MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2127647218 · doi:10.1017/s0022112010003368

On a uniformly valid analytical rectilinear cascade response function

2010· article· en· W2127647218 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Fluid Mechanics · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAerodynamics and Acoustics in Jet Flows
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCascadeTurbofanAirfoilJumpComputer sciencePhysicsMechanicsAerospace engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper extends an existing analytical model of the aeroacoustic response of a rectilinear cascade of flat-plate blades to three-dimensional incident vortical gusts, by providing closed-form expressions for the acoustic field inside the inter-blade channels, as well as for the pressure jump over the blades in subsonic flows. The extended formulation is dedicated to future implementation in a fan-broadband-noise-prediction tool. The intended applications include the modern turbofan engines, for which analytical modelling is believed to be a good alternative to more expensive numerical techniques. The initial model taken as a reference is based on the Wiener–Hopf technique. An analytical solution valid over the whole space is first derived by making an extensive use of the residue theorem. The accuracy of the model is shown by comparing with numerical predictions of benchmark configurations available in the literature. This full exact solution could be used as a reference for future assessment of numerical solvers, of linearized Euler equations for instance, in rectilinear or narrow-annulus configurations. In addition, the pressure jump is a key piece of information because it can be used as a source term in an acoustic analogy when the rectilinear-cascade model is applied to three-dimensional blade rows by resorting to a strip-theory approach. When used as such in a true rectilinear-cascade configuration, it reproduces the exact radiated field that can be derived directly. The solution is also compared to a classical single-airfoil formulation to highlight the cascade effect. This effect is found important when the blades of the cascade overlap significantly, but the cascade solution tends to the single-airfoil one as the overlap goes to zero. This suggests that both models can be used as the continuation of each other if needed.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.811
Threshold uncertainty score0.497

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.225 · 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