MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2334705585 · doi:10.2514/6.2003-4669

Transient Shock Wave Interaction with Rocket Nozzle - Cold-Flow Study

2003· article· en· W2334705585 on OpenAlexafffund
Harmanjit Singh Chopra, David R. Greatrix, J. G. Kawall

Bibliographic record

Venue39th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference and Exhibit · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicComputational Fluid Dynamics and Aerodynamics
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPropellantShock waveNozzleMechanicsShock tubeRocket (weapon)Transient (computer programming)Solid-fuel rocketShock (circulatory)Rocket engine nozzleProjectileAerospace engineeringRocket engineFlow (mathematics)Materials sciencePhysicsEngineeringComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A potential supporting mechanism, with respect to axial combustion instability behavior in solid -propellant rocket motors, is gasdynamic wave reinforcement in the vicinity of the nozzle convergence. An experimental and numerical study has been undertaken to examine the various aspects surrounding the interaction of an incident trave ling normal shock wave on a motor’s exhaust nozzle. A cold -flow experiment, based on a shock tube scheme tailored to the present application, proved useful in providing information surrounding the interaction process. Both experimental and numerical result s confirmed the existence of transient radial wave development of a substantial level superimposed on the base reflected axial shock wave; there is the potential for such transverse wave activity to instigate an augmentation of the local propellant burning rate in the aft port region. Nomenclature

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 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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.421
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.197 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations3
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue39th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference and ExhibitSame topicComputational Fluid Dynamics and AerodynamicsFrench-language works237,207