Large Eddy Simulation of Airfoil Tip Noise at Various Angles of Attack
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study conducts a detailed investigation of side-edge noise on a supercritical cantilever wing at angles of attack of 5° and 10° using wall-resolved large-eddy simulations (WR-LES) complemented by experimental data. It focuses on the aerodynamic and aeroacoustic phenomena contributing to airframe noise, particularly during aircraft approach. The research identifies the Tri-Vortex System (TVS) comprising of primary, secondary, and tertiary vortices as significant contributors to side-edge noise generation. Dynamic Mode Decomposition (DMD) pinpoints dominant acoustic sources and their radiation patterns, distinguishing between duct acoustic modes below 2500 Hz and localized sources above this frequency with clear dipole radiation patterns. Far-field noise spectra, analyzed through the Ffowcs Williams-Hawkings (FW-H) analogy, align with experimental observations within the 1.5 kHz to 9 kHz range. An increase in angle of attack from 5 degrees to 10 degrees results in a spectra level elevation of approximately 4 dB, highlighting the angle’s influence on acoustic emissions
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".