MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4367321416 · doi:10.18280/mmep.100241

Structural Analysis of Compressor Blades Using Finite Elements Method

2023· article· en· W4367321416 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hayder H. Khaleel

Bibliographic record

VenueMathematical Modelling and Engineering Problems · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMechanical Failure Analysis and Simulation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFinite element methodGas compressorComputer scienceStructural engineeringMechanical engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The axial compressor considers the main component and plays a significant role in highspeed engines and it is subjected to different loads during the operations conditions. In this work, the simulation of the mechanical performance of the axial compressor under various loads was achieved. The simulation of the axial compressor (semi-open impeller type) was achieved with SOLIDWORKS 2016 while the structural numerical analysis was performed with ANSYS 2020 with three different materials which were (stainless steel, titanium, carbon fiber) to study the effect of different force values (5000, 10000, 15000) N on the mechanical performance of the axial compressor and to compare the behavior of modern material such as carbon fiber, which has been recently in the manufacturing of mechanical parts due to its significant properties like a high strengthweight ratio, with the other traditional materials. The output results were directional deformation, overall deformation, highest stress, highest shear stress and maximum strain. The results revealed that the carbon fiber showed the highest deformation more than the other two materials because of the type of failure that happened under loads such as delamination and cracks which may cause sudden failure for the compressor.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.219 · 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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMathematical Modelling and Engineering ProblemsSame topicMechanical Failure Analysis and SimulationFrench-language works237,207