MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2514613828 · doi:10.5220/0005975500750083

Passivity-based Control of Surge and Rotating Stall in Axial Flow Compressors

2016· article· en· W2514613828 on OpenAlexaff
Gholam-Reza Sari, Ouassima Akhrif, Lahcen Saydy

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicNumerical methods for differential equations
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie SupérieurePolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStall (fluid mechanics)SurgeAxial compressorControl theory (sociology)PassivityGas compressorComputer scienceMechanicsGeologyEngineeringPhysicsControl (management)Electrical engineeringMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this work, we address the stability of compression systems and the active control of performance limiting phenomena: surge and rotating stall. Despite considerable efforts to stabilize axial compressors at efficient operating points, preventing and suppressing rotating stall and surge are still challenging problems. Due to certain passivity properties of the widely used Moore and Greitzer model for axial compressors, a robust passivity-based control approach is applied here to tackle the problem. The main advantage of this approach is that robust stabilization and high performance control can be achieved by simple control laws and limited control efforts. Analytical developments and time-domain simulations demonstrate that the developed control laws can effectively damp out rotating stall and surge limit cycles by throttle and close-coupled valve actuations. The robust performance of the controller is validated in the presence of bounded mass flow and pressure disturbances, as well as model uncertainties.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.278 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNumerical methods for differential equationsFrench-language works237,207