Validation and Assessment of a Numerical Methodology for Turbulent Liquid Fuel Jets in High-Speed Crossflow
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract For lean combustion technology, sufficient mixing between fuel and air helps to move away from stoichiometric combustion, the flame temperature of which enormously promotes the production of harmful pollutants. Good fuel-air mixing is also essential to avoid fuel-rich pockets, where unburnt hydrocarbon and soot are likely to be produced. For low emissions gas turbines using liquid fuels, such as diesel, jet in crossflow is one the approaches to achieve efficient liquid jet breakup and evaporation as well as superior mixing characteristics. In order to develop low emissions fuel spray technologies that use transverse jets, it is important that the current numerical tools have the ability to accurately predict the jet breakup, both primary and secondary, evaporation mechanisms, to properly assess the performance of an injector design. However, because the numerical tools often use model constants that are calibrated with experimental data mostly only applicable to a specific range of operating conditions, a particular test fluid or injection method, it is very challenging to assess the accuracy of the predicted results without further experimental validation. To the author’s best knowledge, the breakup mechanism and the predictive capabilities of the breakup models used to guide the design of novel injectors for fuel transverse jets at elevated pressure and high-speed turbulent crossflow have not been reported in full detail. Thus, the main focus of this study is to compare and assess the capabilities of the breakup models used in state-of-the-art CFD, including a stochastic approach that relies less on experimental model constants, to predict the spray characteristics of turbulent jets in crossflow at different pressures, gas Weber numbers and momentum flux ratios that are more representative of gas turbine applications. This study will be conducted by using Simcenter STAR-CCM+. The simulated results will be compared to experimental data to validate and calibrate the breakup models through a parametric and sensitivity study.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".