Turbulence Models of Separated Flow in Shock Wave Thrust Vector Nozzle
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AbstractIn the present paper, based on typical jet flows in shock wave thrust vector nozzles, turbulence modeling in gas flow dynamics has been numerically explored in 2-D laval nozzle which has a secondary injection on one side of its divergent portion in order to simulate the complex strong pressure gradient and accurately capture flow separation point. Nine turbulence models have been adopted and assessed by comparing the obtained results which involve flow separation point and static wall pressure with the available experimental data. Another 3-D nozzle model is simulated using five different turbulence models and results are also compared with experimental data. The numerical results reveal that Goldberg's realizable k-epsilon model gives the best results compared with other models in predicting the shock wave position and separation point, while the SA model shows its advantage in predicting the static wall pressure under certain conditions compared to the Goldberg's realizable k-epsilon model. The computational results were analyzed and the change of the shock structure in different NPRs was discussed in laval nozzle with a secondary flow.Keywords: turbulence modelthrust vector nozzlestatic wall pressureshock wave
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it