MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4317632766 · doi:10.2514/6.2023-2179

Blowoff Dynamics of Interacting Swirl Premixed Flames

2023· article· en· W4317632766 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueAIAA SCITECH 2023 Forum · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicCombustion and flame dynamics
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Christian StudiesUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCombustorPremixed flameExtinction (optical mineralogy)CombustionPlanar laser-induced fluorescenceMechanicsJet (fluid)Particle image velocimetryMaterials scienceFlame structureDiffusion flamePhysicsOpticsLaserChemistryLaser-induced fluorescenceTurbulence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

View Video Presentation: https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2023-2179.vid In this paper, we present experimental results that provide insights into the flow-combustion dynamics leading to flame blowoff inside a model gas turbine combustor housing three interacting swirl premixed flames. In particular, we focus on the mechanism of quasi-periodic extinction reignition phenomena and the final blowoff event i.e. complete flame extinction. The studies were performed inside a multi-swirler combustor which comprises of three swirling premixed flames arranged in an inline configuration. The dynamics of the system close to the blowoff condition was characterized using simultaneous pressure and multi-kHz OH∗ chemiluminescence measurements. Stereoscopic Particle Image Velocimetry (sPIV) and OH-Planar Laser Induced Fluorescence (OH-PLIF) were used to probe the flow-flame interactions. Chemiluminescence and pressure measurements reveal that there exists low frequency, large amplitude oscillations due to the large-scale extinction and reignition events occurring inside the combustor. Further analysis based on the high-speed OH∗ imaging and sPIV-PLIF measurements reveal that there exist two possible routes to the reignition, which we call as Type 1 and Type 2 reignition processes, respectively. Type 1 reignition occurs when the flame can propagate from a reacting swirling jet to its extinguished neighbors across the regions where the swirling jets interact. However, even when all the swirling jets are individually extinguished, a detached and roving flame kernel can still swirl back into the swirler recirculation zone to cause a quasi-explosive reignition event. This is identified as Type 2 reignition. The detailed mechanisms of both types of reignition events are elucidated in the paper.

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 score0.597
Threshold uncertainty score0.700

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.212 · 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