MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2014422603 · doi:10.1115/1.1403445

An Investigation on the Use of Connors’ Equation to Predict Fluidelastic Instability in Cylinder Arrays

2001· article· en· W2014422603 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pressure Vessel Technology · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Vibration Analysis
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsInstabilityMechanicsCylinderPhysicsClassical mechanicsMathematicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The use of Connors’ equation, or variations thereof, to predict the velocity at which fluidelastic instability occurs in cylinder arrays subject to cross-flow has become ubiquitous. The implicit assumption being that this equation accurately models the physics of fluidelastic instability, and all that is required is to find the “correct” value of Connors’ constant. The evidence for and against this assumption is examined in this paper. Other theoretical models of fluidelastic instability are reviewed and compared with Connors’ analysis. In addition, evidence from experimental data is considered. It is concluded that there are many deficiencies associated with Connors’ equation, and that if better “design guides” are to be obtained, more emphasis must be put on examining the physics of fluidelastic instability.

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.

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 score0.147
Threshold uncertainty score0.293

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.202 · 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