Passive Control of Trapped Mode Resonance of Ducted Cavities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Gas flow over ducted cavities can excite strong acoustic resonances within the confined volumes housing the cavities. When the wavelength of the resonant acoustic modes is comparable with, or smaller than, the cavity dimensions, these modes are referred to as trapped acoustic modes. The flow excitation mechanism causing the resonance of these trapped modes in axisymmetric shallow cavities has been investigated experimentally in a series of papers by Aly and Ziada (2010, “Flow-Excited Resonance of Trapped Modes of Ducted Shallow Cavities,” J. Fluids Struct., 26, pp. 92–120; 2011, “Azimuthal Behaviour of Flow-Excited Diametral Modes of Internal Shallow Cavities,” J. Sound Vib., 330, pp. 3666–3683; 2012, “Effect of Mean Flow on the Trapped Modes of Internal Cavities,” J. Fluids Struct., 33, pp. 70–84). In this paper, the same experimental set-up is used to investigate the effect of the upstream edge geometry on the acoustic resonance of trapped modes. The investigated geometries include sharp and rounded cavity corners, chamfering the upstream edge, and spoilers of different types and sizes. Rounding-off the cavity edges is found to increase the pulsation amplitude substantially, but the resonance lock-on range is delayed, i.e., it is shifted to higher flow velocities. Similarly, chamfering the upstream corner delays the onset of resonance, but maintains its intensity in comparison with that of sharp edges. Spoilers, or vortex generators, added at the upstream edge have been found to be the most effective means to suppress the resonance. However, the minimum spoiler size which is needed to suppress the resonance increases as the cavity size becomes larger.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".