The Aeroacoustic Response of a Single Square Cylinder in Confined Cross Flow
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Unstable flow patterns around arrangements of bluff bodies in different engineering applications can give rise to pressure oscillations, leading to excitation of strong acoustic resonance that can interrupt operation. In certain conditions, flow fluctuations arising from vortex shedding downstream of a circular cylinder are reported to excite severe acoustic resonance. On the other hand, cylinders of a square cross section are known to be particularly susceptible to mechanisms that involve coupling between the flow and a structural mode. It is not documented, however, if such coupling would occur between an acoustic mode and flow fluctuations downstream of a square cylinder. In this work, the possibility of excitation of acoustic resonance due to coupling between unsteady flow downstream of a single square cylinder with an acoustic cross mode of a rectangular duct is experimentally investigated. During the experiments, acoustic resonance was self-excited. Measurements of the acoustic pressure and the flow velocity are carried out for a single square cylinder of an edge length of 25.4 mm. Results show that aeroacoustic response characteristics for this configuration are not completely analogous to the case of a circular cylinder, with a number of features not reported before. A brief summary of the results is presented in this work.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".