechanicsComputational fluid dynamicsBoundary layerMathematicsNoise (video)Applied mathematicsPhysicsComputer scienceAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Two deterministic incompressible flow solvers are coupled with a nonintrusive stochastic collocation method to propagate several aerodynamic uncertainties of the same type encountered in a standard trailing-edge noise experiment of a low-speed controlled-diffusion airfoil to predict the far-field noise. Reynolds-averaged Navier–Stokes and large-eddy simulations are applied to a common restricted domain surrounding the airfoil embedded in the potential core of the jet in the anechoic wind-tunnel experiment. Both simulation methods provide the wall-pressure fluctuations near the airfoil trailing edge, which are then used in Amiet’s acoustic analogy for trailing-edge noise. In the Reynolds-averaged Navier–Stokes simulations, two different representative models are used to reconstruct the wall-pressure fluctuations: Rozenberg’s deterministic model directly based on integral boundary-layer parameters, and Panton and Linebarger’s statistical model based on the velocity field in the boundary layer. The nonintrusive stochastic model is solved in a stochastic collocation framework, with the inlet velocity profiles as random variables. This framework is found to be two orders of magnitude more efficient than a classical Monte Carlo simulation for the same accuracy. Comparisons of the mean and standard deviations of the wall-pressure spectra and the far-field acoustic pressure with experiment stress that Rozenberg’s model is more accurate at low frequencies and has larger uncertainties at high frequencies because of the uncertainty on the wall shear stress and that Panton and Linerbarger’s is less accurate at low frequencies because of the slow statistical convergence of the integration involved in the model.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.576
Threshold uncertainty score0.246

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.204 · 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
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAIAA JournalSame topicAerodynamics and Acoustics in Jet FlowsFrench-language works237,207