MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386072860 · doi:10.11159/htff23.125

Experimental and Numerical Investigation of Controlled Rotomolded Axial Fan by Internal Air Injection at Gap Clearance

2023· article· en· W4386072860 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ayoub Bouanik, Abderrahim LARABI, Tarik Azzam, M. Mekadem, Farid Bakir

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the World Congress on Mechanical, Chemical, and Material Engineering · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Turbulent Flows
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAir gap (plumbing)Mechanical fanFan-outMechanicsPhysicsMaterials scienceComputer scienceMechanical engineeringEngineeringOptoelectronicsComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the present era, axial fans play a pivotal role in crucial sectors of both industry and research.As a result, significant attention has been directed towards enhancing their aerodynamic performances.The ongoing inquiry is centered around elevating the aeraulic efficiencies of a fan produced through rotational molding techniques.First is adopting an active control by injecting a compressed air through 16 holes placed at the fan's hollow shroud ring of a dimension of 4 mm, by leveraging a benefit that involves in exploiting the hollow nature of the fan with the centrifugal effect.In the other hand, the fan's axial position with respect to the casing was investigated to know its influence on aerodynamics performances.The numerical investigation employing the K-ω SST turbulence model allows a detailed characterization of the flow modification around the fan.Results show that the swirling zone that forms around the shroud ring in investigated axial positions as a result of the interaction of the main and leakage flows with casing walls, has a significant impact on the change of the flow topology.In comparison to the baseline case, the aerodynamic performances are improved as the leakage flow and the swirling zone are both reduced.This improvement is translated into a gain of approximately 53% in aeraulic power and a leakage flow reduction of about 80%.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.187 · 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 venueProceedings of the World Congress on Mechanical, Chemical, and Material EngineeringSame topicFluid Dynamics and Turbulent FlowsFrench-language works237,207