Numerical Analysis on Aerodynamic Performance of Counter-rotating Wind Turbine through Rear Rotor Configuration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Numerical analysis was conducted on the aerodynamic performance and the flow characteristics around the counter-rotating wind turbine or CRWT blade through rear rotor configuration using various rotor diameter ratios and distance ratios to the turbine blade through a CFD (Computational Fluid Dynamics) simulation. CFD simulation showed the normalized power coefficients of the front rotor, rear rotor, and combined rotor (CRWT) to the single rotor with a strong influence of the rear rotor configuration with the addition of tip speed ratio (TSR). A larger average normalized power coefficient takes place at D1/D2=1.0 with L/D1=0.75 by 1.221. It is about 22.1% increased to the SRWT for the given TSR range. Axial velocity contours and resultant velocity vectors around the CRWT blade with a diameter ratio of D1/D2 > 1.0 and a closer rotor distance provide a stronger bound vortex and strong separation around the rear hub blade with a tendency to increase from the hub to the tip blade at low TSR. The higher the TSR, the movement of tip vortex moves closer to the rear tip blade which has the effect of increasing the leakage flow in the area of D1/D2 < 1.0.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".