Stator and Support Arm Aerodynamic Performance for Automotive Engine Cooling Fans with Realistic Inlet Conditions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<div class="htmlview paragraph">The influence of a typical stator and support arm on the performance of an automotive engine cooling module is evaluated. Measured lift (C<sub>L</sub>) and the drag (C<sub>D</sub>) coefficients are compared for a typical stator and support arm under real unsteady inlet conditions. These inlet conditions are based on Laser Doppler Velocimetry (LDV) data taken in the flow downstream of an automotive cooling fan. The quality of the experimental results is assessed upon comparison with the well-established flat plate data. It is found that inlet conditions dramatically affect the aerodynamic performance of both the stator and the support arm. A suitable range of inlet conditions on which to base the design is presented.</div> <div class="htmlview paragraph">The second objective of the current study is to establish accurate numerical simulation guidelines for future fan designs. Various turbulence models are evaluated based on comparison with experimentally measured data for a stator and a support arm at various angles of attack. The deviations between experimental measurements and numerical predictions are highlighted and interpreted.</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.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".