MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416003784 · doi:10.1063/5.0300953

Optimization of Laval nozzle structure for gas mixture of NH3–O2 combustion products and CO2–H2O by response surface methodology

2025· article· en· W4416003784 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nianduo Song, Xin‐Lin Xia, Xiaolei Li

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics of Fluids · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicCombustion and flame dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsResponse surface methodologyNozzlePropellantCombustionThrustInletCoupling (piping)Propulsion

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ammonia is a promising alternative fuel, and the nozzle plays a critical role as a core component in ammonia-fueled hypersonic propulsion systems. This study combines response surface methodology (RSM) with computational fluid dynamics (CFD) simulations to optimize the geometric configuration and combustion performance of the ammonia-fueled Laval nozzle. The RSM is adopted for optimizing the thrust by adjusting the nozzle's geometric parameters and the inlet parameters of the Laval nozzle. The CFD's results demonstrate that the quadratic effect of the throat radius and the interaction between the inlet and throat radii are critical for thrust optimization. The response surface models have demonstrated significant potential in enhancing nozzle thrust. The thrust is increased by 2% through adjusting the geometric parameter of the nozzle. Optimizing inlet parameters indicates that higher inlet temperatures (1073.15 K) and higher oxygen concentrations (12%) enhance the chemical kinetics efficiency of ammonia combustion, thereby improving the conversion of thermal energy into kinetic energy. The thrust increased by 37% under the optimal inlet parameters obtained through response surface optimization. The effectiveness of RSM in multi-variable optimization is verified, and the mechanism of multi-parameter coupling effects on hypersonic ammonia combustion dynamics is revealed.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.287
Threshold uncertainty score0.452

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysics of FluidsSame topicCombustion and flame dynamicsFrench-language works237,207