Flow separation on flapping and rotating profiles with spanwise gradients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The growth of leading-edge vortices (LEV) on analogous flapping and rotating profiles has been investigated experimentally. Three time-varying cases were considered: a two-dimensional reference case with a spanwise-uniform angle-of-attack variation α; a case with increasing α towards the profile tip (similar to flapping flyers); and a case with increasing α towards the profile root (similar to rotor blades experiencing an axial gust). It has been shown that the time-varying spanwise angle-of-attack gradient produces a vorticity gradient, which, in combination with spanwise flow, results in a redistribution of circulation along the profile. Specifically, when replicating the angle-of-attack gradient characteristic of a rotor experiencing an axial gust, the spanwise-vorticity gradient is aligned such that circulation increases within the measurement domain. This in turn increases the local LEV growth rate, which is suggestive of force augmentation on the blade. Reversing the relative alignment of the spanwise-vorticity gradient and spanwise flow, thereby replicating that arrangement found in a flapping flyer, was found to reduce local circulation. From this, we can conclude that spanwise flow can be arranged to vary LEV growth to prolong lift augmentation and reduce the unsteadiness of cyclic loads.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".