MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388018877 · doi:10.3390/en16217331

Effects of Parameter Scaling on Archimedes Screw Generator Performance

2023· article· en· W4388018877 on OpenAlexaff
Scott Simmons, Guilhem Dellinger, William David Lubitz

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergies · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicCavitation Phenomena in Pumps
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRange (aeronautics)ScalingExperimental dataScale (ratio)Envelope (radar)Mechanical engineeringPerformance predictionPower (physics)Reference dataScale modelEngineeringSimulationComputer scienceAerospace engineeringMathematicsGeometryPhysicsData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Archimedes screws are an ancient pumping technology that has more recently found use as a technology for hydropower generation. Currently, the literature is lacking reliable data, performance predicting models, and design guidelines. Most performance models presented in the literature are theoretical or were developed and evaluated using laboratory-scale data. This paper presents novel experimental and numerical simulation data to the literature from screw generators with a wide range of sizes (laboratory to full-scale powerplant scale) and orientations. The data suggest that the components of power production (pressure-driven and viscous/friction) scale differently depending on system size, configuration, and operating conditions. So, for the robust validation of models and the development of reliable design guidance, data from a wide range of sizes and configurations are crucial. The paper presents data collected from laboratory experiments, field measurements from operating powerplants, and data from numerical simulations. The numerical simulations were evaluated for accuracy with experimental data, then used to collect performance data from a wide range of screw geometries and scales. The length-scale (diameter), number of blades, fill height of water, inclination angle, and surface roughness were all varied. The data gathered in these experiments were analyzed and used to develop back-of-the-envelope estimations for the effect of each parameter on overall system performance; the relationships are intended to serve as a useful reference for designers, though they should not be used in lieu of a design model. The length-scale and number of blades were related to power in a way that could be reasonably approximated with a constant value. The fill height, inclination angle, and surface roughness were related to power in a way that could be approximated reasonably with first-order polynomial fits. Altogether, this paper presents much-needed, novel data to the literature; the data are integral for future model development and evaluation.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.843
Threshold uncertainty score0.353

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 head0.202
Teacher spread0.194 · 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

Citations6
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnergiesSame topicCavitation Phenomena in PumpsFrench-language works237,207