MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2314169635 · doi:10.2514/6.2004-3400

Design Methodology for a Pulse Detonation Engine as a Ramjet Replacement

2004· article· en· W2314169635 on OpenAlexaff
Paul Harris, Robert Stowe, Stephen M. Guzik

Bibliographic record

Venue40th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference and Exhibit · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicCombustion and Detonation Processes
Canadian institutionsDefence Research and Development Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRamjetDetonationPulse (music)Aero engineAerospace engineeringComputer scienceAutomotive engineeringMechanical engineeringCombustorEngineeringCombustionExplosive materialTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An idealized pulse detonation engine (PDE) based on a realistic system concept is defined for which propulsive performance is significantly greater than that of a ramjet over a large range of Mach numbers. An analytical model of the system is developed that calculates physical, timing and flow parameters that can be used as input to multi -dimensional computational fluid dynamics (CFD) analyses and provide a starting point for real system design. A parametric study of the influence on propulsive performance of flight Mach number, inlet pressure recovery, l ength of the detonation tube, mass flow rate of air through the engine, percentage purge and the tube filling strategy is performed with an analytical model and a one -dimensional code based on the method of characteristics. Finally, in a sample engine des ign exercise a PDE based system is specified for which propulsive performance for steady flight is significantly greater than that of a ramjet .

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)0.000
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.088
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.205 · 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

Citations18
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue40th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference and ExhibitSame topicCombustion and Detonation ProcessesFrench-language works237,207