MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2053958464 · doi:10.1260/0309-524x.37.1.105

Betz Limit Not an Exact Optimum

2013· article· en· W2053958464 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueWind Engineering · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Turbulent Flows
Canadian institutionsRemotely Operated Platform for Ocean Sciences
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWakeThrustRotor (electric)Trailing edgeLimit (mathematics)PhysicsMomentum (technical analysis)Control theory (sociology)MechanicsMathematicsMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Betz high speed ratio limit has not been derived in the complete generality that would prove it absolute for an unshrouded actuator. The assumed uniform wake or thrust loading is hard to prove optimal. Many authors also assume uniform flow at the rotor or equivalently the differential form of the momentum equation but neither is necessary in the derivation or in fact true. Calculations of the expanding vortex ring wake have indicated lower velocity at the rotor's edge and slightly higher in the center. It is shown that if the uniform wake is perturbed by a fraction of the same variation function, the Betz power coefficient is raised. The increase is very small for a Hawt but might be bigger for a 2D actuator with a larger variation function. Thus the Betz value is very close to a local optimum, but not exact or absolute.

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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.933

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.171
Teacher spread0.164 · 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