Correct me. Are use of "decreases" and "reduces" and "Reduction" in the following sentences correct grammatically and conceptually? Reduction of entropy generation downstream of flow means that the blade-to-blade interaction decreases and this reduces the amount of fossil fuels consumption and air pollution in order to produce the electrical energy.

a high-velocity flow of the blade’s pressure surface interaction According to the following figure, Is use of "a high-velocity flow of the blade’s pressure surface interaction" in the following sentences correct grammatically and conceptually? If it is not , kindly suggest ways to make it clearer. From Fig. 18(b) and (c), and Fig. 19(b) and (c), it can be seen that a high entropy generation region appears behind the TE portion of the blade because there is a high-velocity flow of the blade’s pressure surface interaction with backflow region and the low-velocity leakage vortex. TE=trailing edge My meaning of "a high-velocity flow of the blade’s pressure surface interaction with... " is "an interaction of high-velocity flow from the blade’s pressure surface with...".

Correct me, Thnnks. Fig. 16 presents a comparison between viscous dissipation and turbulent dissipation at deep stall condition (ϕ=0.275) in the CTB. As shown in the fig. 16(a), viscous dissipation on the blade’s suction surface is higher than turbulent dissipation on that, while the maximum value of turbulent dissipation on the hub surface (effect horseshoe vortex) and the blade tip (effect of tip leakage flow) is higher than that of viscous dissipation on that. Further, the affected area of viscous dissipation on the hub surface is greater than that of turbulent dissipation on that. As is evident in Fig. 16(b), the turbulent dissipation around the blade’s suction surface (effect interaction between leakage vortex and fluid flow) is higher than viscous dissipation around that. The views of viscous dissipation in TE and the LE are magnified.

Are the following sentences correct grammatically and conceptually? Hi, According to the following figure, Are the following sentences correct grammatically and conceptually? If it is not, kindly suggest ways to make it clearer. High entropy generation zone in the VTB (from the LE to the TE) is greater than that in the CTB because there is a stronger interaction between tip leakage vortex and fluid flow in the VTB due to the higher velocity of fluid particles around the VTB’s suction surface. CTB=constant thickness blade VTB=variable thickness blade TE=trailing edge of the blade LE=leading edge of the blade The following figure illustrate entropy generation contours at the near tip plane for the CTB and the VTB.

Could you please suggest some words and verb to replace "placed" and "emphasis"? Could you please suggest some words and verb to replace "placed" and "emphasis"? Kock derived the entropy generation for Reynolds averaged equations and placed much emphasis in the entropy generation occurring in the fluctuating field.

use of "including" Hi, Is use of "including" in the following sentence correct grammatically and conceptually? If it is not , kindly suggest ways to make it clearer. This term, including(or containing) the mean velocity gradients, is often referred to as direct or viscous dissipation. explanation: The term is as follows:

extends more of<...> Hi, According to the uploaded picture, Is use of "more of" in the following sentence correct grammatically and conceptually? If it is not , kindly suggest ways to make it clearer. The sentence is about the turbine. My meaning is : tip leakage vortex exceeds mid-span and goes under mid-span(between hub and mid-span). It affects fluid flow around of blade under mid-span! this influence is bad phenomena. "The tip leakage vortex in the CTB extends more of mid-span and mid-cord of the blade suction surface. " CTB=Constant thickness blade

<"because of existing"> Is use of "because of existing" in the following sentences correct grammatically and conceptually? If it is not , kindly suggest ways to make it clearer. "particularly at low flow coefficients." is related to blade-to-blade boundary layer interaction. Also, just one periodic condition exists. First, the sentences were as follows: Because of occurring wake and separation near to TE, a fine mesh is generated in this region. For this reason, it also should be generated a fine mesh in LE because there are periodic condition in the circumferential direction and also stagnation point near to the leading edge at pressure surface of blade. On the other hand, it is necessary to generate a fine mesh in TE and LE to capture blade-to-blade boundary layer interaction, particularly at low flow coefficients. But I changed briefly as follows: Because of occurring wake and separation near to TE, a fine mesh is generated in this region. For this reason, it also should be generated a fine mesh in LE because of existing periodic condition in the circumferential direction, stagnation point near to the leading edge at pressure surface of the blade, and blade-to-blade boundary layer interaction, particularly at low flow coefficients. My meaning is : 1. " For this reason, it also should be generated a fine mesh in LE because of existing periodic condition in the circumferential direction, stagnation point near to the leading edge at pressure surface of the blade, and blade-to-blade boundary layer interaction, particularly at low flow coefficients." creates sense? 2. "particularly at low flow coefficients." is related to blade-to-blade boundary layer interaction in this above sentence? 3. Is not this sentence long? Is there any problem in this case?

<Although> Is use of "Although" in the following sentences correct grammatically and conceptually? If it is not , kindly suggest ways to make it clearer. The secondary flow loss is due to the interaction between vortices (tip leakage and horseshoe vortices) and boundary layer of suction, casing and hub surfaces in the Wells turbine. These interactions decrease turbine performance. Although the secondary flows are a major reason for the aerodynamic losses which are responsible for 35%-40% of the total losses in the turbine passage. Thus these results will require consideration from the turbine designers.