MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2904473351 · doi:10.1177/1475472x18812798

Modal analysis of the laminar boundary layer instability and tonal noise of an airfoil at Reynolds number 150,000

2018· article· en· W2904473351 on OpenAlexaff
Marlène Sanjosé, Aaron Towne, Prateek Jaiswal, Stéphane Moreau, Sanjiva K. Lele, Adrien Mann

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Aeroacoustics · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAerodynamics and Acoustics in Jet Flows
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsReynolds numberAirfoilMechanicsBoundary layerVortexVortex sheddingTurbulenceLattice Boltzmann methodsAcoustics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A direct numerical simulation of the flow field around a controlled-diffusion airfoil within an anechoic wind-tunnel at [Formula: see text] incidence and a high Reynolds number of [Formula: see text] is performed for the first time using a lattice Boltzmann method. The simulation compares favorably with experimental measurements of wall-pressure, wake statistics, and far-field sound. The simulation noticeably captures experimentally observed high-amplitude acoustic tones that rise above a broadband hump. Both noise components are related to a breathing of a recirculation bubble formed around 65–70% of the chord, and to Kelvin-Helmholtz instabilities in the separated shear layer that yield rollers that break down into turbulent vortices whose diffraction at the trailing edge produces a strong dipole acoustic field. A wavelet analysis of the wall-pressure signals combined with some flow visualization has shown that the flow statistics are dominated by intense events caused by intermittent, large and intense bursting rollers. Several modal analyses of these events are performed on both the wall-pressure fluctuations and the span averaged flow field in order to analyse the boundary layer instability which triggers the typical sharp tones over a broadband hump in airfoil noise. A suction side Kelvin-Helmholtz instability is observed to be coupled with a pressure side vortex shedding induced by the sudden transition to turbulence and the blunt trailing edge.

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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.241 · 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

Citations58
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of AeroacousticsSame topicAerodynamics and Acoustics in Jet FlowsFrench-language works237,207