MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Aerodynamic effects on a high slenderness concrete chimney

2019· article· en· W2995619990 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Acir Mércio Loredo-Souza, Marcelo Maia Rocha, Maria Eduard⁩a Melo Oliveira, Pedro Grala

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista IBRACON de Estruturas e Materiais · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Vibration Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAeroelasticityAerodynamicsStructural engineeringChimney (locomotive)Wind tunnelEngineeringTurbulenceWind speedAerospace engineeringMechanicsMeteorologyMechanical engineeringPhysicsInlet

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper presents the results of a theoretical-experimental study on the aerodynamic behavior of a 150m high, slenderness 30, concrete chimney. For the wind tunnel tests two scaled models were built: one rigid for the measurement of the external pressures, and other aeroelastic, in which the main dynamic characteristics of the real structure were reproduced. The dynamic response under atmospheric turbulence (along-wind direction) is described in the paper and is compatible with the methodology of the Brazilian wind code NBR-6123. A brief analysis of the transversal response due to vortex shedding is presented according to the Canadian Wind Code NBCC. It is observed that, due to the low frequency of the structure, the dynamic approach leads to results significantly larger than those obtained from applying the conventional static approach of gust wind speed. The presence of the neighborhood have increased the loads on the structures.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.002
GPT teacher head0.174
Teacher spread0.172 · 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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevista IBRACON de Estruturas e MateriaisSame topicFluid Dynamics and Vibration AnalysisFrench-language works237,207