MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The impact of heat and inflow wind variations on vertical transport around a supertall building – The One Vanderbilt field experiment

2022· article· en· W4293245986 on OpenAlexaff
Katia Lamer, Edward Luke, Zackary Mages, Erin Leghart, Zeen Zhu, Bernat Puigdomènech Treserras, Rohit Rawat, Andrew M. Vogelmann

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Science of The Total Environment · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWind and Air Flow Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersBrookhaven National Laboratory
KeywordsInflowCanyonMeteorologyWind directionEnvironmental scienceAtmospheric sciencesFlow (mathematics)Wind speedGeologyMechanicsPhysicsGeomorphology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The impact skyscrapers have on wind flow remains poorly characterized, thus affecting atmospheric dispersion predictions in dense urban centers. A new mobile observatory equipped with remote sensors controlled by a smart sampling protocol was developed to collect high-resolution (18 m, 15 s) observations throughout the atmospheric layer below 1.5 km. A series of four deployments was performed around the One Vanderbilt skyscraper (H 1 = 427 m) located in Manhattan, NY to document wind flow and temperature in canyons with relatively high width-to-depth ratios (H 2 /W ~ 1.2–7.5; H 2 being the height of the adjacent building) and steepness (H 1 /H 2 = 2.1–11.2) and that under a range of inflow wind and solar heating conditions. A series of flow features were common to all case studies with head-on winds. A stagnation point was observed 2/3 of the way up the impeded portion of the One Vanderbilt, pointing to the importance of the upwind building height in controlling vertical air flow. In the canyons parallel to the flow, three sets of mirroring counterrotating vortices were detected pointing to the fact that H 2 is not as important a parameter in controlling flow in canyons parallel to the inflow wind. Plumes of rapidly rising air were detected near building heat vents under both 10 m s −1 and 3 m s −1 inflow wind conditions, at night and in the morning respectively. This suggests that anthropogenic heat may be an important energy source especially in the absence of solar heating. In the presence of solar heating, a systematic tendency for upward flow was observed above H 1 . We associate this pattern to the presence of rising thermals, a common mechanism for planetary boundary layer growth. Below H 2 , complete flow reversal (relative to mechanically driven circulations) was detected ~20 % of the time, showing evidence of dominant thermal effects even under 7 m s −1 inflow wind conditions.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.070
Threshold uncertainty score0.140

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations8
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Science of The Total EnvironmentSame topicWind and Air Flow StudiesFrench-language works237,207