An Influence of the Numerical Modeling of the Transition Between the Stator and Rotor on the Thermodynamic Condensation Loss in the Low-Pressure Part of a Steam Turbine
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Accuracy of numerical simulation of non-equilibrium steam condensation is strongly influenced by a condensation model, i.e. a nucleation rate model and a droplet growth model. Numerical studies of steam condensation in Laval nozzles show that the choice of the condensation model has a significant influence on nucleation rate, position of nucleation zone and consequently steam wetness and the droplet size in the nozzle outlet. It is necessary to model the transition area between rotating-rotor and stationary part-stator in numerical simulations of steam flow in steam turbines. For this purpose, “Stage” and “Frozen rotor” rotor-stator interface models are widely used. The aim of the present work has been to analyze how the numerical modeling of the rotor-stator transition area together with the condensation model influences the result of numerical simulation of flow with non-equilibrium steam condensation in the low pressure part of steam turbine of large power output.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".