MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2888844897 · doi:10.1115/gt2018-76698

Rotordynamics Experimental Validation of a Sliding-Blade Architecture for an Inside-Out Ceramic Turbine

2018· article· en· W2888844897 on OpenAlexafffund
Céderick Landry, B. Picard, T. Parent-Simard, Jean‐Sébastien Plante, Mathieu Picard

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTurbomachinery Performance and Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersUniversité de Sherbrooke
KeywordsRotordynamicsRotor (electric)CeramicMaterials scienceMechanical engineeringTurbine bladeDisplacement (psychology)Spring (device)Structural engineeringBlade (archaeology)TurbineEngineeringComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The integration of monolithic ceramic blades into sub-megawatt microturbines is a low-cost option for increasing Turbine Inlet Temperature and efficiency. The Inside-Out Ceramic Turbine (ICT) is a promising concept for the integration of ceramic blades by loading each blades in compression using a carbon-polymer composite rim to convert the blade radial loads to tangential hoop stress. High tangential velocities lead to elevated radial displacement of the rim and, therefore, the rotor hub needs to be able to maintain the contact with the blades for a large range of radial displacements. This displacements comes with hub structural challenges and rotordynamics considerations. For these reasons, blade tip speed have been previously limited to about 360 m/s. This paper presents a hub design that allows high radial displacement using the combination of inclined blade roots, inclined hub grooves and an axial spring. The contact between the blade root and the hub is maintained through the inclined planes by the axial forces from the spring creating internal friction in the rotor that can induce sub-synchronous rotordynamics instabilities. The onset of instabilities is investigated experimentally with cold spin tests of a simplified ICT prototype. The results first show that the concept remains stable up to the maximum speed tested of 127 kRPM (tip speed of 387 m/s) if the spring is designed such that it remains in contact with the blade roots at all time. On the other hand, when reducing the preload sufficiently to test the limits of the concept, the rotor first mode became unstable at 120 kRPM resulting in failure of the prototype. These results suggest that, provided a sufficient spring preload to prevent excessive relative motion, the blades can reach the desired radial displacements, removing the main constraint on ICT tip speed.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.139
Threshold uncertainty score0.413

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.242 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTurbomachinery Performance and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207