MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Rotor Stress Prediction Using Convolutional Neural Network

2025· article· W7108341504 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicModel Reduction and Neural Networks
Canadian institutionsSiemens (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRotor (electric)Convolutional neural networkArtificial neural networkMargin (machine learning)Deep learningTurbineKey (lock)Finite element method

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Application of AI/ML in creating predictive surrogate models in engineering domain is still in very initial stages. Several deep learning architectures such as Physics Informed Neural Network (PINN), and Kolmogorov Arnold Network are being developed. PINN requires explicit use of governing PDEs in the network and may not be straightforward for some industry problems. KAN is still in the initial development stage. Limited data and demand of higher quantitative accuracy mean that while using more conventional ML models, identification-cum-transformation of input features and model selection can be a challenge that requires deeper understanding of physics of the problem being solved. In this study, we present an innovative AI-ML based stress prediction model specifically designed for gas turbine rotor disks. The model leverages CNN (Convolutional Neural Network) architecture of AlexNet to create a deep learning regression model that identifies critical geometric features from the 2D cross-sectional images of the rotor disk and predicts the stress distribution at key locations under centrifugal loading conditions. To train and validate our model, the data is generated from ANSYS based FEA simulations using auto-generated rotor disk geometries. Our model demonstrates high accuracy with a margin of error within 5%, making it a valuable tool for rapid iterations during the preliminary design phase. This capability significantly enhances the efficiency of the design process, allowing for quicker optimization and validation of rotor disk designs. Looking ahead, we aim to extend the application of our AI-ML model to other gas turbine components and analysis, enabling the creation of a true digital twin of a gas turbine. This expansion will further streamline the design and analysis process, contributing to the development of more robust and efficient gas turbine systems.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.573
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.249 · 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.

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicModel Reduction and Neural NetworksFrench-language works237,207