MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3144726955 · doi:10.1002/we.2627

Modeling dynamic loads on oscillating airfoils with emphasis on dynamic stall vortices

2021· article· en· W3144726955 on OpenAlexaff
Ayman Mohamed, David Wood

Bibliographic record

VenueWind Energy · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Turbulent Flows
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersLuonnontieteiden ja Tekniikan Tutkimuksen Toimikunta
KeywordsStall (fluid mechanics)AirfoilAerodynamicsMechanicsVortexChord (peer-to-peer)Aerodynamic forceVortex sheddingPitching momentControl theory (sociology)PhysicsComputer scienceAngle of attackReynolds number

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We present a modified version of the ONERA dynamic stall model for improving the prediction of the unsteady forces and load overshoots generated by the shedding of dynamic stall vortices. The modifications include modeling the chord‐axis forces instead of the wind‐axis forces used originally. A novel approach for defining the onset of a dynamic stall is based on the behavior of the chordwise force without correlating the onset empirically. Overshoots in the unsteady aerodynamic loads caused by vortex shedding are modeled by sine‐shaped functions added to the normal force and moment. The onset and duration of these pulses are empirically described in the time domain for convenient use in time‐marching simulations. The modified dynamic stall model is calibrated using a genetic algorithm and compared to experimental data of different airfoils relevant to wind turbine applications. The results show an excellent correlation with the experimental data, particularly in deep dynamic stall, which are characterized by large fluctuations in the aerodynamic loads.

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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.194
Teacher spread0.188 · 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

Citations5
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWind EnergySame topicFluid Dynamics and Turbulent FlowsFrench-language works237,207