Aerodynamic and Structural Design of Flow Conditioning, Flow Seeding and Testing Sections of a High-Speed Wind Tunnel
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This thesis presents the design of two test sections, one annular and one rectilinear, to facilitate the study of ducted flows at high subsonic Mach numbers on the Carleton high-speed wind-tunnel. The structural performance of the two designs was evaluated using finite element tools and were deemed compliant with provincial pressure-vessel regulatory requirements. Both designs benefit from lighter-weight materials and a greater degree of modularity than existing high-speed test sections. The aerodynamic performance of an annular-flow air-supply system was evaluated using a transient, one dimensional algorithm. The annular flow path is designed to provide a steady Mach number flow in the range of 0.3 to 0.8 at the test section discharge, with minimal pressure loss to achieve minimum run times of 25-30 seconds on a blow-down type wind-tunnel. The present study also evaluates the flow seeding performance of a seed material injection system on the annular-flow air-supply system for particle image velocimetry measurements. The study demonstrates the ability of computational fluid engineering tools to accurately evaluate the sensitivity of the seed injection system's performance to a range of geometric parameters, and velocity and pressure conditions specific to this design.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".