MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6982604528

Investigation of the ground effect on wingtip vortex generated by a rectangular NACA0012 wing

2020· dissertation· en· W6982604528 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueeScholarship@McGill (McGill) · 2020
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAerodynamics and Fluid Dynamics Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVortexWingtip vorticesGround effect (cars)Horseshoe vortexDragLift-induced dragWake turbulenceWakeStarting vortexLift-to-drag ratio
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The two stream-wise counter-rotating wingtip vortices generated behind aircraft and their interactions with the runway have always been a concern to aviation, airport traffic control, and aircraft manufacturers alike.For aircraft flying at constant distance from ground (i.e.Ground Effect Vehicles), the behavior of wake vortices and the lift-induced drag are being investigated as well.It was observed that lift increase and drag reduction are experienced by wings in ground effect.To further understand the phenomenon both qualitatively and quantitatively, the ground effect on the aerodynamics and tip vortex flow of a rectangular wing was investigated experimentally at = 2.71 10 5 .The results showed that there was a large lift increase with reducing ground distance.By contrast, a small drag increase was observed in ground effect except in close ground proximity for which a significant drag decrease appeared.The tip vortex also moved further outboard and upward with reducing ground distance.Near the ground, there was the presence of a corotating ground vortex (produced by the rolling up of the boundary layer developed on the ground surface), leading to an increased vortex strength.In extreme ground proximity, a counterrotating secondary vortex (SV) (induced by the crossflow of the tip vortex), relative to the tip vortex, appeared, which caused a reduced vortex strength and a lowered lift-induced drag, as well as a vortex rebound.The impact of ground effect on the vortex flow properties was also discussed.The lift-induced drag, computed based on the crossflow measurements via the Maskell wake integral method, in ground effect was compared against the inviscid flow predictions and wind tunnel total drag force measurements.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.093
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.207 · 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.

Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeScholarship@McGill (McGill)Same topicAerodynamics and Fluid Dynamics ResearchFrench-language works237,207