Analysis of the stress wave effect during coal breakage by a high-pressure abrasive air jet
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In view of the defects of borehole collapse, inhibition of gas desorption and migration of gas existing in hydraulic fracturing and other hydraulic permeability–increasing measures for soft coal seams with low-permeability technology is proposed for coal breakage by a high-pressure abrasive gas jet for relieving pressure and increasing permeability. The comparative analysis of gas jet flow field structure between convergent nozzle and Laval nozzle has been given by numerical simulation. For Laval nozzle, the expansion wave and compression wave alternate and move forward steadily in gas jet and vanish when potential core length reaches maximum. So, the Laval nozzle can form more stable flow filed structure of gas jet and avoid shock wave in gas jet. Furthermore, a high-speed camera is adopted to analyze the jet structure and verify the conclusion of numerical simulation. Based on thermodynamic theory, this article calculates and analyzes the critical local sound velocity and pressure generated from the stress wave during the process of coal breakage by the gas jet. Furthermore, experimental coal breakage by a high-pressure abrasive gas jet is carried out. The high-pressure abrasive gas jet impacts the coal body as a quasi-static load and a dynamic load and forms corrosion pits on the surface of the coal body. Penetrating cracks are formed within the coal in the pattern of the loaded stress wave which leads to coal breakage. The effects of porosity and permeability on the propagation of the stress wave in coal are analyzed by establishing the dispersion equation for the spread of the stress wave in coal. The results show that porosity has a significant effect on wave velocity and that the attenuation of the stress wave is intensified with an increase in porosity. Moreover, the stress wave attenuation is more obvious at high frequency. The effect of permeability on the wave velocity is not significant at low frequencies. In contrast, at high frequency and relatively low permeability, the wave velocity increases with the permeability, and the attenuation of the wave velocity initially increases and then decreases. When the permeability is greater than 10 −11 m 2 , the wave velocity is not affected by the permeability. However, the stress wave is not attenuated.
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) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".