Evaluation of Influences of Changed Lower Cover Geometry on Kerosene–Air Interaction in a Scramjet Combustor
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The fuel in a scramjet combustor must be injected into a high-speed crossflow and mixed with supersonic air in a very short period of time in order for the scramjet jet to operate reliably. More generally, the supersonic air is produced by the lower cover, similar to a Laval type nozzle, of the scramjet combustor. However, significant variation in lower cover geometry is prone to produce unstable vortexes. The unstable vortexes are accompanied by nonuniform stress and strain and are detrimental to the lower cover, even to the combustor. Inspired by mechanical design, this study proposes to change lower cover geometry by decreasing its sizes and then evaluates effects of these changes on kerosene fuel-air interaction in the combustor. The evaluation is based on three-dimensional computational fluid dynamics with couple level set and volume of fluids, which characterizes the penetration height, span expansion area, shock wave angle, and Sauter mean diameter of kerosene jets for three different injection diameters (0.5, 1.0, and 1.5 mm). The simulated air-kerosene interactions reasonably agree with the past numerical findings at identical working conditions. This result demonstrates the effectiveness of the changed lower cover geometry for the scramjet combustor.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".