MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4254300115 · doi:10.1115/gt2011-45554

Influences of Inlet Swirl Distributions on an Inter-Turbine Duct: Part I—Casing Swirl Variation

2011· article· en· W4254300115 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTurbomachinery Performance and Optimization
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
FundersNational Research Council Canada
KeywordsCasingBoundary layerMechanicsVortexTurbineAdverse pressure gradientPressure gradientFlow separationDuct (anatomy)InletWakeTurbulenceStatic pressureBoundary layer thicknessTurbine bladeAerodynamicsPhysicsMaterials scienceAerospace engineeringMechanical engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The inter-turbine transition duct (ITD) of a gas turbine engine has significant potential for engine weight reduction and/or aerodynamic performance improvement. This potential arises because very little is understood of the flow behavior in the duct in relation to the hub and casing shapes and the flow entering the duct (e.g., swirl angle, turbulence intensity, periodic unsteadiness and blade tip vortices from upstream HP turbine blade rows). In this study, the flow development in an ITD with different inlet swirl distributions was investigated experimentally and numerically. The current paper, which is the first part of a two-part paper, presents the investigations of the influences of the casing swirl variations on the flow physics in the ITD. The results show a fair agreement between the predicted and experimental data. The radial pressure gradient at the first bend of ITD drives the low momentum hub boundary layer and wake flow radially, which results in a pair of hub counter-rotating vortices. Furthermore, the radially moving low momentum wake flow feeds into the casing region and causes 3D casing boundary layer. At the second bend, the reversed radial pressure gradient together with the 3D casing boundary layer generates a pair of casing counter-rotating vortices. Due to the local adverse pressure gradient, 3D boundary layer separation occurs on both the casing and hub at the second bend and the exit of the ITD, respectively. The casing 3D separation enhances the 3D features of the casing boundary layer as well as the existing casing counter-rotating vortices. With increasing casing swirl angle, the casing 3D boundary layer separation is delayed and the casing counter-rotating vortices are weakened. On the other hand, although the hub swirls are kept constant, the hub counter-rotating vortices get stronger with the increasing inlet swirl gradient. The total pressure coefficients within the ITD are significantly redistributed by the casing and hub counter-rotating vortices.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.209
Threshold uncertainty score0.394

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.202 · 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