1

Is use of "except" in the following sentences correct grammatically and conceptually? Is the following sentences correct grammatically?If it is not , kindly suggest ways to make it clearer.

As discussed previously, there are another kind of losses in Wells turbine except loss due to blade profile. These losses are secondary flows and Fig. 11 highlights the main secondary flow structures in Wells turbine such as tip leakage vortex and horse-shoe vortices near the hub (endwall boundary layer flow).

Improve this question
1
  • This was written poorly. What is the source? "there are another kind of losses"?? As it is, in place of except I would use excepting.
    – user3169
    Commented Nov 3, 2016 at 19:54

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
2

For this use, I would choose besides. You are not excluding blade profile loss as important--you are writing about other losses. Another option would be apart from.

Also, I'd correct the bolded parts as well for plurality agreement, independent clauses, and article usage. Not knowing your domain, I am unsure of styles particular to it, but some of the structure was a bit confusing:

As discussed previously, there is another kind of loss in the Wells turbine besides loss due to blade profile. These losses are secondary flows. Figure 11 highlights the main secondary flow structures in Wells turbines such as a tip leakage vortex and horse-shoe vortices near the hub (endwall boundary layer flow).

It is also common to reorder the sentence to use other than, but I prefer the above.

As discussed previously, other than loss due to blade profile, there is another kind of loss in the Wells turbine.

Or you might want to simplify by dropping unnecessary parts, making it more terse and introducing the main point (secondary flows) in the first sentence:

Besides loss due to blade profile, the Wells turbine has losses due to secondary flows.

Improve this answer
2
  • 1
    Someone needs to sort out the plurality there! You've changed OP's there are another kind of losses to ...another kind of loss, but the problem remains that we're talking about a singular kind of loss, so it should be there is another kind of loss (or there are other kinds of loss/es).
    – FumbleFingers
    Commented Nov 3, 2016 at 15:21
  • 1
    Yes, meant to fix that one too. Now I have.
    – Patrick Szalapski
    Commented Nov 3, 2016 at 15:23

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .