MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3034671848 · doi:10.2514/6.2020-2607

Large Eddy Simulation of an Outflow butterfly valve

2020· article· en· W3034671848 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAIAA AVIATION 2020 FORUM · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAerodynamics and Acoustics in Jet Flows
Canadian institutionsUniversité du QuébecUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsButterfly valveAerodynamicsAcousticsNoise (video)SchlierenTransonicLarge eddy simulationWind tunnelAerospace engineeringComputer scienceMechanicsPhysicsEngineeringMechanical engineeringTurbulence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present study focuses on the aeroacoustic aspects of an outflow butterfly valve that is used to maintain the pressure inside an airplane cabin. When flying at 17,000 ft, an annoying tonal noise has been reported and the flowwithin the valve is transonic. Large Eddy Simulations are performed on different setups in order to understand the noise mechanisms and results are compared with a 2D-rectangular channel butterfly valve representative of the actual geometry. The experimental valve allows performingwall-pressure measurements, Schlieren visualization and far-field noise investigation. Initial LES simulations with second order precision on a relatively coarse mesh have shown difficulties to reproduce the experimental results. Therefore, improvements are made in terms of configuration and numerical scheme leading to the two numerical setups investigated in this paper. Different aerodynamic behaviors, mostly in the shock/boundary layer interaction region, are observed between the two configurations with 0.1D and 0.3D span width. As for the acoustics, far-field computations with FW-H analogy will be compared with experiments for both cases.

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.

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)0.000
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.704
Threshold uncertainty score0.508

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.219 · 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