Influence of Cavity Shape on Synthetic Jet Performance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A synthetic jet is an unsteady jet that transfers linear momentum to the surroundings by alternately ingesting and expelling fluid from a cavity containing an oscillating diaphragm. This work presents the first experimental effort to validate the limited number of numerical investigations that have postulated synthetic jets are insensitive to cavity shape. Three axisymmetric synthetic jets with different cavity shapes were used to examine jet performance while keeping other parameters constant such as cavity volume, nozzle length and orifice diameter. Cylindrical, conical and contraction shaped cavities were considered. The cavity pressure and velocity at the orifice exit plane were measured using a microphone and hot-wire, respectively. The results demonstrated that for several operating conditions near Helmholtz resonance of the cavity, noticeable differences were observed in the radial velocity profiles between the three geometries. The Reynolds number decreased sequentially from the cylindrical to conical to contraction cavity. The momentum flux, which is relevant in flow control applications, followed the same trend. In general, the experimental results showed that synthetic jet performance is, to some degree, dependant on cavity shape.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".