MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1973023095 · doi:10.1115/gt2014-25594

Aerodynamic Calibration and Thrust Correction Method With Inflow Separation in Indoor Sea Level Test Facility

2014· article· en· W1973023095 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Feng Wu, XiaoQi Gong, JinYou Su

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAdvanced Aircraft Design and Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTurbofanThrustAerodynamicsThrust specific fuel consumptionMarine engineeringInflowCalibrationJet engineNozzleSeparation (statistics)Momentum (technical analysis)Environmental scienceAerospace engineeringEngineeringFuel efficiencyMechanicsComputer scienceMathematicsPhysicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Thrust performance, which can be obtained by indoor sea level test facility, plays a critical role in jet and turbofan engine performance. In this study, to obtain the aerodynamic characteristics in test cell and the final thrust correction coefficient, a standard turbofan engine is chosen as the testing engine, which is mounted separately on a fixed contracting or adjustable Laval nozzle. Experimental results show that the aerodynamic performance of intake is poor if no guide vanes are implemented. In this situation, inhomogeneity of intake flow is up to 97%. Besides, the flow would separate in the upstream of the engine, which is also proven by the CFD simulation results. With the flow separating upstream of the test engine, the traditional intake momentum correction method by using ideal horizontal intake condition could result in greater correction error of intake momentum. Thus, a new formula is derived in the present paper to correct the intake momentum with flow separation by mechanic control system. Comparisons of thrust performance and specific fuel consumption are conducted between the result corrected by new formula suited for flow separation condition and those obtained from the performance data of the same engine tested in the sea level condition. And good agreement has been achieved. Thus it is proven that the new thrust correction method is correct and reliable. Result of this study indicates that: 1) intake flow separation has a great influence on thrust measurement in jet engine test facility, which will result in the 1.4 to 2 times greater correction error. Thus, guide vanes should be implemented at inlet tower corner in preventing from the flow separation. 2) The new correction method derived in this paper is very effective to correct the engine thrust performance with the flow separation upstream of the test engine.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations2
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Aircraft Design and TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207