MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410856822 · doi:10.1016/j.ress.2025.111300

Modelling downburst velocity fields in relation to Main Wind Force Resisting Systems

2025· article· en· W4410856822 on OpenAlexafffund
Federico Canepa, Massimiliano Burlando, Djordje Romanić, Horia Hangan

Bibliographic record

VenueReliability Engineering & System Safety · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWind and Air Flow Studies
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech UniversityWestern UniversityMcGill University
FundersEuropean Research CouncilHorizon 2020 Framework ProgrammeEuropean CommissionCanada Foundation for Innovation
KeywordsRelation (database)Wind forceEngineeringWind speedAerospace engineeringEnvironmental scienceMarine engineeringMeteorologyMechanicsComputer sciencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Over the past two decades, wind engineering has focused on non-synoptic wind storms, which exhibit greater spatio-temporal complexity than synoptic scale winds. Here we focus on the modelling of downburst velocity fields in relation to the way these models can be used to determine structural responses to downburst winds. Two approaches have been defined in relation to the Main Wind Force Resisting Systems (MWFRS): (i) the Gust Front Factor (GFF) from Professor Ashan Kareem’s group at Notre Dame University in USA and (ii) the Thunderstorm Response Spectrum Technique (TRST) from the late Professor Giovanni Solari’s team at the University of Genova in Italy. Both methods decompose the downburst mean wind field into a vertical profile and a time variation. Here we focus on the modelling of downburst velocity fields in terms of spatial and time characterizations including the effects of translation, atmospheric boundary layer (ABL) superposition and surface effects. Herein, we focus on analysing how various analytical models, that include both time and space velocity variations, can be adapted to fit an experimental database of downburst-like flows (DLFs), generated at WindEEE Dome at Western University under the project THUNDERR. The calibration is conducted through the superposition of stationary mean flow fields with the effects of translation, background synoptic wind and surface roughness. Analytical models for the profile variation, the Oseguera-Bowles-Vicroy (OBV) and Wood & Kwok models, along with the sine wave models for temporal variation, are tested against this extensive database. The resulting adapted proposed models provide a potential frame on DLFs to be applied in the context of MWFRS approaches.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.186 · 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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReliability Engineering & System SafetySame topicWind and Air Flow StudiesFrench-language works237,207