MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2005886588 · doi:10.1115/gt2010-23441

Effects of Fuel Nozzle Condition on Gas Turbine Combustion Chamber Exit Temperature Distributions

2010· article· en· W2005886588 on OpenAlexaff
Kristen Bishop, W. Allan

Bibliographic record

VenueVolume 2: Combustion, Fuels and Emissions, Parts A and B · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicCombustion and flame dynamics
Canadian institutionsRoyal Military College of CanadaCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNozzleCombustion chamberCombustionMaterials scienceMechanicsMach numberLigand cone angleSpray characteristicsRoundness (object)Spray nozzleOpticsThermodynamicsChemistryComposite materialPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The effects of fuel nozzle condition on the temperature distributions experienced by the nozzle guide vanes have been investigated using an optical patternator. Average spray cone angle, symmetry, and fuel streaks were quantified. An ambient pressure and temperature combustion chamber test rig was used to capture exit temperature distributions and to determine the pattern factor. The rig tests matched representative engine operating conditions by matching Mach number, equivalence ratio, and fuel droplet size. It was observed that very small deviations (± 10° in spray cone angle) from a nominal distribution in the fuel nozzle spray pattern correlated to increases in pattern factor, apparently due to a degradation of mixing processes, which created larger regions of very high temperature core flow and smaller regions of cooler temperatures within the combustion chamber exit plane. The spray cone angle had the most measureable influence while the effects of spray roundness and streak intensity had slightly less influence. Comparisons were made with published studies conducted on the combustion chamber geometry, and recommendations were made for fuel nozzle inspections.

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)0.004
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 score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.207
Teacher spread0.202 · 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

Citations10
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVolume 2: Combustion, Fuels and Emissions, Parts A and BSame topicCombustion and flame dynamicsFrench-language works237,207