MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2024579004 · doi:10.1115/gt2014-27200

Isolating Effects of Area Ratio From Lobe Number for Turbofan Engine Exhaust Systems

2014· article· en· W2024579004 on OpenAlexafffund
Alex Wright, Ali Mahallati, Julio Militzer

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicCombustion and flame dynamics
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityNational Research Council Canada
FundersPratt and Whitney Canada
KeywordsTurbofanLobeThrust specific fuel consumptionMixing (physics)MechanicsThrustCylinderMaterials scienceEnvironmental scienceCrestAutomotive engineeringFuel efficiencyPhysicsGeometryMathematicsOpticsEngineeringThermodynamicsComposite materialAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a numerical investigation of lobed mixer performance at experimentally validated low speed conditions and conditions representative of high speed engine operation. The purpose of this study was to first assess and understand how variations in bypass-to-core area ratio (AR) can affect engine performance, then isolate those effects to determine the efficacy of increasing the number of mixer lobes. The area ratio was manipulated via adjustment of the lobe crest and valley radiuses. No other geometric features were altered in any of the 5 mixers studied (12-lobe AR of 3, 2.5 and 3.5, 16-lobe AR of 3 and 18-lobe AR of 3). Results indicate that performance can be affected by area ratio. Low-speed results showed that pressure loss and thrust output were improved at lower area ratios. High speed results showed the opposite. This behavior is believed to be the result of a bypass-to-core momentum ratio difference between the two test conditions. These effects were avoided when studying the number of lobes by maintaining a constant area ratio. Results indicate that adding lobes enhanced exhaust mixing but hampered performance at low speed conditions. No appreciable performance difference was observed at high speed conditions. Fluid viscosity and associated viscous mixing losses are believed to be the parameters at fault for the reduced low-speed performance 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.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.798
Threshold uncertainty score0.404

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 head0.185
Teacher spread0.181 · 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
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCombustion and flame dynamicsFrench-language works237,207