Next Article in Journal
Methods of Identifying Correlated Model Parameters with Noise in Prognostics
Next Article in Special Issue
Temperature and Pressure Dynamic Control for the Aircraft Engine Bleed Air Simulation Test Using the LPID Controller
Previous Article in Journal
InnoCube—A Wireless Satellite Platform to Demonstrate Innovative Technologies
Previous Article in Special Issue
Investigation of the Film-Cooling Performance of 2.5D Braided Ceramic Matrix Composite Plates with Preformed Hole
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Effect of Two-Head Flared Hole on Film Cooling Performance over a Flat Plate

Aerospace 2021, 8(5), 128; https://doi.org/10.3390/aerospace8050128
by Xuan-Truong Le 1, Duc-Anh Nguyen 1, Cong-Truong Dinh 1,* and Quang-Hai Nguyen 2
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Aerospace 2021, 8(5), 128; https://doi.org/10.3390/aerospace8050128
Submission received: 26 March 2021 / Revised: 19 April 2021 / Accepted: 21 April 2021 / Published: 4 May 2021
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advances in Aerothermal Engineering)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

  • 5 sig-figs for FE improvement? I'm not sure that's justified based on the model's assumptions. 60.8% is probably more accurate.
  • the  nomenclature list for all acronyms and symbols needs to be more extensive. Not sure exactly how you defined 'lateral-averaged effectiveness' vs. 'spatially-averaged effectiveness'. [You defined eta_s on p.4, but never eta_l.] Eta_s equation should be better formatted (e.g., denominator 21x4 is confusing)  
  • Discuss the effect of pressure ratio across the hole. The original hole geometry is cylindrical, which naturally limits the speed of the flow everywhere, as does the flared-inlet geometry. But the flared outlet geometry could become supersonic (con-di), if the pressure ratio is high enough and flow heating occurs in the hole. Figures 16-18 should show the flow speed profile as Mach contours instead of dimensional speed, to illustrate how close this is to choking.
  • Many typos need to be reviewed.

Author Response

Please see the detail of our answers in the attached file

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

The paper presents a numerical study of film cooling performance and efficiency for a certain hole geometry that can be used in turbine blades. The authors use a commercial code (ANSYS CFX) to compute the 3-dimensional RANS turbulent flowfield through the cooling passage.  It is clear from reading the manuscript that the paper is well-thought and executed, with sufficient initial validation & verification steps that examine the fit of the model parameters and the numerical grid. The results are clear and convincing, and not at all insignificant: an increase in cooling performance/efficiency by a few percentage points is quite important. The only issue that I see with the paper is the 'placement' of the present work with respect to past work. There is an extensive list of past works (1-20) most of which (7-10, 12-20) examine the effect of the hole size, shape, geometry, fluid mechanics in a similar configuration. The authors need to clearly distinguish what in the paper is their own contribution, and how their numerical analysis and results advance the state-of-the-art in the topic. A little more clarity is necessary with regards to what is new in the present work, even if it comes out to be - at the end - nothing more than a quantitative increase of cooling performance.      

Author Response

Please see the detail of author answers in the attached file.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Back to TopTop