FENSAP-ICE in Aid of Certification: From CFD to Flight Testing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<div class="section abstract"><div class="htmlview paragraph">CFD-Icing (CFD-I) is a powerful companion to CFD-Aero (CFD-A) in the design and certification of new aircraft, rotorcraft and jet engines. It can drastically reduce the number of tunnel and flight tests, and their associated costs, by simulating on computers the full Appendix C and beyond such as is proposed in new Appendices D and O. It can also predict performance and moment coefficients in roll, pitch and yaw. These predictions can then be used in original certification or supplemental certifications to the type design, allowing mitigating potential hazards of flight-testing. This work presents an example of the application of FENSAP-ICE to predict 45 minutes of ice accretion on a RC-26B aircraft fuselage retrofitted by the addition of a FLIR sensor and a SATCOM antenna. The predicted aerodynamic penalties are compared with recorded flight test data obtained with simulated ice shapes. Of further interest is that two similar FLIR installations were tested with post-processed data to account for minor differences in the vertical dimension of the FLIR sensor installation. This validation campaign shows the ability of such second-generation CFD-I tools to properly model the impact of ice accretion, starting from clean aerodynamics, to water impingement, to ice accretion, to aerodynamic characteristics of contaminated aircraft.</div></div>
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".