MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2004618216 · doi:10.1115/gt2013-95620

Influence of Freestream Turbulence on the Aerodynamic Performance of Transonic Vanes

2013· article· en· W2004618216 on OpenAlexaff
Roderick Edwards, Asad Asghar, W. Allan, R. Woodason, Marc LaViolette

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTurbomachinery Performance and Optimization
Canadian institutionsRoyal Military College of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTurbulenceFreestreamTransonicComputational fluid dynamicsAerodynamicsCascadeFlow visualizationMechanicsWind tunnelMaterials scienceAerospace engineeringFlow (mathematics)PhysicsEngineeringReynolds number

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present authors have reported a noticeable reduction in the aerodynamic performance of turbine vanes which had been modified as a result of commonly applied repair processes. These tests were done at a low turbulence level to isolate the profile-only effect. In the present research, the effect of the same profile modification on the performance of the vanes was investigated at engine representative flow conditions by increasing the turbulence level and length scale. Since the tested vane profiles in the present research were synthesized using the profile of LPT vanes, the turbulence level was maintained at around 4% and the length scale was set at 2 cm. In the present investigation, calculations with computational fluid dynamics and measurements in a transonic cascade rig were carried out. The high turbulence level in the cascade rig was produced using a passive turbulence-generating grid and in CFD by specifying the desired level and length scale. Coordinates of the baseline profile were obtained from the LPT vanes of an in-service turboshaft engine using 3D optical scanning and digital modeling. The repaired vanes were synthesized using profiles representative of two specific repair types. In both methods, flow visualization was carried out using axial density gradient or schlieren and exit total pressure was obtained numerically or using a multihole probe. Further insight into the flow phenomenon was obtained by surface flow visualization in the cascade rig using a graphite and paraffin oil mixture and by computed surface pressure distributions on the vane. The shock pattern in the cascade for low and high turbulence flows was similar; however, the surface flow pattern exhibited a significant difference for the two conditions. The total pressure ratio and cascade loss also showed some differences.

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)0.000
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 score0.182
Threshold uncertainty score0.225

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.153
Teacher spread0.150 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTurbomachinery Performance and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207