MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1968630044 · doi:10.2514/6.2003-1576

Investigation of Weight Reduction in a Thrust Reverser Cascade Using Aerodynamic and Structural Integration

2003· article· en· W1968630044 on OpenAlexaff
Joseph Butterfield, Hui Yao, Emmanuel Bénard, Mark Price, Richard K. Cooper, D. Monaghan, Cecil Armstrong, Raghu Raghunathan

Bibliographic record

Venue44th AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics, and Materials Conference · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHeat Transfer and Optimization
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAerodynamicsCascadeReduction (mathematics)Computer scienceAerospace engineeringEngineeringMathematicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper focuses on the design of a cascade within a cold stream thrust reverser, see Figure 1. Methodologies for weight reduction during the design process are established using the simulation methods of computational fluid dynamics (CFD) and finite element analysis (FEA). Aerodynamic and structural simulations were carried out using realistic operating conditions for three different design configurations. Results show that total reverse thrust decreased by 0.28% when the aerodynamic performance of the deformed cascade vanes was compared to the un-deformed case. This shows that for the conditions tested, the deformation of the cascade vanes had no significant affect on aerodynamics. Although the degree of reverse thrust was reduced by 9% for two weight reduced designs, it was found that in both cases, the maximum air speed within the thrust reverser was sub-sonic. The maximum airspeed was above Mach 1 for the original design. The cascade vanes in the weight reduced designs will therefore, not be subjected to the shock waves associated with supersonic air flow. Having reduced cascade weight by 5% and then 10% by modifying the vane configurations, it was found that the structural performance of the cascade vanes improved with significantly reduced levels of vane displacement and stress. The affect of any design changes on lifecycle cost and ease of component manufacture will also have to be taken into consideration before any firm conclusions are drawn regarding the final cascade configuration.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0020.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations5
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venue44th AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics, and Materials ConferenceSame topicHeat Transfer and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207