MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2085761776 · doi:10.3390/en3111790

Scale Effects on Quasi-Steady Solid Rocket Internal Ballistic Behaviour

2010· article· en· W2085761776 on OpenAlex
David R. Greatrix

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergies · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRocket and propulsion systems research
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInternal ballisticsPropellantSolid-fuel rocketBallisticsDeflection (physics)Aerospace engineeringEngineeringMechanicsSimulationMechanical engineeringMaterials sciencePhysicsClassical mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The ability to predict with some accuracy a given solid rocket motor’s performance before undertaking one or several costly experimental test firings is important. On the numerical prediction side, as various component models evolve, their incorporation into an overall internal ballistics simulation program allows for new motor firing simulations to take place, which in turn allows for updated comparisons to experimental firing data. In the present investigation, utilizing an updated simulation program, the focus is on quasi-steady performance analysis and scale effects (influence of motor size). The predicted effects of negative/positive erosive burning and propellant/casing deflection, as tied to motor size, on a reference cylindrical-grain motor’s internal ballistics, are included in this evaluation. Propellant deflection has only a minor influence on the reference motor’s internal ballistics, regardless of motor size. Erosive burning, on the other hand, is distinctly affected by motor scale.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.730
Threshold uncertainty score0.540

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.258 · 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