MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2036602684 · doi:10.4271/2012-01-0298

CFD Analysis of Various Automotive Bodies in Linear Static Pressure Gradients

2012· article· en· W2036602684 on OpenAlexaff
Mark Gleason

Bibliographic record

VenueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper series · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAerodynamics and Fluid Dynamics Research
Canadian institutionsChrysler (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutomotive industryComputational fluid dynamicsAutomotive engineeringMechanical engineeringComputer scienceMechanicsAerospace engineeringEngineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Establishing data adjustments that will give an interference free result for bluff bodies in automotive wind tunnels has been pursued for at least the last 45 years. Recently, the Two-Measurement correction method that yields a wake distortion adjustment for open jet wind tunnels has shown promise of being able to adjust for many of the effects of non-ideal static pressure gradients on bluff automotive bodies. Utilization of this adjustment has shown that a consistent drag results when the vehicle is subjected to the various gradients generated in open jet wind tunnels. What has been lacking is whether this consistent result is independent of the other tunnel interference effects. The studies presented here are intended to fill that gap on the performance of the two-measurement technique. The subject CFD studies are designed to eliminate all wind tunnel interference effects except for the variation of the (linear) static pressure gradient. Zero gradients and linear gradients are generated by tapering the walls of solid wall test sections with a blockage ratio of 0.5%. Under these conditions, the variation in drag coefficient is observed with and without application of simple buoyancy adjustments, Glauert Factor based adjustments, and the two-measurement method adjustments. Conclusions are reached relative to the ability with each of these approaches to achieve interference free results on a range of vehicle body styles both simplified and with a moderate level of production vehicle detail.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

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 communication0.0010.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.251 · 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

Citations10
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper seriesSame topicAerodynamics and Fluid Dynamics ResearchFrench-language works237,207