MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2323859185 · doi:10.2514/6.2006-243

Low Frequency Oscillations Of Thin Airfoils In Subsonic Compressible Flows

2006· article· en· W2323859185 on OpenAlexaff
Dan Mateescu, Silviu Neculita

Bibliographic record

Venue44th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Turbulent Flows
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAirfoilAcousticsMechanicsCompressibilityAerospace engineeringPhysicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

*† New and efficient analytical solutions are presented in this paper for the unsteady subsonic compressible flows past rigid and flexible airfoils executing low frequency oscillations. These solutions are obtained using a specially developed method based on velocity singularity associated with the airfoil leading edge and ridges (defined by the changes in the boundary conditions). Efficient analytical solutions in closed form are presented for the unsteady lift and pitching moment coefficients and for the chordwise distribution of the unsteady pressure difference coefficient in the general case of rigid or flexible airfoils executing oscillatory rotations and translations and flexural oscillations. A detailed analysis of the variations of these aerodynamic coefficients with the Mach number and with the reduced frequency of oscillations is also presented for the cases of oscillatory pitching rotations and normal-to-chord translations of rigid airfoils and for the flexural oscillations of flexible airfoils. The present solutions were found in very good agreement with previous incompressible flow results obtained in the limit case of incompressible flows by Theodorsen, Postel & Leppert and Mateescu & Abdo, and with previous compressible flow results.

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 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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.074
Threshold uncertainty score0.604

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.195 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations2
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue44th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and ExhibitSame topicFluid Dynamics and Turbulent FlowsFrench-language works237,207