Effect of Flow Approach Angle on Flow Periodicity and Acoustic Resonance in Triangular Tube Bundles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This study experimentally investigates the excitation of acoustic resonance in a small pitch ratio triangular tube array (P/D = 1.5), with a focus on the influence of the flow approach angle on the intensity of acoustic resonance excitation and the associated periodic flow instabilities that trigger self-sustained acoustic resonance. The objective is to identify the dominant mechanisms sustaining acoustic resonance in heat exchanger applications, particularly when the flow direction deviates from being strictly normal to the tube array. Three flow approach angles—0 deg, 15 deg, and 30 deg—were analyzed, covering the standard triangular configurations (parallel triangular tube array at 0 deg and normal triangular tube array at 30 deg) as well as an intermediate case (15 deg). Periodic flow structures and their corresponding Strouhal numbers were evaluated for each configuration, enabling the identification of the flow instabilities responsible for initiating and sustaining acoustic resonance. The results show that the maximum acoustic pressure at resonance is highly sensitive to the flow approach angle. At a 0 deg flow approach angle, the highest sound pressure levels (SPLs) were recorded, exceeding 162 dB. This strong flow-induced acoustic resonance led to high-cycle fatigue failure of multiple tubes, despite the tubes being rigidly supported within the bundle. This highlights the critical importance of considering flow-induced acoustic resonance during the design of tube arrays for industrial applications such as heat exchangers. Neglecting this phenomenon can lead to catastrophic consequences.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".