Control of Vortex Shedding and Acoustic Resonance of a Circular Cylinder in Cross-Flow
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This paper presents an experimental study of the aeroacoustics response from a circular cylinder in cross-flow with a control rod. The effectiveness of the control rod on suppressing acoustic resonance excitation is investigated. The control rod diameter-to-circular cylinder diameter ratio (d/D) is fixed at 0.21. The gap (G) between the circular cylinder and the control rod is taken at 0.11D. The rod is placed at several angular positions, which varied from 0° (front stagnation of the main cylinder) to 180° (base of the main cylinder). Phase-locked particle image velocimetry (PIV) measurements are performed during acoustic resonance to visualize the coherent vortex structures downstream of the cylinders. The results show that the placement of the control rod significantly influences the Strouhal periodicity with great dependence on the rod’s angular orientation. Moreover, at some angular positions, the existence of the rod has resulted in a reduction of the sound pressure level (SPL) generated during acoustic resonance excitation. However, at other angular positions, the rod has resulted in a stronger resonance excitation. This behavior is due to the profound effect of the control rod’s angular position on the formation of vortex cores during acoustic resonance. A brief summary of the results is presented herein.
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 | 0.000 | 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".