MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3131911782 · doi:10.1115/imece2020-23938

Hydrokinetic Vortex Induced Vibration (VIV) Energy Harvester

2020· article· en· W3131911782 on OpenAlexaff
Xiaoyu Zhou, Vesselina Roussinova, Vesselin Stoilov

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInnovative Energy Harvesting Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBluffVibrationVortex-induced vibrationAcousticsAmplitudeTransducerEnergy harvestingVortexCylinderMechanicsPhysicsEnergy (signal processing)Power (physics)Flow (mathematics)Vortex sheddingMaterials scienceEngineeringReynolds numberMechanical engineeringTurbulenceOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper investigates the performance of vortex-induced vibration (VIV) energy harvester in low-speed water flow. The proposed VIV harvester is extracting hydrokinetic energy from the flowing current and transferring it into mechanical vibrations. The vibrations are further converted into electrical energy using the piezoelectric transducer to supply the modern demand for energy-consumption. To meet the demand, the single harvester is analyzed to determine the suitable geometry for the bluff body that is sensitive to the low-speed flow. Furthermore, the converter must be able to harvest vibrations of varying amplitudes and frequencies. To maximize the power output, different array configurations of multiple bluff bodies are examined. A single positively buoyant elastically mounted cylinder is tested experimentally and at a low flow speed of 0.3 m/s, it can harvest vibrations with an average frequency of 1.8 Hz and peak to peak amplitude of 1.5d, where d is the diameter of the bluff body. It was found that for an array consisting of ten bluff bodies, the average frequency and peak to peak amplitude increases to 2.09Hz and 1.54d, respectively.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.190
Teacher spread0.166 · 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 designBench or experimental
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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicInnovative Energy Harvesting TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207