MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4293531533 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2110.08737

Pulsating propagation and extinction of hydrogen detonations in ultrafine water sprays

2021· preprint· en· W4293531533 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Yong Xu, Huangwei Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2021
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicCombustion and Detonation Processes
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Supercomputing Centre SingaporeTsinghua UniversityNational Research FoundationEgg Farmers of Canada
KeywordsDetonationExtinction (optical mineralogy)MechanicsShock waveMaterials scienceCombustionShock (circulatory)HydrogenVolume (thermodynamics)ThermodynamicsChemistryPhysicsOpticsExplosive material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Eulerian-Lagrangian method is applied to simulate pulsating propagation and extinction of stoichiometric hydrogen/oxygen/argon detonations in ultrafine water sprays. Three detonation propagation modes are found: (1) pulsating propagation, (2) propagation followed by extinction, and (3) immediate extinction. For pulsating detonation, within one cycle, the propagation speeds and the distance between reaction front (RF) and shock front (SF) change periodically. The pulsating phenomenon originates from the interactions between gas dynamics, chemical kinetics, and droplet dynamics inside the induction zone. Multiple pressure waves are emanated from the RF within one cycle, which overtake and intensify the lead SF. An autoigniting spot arises in the shocked gas after the contact surface. The relative locations of SF, RF, shock-frame sonic point, and two-phase contact surface remain unchanged in a pulsating cycle, but their distances have periodic variations. Moreover, the unsteady behaviors of detonation extinction include continuously increased distance between the RF and SF and quickly reduced pressure peaks, temperature, and combustion heat release. The decoupling of RF and SF leads to significantly increasing chemical timescale of the shocked mixture. The hydrodynamic structure also changes considerably when detonation extinction occurs. Moreover, the predicted map of detonation propagation and extinction illustrates that the critical mass loading for detonation extinction reduces significantly when the droplet size becomes smaller. It is also found that for the same droplet size, the average detonation speed monotonically decreases with water mass loading. However, detonation speed and pulsating frequency have a non-monotonic dependence on droplet size under a constant water mass loading.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.079
Threshold uncertainty score0.603

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.166
Teacher spread0.132 · 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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicCombustion and Detonation ProcessesFrench-language works237,207