MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Investigation of the Influence of Laval Nozzle Throat Width via Euler-based Flow Simulation

2021· article· en· W3196763908 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Yu’ang Lu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Physics Conference Series · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRocket and propulsion systems research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNozzleMechanicsMach numberDischarge coefficientFlow (mathematics)Euler equationsDiscretizationEuler's formulaChoked flowPhysicsMechanical engineeringMaterials scienceMathematicsEngineeringSupersonic speedThermodynamicsMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The nozzle is a kind of widely used fluid equipment. It is very important to study its internal flow for improving nozzle performance or improving nozzle design. In this paper, the numerical simulation method based on the Euler equation is used to solve the flow in the nozzle. Euler equations are solved by an explicit finite difference method, including discretization, pre-estimation and correction steps. Boundary treatment for the subsonic inlet and supersonic outlet are discussed. The flow characteristics inside a Laval nozzle are analysed based on the numerical results. The influence of Laval nozzle throat width on the nozzle flow is investigated by comparing three nozzles. It is observed that the dimensionless pressure, temperature, and density of the three nozzles have similar trends. While the maximum Mach number at the outlet decreases with the increase of the throat width. In short, the throat width should be decreased if a larger outlet speed of the flow is needed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Physics Conference SeriesSame topicRocket and propulsion systems researchFrench-language works237,207