MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2913423977 · doi:10.1139/tcsme-2018-0060

Application of computational fluid dynamics for thermohydrodynamic analysis of high-speed squeeze-film dampers

2019· article· en· W2913423977 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Maxime Perreault, Sina Hamzehlouia, Kamran Behdinan

Bibliographic record

VenueTransactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical Engineering · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTribology and Lubrication Engineering
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTurbomachineryComputational fluid dynamicsDamperLubricantVibrationMechanicsFlutterMaterials scienceMechanical engineeringControl theory (sociology)EngineeringAerodynamicsStructural engineeringComputer sciencePhysicsAcoustics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In high-speed turbomachinery, the presence of rotor vibrations, which produce undesirable noise or shaft deflection and losses in performance, has brought up the need for the application of a proper mechanism to attenuate the vibration amplitudes. Squeeze-film dampers (SFDs) are a widely employed solution to the steady-state vibrations in high-speed turbomachinery. SFDs contain a thin film of lubricant that is susceptible to changes in temperature. For this reason, the analysis of thermohydrodynamic (THD) effects on the SFD damping properties is essential. This paper develops a computational fluid dynamics (CFD) model to analyze the THD effects in SFDs, and enabling the application of CFD analysis to be a base-line for validating the accuracy of analytical THD SFD models. Specifically, the CFD results are compared against numerical simulations at different operating conditions, including eccentricity ratios and journal whirl speeds. The comparisons demonstrate the effective application of CFD for THD analysis of SFDs. Additionally, the effect of the lubricant THDs on the viscosity, maximum and mass-averaged temperature, as well as heat generation rates inside the SFD lubricant are analyzed. The temperature of the lubricant is seen to rise with increasing whirl speed, eccentricity ratios, damper radial clearance, and shaft radii.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.186
Teacher spread0.182 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations8
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical EngineeringSame topicTribology and Lubrication EngineeringFrench-language works237,207