MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Identification of Noise Sources in a Realistic Turbofan Rotor Using Large Eddy Simulation

2021· article· en· W3165471595 on OpenAlexaff
Pavel Kholodov, Stéphane Moreau

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Physics Conference Series · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAerodynamics and Acoustics in Jet Flows
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTurbofanAcousticsNoise (video)AerodynamicsRotor (electric)Trailing edgeLeading edgeLarge eddy simulationPhysicsHelicopter rotorVortexFrequency domainAmplitudeDynamic mode decompositionAeroacousticsBlade (archaeology)MechanicsAerospace engineeringVibrationEngineeringStructural engineeringComputer scienceTurbulenceOpticsSound pressure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Large Eddy Simulation (LES) is performed using the NASA Source Diagnostic Test database at approach conditions (62% of the design speed). The simulation is performed in a periodic domain containing one single blade. The aerodynamic and acoustic results are compared with the experiment. Ffowcs Williams and Hawkings’ (FWH) analogy is used to compute the far-field noise from the solid surface of the rotor blade. The analogy is computed for the full blade and for its tip region to see the contribution of the latter. The dynamic mode decomposition is performed at different iso-radii of the computational domain. The contribution of the tip region to the far-field noise is observed around the first blade passing frequency (2.8 kHz) and 4 kHz due to the mixing process of the leading-edge and tip vortices. The rest of the blade contributes more at frequencies above 7 kHz which corresponds to the trailing-edge noise. The high-amplitude modes are observed at 75% and 90% of the spanwise length. These modes contribute to the corresponding frequency humps in the far-field spectrum.

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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.242 · 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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Physics Conference SeriesSame topicAerodynamics and Acoustics in Jet FlowsFrench-language works237,207