MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2618725488 · doi:10.5539/mas.v9n11p222

A Study of the Influence of Guide Vane Design to Increase Savonius Wind Turbine Performance

2015· article· en· W2618725488 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueModern Applied Science · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEngineering Structural Analysis Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRotor (electric)Tilt (camera)TurbineMarine engineeringWater turbineWork (physics)Power (physics)Wind powerTip-speed ratioEnvironmental scienceStructural engineeringPhysicsMechanical engineeringEngineeringElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<p>This work experimentally studied the influence of guide vane design to increase Savonius rotor performance. Guide vane is one of additional device that its function is for directing wind stream on to concave blade and deserves as obstacle of the wind that flowing on to convex blade. That way increased wind speeds to the rotor, consequently it produced higher power coefficient and the Savonius rotor performed better performance. Four designs of guide vane were arranged in this study. They are basic design of guide vane and basic design of guide vane that added a tilt angle on the top and bottom sides by 15°, 30°, and 45°. The result concludes that guide vane affects the performance of Savonius rotor. The power that generated by the rotor with guide vanes increase significantly compared with Savonius rotor without guide vane. The maximum improvement was attained up to 65.89%.</p>

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)0.001
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 score0.122
Threshold uncertainty score0.430

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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.233 · 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