MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4230658806 · doi:10.32920/ryerson.14656098

Redesigning a compressor inlet guide vane for 0 to 60 degree stagger angles

2021· preprint· en· W4230658806 on OpenAlexaff
Stephanie Waters

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTurbomachinery Performance and Optimization
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCamber (aerodynamics)InletGas compressorCruiseComputational fluid dynamicsFuel efficiencyAerospace engineeringCurvatureRADIUSRadius of curvatureThrust specific fuel consumptionMarine engineeringEngineeringAutomotive engineeringMechanical engineeringComputer scienceGeometryMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This report's objective is to reduce the total pressure loss coefficient of an inlet guide vane (IGV) at high stagger angles and to therefore reduce the overall fuel consumption of an aircraft engine. IGVs are usually optimized for cruise where the stagger angle is approximately 0 degrees. To reduce losses, four different methodologies were tested: increasing the leading edge radius, increasing the camber, creating a "drooped nose", and creating an "S" curvature distribution. A baseline IGV was chosen and modified using these methodologies to create 10 new IGV designs. CFX was used to perform a CFD analysis on all 11 IGV designs at 5 stagger angles from 0 to 60 degrees. Typical missions were analyzed and it was discovered that the new designs decreased the fuel consumption of the engine. The IGV with the "S" curvature and thicker leading edge was the best and decreased the fuel consumption by 0.24%.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.228 · 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 topicTurbomachinery Performance and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207