MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Effects of the Turbulence Integral Scale on the Non-Gaussian Properties and Extreme Wind Loads of Surface Pressure on a CAARC Model

2022· article· en· W4293418552 on OpenAlexaff
Xiongwei Yang, Shubi Du, Mingshui Li, Chuan Qin, Haicheng Zhang, Jianhan Yu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Structural Engineering · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWind and Air Flow Studies
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTurbulenceKurtosisGaussianSurface pressureWind shearSkewnessK-epsilon turbulence modelMechanicsMeteorologyEnvironmental sciencePhysicsMathematicsWind speedStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To study the effects of the turbulence integral scale on the non-Gaussian properties and extreme wind loads of surface pressure, the surface pressures for two Commonwealth Advisory Aeronautical Research Council (CAARC) scaled models were measured in three turbulent flow fields with different turbulence integral scales. The results show that the surface pressure distribution on the windward surface is fundamentally Gaussian, while the surface pressures on the side and leeward surfaces are markedly non-Gaussian. The deviation from normality strongly depends on the ratio of the turbulence integral scale to the windward width (Lux/D). With changing Lux/D, the fluctuating pressure, skewness, kurtosis, probability density distribution, non-Gaussian peak factors, and extreme wind loads vary significantly. In addition, the surface pressure nonnormality becomes more evident for lower Lux/D wind fields, increasing Sk, Ku, and the fluctuating pressure’s peak factor. In contrast, the fluctuating pressure decreases with decreasing wind-field Lux/D, resulting in the underestimation of extreme wind loads. Further, the extreme wind load maximal error margin reaches 30.7% when the simulated turbulence integral scale error margin is 70%, even for nonnormal surface pressures. Hence, nonnormality of the surface pressure and the effects of the turbulence integral scale should be carefully considered when estimating extreme wind loads for CAARC standard tall buildings using wind-tunnel tests.

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)0.002
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 score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.165
Teacher spread0.157 · 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

Citations16
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Structural EngineeringSame topicWind and Air Flow StudiesFrench-language works237,207