MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2068642905 · doi:10.1115/1.4029658

Aeroacoustic Response of a Single Cylinder With Straight Circular Fins in Cross-Flow

2015· article· en· W2068642905 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pressure Vessel Technology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Vibration Analysis
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsFinCylinderAcoustic resonanceSound pressureMaterials scienceResonance (particle physics)AmplitudeAcousticsMechanicsVortex sheddingDuct (anatomy)PhysicsOpticsGeometryTurbulenceComposite materialReynolds numberAtomic physicsMathematicsAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The phenomenon of sound generation has been investigated in some detail for the case of bare cylinders; however, the effect of adding fins to the cylinder on the flow–sound interaction mechanism is not yet fully understood. Thus, the aeroacoustic response of a cylinder with straight circular fins in cross-flow is investigated experimentally in this work. During the experiments, the acoustic modes of the duct housing the cylinder are self-excited due to the vortex shedding that emerges from the cylinder's surface. In order to determine the effect of different fin parameters on the onset and intensity of acoustic resonance, 14 different finned cylinders with fin thickness ranging from 0.35 to 1.5 mm and fin density ranging from 4 to 13.7 fin/in. are investigated. It is observed that the finned cylinders experience an earlier acoustic resonance and higher levels of acoustic pressure compared to their equivalent bare cylinders. Moreover, it is observed that, for constant fin spacing, the acoustic pressure amplitude increases and the acoustic resonance occurs at earlier velocities as the fin thickness increases. On the other hand, for constant fin thickness, as the fin spacing increases the amplitude of the acoustic pressure decreases while the onset of the resonance is delayed. Finally, the effect of the cylinder's aspect ratio on the acoustic resonance excitation is presented. It is shown that as the finned cylinders' aspect ratio increases from 4.85 to 11.3, the normalized acoustic pressure during resonance increases drastically. However, for bare cylinders the normalized acoustic pressure during resonance is not highly dependent on the cylinders' aspect ratio. These results indicate that adding fins to the cylinder alters the flow field downstream of the cylinder in a manner that makes it more susceptible to acoustic excitation.

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 score0.092
Threshold uncertainty score0.391

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.232
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