Thermodynamic and Aerodynamic Loss Evaluation of Supersonic Nucleating Steam With Shocks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Near saturation steam undergoing rapid expansion is numerically studied in a series of converging diverging nozzles with and without shocks. A detailed examination of the aerodynamic and thermodynamic losses are performed for thermodynamic non-equilibrium conditions. The calculations rely on a new numerical model, previously reported, for non-equilibrium phase change with droplet nucleation. In a systematic approach, the model results are first validated versus experimentally available data and then applied to more general flow situations to assess loss mechanisms. The results indicate that for weak normal shocks situated just downstream of the nozzles throat, the aerodynamic and thermodynamic losses are roughly equivalent. As the back pressure is reduced (i.e. shocks become stronger) the aerodynamic component rapidly becomes the predominant loss mechanism. The thermodynamic loss, associated with heat transfer between the phases, increases only gradually with shock strength. This gradual increase starts from a base level of loss originating with the initial nucleation of moisture, which has a strength and location independent of back pressure.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".