MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4353065597 · doi:10.34133/space.0032

Multiphysics Numerical Simulation and Geometric Optimization of a Micronozzle for the MEMS Thruster

2023· article· en· W4353065597 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Xingchen Li, Haopeng Liang, Ruofan Zhang, Wen Yao, Xiaoqian Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueSpace Science & Technology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHeat Transfer and Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMultiphysicsMechanical engineeringMicroelectromechanical systemsNozzleHeat transferMicrofabricationEngineeringFinite element methodMechanicsMaterials scienceFabricationStructural engineeringPhysicsNanotechnology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper reports a numerical research on MEMS (microelectromechanical system) micronozzles through multiphysics coupling simulation along with design optimization based on simulation results. The micronozzle, which is a core component of the electrothermal microthruster, features a micron-scale geometry, a 2-dimensional (2D) Laval configuration, a rectangular cross section, and a highly thermal conductive silicon wall due to MEMS fabrication. As a result, viscous loss in the flow field and heat transfer to the nozzle wall can strongly influence nozzle performance, namely, thrust force and specific impulse. To accurately understand the flow field inside the micronozzle and how the highly thermal conductive silicon wall interacts with gas flow, a numerical simulation that couples fluid dynamics field and solid heat transfer field is employed in the research. The influence of different structural parameters on micronozzle performance is then investigated to set a basis for design optimization. The optimum design of the linear expander micronozzle is obtained through constrained optimization by linear approximation. To further improve micronozzle performance, the bell-shaped expander is adapted. The optimization result shows that the bell-shaped expander is not suitable for micronozzle featuring 2D Laval configuration, and the reason behind the phenomenon is thoroughly discussed.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.244 · 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

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpace Science & TechnologySame topicHeat Transfer and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207