MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1982499032 · doi:10.2514/6.2003-214

An Iterative Inverse Design Method Based on Aerodynamic Streamline Equations

2003· article· en· W1982499032 on OpenAlexaff
Jianzhong Yu, Farooq Saeed, Ion Paraschivoiu

Bibliographic record

Venue41st Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicComputational Fluid Dynamics and Aerodynamics
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAerodynamicsComputer scienceIterative methodInverseApplied mathematicsMathematical optimizationAlgorithmMathematicsMechanicsPhysicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aerodynamic characteristics are very sensitive to airfoil leading-edge geometry, and its accurate treatment is a limitation of many existing design methods. The objective of the present research is to develop an interactive inverse design method that is not only efficient but can also treat the leading-edge region accurately. In the formulation of the method, a small-perturbation geometric equation is deduced from the streamline momentum equations, the continuity equation, and the isentropic relations with the geometry similarity assumption of near streamlines to the airfoil surface. Moreover, the transonic correction is considered in the aforementioned equation with the assumption for the effects of waves reflected from the free surface (sonic line) because the method based on the surface flow values cannot take into account the transonic characteristics such as wave interference. The geometric perturbation normal to the airfoil surface is then calculated by solving this second-order initial value ordinary differential equation iteratively to obtain an airfoil design. Techniques such as airfoil smoothing, nonuniform relaxation, and the strained coordinate transfer are employed to accelerate convergence. The airfoil design cases demonstrate the remarkable efficiency and accuracy of the method not only for compressible flows but also for low-speed flows. Moreover, the method allows the leading-edge shape to be determined accurately and, thus, to overcome the deficiency of many of the related methods.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.534
Threshold uncertainty score0.823

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue41st Aerospace Sciences Meeting and ExhibitSame topicComputational Fluid Dynamics and AerodynamicsFrench-language works237,207