Experimental Characterization of Leading Edge Tubercles on Rotor Blades
Bibliographic record
Abstract
View Video Presentation: https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2022-1966.vid This paper presents the first experimental measurements of leading edge tubercles applied to rotor blades. Using the Royal Military College Rotor Rig, the effect of applying uniform SinA03L12.5 and SinA06L25 tubercles was characterized by comparing thrust, power, and acoustic measurements to a baseline NACA 0014 blade. Tubercles showed an improvement in overall sound pressure levels at low to moderate pitch angles attributed to a reduction in blade wake interaction noise. Such improvement appears to come with a reduction in peak Figure of Merit at higher thrust coefficient with larger loss in performance for the SinA06L25 shape than the SinA03L12.5. Non-linear deflections induced via elasticity of the blade affect the performance interpretation of the obtained results and further experimentation will be required. Results indicate that improvements in performance and reduction in noise is possible if proper selection of tubercles shape is done at specific span-wise locations.
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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".