MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2326587361 · doi:10.2514/6.2008-5874

A New Airfoil for the Supporting Struts of Smaller-Capacity Straight-Bladed VAWT

2008· article· en· W2326587361 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venue12th AIAA/ISSMO Multidisciplinary Analysis and Optimization Conference · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWind Energy Research and Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAirfoilDragLift (data mining)Marine engineeringTurbineLift-to-drag ratioWind powerAerospace engineeringVertical axis wind turbineStructural engineeringEngineeringComputer scienceElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The primary sources of drag for a straight-bladed vertical axis wind turbine (SB-VAWT) are the blades which are also responsible for generating lift. The supporting struts of a SB-VAWT are also responsible for generating additional parasitic drag which reduces the overall power output. It is one of the major disadvantages of the SB-VAWTs as the loss of power due to its effect is proportional to the cube of tip speed ratio. The aim of this paper is to present an alternative airfoil for the shape of the supporting struts of smaller-capacity fixed-pitch SB-VAWTs to reduce the parasitic drag losses. A new airfoil "MI-STRUT1" has been designed which performs better than another available streamlined strut, namely E862, especially at low RN range. Based on the finding it has been proposed that MI-STRUT1 can be considered as a potential candidate for the profile of supporting struts of SB-VAWT for better performance. Copyright © 2008 by Islam, Amin, Ting & Fartaj.

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 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)0.000
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.817
Threshold uncertainty score0.685

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.218 · 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