Shock wave configurations and reflection hysteresis outside a planar Laval nozzle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
When the pressure ratio increases from the perfectly expanded condition to the third limited condition in which a normal shock is located on the exit plane, shock wave configurations outside the nozzle can be further assorted as no shock wave on the perfectly expanded condition, weak oblique shock reflection in the regular reflection(RR) pressure ratio condition, shock reflection hysteresis in the dual-solution domain of pressure ratio condition, Mach disk configurations in the Mach reflection(MR) pressure ratio condition, the strong oblique shock wave configurations in the corresponding condition, and a normal shock forms on the exit plane in the third limited condition. Every critical pressure ratio, especially under regular reflection and Mach reflection pressure ratio conditions, is deduced in the paper according to shock wave reflection theory. A hysteresis phenomenon is also theoretically possible in the dual-solution domain. For a planar Laval nozzle with the cross-section area ratio being 5, different critical pressure ratios are counted in these conditions, and numerical simulations are made to demonstrate these various shock wave configurations outside the nozzle. Theoretical analysis and numerical simulations are made to get a more detailed understanding about the shock wave structures outside a Laval nozzle and the RRMMR transition in the dual-solution domain.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".