On the Effects of Wind Tunnel Floor Tangential Blowing on the Aerodynamic Forces of Passenger Vehicles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<div class="section abstract"><div class="htmlview paragraph">Many aerodynamic wind tunnels used for testing of ground vehicles have advanced ground simulation systems to account for the relative motion between the ground and the vehicle. One commonly used approach for ground simulation is a five belt system, where moving belts are used, often in conjunction with distributed suction and tangential blowing that reduces the displacement thickness of the boundary layer along the wind tunnel floor. This paper investigates the effects from aft-belt tangential blowing in the Volvo Cars Aerodynamic wind tunnel. First the uniformity of the boundary layer thickness downstream of the blowing slots is examined in the empty tunnel. This is followed by investigations of how the measured performance of different vehicle types in several configurations, typically tested in routine aerodynamic development work, depends on whether the tangential blowing system is active or not. Numerical simulations are also used to explain the flow field origin of the force differences measured in the wind tunnel. Results show that even though the displacement thickness behind the blowers varies along the width of the blowing slots, it is significantly reduced compared to the case of no blowing; furthermore, it is also shown that deactivating the blowing altogether has an effect not only on the absolute forces but also on the deltas measured between different configurations, and that this phenomenon is more prominent if the vehicle has a larger base area.</div></div>
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".