Aerodynamic dataset for selected doubly curved membrane canopy structures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A dataset of aerodynamic measurements is collected for doubly curved membrane structures as part of a comprehensive experimental testing campaign on wind effects on structural membranes conducted at the WindEEE Dome at Western University, Canada. Common doubly curved membrane geometries - the hypar, ridge valley, arch supported, cone, and umbrella - were tested in isolated instances. The cone geometry was also tested in both a 1 × 3 row and a 3 × 3 group arrangement. All models were tested at a 1:25 scale under atmospheric boundary layer (ABL) flow at angles of attack ranging from 0° to 180° in 10° increments (and 45°, and 135° -depending on the line of symmetry). In addition to ABL, the hypar geometry was subjected to two other distinct flow scenarios: tornado, and downburst. Pressure time series at various tap locations are included in the data. In total, approximately 425 tests were conducted, providing a comprehensive dataset on the aerodynamic behavior of doubly curved structures under wind loads. This experimental data set offers valuable insights for the design and analysis of such structures in architectural and engineering applications and future design guideline developments. Data is available on an open-source dataset Zenodo as part of the ERIES-WENSS project.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.012 |
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".