MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1972986951 · doi:10.1115/1.4024950

Influence of Tip Shape on Reynolds Number Sensitivity for a Seven Hole Pressure Probe

2013· article· en· W1972986951 on OpenAlexafffund
James Crawford, A. M. Birk

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Vibration Analysis
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsReynolds numberMechanicsConical surfaceMagnetic Reynolds numberFlow (mathematics)Sensitivity (control systems)Reynolds equationPhysicsOpticsMaterials scienceGeometryMathematicsTurbulence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The effects of tip shape on Reynolds number sensitivity of a seven hole pressure probe are studied over a range of flows associated with practical use of turbomachinery. It is shown that at low flow angles the response of a conical or hemispherical tipped probe is independent of a Reynolds number above Re = 3000, and at high flow angles Re = 6000. Despite there not being a discernible difference in the average error in flow properties at different Reynolds numbers between the two tip shapes, it is shown that the hemispherical tip is preferred because the pressure distributions around the tip are more consistent.

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 score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.411

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.199 · 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

Citations11
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and PowerSame topicFluid Dynamics and Vibration AnalysisFrench-language works237,207