Effect of Sound on the Wake of Side-by-Side Cylinders in a Duct
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The phenomenon of flow-excited acoustic resonance, where periodic flow oscillations are enhanced by a resonant sound field, is a design concern in many engineering applications such as in heat exchangers, piping systems, and cavity flows. This study experimentally examines the phenomenon of flow-excited acoustic resonance for two side-by-side cylinders in a duct with cross-flow. This geometry has been investigated for three cylinder spacing ratios, defined as the center-to-center distance, normalized by the diameter, of T/D = 1.25, 1.46 and 2.5, and for a range of acoustic pressure amplitudes. Intermediate and small spacing ratios have been given special attention, as these cases have been found to exhibit bistable flow in the wake in the absence of acoustic resonance. Phase-locked PIV measurements reveal that the self-excited sound field produces a strong oscillatory flow pattern in the cylinder wakes, which is symmetric for large spacing ratios and high acoustic amplitudes, but remains bistable for small spacing ratios, even during very intense acoustic resonances. The aeroacoustic sources and sinks within the flow have been computed using Howe’s theory of vortex sound, and the distribution of these sources will be compared for the range of spacing ratios examined in this study.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".