Surface Pressure Fluctuations in Separated-Reattached Flows Behind Notched Spoilers
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<div class="htmlview paragraph">Notched spoilers may be used to suppress flow-induced cavity resonance in vehicles with open sunroofs or side windows. The notches are believed to generate streamwise vortices that break down the structure of the leading edge cross-stream vortices predominantly responsible for the cavity excitation. The objectives of the present study were to gain a better understanding of the buffeting suppression mechanisms associated with notched spoilers, and to gather data for computational model verification. To this end, experiments were performed to characterize the surface pressure field downstream of straight and notched spoilers mounted on a rigid wall to observe the effects of the notches on the static and dynamic wall pressure. Detailed flow velocity measurements were made using hot-wire anemometry. The results indicated that the presence of notches on the spoiler reduces drag, and thus tends to move the flow reattachment location closer to the spoiler. The notches cause a decrease in the coherence of the wall pressure field, and induce a monotonic spanwise phase lag distribution at low frequencies typical of flow induced buffeting. The latter effects could be in part responsible for buffeting reduction, although further work is needed to clarify the exact mechanisms through additional experiments on actual cavity flows.</div>
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 it