MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2047887886 · doi:10.1115/power2011-55202

CFD Analysis of Ventilation Flow for a Scale Model Hydro-Generator

2011· article· en· W2047887886 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWater Systems and Optimization
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique MontréalHydro-Québec
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaHydro-QuébecFonds Québécois de la Recherche sur la Nature et les Technologies
KeywordsComputational fluid dynamicsRotor (electric)StatorParticle image velocimetrySimulationParametric statisticsComputer scienceMechanicsInterface (matter)Transient (computer programming)Mechanical engineeringEngineeringTurbulencePhysicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 2006, the first Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) simulations of the ventilation of specific hydro-generator components were performed at the Hydro-Que´bec Research Institute (IREQ) and lately the entire ventilation circuit is being investigated. Due to the complexity of flow calculations, a validation process is necessary and for this reason a 1:4 scale model of a hydro-generator has been built at IREQ to get experimental data by means of particle image velocimetry (PIV). This paper presents 2D and 3D simulation results for the scale model obtained with a commercial CFD code and addresses the challenges associated with the application of CFD to hydro-generators. In particular, the effect of rotor-stator interface (RSI) types and configuration is analyzed to determine the approach that best suits this application. Two-dimensional calculations show that the steady state multiple frames of reference (MFR) solution is highly sensitive to the type (frozen rotor (FR) vs. mixing plane (MP)) and location of the RSI. A parametric study is performed where each interface configuration is compared to the transient case results. The MFR-FR interface model produces results that may vary significantly depending on the relative rotor position and the radial location of the RSI in the air gap. The MFR-MP interface model appears to be more coherent with reference values obtained from a transient case, since the radial velocity profiles in the stator are similar. Furthermore with an appropriate radial positioning of the interface, the windage losses are within 20%. Simulations of the complete 3D ventilation circuit revealed a maximum variation of 10% in both total ventilation flow rate and total windage losses, between the RSI configurations studied. However, the relative flow distributions, normalized with respect to the total flow rate, are unaffected by changes in RSI configuration. This paper focuses mainly on sensitivity studies to numerical settings, but this comparison still requires experimental validation before any final conclusions can be made.

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.

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 score0.830
Threshold uncertainty score0.147

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.190
Teacher spread0.168 · 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

Quick stats

Citations24
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicWater Systems and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207