MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2051774725 · doi:10.1080/10407780500324798

Numerical Predictions of Stanton Numbers, Skin Friction Coefficients, Aerodynamic Losses, and Reynolds Analogy Behavior for a Transsonic Turbine Vane

2006· article· en· W2051774725 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueNumerical Heat Transfer Part A Applications · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTurbomachinery Performance and Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMach numberAerodynamicsStanton numberReynolds numberTurbulenceFluentTurbineMechanicsEngineeringMechanical engineeringMeteorologyPhysicsComputational fluid dynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Stanton numbers, skin friction coefficients, aerodynamic losses, and Reynolds analogy behavior are numerically predicted for a turbine vane using the FLUENT commercial code with a k–ϵ RNG model to show the effects of Mach number, mainstream turbulence level, and surface roughness. Test vane geometry, configuration, and flow conditions match ones from a practical application. Comparisons with experimental data on wake aerodynamic losses are made. Numerical and experimental results show that the magnitudes of integrated aerodynamics losses increase dramatically as the exit Mach number increases from 0.35 to 0.71. Downstream wakes are also widened as the mainstream turbulence intensity level, exit Mach number, or level of surface roughness increases. Deviations of numerically predicted 2 St/C f magnitudes from 2 St/C f ≅ 1 on the vane suction and pressure sides are also presented for a variety of flow conditions. The research reported in this article was sponsored by the National Science Foundation (NSF Grant CTS-0086011). Dr. Stefan Thynell and Dr. Richard Smith were the NSF program monitors. The authors also acknowledge Mr. Mike Blair of Pratt & Whitney Corporation, Dr. Hee-Koo Moon of Solar Turbines, Inc., Mr. Edward North, Mr. Ihor Diakunchak of Siemens-Westinghouse Corp., and Dr. Sri Sreekanth and Dr. Ricardo Trindade from Pratt & Whitney—Canada Corporation for guidance and suggestions on this research effort. Technical support from FLUENT Incorporated is also acknowledged. Notes a Based on true chord length.

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 score0.817
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.214 · 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