MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Validation of deep part load dynamic stresses for axial runners

2022· article· en· W4306175639 on OpenAlexaff
Christine Monette, J Chamberland-Lauzon, B Nennemann

Bibliographic record

VenueIOP Conference Series Earth and Environmental Science · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicCavitation Phenomena in Pumps
Canadian institutionsAndritz (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStrain gaugeComputational fluid dynamicsRange (aeronautics)VibrationHydropowerStructural engineeringVortexStress (linguistics)Francis turbineFlow (mathematics)Power (physics)Mechanical engineeringEngineeringMechanicsAcousticsTurbineElectrical engineeringAerospace engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract To accommodate renewable energy production and load demand variability, hydropower plant owners need to increase their operating range regardless of their units’ original design load envelop. When this increased operating range is an issue for the fatigue life of the old runners, solutions need to be found with the design of a new runner to sustain those new challenging loads of the increased operating range. In recent years, many papers have been published to show the challenging loads on Francis runners at speed-no-load and deep part load conditions. Andritz demonstrated a good numerical prediction capability for stress levels at deep part load conditions for Francis runners. However, for axial units, very little has been published. Very recently, some papers showed good predictability by CFD of the flow behavior at deep part load including the vortices present at those conditions. This paper demonstrates the prediction capability of the numerical tools by comparing strain gage measurements on an axial runner to CFD-FEA stress predictions. The measurement campaign was conducted conjointly by the unit owner and the manufacturer for research purposes. In the deep part load operating zone under the effect of columnar vortices, frequency analysis of the measured vibrations and strain gage signals confirmed the flow behavior predicted by CFD, and the measured dynamic strain amplitudes were well predicted. Numerical prediction of dynamic stress in the complete range from 0-100% power of the measured unit as well as detection of high vibration zones was successful.

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 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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.052
Threshold uncertainty score0.423

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.188 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations5
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIOP Conference Series Earth and Environmental ScienceSame topicCavitation Phenomena in PumpsFrench-language works237,207