MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2625203624 · doi:10.1017/jfm.2017.484

Linear feedback stabilization of point-vortex equilibria near a Kasper wing

2017· article· en· W2625203624 on OpenAlexaff
Rhodri Nelson, Bartosz Protas, Takashi Sakajo

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Fluid Mechanics · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Turbulent Flows
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLinear-quadratic-Gaussian controlControl theory (sociology)PhysicsVortexDelta wingSingularityTrailing edgeVorticityMechanicsClassical mechanicsOptimal controlMathematicsMathematical analysisComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper concerns feedback stabilization of point-vortex equilibria above an inclined thin plate and a three-plate configuration known as the Kasper wing in the presence of an oncoming uniform flow. The flow is assumed to be potential and is modelled by the two-dimensional incompressible Euler equations. Actuation has the form of blowing and suction localized on the main plate and is represented in terms of a sink–source singularity, whereas measurement of pressure across the plate serves as system output. We focus on point-vortex equilibria forming a one-parameter family with locus approaching the trailing edge of the main plate and show that these equilibria are either unstable or neutrally stable. Using methods of linear control theory we find that the system dynamics linearized around these equilibria is both controllable and observable for almost all actuator and sensor locations. The design of the feedback control is based on the linear–quadratic–Gaussian (LQG) compensator. Computational results demonstrate the effectiveness of this control and the key finding of this study is that Kasper wing configurations are in general not only more controllable than their single-plate counterparts, but also exhibit larger basins of attraction under LQG feedback control. The feedback control is then applied to systems with additional perturbations added to the flow in the form of random fluctuations of the angle of attack and a vorticity shedding mechanism. Another important observation is that, in the presence of these additional perturbations, the control remains robust, provided the system does not deviate too far from its original state. Furthermore, except in a few isolated cases, introducing a vorticity-shedding mechanism enhanced the effectiveness of the control. Physical interpretation is provided for the results of the controllability and observability analysis as well as the response of the feedback control to different perturbations.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations6
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Fluid MechanicsSame topicFluid Dynamics and Turbulent FlowsFrench-language works237,207