MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399271256 · doi:10.2514/6.2024-3328

Combustion Noise Modelling Re-Examined for Thermally Perfect and Multi-Species Gas Flows

2024· article· en· W4399271256 on OpenAlexaff
Yann Gentil, Guillaume Daviller, Stéphane Moreau

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicCombustion and flame dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCombustionNoise (video)Environmental scienceMaterials scienceMechanicsComputer sciencePhysicsChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Combustion noise has now become a significant noise contribution of turboshaft engine due to the current and past noise reduction efforts mainly focused on jet and fan noise. It is basically differentiated into two mechanisms: direct noise, generated by the unsteady turbulent flame, and indirect noise, generated by the acceleration/deceleration of entropy spots, vortical and compositional heterogeneities produced in the combustion chamber through the turbine. To predict these noise generation mechanisms, several hypotheses are used to describe fluctuation motions through nozzles. One of them is the calorifically perfect gas mixture assumption, i.e. $c_p = cst$, which is re-examined in this study using thermally perfect gas mixture flow, i.e. $c_p = c_p(T)$. To do so, the quasi one-dimensional Euler equations for multi-species, isentropic and non-reactive flow are considered within nozzle. Their linearization yields a new prediction model in addition to show a new entropy-to-entropy coupling mechanism. In the assumption of low-frequency perturbation, a solution of that system is derived. By performing parametric studies, the fixing of the constant heat capacity $c_p$ in calorifically perfect flow is shown to have significant impact on the noise transfer function modulus prediction compared to thermally perfect flow. Finally, it is shown that acoustic-to-acoustic and composition-to-acoustic mechanisms are less impacted by a change in $c_p(T)$, whereas entropy-to-entropy, entropy-to-acoustic and composition-to-entropy mechanisms undergo important variations up to $10\%$ in choked nozzle, representative of actual take-off conditions in a turboengine.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.771
Threshold uncertainty score0.441

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.199 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCombustion and flame dynamicsFrench-language works237,207