MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2088683927 · doi:10.1016/j.proeng.2012.10.133

Development of a Wind Tunnel Test Facility to Simulate the Effect of Rain on Roof Ventilation Systems and Environmental Measuring Devices

2012· article· en· W2088683927 on OpenAlexaff
T.G. Flynn, G. Behfarshad, Noor A. Ahmed

Bibliographic record

VenueProcedia Engineering · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWind and Air Flow Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRoofPitot tubeMarine engineeringWind tunnelEngineeringVentilation (architecture)Wind speedEnvironmental scienceCivil engineeringMeteorologyMechanical engineeringAerospace engineeringFlow (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The design and development of a new test facility in the form of a rain chamber or test section was undertaken to provide an additional test facility to compliment efforts in the performance investigation of wind driven roof ventilators and other environmental measuring devices, such as Pitot probes in rain. To reduce cost and optimise greater usage of resources, it was decided to make the test facility compatible for operation with a conventional wind tunnel. Successful tests were carried out to confirm the suitability new facility through velocity profile measurement with a purpose built water spray delivery system. Testing of two different types of roof ventilator was carried out to test for ventilator water ingress performance. The study was limited in scope, yet the testing showed some interesting features associated with the operation of the roof ventilators in different weather conditions and confirmed the benefits of using the new test section.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.186
Teacher spread0.177 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations9
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProcedia EngineeringSame topicWind and Air Flow StudiesFrench-language works237,207