Structural modal interaction of a four degree-of-freedom bladed disk and casing model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Consideration is given to a very specific interaction phenomenon that may occur in turbomachines due to radial rub between a bladed disk and surrounding casing. These two structures, featuring rotational periodicity and axisymmetry, respectively, share the same type of eigenshapes, also termed nodal diameter traveling waves. Higher efficiency requirements leading to reduced clearance between blade-tips and casing together with the rotation of the bladed disk increase the possibility of interaction between these traveling waves through direct contact. By definition, large amplitudes as well as structural failure may be expected. A very simple two-dimensional model of outer casing and bladed disk is introduced in order to predict the occurrence of such phenomenon in terms of rotational velocity. In order to consider traveling wave motions, each structure is represented by its two nd-nodal diameter standing modes. Equations of motion are solved first using an explicit time integration scheme in conjunction with the Lagrange multiplier method, which accounts for the contact constraints, and then by the harmonic balance method (HBM). While both methods yield identical results that exhibit two distinct zones of completely different behaviors of the system, HBM is much less computationally expensive.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".