MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2921494499 · doi:10.3390/jmse7030068

The Hydrodynamic Noise Suppression of a Scaled Submarine Model by Leading-Edge Serrations

2019· article· en· W2921494499 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Yongwei Liu, Yalin Li, Dejiang Shang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Marine Science and Engineering · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAerodynamics and Acoustics in Jet Flows
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Alberta
KeywordsNoise (video)Leading edgeVortexMechanicsHullReynolds numberChord (peer-to-peer)PhysicsWater tunnelNoise reductionEnhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionAmplitudeAcousticsOpticsEngineeringMarine engineeringTurbulenceTelecommunicationsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

High hydrodynamic noise is a threat to the survival of underwater vehicles. We investigated a noise suppression mechanism by putting leading-edge serrations on the sail hull of a scaled SUBOFF model, through numerical calculation and an experimental test. We found that the cone shape of leading-edge serrations can decrease the intensity of the adverse pressure gradient and produce counter-rotation vortices, which destroy the formation of the horseshoe vortex and delay the tail vortex. To achieve the optimum hydrodynamic noise reduction, we summarized the parameters of leading-edge serrations. Then, two steel models were built, according to the simulation. We measured the hydrodynamic noise based on the reverberation method in a gravity water tunnel. The numerically calculated results were validated by the experimental test. The results show that leading-edge serrations with amplitudes of 0.025c and wavelengths of 0.05h can obtain hydrodynamic noise reduction of at least 6 dB, from 10 Hz to 2 kHz, where c is the chord length and h is the height of the sail hull. The results in our study suggest a new way to design underwater vehicles with low hydrodynamic noise at a high Reynolds number.

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 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 score0.271
Threshold uncertainty score0.321

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.189 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations14
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Marine Science and EngineeringSame topicAerodynamics and Acoustics in Jet FlowsFrench-language works237,207