Numerical Investigation on the Effects of Vortex Generator Locations on Film Cooling Performance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Described in this paper is a numerical investigation on the concept for enhancing film cooling performance by placing vortex generator (VG) upstream the film hole. Six film cooling configurations with different VG locations are investigated, including the distances for VG upstream the film hole (Upstream Distances) of 20 mm, 25 mm, and 30 mm and the VG gaps of 0, 2 mm, 4 mm and 6 mm respectively. The effect of VG locations on film cooling performance were conducted. The film cooling performance is evaluated at the density of 0.97 with the blowing ratio of 1.0. Results obtained show that the twisted flow generated by upstream VG rotates in the opposite direction of kidney vortex, producing an adverse effect on kidney vortex. The enhanced adverse effect could dramatically improve the film cooling performance. Moreover, the intensity of twisted flow is greatly related to the VG locations. The film cooling performance improves with the increasing upstream distances. The film cooling performance improves first and then impairs with increasing VG gaps. In this case, the film cooling performance in the case with gap of 4 mm is superior to those in other cases.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".