Applicability of Non-Uniformly Varying the Fin Density of Tandem Finned Cylinders As a Viable Vortex and Noise Suppression Technique
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This article explores the applicability of using non-uniform finned tubes in tandem arrangement at L/Deq(avg) = 2.5 to suppress flow-induced acoustic resonance. Particle Image Velocimetry (PIV) measurements are performed to visualize the vortex development in the wake before and during flow-induced acoustic resonance. Acoustic pressure measurements are performed to characterize the aeroacoustic response of the tandem finned tubes. It was found that non-uniform finned tubes weaken the vortex shedding process and reduce the sound pressure level (SPL) during flow-induced acoustic resonance associated with the vortex shedding process by 50%. However, non-uniform finned tubes do not hinder the instability of the shear layers within its gap. This makes non-uniform finned tubes susceptible to flow-induced acoustic resonance associated with the instability of the gap shear layers. During this type of acoustic resonance excitation, highly discrete and well-organized vortex cores are formed in the gap and wake of both uniform and nonuniform finned tubes with SPL similar to that generated by the uniform finned tubes. A summary of the results are presented in the paper.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".