MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1543821032 · doi:10.2514/1.b35433

Adjoint-Based Constrained Aerodynamic Shape Optimization for Multistage Turbomachines

2015· article· en· W1543821032 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

VenueJournal of Propulsion and Power · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicComputational Fluid Dynamics and Aerodynamics
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTurbomachinerySolverAerodynamicsApplied mathematicsTransonicMathematicsComputational fluid dynamicsMathematical optimizationAdjoint equationComputer scienceAerospace engineeringMathematical analysisPartial differential equationEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper develops the discrete adjoint equations for a turbomachinery Reynolds-averaged Navier–Stokes solver and proposes a framework for fully automatic gradient-based constrained aerodynamic shape optimization in a multistage turbomachinery environment. The systematic approach for the development of the discrete adjoint solver is discussed. Special emphasis is put on the development of the turbomachinery-specific features of the adjoint solver (that is, on the derivation of flow-consistent adjoint inlet and outlet boundary conditions) and, to allow for a concurrent rotor–stator optimization and stage coupling, on the development of an exact adjoint counterpart to the nonreflective, conservative mixing-plane formulation used in the flow solver. The adjoint solver is validated by comparing its sensitivities with finite difference gradients obtained from the flow solver. A sequential-quadratic programming algorithm is used to determine an improved blade shape based on the gradient information provided by the adjoint solution. Optimization within a sequential-quadratic programming framework avoids the time-consuming task to determine the weights of the individual constraints by including the constraints directly into the design problem. The functionality of the proposed optimization method is demonstrated by the redesign of two two-dimensional transonic compressor configurations. The design objective is to maximize the isentropic efficiency while constraining the mass flow rate and the total pressure ratio.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.285
Threshold uncertainty score0.357

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.223 · 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