MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2948510640 · doi:10.11159/ffhmt19.131

A Practical Axial Compressor Design Optimization Approach Based on Gas Turbine Operation

2019· article· en· W2948510640 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mohammad Reza Pakatchian, Hossein Saeidi

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the ... International Conference on Fluid Flow, Heat and Mass Transfer · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTurbomachinery Performance and Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGas compressorGas turbinesComputer scienceMechanical engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the current study, it is focused on blade optimization of compressor to achieve improved performance characteristics.Due to dependency of mass flow rate on the inlet temperature of the gas turbine, temperature changes influence on compressor performance and efficiency.In order to enhance the working conditions at design and off-design operation, an automated design process is applied.The process has three main steps including parametrization of the geometry, numerical simulation of flow and optimization design approach.Stochastic design approach is utilized for optimization.The objective of this improvement will push the airfoil geometry in a way that minimum loss value, extended acceptable off-design operation in constant exit flow angle can be achieved with being focused on hot day's operation.The considered case in the present study is a compressor of MGT-70 heavy-duty gas turbine and the optimization focuses on the first four stages.Based on numerical simulation of optimized compressor, 1% enhancement in efficiency in all operating conditions is achievable.Moreover, the mass flow rate can be enhanced roughly up to 0.8% and 1% for design and off-design conditions, respectively.After assembling the new developed parts, the first upgraded prototype of the gas turbine has been tested in sixth Unit of Parand power station.More than 600 signals of pressure and temperature in circumferential and radial directions were extracted from compressor section.The results show good agreement predicted in range inlet flow angle between measurements and theoretical targets.

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)0.001
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.207 · 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
GenreMethods

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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the ... International Conference on Fluid Flow, Heat and Mass TransferSame topicTurbomachinery Performance and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207