MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2056040929 · doi:10.1115/detc2003/dac-48801

Optimization of Helicopter Air Intake Scoop Design

2003· article· en· W2056040929 on OpenAlexafffund
Dapeng Wang, G. Gary Wang, G.F. Naterer

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAdvanced Aircraft Design and Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsFinite element methodSCOOPIcingShape optimizationPenalty methodComputational fluid dynamicsComputer scienceMultidisciplinary design optimizationMechanical engineeringThermal conductionEngineeringStructural engineeringMathematical optimizationAerospace engineeringMaterials scienceMathematicsMultidisciplinary approach

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, a global optimization technique based on the Adaptive Response Surface Method (ARSM) is integrated with a Control Volume Finite Element Method (CVFEM) for thermofluid optimization. The objective of the optimization is to improve the thermal effectiveness of an aircraft de-icing strategy by re-designing the cooling bay surface shape. By optimizing objective function in terms of the de-icing strategy and shape of the intake scoop, the best performance of the helicopter engine is achieved. This design problem is implemented on two different physical models. One model involves a heat conduction finite element analysis (FEA) process and the other combines the heat conduction and potential fluid flow FEA processes. Based on the comparison between the ARSM predicted results and the plotted objective function, it is observed that the integrated technique provides an effective method for thermofluid optimization. It also shows that the ARSM has a good flexibility to work with the computationally intensive process, e.g. CVFEM, and, potentially, could be developed and applied to the multidisciplinary design optimization (MDO) due to its open structure.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.205 · 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

Citations2
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Aircraft Design and TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207