MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2008389693 · doi:10.2514/1.2707

Structure and Induced Drag of a Tip Vortex

2004· article· en· W2008389693 on OpenAlexaff
David M. Birch, T. Lee, Farzin Mokhtarian, F. Kafyeke

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Aircraft · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Turbulent Flows
Canadian institutionsBombardier (Canada)McGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAirfoilStarting vortexMechanicsWakeVortexPhysicsAngle of attackVorticityVortex liftLift coefficientDragLift-to-drag ratioHorseshoe vortexLift (data mining)Vortex ringReynolds numberAerodynamicsTurbulence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The three-dimensional flow structure of a tip vortex in the near wake of both a rectangular, square-tipped NACA 0015 airfoil and a high-lift cambered airfoil was investigated by using a seven-hole pressure probe at Re = 2.01 x 10 5 . Lift-induced drag was computed based on vorticity and was compared with force-balance data. For both the airfoils tested, the vortex strength reached a maximum immediately behind the trailing edge and remained nearly constant up to two chord lengths downstream. As the airfoil incidence increased, the increase in the lift force resulted in a basically linear increase in the vortex strength and the peak values of the tangential velocity and vorticity, whereas the vortex radius did not appear to have a clear dependence on the vortex strength. Depending on the airfoil incidence, the core axial velocity could be wake-like or jet-like. The normalized circulation within the inner region of the nearly axisymmetric tip vortex exhibited a universal, or self-similar, structure. The NACA 0015 airfoil, however, possessed smaller tangential velocities but similar vortex core diameters compared to those of a cambered airfoil

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.186 · 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 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

Citations110
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of AircraftSame topicFluid Dynamics and Turbulent FlowsFrench-language works237,207