MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2880128716 · doi:10.1115/1.4040807

Design Space Exploration of a Beam Flexible Hub Concept for an Inside-Out Ceramic Turbine Using a Simplified Rotordynamic Finite Element Model

2018· article· en· W2880128716 on OpenAlexafffund
Céderick Landry, P. K. Dubois, Jean‐Sébastien Plante, François Charron, Mathieu Picard

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of vibration and acoustics · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMagnetic Bearings and Levitation Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsRotordynamicsFinite element methodEngineeringRotor (electric)Mechanical engineeringStructural engineeringTurbine bladeDisplacement (psychology)TurbineStress (linguistics)CeramicMaterials scienceComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a new flexible hub design for the inside-out ceramic turbine (ICT) rotor configuration. This configuration is used in microturbines to integrate ceramic blades in order to increase turbine inlet temperature (TIT), which leads to higher cycle efficiency values. The ICT uses an outer composite rim to load the ceramic blades in compression by converting the centrifugal loads of the blades into hoop stresses in the composite rim. High stresses in the composite rim lead to high radial displacement of the blades. This displacement is compensated by using flexible hub in order to maintain the contact with the blades. However, hub flexibility can lead to rotordynamic problems as heavy hub deformation will induce high stresses in it. Thus, stresses in the hub are induced by both rotordynamics and centrifugation, requiring a multi-objective design process, which has yielded geometries that limited, until now, the blade tip speed to 358 m/s. In this paper, a simplified rotordynamics finite element model of a flexible hub is developed to allow quick design iterations. Using the model, a design space exploration of this hub concept is done while considering centrifugation and rotordynamics. Experimental validation is conducted on a simplified ICT prototype up to 129 krpm, i.e., an equivalent blade tip speed of 390 m/s. Finally, predictions from the experimentally calibrated model show that the tested prototype hub could reach a blade tip speed of 680 m/s.

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 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.717
Threshold uncertainty score0.416

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.228 · 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.

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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of vibration and acousticsSame topicMagnetic Bearings and Levitation DynamicsFrench-language works237,207