MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2043060083 · doi:10.2514/1.6749

Effect of Trailing-Edge Flap on a Tip Vortex

2005· article· nl· W2043060083 on OpenAlexafffund
David M. Birch, T. Lee

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Aircraft · 2005
Typearticle
Languagenl
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Turbulent Flows
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsVortexTrailing edgeStarting vortexWakeAngle of attackAirfoilMechanicsPhysicsDragVortex sheddingVortex liftLift coefficientHorseshoe vortexVorticityVortex ringAerodynamicsReynolds numberTurbulence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The near-wake tip vortex flow structure behind a NACA 0015 airfoil with a trailing-edge flap was investigated. Lift-induced drag was computed based on vorticity and was compared with force-balance data. The vortex strength reached a maximum immediately behind the trailing edge and remained nearly constant up to two chord lengths downstream (x/c = 3). The displaced flap produced a more concentrated vortex of similar diameter and a higher induced drag compared to that of a baseline airfoil and had a larger radial gradient in circulation strength for flap angle δ < 15 deg; the vortex radius increased significantly for δ =2 0deg. For δ < ‐ 15 deg, the axial flow velocity was jetlike with the peak values increased with the flap angle. The nearly symmetric vortex was observed at x/c =2 .25 fo ra displaced flap while at x/c =1 . 5f or a baseline airfoil. The stength and interaction of the secondary and main vortices along the tip were also found to increase with the flap angle, and the vortex flow (immediately downstream of the deflected flap) was dominated by the presence of multiple vortices. The normalized circulation in the inner part of the symmetric vortex exhibited a self-similar structure, insensitive to the flap angle.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.083
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations6
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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