MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2335492052 · doi:10.2514/6.2009-5177

Steepness of Grain Geometry Transitions on Instability Symptom Suppression in Solid Rocket Motor

2009· article· en· W2335492052 on OpenAlexaff
Chris Baczynski, David R. Greatrix

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRocket and propulsion systems research
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSolid-fuel rocketInstabilityAerospace engineeringRocket (weapon)Materials scienceGeometryMechanicsPhysicsEngineeringMathematicsPropellant

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Research towards predicting and quantifying undesirable transient nonlinear axial combustion instability symptoms in solid rocket motors, and the various means for suppressing these symptoms, is being undertaken through the use of a comprehensive numerical model for internal ballistic simulation under dynamic flow, combustion and structural vibration conditions. In the present paper, as a follow-on study of area transition effects, the effect of the steepness of left-to-right internal propellant grain port geometry transitions in suppressing instability symptoms is comprehensively examined. Individual transient simulation runs for unstable cases show the evolution of the axial pressure wave and associated dc shift for the given grain geometry of a reference motor, as initiated by a given pressure disturbance. Limit pressure wave magnitudes are collected for a number of simulation runs for different grain area transition gradients, and mapped on an attenuation trend chart. Within the context of the present study, for one reference motor design and size, it is clear that steeper area transitions are more effective in suppressing wave development. When the effect of acceleration (through structural vibration of the propellant surface) on the combustion process is included in the numerical calculations, one observes substantial differences in burning and internal flow behavior in the presence of axial pressure wave activity, as reflected in individual firing simulations and the corresponding attenuation map.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.267 · 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

Citations12
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRocket and propulsion systems researchFrench-language works237,207