Centrifugal Compressor Spiral Dry Gas Seal Simulation Working at Reverse Rotation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Unidirectional dry gas seal may experiences reverse rotation when equipped in a centrifugal compressor. This paper describes how the reverse rotation effects on the spiral unidirectional dry gas seal performance and pressure distribution inside the gas film, also an investigation of using a different herringbone shape grooves configurations has been done using ANSYS FLUENT 14.5 CFD simulation. The influence of decreasing rotational speed to the static condition and rotate in the reverse direction on internal flow and gas seal performance is examined from 10800 to -10380 rpm. The results indicate that the internal pressure distribution inside the gas seal in reverse rotation is decreased and the open force consequently decreased by 4%. The modification on the same seal is done to enhance its performance at reverse rotation condition. The herringbone spiral grooves is used with different configuration, the new configurations are examined in the forward and reverse rotation direction. The analysis for the pressure distribution is done and its effect on the seal performance is examined. Seal performance is compared with standard one for all geometrical and operating conditions. At high forward rotational speed 10380 rpm, the pressure at the end of the spiral groove is about 11.4% higher than the inlet pressure at the seal outer diameter, while at reverse rotation, the pressure is not increased in radial direction. The open force corresponding to reverse rotation increased with a value 1.5 kN for both the 100 overlap and 50% forward overlap seal faces, but using seal face with 50% backward overlap failed to enhance the open force at reversal condition.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".