MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2056003024 · doi:10.1115/fedsm2012-72005

Aerodynamic Forces and Vortex Shedding for Surface-Mounted Finite Square Prisms and the Effects of Aspect Ratio and Incidence Angle

2012· article· en· W2056003024 on OpenAlexaff
John F. McClean, David S. Sumner

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAerodynamics and Fluid Dynamics Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStrouhal numberVortex sheddingDrag coefficientLift coefficientReynolds numberLift (data mining)DragMechanicsAngle of attackPrismPhysicsGeometryOpticsAerodynamicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The flow around a surface-mounted square prism of finite height was investigated experimentally using a low-speed wind tunnel. Of interest were the effects of aspect ratio and incidence angle on the mean aerodynamic forces and vortex shedding. Compared to the case of the “infinite” (or two-dimensional) square prism, the flow around the finite square prism has not been extensively studied. The experiments were conducted at a Reynolds number of Re = 7.2 × 104 for aspect ratios of AR = 3, 5, 7, 9, and 11 and incidence angles of α = 0°, 15°, 30° and 45°. The thickness of the boundary layer on the ground plane relative to the side length was δ/D = 1.5. Measurements of the vortex shedding frequency were made with a single-component hot-wire probe in the wake, and measurements of the mean drag and lift forces were obtained with a force balance. For all aspect ratios and incidence angles, the Strouhal number and the mean drag coefficient were lower than those of an infinite prism, while the mean lift coefficient was of nearly similar magnitude. As the aspect ratio was increased from AR = 3 to 11, the force coefficients and Strouhal number slowly approached the infinite-square-prism data. The behaviours of the mean drag coefficient and Strouhal number with incidence angle were less sensitive compared to the case of the infinite square prism, although a minimum mean drag coefficient, minimum (most negative) mean lift coefficient, and maximum Strouhal number were found at α = 15°. The reduced sensitivity to incidence angle is attributed to the complex three-dimensional flow over the free end of the prism and the downwash flow that enters the near wake. The behaviour of the force coefficients and Strouhal number for the prism of AR = 3 was distinct from the other prisms (with lower values of drag coefficient and lift coefficient magnitude, and a different Strouhal number trend), suggesting the critical aspect ratio was between AR = 5 and AR = 3 in these experiments. In the wall-normal direction, the power spectra for AR = 11 and 9 tended to have weaker and/or more broad-banded vortex shedding peaks near the ground plane and near the free end at α = 0° and 15°. For AR = 7 to 3, well-defined vortex shedding peaks were detected along the entire height of the prisms. For AR = 11 and 9, at α = 30° and 45°, vortex shedding peaks were absent in the power spectra in the upper part of the wake.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.896
Threshold uncertainty score0.449

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.236 · 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.

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

Citations6
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAerodynamics and Fluid Dynamics ResearchFrench-language works237,207