MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2073156185 · doi:10.1243/09544100jaero513

Prediction of unsteady non-linear combustion instability in solid rocket motors

2009· article· en· W2073156185 on OpenAlexafffund
John Montesano, David R. Greatrix, Kamran Behdinan, Zouheir Fawaz

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part G Journal of Aerospace Engineering · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRocket and propulsion systems research
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPropellantSolid-fuel rocketMechanicsInstabilityCombustionCombustion chamberRocket (weapon)CasingTransient (computer programming)Computer simulationInternal flowMaterials scienceFlow (mathematics)Aerospace engineeringPhysicsEngineeringChemistryMechanical engineeringComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The influence of the surrounding motor structure on the appearance of unsteady non-linear axial combustion instability symptoms in a solid rocket motor internal combustion chamber is investigated. The numerical simulation model consists of three coupled physical components, including the combined propellant and motor casing structure, the motor core fluid flow, and the corresponding propellant combustion. A transient frequency-dependent burning-rate model and an updated erosive burning-rate component model are incorporated in the current overall numerical simulation model. The results of simulating a hot-flow unsteady motor firing indicate that structural vibrations directly affect the burning rate and the axial pressure wave development within the chamber that appears as a primary symptom of combustion instability. Comparison of the predicted results with the experimental test results indicates that a good correlation exists between the two, providing support for the present simulation model.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.222 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part G Journal of Aerospace EngineeringSame topicRocket and propulsion systems researchFrench-language works237,207