MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2963939335 · doi:10.1063/1.5114012

Numerical modelling of detonation initiation via shock interaction with multiple flame kernels

2019· article· en· W2963939335 on OpenAlexaff
G. Bakalis, K. C. Tang Yuk, XiaoCheng Mi, Hoi Dick Ng, Nikolaos Nikiforakis

Bibliographic record

VenueAIP conference proceedings · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicCombustion and Detonation Processes
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDetonationShock (circulatory)MechanicsComputer scienceMaterials scienceAerospace engineeringPhysicsChemistryEngineeringExplosive material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study, the deflagration-to-detonation transition from the interaction of a shock wave with multiple laminar flame kernels is analyzed computationally. For comparison, both Euler equations and Navier-Stokes equations including the effects of viscosity, thermal conduction and molecular diffusion for an acetylene–air mixture model with a single-gas approximation are solved numerically to identify the dominant mechanism on the transition process. A finite-volume operating splitting scheme based on the 2nd order Godunov-type, Weighted Average Flux (WAF) method with an approximate HLLC Riemann Solver and second-order finite differences for the Navier-Stokes fluxes evaluation are used in the present computation. Adaptive mesh refinement (AMR) is employed to dynamically increase the resolution of a simulation in regions of interest around shocks, flame fronts and regions of large gradients in density using a hierarchical grid structure. The simulation results show that repeated shock–multiple flames and shock-boundary interactions lead to the acceleration of the original shock into unreacted material near the wall and subsequently the development of a hotspot explosion center. The Richtmyer-Meshkov instability caused by the interaction of the shock with subsequent flames also generates and maintains a highly turbulent flame brush. In the absence of physical diffusion in the Euler simulation, the enhanced burning rate of the turbulent flame brush is suppressed. Nevertheless, the intense flow fluctuations generated by the interactions of shocks, boundary and flames create the conditions under which deflagration-to-detonation can potentially occur at later times. A numerical study is also carried out to verify the effect of numerical grid resolution.

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 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.630
Threshold uncertainty score0.504

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.202 · 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.

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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAIP conference proceedingsSame topicCombustion and Detonation ProcessesFrench-language works237,207