Application Of De-Laval Nozzle Transonic Flow Field Computation Approaches
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A supersonic expansion cannot be achieved within a convergent-divergent nozzle if the flow velocity does not reach that of the sound at the throat. The computation of the flow field characteristics at the throat is thus essential to the nozzle developed thrust value and therefore to the aircraft or rocket it propels. Several approaches were developed in order to describe the transonic expansion, which takes place through the throat of a De-Laval convergent-divergent nozzle. They all allow reaching good results but showing a major shortcoming represented by their inability to describe the transonic flow field for nozzles having a small throat radius. The approach initially developed by Kliegel & Levine uses the velocity series development in terms of the normalized throat radius added to unity instead of solely the normalized throat radius or the traditional small disturbances theory approach. The present investigation carries out the application of these three approaches for different throat radiuses of curvature. The method using the normalized throat radius added to unity shows better results when applied to geometries integrating small throat radiuses.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".