Flow Regimes and Drag Characteristics of Yawed Elliptical Cavities With Varying Depth
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The effect of yaw angle and cavity depth on the resulting flow field of cavities with elliptical planform areas embedded in a low velocity turbulent boundary layer was investigated experimentally. A 2:1 elliptical cavity with depth to minor axis ratios ranging from 0.1 to 1.0 was tested in a wind tunnel facility. Surface pressure measurements and wake velocity measurements, using hot-wire anemometry, were conducted to examine the resulting flow regimes. The results indicated several different flow regimes for the different yaw angle and cavity depth configurations. Cellular structures were observed when the minor axis was aligned with the streamwise direction. Yawing the cavity with respect to the streamwise direction resulted in a highly asymmetric flow regime. This flow regime was also associated with high drag for certain cavity depth configurations. A nominally two-dimensional flow regime was observed for large yaw angles, when the major axis of the cavity was aligned with the streamwise direction. The yaw angle had only a minor effect on the flow regimes associated with the shallowest and deepest cavities examined. A strong resemblance was found between the flow regimes associated with elliptical and rectangular cavities for similar yaw and depth configurations. This similarity was also observed in the lift and drag coefficients for the different yaw angles and cavity depths. This indicated that the wall radius of curvature of elliptical cavities has a negligible effect on the resulting flow regimes when compared to rectangular cavities.
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".