Aeroacoustic Source of Multiple Cavities and Prediction of Self-Excited Oscillations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Self-sustaining oscillations of flow over ducted cavities and corrugated pipes proved to be a potential source of tonal noise and possible failure in industrial applications. Most of the recent studies focused on the flow over a single cavity to simplify the problem and establish basic understanding of the phenomenon. This paper investigates experimentally the flow over multiple cavities, specifically two and three-cavity configurations, and the results are compared with those of a single cavity. Two different categories of experiments were performed in this study. The first category of measurements quantified the aeroacoustic source of various cavity configurations as a function of Strouhal numbers and acoustic velocity of the resonant pipe mode. The cavities are situated at the acoustic pressure node of a piping system which was sufficiently long to maintain the acoustic velocity fairly constant along the test section. The second category involved self-excited oscillations where the cavities were tested in a short piping system. The flow velocity was gradually increased and the acoustic pressure amplitude and frequency were measured and the lock-in ranges for different shear layer modes were identified. A semi-empirical model is then developed to use the measured source to predict the self-excited oscillation amplitude.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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 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".