The Development of a 2D CFD Modelling and Optimizing Approach for a Power-Generating Wave Rotor
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Wave rotors exchange energy between two flows through pressure waves and have the potential to enhance efficiency in a range of power generation applications. Compared to the traditional turbomachine, wave rotors have the advantage of lower speed, simpler design, lower manufacturing cost, and a more compact design. These advantages are ideally suited to a micro-gas turbine that is based on a power-generating wave rotor. However, to make this concept viable, improvements must be made in the efficiency of power extraction from the flows through the channels. In this paper, a wave rotor has been modeled and optimized in 2D CFD based on an existing wave rotor micro-gas turbine design reported in other work. Parameter and constraints are designed based on a baseline wave rotor of 60 mm in diameter, 30 mm in length with symmetrical channel camber. The wave rotor consists of 4 ports per cycle, two inlets on one side and two outlet ports on the opposite side to create a through-flow design. On the inlet side, a rotor channel will first arrive at the High-Pressure Gas (HPG) followed by the Low-Pressure Air (LPA) port and on the outlet side, first a High-Pressure Air (HPA) port followed by a Low-Pressure Gas (LPG) port. The Fluent model solution uses a pressure-based and allows the exploration of boundary conditions of the pressure-inlets and the pressure-outlets. The main purpose, is to use this model to investigate the port timing, portangle and channel curvature to optimize power generation and cycle efficiency. First, the paper models curve channel designs where experimental results are available in order to validate the model. The model is then used to optimize the aforementioned parameters, and a number of new designs are shown and discussed in terms of their performance tradeoffs.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".