MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7162022515 · doi:10.82308/47087

Experimental and computational investigations of the flow within a scale model of a hydroelectric generator

2022· dissertation· en· W7162022515 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kevin Venne

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFlow Measurement and Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWindageHydroelectricityRotor (electric)Flow (mathematics)Flow measurementMass flowMass flow rateGenerator (circuit theory)Scale model

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Decarbonization of the Atlantic Northeast’s electricity is achievable by utilizing Québec’s power system, if the reliability of the latter can be ensured. However, a critical element is the thermal management of the power system’s aging hydroelectric generators. To improve the thermal management, a 1:4 scale model of a hydroelectric generator was developed by Hydro-Québec. The research presented in this work utilized the scale model to refine a thermal mass flow meter and develop a numerical model to simulate the flow and heat transfer within hydroelectric generators. The new design of the flow meter enabled the first measurements of the flow rate within the rotor rim ducts of an in-service hydroelectric generator. Particle image velocimetry measurements demonstrated that the improved design had an accuracy of 8% and a 3.5% measurement repeatability, and allowed for the characterization of the flow in the rotor rim of the scale model. To further investigate the thermal management of hydroelectric generators, a numerical model capable of predicting the locations of hot-spots on the scale model’s rotor pole was developed. The numerical model employed a meshing technique that reduced the mesh generation time for hydroelectric generators from months to hours, and predicted the net mass flow rate, windage losses, maximum and average pole temperatures to within 5%, 4%, 3°C, and 5°C of experimental results, respectively. Furthermore, the numerical model was utilized to investigate alternate ventilation configurations for the scale model, which showed that i) adding a deflector at the pit outlet reduced the windage losses by 8.8%, and ii) increasing the surface area of the spider arms reduced the pole’s maximum surface temperature by 2.6°C

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.345

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.197 · 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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicFlow Measurement and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207