7. Thermal Management and Power Generation for Directed Energy Weapons (2010-01-1781)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Two recent studies highlight the unique cooling requirements of Directed Energy Weapons (DEW) and identify methods to address these requirements. Both systems generate substantial heat loads, one requiring more than 1 MW of cooling. Furthermore, much of the heat is generated within a small volume, resulting in a high heat flux. Both spray cooling with ammonia and microchannel heat exchangers with de-ionized water or ammonia were considered. In each case it was determined that the ultimate heat sink would be the ambient air. In one study the heat transfer process was more challenging due to a relatively narrow allowable temperature range and a maximum allowable temperature near the ambient air temperature. Heat transfer options considered the use of a liquid loop with either direct ram air cooling, an air cycle cooling system, and a vapor cycle cooling system. The latter options provided greater differential temperatures between the working fluid and ambient air, resulting in smaller and lighter systems at the expense of increased cooling system power requirements. Since neither of the systems studied operates continuously, the size and weight of some of the heat transfer components could be reduced by incorporating thermal storage capacity in the systems. For the duty cycles studied, the savings in overall system weight, size, drag, and power required was substantial. A thermal storage unit utilizing a paraffin-based phase-change material was developed and tested. Test results validated the performance models. Methods of power generation for DEW systems are also considered. Approaches include the use of existing power generation systems combined with batteries, high-power engine-mounted generators, bleed-air-driven generators, a novel bleed and burn concept, propellant power systems, ram air turbines, and generators driven by an auxiliary gas turbine engine.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.043 | 0.026 |
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".