How Industry Concepts of Concurrent Engineering Enhance Aircraft Design Education
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Two student projects are described including the intended goals, the approaches taken, the tools used, and what was learned from the exercises. An international collaborative teaching protocol between Ecole Polytechnique de Montreal and the Royal Institute of Technology (KTH) was exercised in aircraft design education. Poignantly, a novel instructive design process using the analogue of contemporary concurrent engineering practices in industry was implemented. The idea was to strategically assign multi-disciplinary design tasks to each Partner University in accordance with their respective competencies. The university-industry coupling was initiated by request for proposals and corresponding marketing requirements and objectives produced by Bombardier Aerospace in Montreal, Canada. Two MATLAB TM-based tools were prominent in facilitating the capstone aircraft design projects. They included: Quick Conceptual Aircraft Research and Design, a computer-aided conceptual design engineering system; and TORNADO, a Vortex-Lattice code for computing aerodynamic characteristics. The result of the two exercises was found to benefit the participating industry, the educational establishments involved, and the students carrying out the projects.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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 it