The Formation of Counter-Rotating Vortex Pair and the Nature of Liftoff-Reattachment in Film-Cooling Flow
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Traditionally, the formation of the Counter-Rotating Vortex Pair (CRVP) has been attributed to three main sources: the jet-mainstream shear layer where the jet meets with the mainstream flow right outside the pipe, the in-tube boundary layer developing along the pipe wall, and the in-tube vortices associated with the tube inlet vorticity; whereas the liftoff-reattachment phenomenon occurring in the main flow along the plate right downstream of the jet has been associated with the jet flow trajectory. The jet-mainstream shear layer has also been demonstrated to be the dominant source of CRVP formation, whereby the shear layer disintegrates into vortex rings that deform as the jet convects downstream, becoming a pair of CRVPs flowing within the jet and eventually turning into the main flow direction. These traditional findings are assessed qualitatively and quantitatively for film-cooling flow in gas turbines by simulating numerically the flow and evaluating the extent to which the traditional flow phenomena are taking place particularly for CRVP and for flow liftoff-reattachment. To this end, three flow simulation cases are used; they are referred to as 1—the baseline case; 2—the free-slip in-tube wall case (FSIT); and 3—the unsteady flow case. The baseline case is a typical film-cooling case. The FSIT case is used to assess the in-tube boundary layer. Cases 1 and 2 are simulated using the Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes equations (RANS), whereas Case 3 solves a Detached Eddy Simulation (DES) model. It is concluded that decreasing the strength of the CRVP, which is the case for e.g., shaped holes, provides high cooling performance, and the liftoff-reattachment phenomenon was thus found to be strongly influenced by the entrainment caused by the CRVP, rather than the jet flow trajectory. These interpretations of the flow physics that are more relevant to gas turbine cooling flow are new and provide a physics-based guideline for designing new film-cooling schemes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it