design_robustness Namespace Reference

Functions
	solve (cfg)
	main ()

Detailed Description

Does a design survive the things the model is NOT sure about?

    python3 scripts/design_robustness.py configs/<design>.yaml

A converged run tells you the design is self-consistent. It tells you nothing about how
much of the answer rests on a number nobody measured. This sweeps the three that carry
real uncertainty and re-solves the design AS WRITTEN at each point.

Read the "Cd got" column. ``inlet_geometry`` resolves Cd inside
``cd_inf_from_orifice_diameter`` and overrides ``Cd_inf``, so a sweep that only sets
``Cd_inf`` silently does nothing -- measured, 0.72 / 0.76 / 0.80 all returned exactly the
same thrust until this script cleared ``inlet_geometry`` too. Any sweep of this model must
report the value it actually achieved, not the one it asked for.

Three knobs carry real uncertainty, and none of them is settled by a converged run:
  eta_c*  -- 0.95 here vs a 0.87 published comparable for this propellant/class
  Cd      -- 0.80 is an inlet-geometry correlation, not a flow test
  Pc      -- the throat grows as the graphite recesses
Each is swept INDEPENDENTLY through its plausible range and the design re-solved as written.

Function Documentation

main()

design_robustness.main

(

)

Definition at line 33 of file design_robustness.py.

References main(), and solve().

Referenced by main().

solve()

design_robustness.solve

(

cfg

)

Definition at line 27 of file design_robustness.py.

Referenced by main().