MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2127143815 · doi:10.1017/s0022112010004386

The mechanism of detonation attenuation by a porous medium and its subsequent re-initiation

2011· article· en· W2127143815 on OpenAlexaff
Matei I. Radulescu, Brian Maxwell

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Fluid Mechanics · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicCombustion and Detonation Processes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDetonationShock waveAttenuationMechanicsMaterials sciencePorous mediumFront (military)Wave propagationReflection (computer programming)Shock (circulatory)DiffractionPorosityOpticsPhysicsExplosive materialChemistryComposite materialMeteorology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The attenuation and re-initiation mechanism of detonations transmitted through a porous section consisting of a two-dimensional array of staggered cylinders was investigated experimentally and numerically for acetylene–oxygen mixtures. It was found that the leading order attenuation mechanism is the wave diffraction around the cylinders. The local re-amplification permitting the self-propagation of the wave was due to wave reflections from adjacent obstacles. The critical conditions for transmittance of a detonation wave were found to correspond approximately to a pore size equal to approximately 30–60 detonation induction lengths, or one to two cell sizes. For quenched detonations, the re-initiation mechanism was found to rely on wave reflections from neighbouring pores. Depending on the mixture sensitivity, one or several shock reflections may be necessary to re-amplify the attenuated detonation wave back to a self-sustained wave. For the latter case, a novel mechanism was identified, where each shock reflection gives rise to a significant enhancement of the gas reactivity and burnout of large portions of unreacted gas. This leads to a slow acceleration of the leading front, punctuated by small-scale local sudden re-accelerations. The resulting wave interactions give rise to a topologically complex reaction zone structure consisting of alternating layers of reacted and unreacted gas. The role of turbulent diffusive burning during this transient is discussed.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.198 · 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

Citations82
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Fluid MechanicsSame topicCombustion and Detonation ProcessesFrench-language works237,207