MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2070578521 · doi:10.1115/gt2006-91083

Fuel Nozzle Performance Analysis Using Laser Techniques and Combustion Chamber With Optical Access

2006· article· en· W2070578521 on OpenAlexaff
Greg Pucher, P. R. Underhill, W. Allan, G. Wang, S. R. D. Guy

Bibliographic record

VenueVolume 2: Aircraft Engine; Ceramics; Coal, Biomass and Alternative Fuels; Controls, Diagnostics and Instrumentation; Environmental and Regulatory Affairs · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicCombustion and flame dynamics
Canadian institutionsRoyal Military College of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNozzleCombustion chamberCombustionSpray characteristicsSpray nozzleAirflowMaterials scienceLaserOpticsMechanical engineeringEnvironmental scienceAutomotive engineeringEngineeringPhysicsChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Correct functioning of fuel nozzles is paramount to the efficient operation of gas turbine engines. Nozzles exhibiting poor distribution of droplets can be detrimental to combustion and overall engine life due to the creation of hot spots and potential for torching. The traditional technique of assessing nozzle performance involves operation in stagnant air conditions. Fuel spray is collected in the subdivided bins of a mechanical patternation system to determine spray symmetry. Recent improvements in spray analysis involve the use of laser light sheets to illuminate specific ‘slices’ of sprays in either cross sectional or axial planes. Typically, scattered light from the intersection of a laser sheet and a spray is recorded by a digital video camera, and images are averaged and corrected to determine the quality of the spray pattern. Such optical means of assessing spray quality provide great improvement over conventional means in terms of speed, convenience, and information retrieved. Nonetheless, data obtained in stagnant air conditions do not give an indication of spray geometry within combustion chambers under realistic operating conditions of airflow and combustion. This paper describes a project which applied laser-based optical patternation in a T-56 gas turbine combustion chamber rig with optical access under realistic flow conditions. As such, nozzle spray pattern was observed for various air and fuel flows in both cross sectional and plume (chamber axial) orientations. A deliberately damaged nozzle was also assessed for comparison with a good nozzle. Using optical filtration, spray patterns were observed under operationally representative combustion conditions.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.601
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.188
Teacher spread0.184 · 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.

Study designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVolume 2: Aircraft Engine; Ceramics; Coal, Biomass and Alternative Fuels; Controls, Diagnostics and Instrumentation; Environmental and Regulatory AffairsSame topicCombustion and flame dynamicsFrench-language works237,207