MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2317029783 · doi:10.2514/6.2013-2667

The Effect of Rotation on the Spanwise Transport of Vorticity in the Absence of Tip Effects

2013· article· en· W2317029783 on OpenAlexaff
Jaime G. Wong, David E. Rival

Bibliographic record

Venue31st AIAA Applied Aerodynamics Conference · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBiomimetic flight and propulsion mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersAir Force Office of Scientific ResearchU.S. Air Force
KeywordsVorticityRotation (mathematics)PhysicsMechanicsVortexGeometryMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The vortex growth around plunging and flapping profiles of varying sweep angle was studied with three-dimensional particle tracking velocimetry and direct-force measurements. For plunging kinematics all sweep angles tested resulted in the same force coefficient history and circulation history. Therefore, it was concluded that nominally two-dimensional spanwise flow has no effect on vortex growth or force history. However, when flapping kinematics were introduced, vortex growth was reduced due to vorticity convection. Vorticity convection for flapping cases could be modulated with the nominally two-dimensional spanwise flow. Reduced circulation for rotating cases corresponded to reduced force coefficient histories. No relationship between vortex stretching and vortex strength was observed at the Rossby number considered in this study. Through an analysis of the vorticity transport equation it was concluded that spanwise flow must be accompanied by gradients in vorticity magnitude in order to limit vortex growth.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.183
Teacher spread0.177 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue31st AIAA Applied Aerodynamics ConferenceSame topicBiomimetic flight and propulsion mechanismsFrench-language works237,207