Blade Tip Leakage Loss Reduction by Means of Passive Tip Injection: Linear Cascade Wind Tunnel Results
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the open literature, an innovative concept for turbine blade tip leakage loss reduction by means of passive tip injection was recently proposed. The present paper presents experimental results obtained for an unshrouded turbine blade corresponding to a 50 % reaction stage. The experiments were performed in a low-speed linear cascade wind tunnel facility with air as working fluid. The effect of passive tip injection on the resulting loss was investigated by detailed five-hole-probe measurements. Cascades with three different tip gap heights and blades with and without passive injection were considered. Special attention was spent to the actual upstream conditions. The detailed flow field measurements showed that at the blade tip exit the leakage flow merged with the main flow and rolled up to a tip leakage vortex. The linear cascade wind tunnel results indicated a slight reduction of the resulting total pressure loss coefficient due to the passive tip injection. The observed tip leakage loss reduction was well comparable with the predictions of simplified analytical model.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".