Structure and Induced Drag of a Tip Vortex
Why is this work in the frame?
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Full frame distilled prediction
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.
- Candidate categories
- none
- Consensus categories
- none
- Domain
- Candidate signal: noneConsensus signal: none
- Study design
- Candidate signal: Simulation or modelingConsensus signal: none
- Genre
- Candidate signal: EmpiricalConsensus signal: Empirical
- Teacher disagreement score
- 0.422
- Threshold uncertainty score
- 0.254
- Validation status
machine_predicted_unvalidated·codex-gemma-dda1882f352a
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
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.
- Teacher spread
- 0.186 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
- Validation status
score_only:v0-immature-baseline· verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it
Abstract
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.
The record
- Venue
- Journal of Aircraft
- Topic
- Fluid Dynamics and Turbulent Flows
- Field
- Engineering
- Canadian institutions
- Bombardier (Canada)McGill University
- Funders
- not available
- Keywords
- AirfoilStarting vortexMechanicsWakeVortexPhysicsAngle of attackVorticityVortex liftLift coefficientDragLift-to-drag ratioHorseshoe vortexLift (data mining)Vortex ringReynolds numberAerodynamicsTurbulence
- Has abstract in OpenAlex
- yes