Subharmonic tonal noise from backflow vortices radiated by a low-speed ring fan in uniform inlet flow
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In order to highlight the mechanisms responsible for subharmonic tonal noise, a complete aeroacoustic study of a ring fan in presence of a uniform inlet flow is conducted. Unsteady RANS simulations with a compressible flow solver are used to compute the flow field and identify the acoustic sources on the rotor. The tip clearance recirculation shows upstream vortices that impinge the rotor blades and create the main source of unsteadiness on the fan. Since these vortices rotate at a lower speed than the rotor, the frequency of the impact is lower than the blade passing frequency. The acoustic signature is computed by propagating the noise sources located on the rotor surfaces using two methods: A Ffowcs-Williams and Hawkings analogy in the time-domain and an analytical model in the frequency-domain based on the compact rotating dipole formulation. A comparison with experimental results confirms that the aeroacoustic phenomena responsible for the subharmonic tonal noise are well captured and properly propagated by the acoustic codes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".