MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2057210481 · doi:10.1109/robot.2010.5509759

Design of an omnidirectional propulsion system for small jet-boats

2010· article· en· W2057210481 on OpenAlexaff
David Foley, Jean‐Sébastien Plante

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicShip Hydrodynamics and Maneuverability
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPropulsionJoystickOmnidirectional antennaNozzleRobustness (evolution)KinematicsRunwayHullComputer scienceEngineeringSimulationAerospace engineeringMarine engineeringPhysicsElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Jet-boats perform remarkably well at high-speed but lack low speed maneuverability for tight maneuvers such as ducking. This paper presents a low speed omnidirectional propulsion system controlled with a joystick for jet-boats. Two concepts are presented and evaluated. The first concept uses all original parts. The second concept uses a set of fix jet nozzles disposed around the hull. The position and angles of the nozzles are optimized with an index of omnidirectionality quality based on the projection of a set of force solutions on a shell with the shape of the desired force space. A 3D simulator backed by experimental results serves for the evaluation by potential customers of each design. The first concept exhibited poor maneuverability, as it offers ten times less force in sway than in surge. The optimized force space of the second concept is much more uniform, and was unanimously appreciated for its quality of low speed maneuverability. Both designs have been validated experimentally. The present work offers an omnidirectional propulsion system that is easy to enhance with advanced control laws. Velocity feedback control is given as example, and shows important improvement of maneuverability and robustness to miscalibration.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.844
Threshold uncertainty score0.246

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 designBench or experimental
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
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicShip Hydrodynamics and ManeuverabilityFrench-language works237,207