MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403188028 · doi:10.3390/aerospace11100818

Shock Wave and Aeroelastic Coupling in Overexpanded Nozzle

2024· article· en· W4403188028 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueAerospace · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicComputational Fluid Dynamics and Aerodynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAeroelasticityShock (circulatory)NozzleShock waveMechanicsPhysicsAerodynamicsThermodynamicsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The growing demand for increasing the engine power of a liquid rocket is driving the development of high-power De-Laval nozzles, which is primarily achieved by increasing the expansion ratio. A high-expansion-ratio for De-Laval nozzles can cause flow separation, resulting in unsteady, asymmetric forces that can limit nozzle life. To enhance nozzle performance, various separation control methods have been proposed, but no methods have been fully implemented thus far due to the uncertainties associated with simulating flow phenomena. A numerical study of a high-area-ratio rocket engine is performed to analyze the aeroelastic performance of its structure under flow separation conditions. Based on numerical methodology, the flow inside a rocket nozzle (the VOLVO S1) is analyzed, and different separation patterns are comprehensively discussed, including both free shock separation (FSS) and restricted shock separation (RSS). Since the location of the flow separation point strongly depends on the turbulence model, both the single transport equation and two-transport-equation turbulence models are simulated, and the findings are compared with the experimental results. Therefore, the Spalart–Allmaras (SA) turbulence model is the ideal choice for this rocket nozzle geometry. A wavelet is used to analyze the amplitude frequencies from 0 to 100 Hz under various pressure fluctuation conditions. Based on a clear understanding of the flow field, an aeroelastic coupling method is carried out with loosely coupled computational fluid dynamics (CFD)/computational structural dynamics (CSD). Some insights into the aeroelasticity of the nozzle under separated flow conditions are obtained. The simulation results show the significant impact of the structural response on the inherent pressure pulsation characteristics resulting from flow separation.

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.

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 score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.441

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.198 · 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