Conjugate Heat Transfer and Film Cooling of a Multi-Stage Cooling Scheme
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cooling techniques play a key role in improving efficiency and power output of modern gas turbines. The conjugate technique of film and impingement cooling schemes is considered in this study. The Multi-Stage Cooling Scheme (MSCS) involves coolant passing from inside to outside turbine blade through two stages. The first stage; the coolant passes through first hole to internal gap where the impinging jet cools the external layer of the blade. Finally, the coolant passes through the internal gap to the second hole which has specific designed geometry for external film cooling. The effect of design parameters, such as, offset distance between two-stage holes, gap height, and inclination angle of the first hole, on upstream conjugate heat transfer rate and downstream film cooling effectiveness performance are investigated computationally. An Inconel 617 alloy with variable properties is selected for the solid material. The conjugate heat transfer and film cooling characteristics of MSCS are analyzed across blowing ratios of Br = 1 and 2 for density ratio, 2. This study presents upstream wall temperature distributions due to conjugate heat transfer for different gap design parameters. The maximum film cooling effectiveness with upstream conjugate heat transfer is less than adiabatic film cooling effectiveness by 24–34%. However, the full coverage of cooling effectiveness in spanwise direction can be obtained using internal cooling with conjugate heat transfer, whereas adiabatic film cooling effectiveness has narrow distribution.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".