MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4205192783 · doi:10.2514/6.2022-2129

Physics-Based Ejector Force Model

2022· article· en· W4205192783 on OpenAlexaff
Eric Stenftenagel, Glenn Gebert

Bibliographic record

VenueAIAA SCITECH 2022 Forum · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydraulic and Pneumatic Systems
Canadian institutionsLockheed Martin (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInjectorAerodynamicsInertiaMechanicsMoment of inertiaAerodynamic forceFlow (mathematics)PhysicsHigh fidelityMechanical engineeringEngineeringClassical mechanicsAcoustics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

View Video Presentation: https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2022-2129.vid A critical part of the store separation analysis is the modeling of the ejector forces. Typically, such loading is included into separation simulation via a table look-up of the ejector forces either as a function of time or stroke of the ejector pistons. The values of the ejector forces are generally obtained by curve fitting experimental static ejection test data. Depending on the fidelity of the model, it may or may not consider the mass of the store in the force history, and such models virtually never consider the moments of inertia of the store or the aerodynamic loading at the time of ejection. This paper develops a model based on the physics of the flow within the ejector to account for the creation of ejector gases, losses in the system, and appropriate physical feedback of the store mass properties, aircraft loading, and the aerodynamics.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.055

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.005

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.191 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAIAA SCITECH 2022 ForumSame topicHydraulic and Pneumatic SystemsFrench-language works237,207