MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2945467804 · doi:10.1177/0957650919845765

Reynolds-averaged Navier–Stokes modelling in transonic S-ducts with passive flow control

2019· article· en· W2945467804 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Tom Hickling, Grant Ingram

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part A Journal of Power and Energy · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Turbulent Flows
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransonicMechanicsDuct (anatomy)TurbulenceBoundary layerReynolds stressReynolds numberFlow separationSecondary flowPhysicsAerospace engineeringAerodynamicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

S-duct diffusers are used in aircraft with embedded engines to route ambient air to the fan face. Sizing and stealth considerations drive a need for high curvature ducts, but the curvature causes complex secondary flows that lead to total pressure distortion and swirl velocities at the engine face. These must be controlled for stable engine operation. In this paper, tubercles, a novel bio-inspired passive flow control method, are analysed numerically in a duct with transonic flow. The results are compared to experimental data obtained as part of a campaign at the Royal Military College, Canada to investigate the effects of S-duct geometry and novel passive flow control devices on the performance of transonic S-ducts. The performance of Reynolds-averaged Navier–Stokes turbulence models in the S-ducts is assessed – Menter's shear stress transport model predicts excessive losses due to the overactivity of its stress limiter. The realisable k–ɛ model gives a significant improvement in the prediction of static pressure distributions, but losses and distortion characteristics are predicted poorly due to the model's inability to resolve the effects of unsteadiness in separated regions. Large tubercle geometries are found to trigger earlier separation in the centre of the duct by concentrating low momentum fluid in valleys, but they also act as boundary layer fences away from the duct centre. Smaller geometries are found to generate vortices that re-energise the boundary layer, delaying flow separation. Methods are recommended for future computational analyses of S-ducts and new designs of tubercles.

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 score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.430

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.155
Teacher spread0.152 · 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

Citations3
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part A Journal of Power and EnergySame topicFluid Dynamics and Turbulent FlowsFrench-language works237,207