Performance of dynamic azimuthing podded propulsor
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents results and analyses of an experimental study into the effects of static and dynamic azimuthing conditions on the propulsive characteristics of a puller podded unit in open water. The model propulsor was instrumented to measure thrust and torque of the propeller, three orthogonal forces and moments on the unit, rotational speed of the propeller, azimuthing angle and azimuthing rate. The model was first tested over a range of advance coefficients at various static azimuthing angles in the range of −180° to 180°. These tests were followed by tests in which the azimuthing angle was varied dynamically at certain azimuthing rate and propeller rotational speed. A comparative study of the performance coefficients at static and dynamic azimuthing conditions in the range of −180° to 180° is presented. The performance coefficients of the propeller and the pod unit showed a strong dependence on the propeller loading and azimuthing angle. The coefficients in static azimuthing conditions fit well with a 10th order polynomial fit of the data obtained in the dynamic azimuthing condition in the corresponding azimuthing angles and advance coefficient. An uncertainty analysis of the measurements is also presented.
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 | 0.000 | 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".