MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3091284624 · doi:10.1088/1361-665x/abbd1d

Optimal turbine blade design enabled by auxetic honeycomb

2020· article· en· W3091284624 on OpenAlexaff
Aniket Pal, Katia Bertoldi, Minh Quan Pham, Megan Schaenzer, Andrew J. Gross

Bibliographic record

VenueSmart Materials and Structures · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicCellular and Composite Structures
Canadian institutionsSiemens (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTurbine bladeMaterials sciencevon Mises yield criterionHoneycombStiffnessStress (linguistics)Blade (archaeology)Honeycomb structureStructural engineeringMechanical engineeringComposite materialTurbineFinite element methodEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Gas turbine blades are subjected to unusually harsh operating conditions—rotating at high velocities in gas streams whose temperature can exceed the melting temperature of the blade. In order to survive these conditions, the blade must efficiently transfer heat to an internal cooling flow while effectively managing mechanical stresses. This work describes a new design strategy for the internal structure of turbine blades that makes use of architected materials tailored to reduce stresses and temperatures throughout the blade. A full 3D characterization was first performed to determine the thermomechanical properties of generalized honeycomb materials with different design parameters: honeycomb angle and wall thickness. A turbine blade cross section was then divided into multiple discrete domains so that different generalized honeycomb materials could be assigned to each of the domains. Optimization of the material assignments was performed in order to minimize the stress ratio—ratio of the maximum Mises’ stress and the temperature dependent yield stress—in the entire model. The optimized design showed substantial improvement with respect to a baseline model; the factor of safety was increased by 171%, while the maximum Mises’ stress and temperature decreased by 42% and 72% respectively. The use of generalized honeycomb materials allows for local control of the material properties to tune the performance of the turbine blade. The results of the optimization clearly indicate that auxetic honeycombs outperform conventional designs; since their lower in-plane stiffness helps to reduce stresses caused by thermal gradients. Our results demonstrated the feasibility of using 3D-printing compatible architected materials in turbine blades to increase their factor of safety and potentially increase operating temperatures to improve thermal efficiency.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.178
Teacher spread0.171 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations18
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSmart Materials and StructuresSame topicCellular and Composite StructuresFrench-language works237,207