Reaction thrust of submerged water jets
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Reaction thrusts of submerged water jets for different cylindrical nozzles are investigated numerically and experimentally. Simplified models of the pressure distribution on the interior walls of high-pressure chambers, the reaction thrust of water jets and the thrust coefficients are all established on the basis of the general characteristics of the isobaric surface near the inlet of the nozzle, respectively. Simulation studies on the reaction thrust are also conducted through a commercial computational fluid dynamics (CFD) software package called FLUENT. In particular, the effects of the inlet conditions as well as the nozzle dimensions on the reaction thrust of the water jet are addressed. Comparison analyses are also performed on the results of the simplified models, the CFD simulation and the experiments. It is concluded from the results that: (a) the model results and the CFD simulation results are in excellent agreement with the experimental results; (b) the nozzle diameter and the inlet conditions exert a significant influence on the reaction thrust of the water jet; and (c) the reaction thrust coefficient is almost a constant, ranging from 1.1 to 1.3. The related conclusions are extended to the study of the water hydraulic flapper-nozzle a servo valve.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".