MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1969263744 · doi:10.1088/1755-1315/22/3/032044

Hydro-dynamic damping theory in flowing water

2014· article· en· W1969263744 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

VenueIOP Conference Series Earth and Environmental Science · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Vibration Analysis
Canadian institutionsAndritz (Canada)TransCanada (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWater hammerMechanicsComputational fluid dynamicsFinite element methodAmplitudeFluid–structure interactionStatorModal analysisCantileverHead (geology)Natural frequencyRotor (electric)Prime moverVibrationFlow (mathematics)Frequency responseEngineeringStructural engineeringPhysicsMechanical engineeringAcousticsGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fluid-structure interaction (FSI) has a major impact on the dynamic response of the structural components of hydroelectric turbines. On mid-head to high-head Francis runners, the rotor-stator interaction (RSI) phenomenon always has to be considered carefully during the design phase to avoid operational issues later on. The RSI dynamic response amplitudes are driven by three main factors: (1) pressure forcing amplitudes, (2) excitation frequencies in relation to natural frequencies and (3) damping. The prediction of the two first factors has been largely documented in the literature. However, the prediction of fluid damping has received less attention in spite of being critical when the runner is close to resonance. Experimental damping measurements in flowing water on hydrofoils were presented previously. Those results showed that the hydro-dynamic damping increased linearly with the flow. This paper presents development and validation of a mathematical model, based on momentum exchange, to predict damping due to fluid structure interaction in flowing water. The model is implemented as an analytical procedure for simple structures, such as cantilever beams, but is also implemented in more general ways using three different approaches for more complex structures such as runner blades: a finite element procedure, a CFD modal work based approach and a CFD 1DOF approach. The mathematical model and all three implementation approaches are shown to agree well with experimental results.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.835
Threshold uncertainty score0.333

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.170
Teacher spread0.166 · 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