MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Two Dimensional CFD Simulation of Optimizing Lift to Drag Ratio of Flapping Tandem NACA 0012 Airfoils

2025· article· en· W4413363624 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueTheoretical and Natural Science · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBiomimetic flight and propulsion mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNACA airfoilAirfoilLift-to-drag ratioAerospace engineeringComputational fluid dynamicsDragLift (data mining)AerodynamicsMechanicsLift-induced dragMarine engineeringEnvironmental sciencePhysicsComputer scienceEngineeringReynolds numberTurbulence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

NACA 0012 airfoil is a symmetrical airfoil that has been widely used in aerodynamic studies. This research investigates the maximum lift to drag ratio (L/D) of the flapping NACA 0012 airfoils under different configurations at low Reynolds numbers (Re ≈ 1300). Through Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) simulations using COMSOL, the research first optimizes the configuration of a single airfoil with a linear motion and a rotational motion by varying the amplitude of the rotational motion and the phase difference between two motions, and then apply the results on simulations of two tandem airfoils with the same motions, by changing the distance between the airfoils and the phase difference between the linear motion of two airfoils. A maximum lift to drag ratio is reached in each simulation. The studies are significant in understanding the effect of vortex produced by the front airfoil on the rear airfoil, and can guide the design of new airfoil and new energy recovery systems.

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.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.513
Threshold uncertainty score0.238

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.245 · 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