NUMERICAL SIMULATIONS OF INVISCID AIRFLOWS IN RAMJET INLETS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The performances of three different ramjet inlets and an entire ramjet are numerically studied in this paper. The fluid is assumed to be inviscid. Inlet 1 is a SCRAMJET inlet and is chosen from the literature. Inlets 2 and 3 are instead designed based on the Oswatitsch principle. Inlets 2 and 3 produce a series of oblique shocks merging at the engine cowl lip followed by a terminating normal shock just downstream of the inlet throat. In ramjet, the combustion is modeled using a non-uniform volumetric heat source distributed in the combustor area. The position of the terminating normal shock in Inlets 2 and 3 is controlled via the inlet’s back pressure. Instead, in ramjet it is bounded by the amount of heat rate added in combustor and the exhaust nozzle throat area. For the numerical simulations, the Roe (1981) and MacCormack (1969) schemes are used. To prevent the spurious numerical oscillations in high resolution computations by Roe scheme the van Albada flux limiter (1982) is used, while in MacCormack scheme artificial viscosity terms are added to damp the oscillations. To double check the accuracy of the computations, the Fluent software package has also been used. Comparisons show very good agreement.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".