MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3199696060 · doi:10.1115/gt2021-58988

Numerical Investigation of Air-Oil Two-Phase Flow Pattern Transition in the Scavenge Line of an Aeroengine

2021· article· en· W3199696060 on OpenAlexaff
Ghofrane Sekrani, Jean-Sebastien Dick, Sébastien Poncet, Sravankumar Nallamothu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Mixing
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTurbulenceMechanicsVolume of fluid methodFlow (mathematics)Two-phase flowFluentAirflowComputational fluid dynamicsEnvironmental scienceMaterials sciencePetroleum engineeringMechanical engineeringEngineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Since most research investments in aeroengines have been targeted at the hot and cold sections, the oil system has remained an area poorly understood. Optimum sizing of the oil system can directly reduce the engine’s weight and specific fuel consumption while maximizing service life. The understanding of air/oil interaction in scavenge lines is required to influence the design of the oil systems and achieve those objectives. The challenge is in the existence of numerous possible flow regimes and phase interactions. In scavenge lines, a complex two-phase flow results from the interaction of sealing airflow and lubrication oil. Scavenge lines can have bends, junctions and sudden area changes which complicates their modeling by amplifying pressure gradients and turbulence generation, and causing the flow to change morphology (annular, slug, stratified, bubbly, mist, etc.). Several multiphase flow approaches have been developed to model two-phase flow in straight scavenge lines. However, up until now, no methodology is preferred by the community for simulating two-phase flow in such application. There are still many unknowns regarding the modeling of turbulence, phase interaction and the compressibility of immiscible mixtures such as air and oil. The present study compares the performance of two numerical models: Volume of Fluid (VOF) and Algebraic Interfacial Area Density (AIAD), for simulating the air/oil flow in a suddenly expanding scavenge line against the experimental data of Ahmed et al. [1–2]. The AIAD model is a two-fluid Eulerian approach newly implemented on Ansys Fluent. Discrepancies between the two models for predicting pressure loss and void fraction are evaluated and discussed into details. The flow regime before and after the sudden expansion is identified using iso-surfaces of the void-fraction and compared against visual data. Based on the results presented, recommendations are formulated for further work regarding the calibration of AIAD modeling parameters.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.218 · 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicFluid Dynamics and MixingFrench-language works237,207