MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411060510 · doi:10.1115/1.4068849

The Impact of Tire Shoulder Radius on the Aerodynamics of a Rotating Isolated Wheel

2025· article· en· W4411060510 on OpenAlexaff
David S.‐K. Ting

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Fluids Engineering · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAerodynamics and Fluid Dynamics Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WindsorFord Motor Company (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAerodynamicsRADIUSAerospace engineeringAutomotive engineeringMechanicsPhysicsAeronauticsEngineeringComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This study investigates the influence of tire shoulder radius and Reynolds number on the aerodynamics of an isolated rotating wheel in contact with a moving ground, representative of automotive applications. Four shoulder radii, ranging from a sharp corner (R/D=0) to a rounded edge (R/D=0.1), were examined across a Reynolds number range (ReD) from 8.38×105 to 1.95×106. Numerical simulations were performed using improved delayed detached eddy simulation (IDDES) and the k−omega SST turbulence model. Wheels with larger R/D exhibited elevated sensitivity to Reynolds number, however, the impact of R/D variation overshadows the impact of the Reynolds sensitivity. Increasing the shoulder radius significantly reduces both drag (up to 47%) and lift (up to 62%), primarily due to improved flow attachment and a consequent reduction in wake size. Larger shoulder radii delayed the formation of the upper counter-rotating vortex pair and reduced the strength of the “jetting” ahead of the contact patch. This research provides insights into isolated wheel aerodynamics and offers guidance for optimizing tire geometry to improve aerodynamic performance.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.118
Threshold uncertainty score0.486

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.253 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Fluids EngineeringSame topicAerodynamics and Fluid Dynamics ResearchFrench-language works237,207