MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1993799654 · doi:10.1115/imece2002-32180

An Experimental Investigation of Staggered Circular Cylinders in a Uniform Planar Shear Flow

2002· article· en· W1993799654 on OpenAlexaff
O.O. Akosile, David S. Sumner

Bibliographic record

Venue5th International Symposium on Fluid Structure Interaction, Aeroelasticity, and Flow Induced Vibration and Noise · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Vibration Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStrouhal numberVortex sheddingMechanicsCylinderLift coefficientDrag coefficientShear flowVortexPotential flow around a circular cylinderLift (data mining)Aerodynamic forceShear (geology)DragPhysicsAerodynamicsMaterials scienceReynolds numberTurbulenceGeometryMathematicsComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Two circular cylinders of equal diameter, arranged in staggered configurations of P/D = 1.125 and 1.25, were immersed in a uniform planar shear flow, at Re = 5.0×104 and a dimensionless shear parameter of K = 0.05. The mean aerodynamic forces and the vortex shedding frequencies were measured for the upstream and downstream cylinders at each P/D. Under uniform, no-shear flow conditions, K = 0, the flow field of the cylinder group is similar to a single bluff body. As the incidence angle is varied from α = 0° to 90°, the forces on each cylinder undergo discontinuous changes, or attain local minimum or maximum values, at several critical incidence angles. At small α, the Strouhal number is greater than that of a single, isolated circular cylinder, whereas at high α the Strouhal number is lower than the single-cylinder value. The effects of shear, K = 0.05, on the aerodynamic forces were different depending on whether the downstream cylinder was situated at a higher or lower centreline velocity compared to the upstream cylinder. The planar shear flow had its greatest influence when the cylinders were in a nearly side-by-side arrangement. This indicated that the effect of shear was mostly on the flow through the gap between the cylinders. The lift coefficient data were mostly unchanged by the shear flow, the drag coefficient data were lowered, and there were shifts in the critical incidence angles. The influence of shear on vortex shedding was less pronounced, but there was a small reduction in Strouhal number compared to the no-shear case.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue5th International Symposium on Fluid Structure Interaction, Aeroelasticity, and Flow Induced Vibration and NoiseSame topicFluid Dynamics and Vibration AnalysisFrench-language works237,207