Analyzing the Performance of a Hovering Ducted Rotor in Ground/Wall Effects to Improve the Controlling Aspects of VTOL Vehicles in Confined Spaces
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper examines ground/wall effects on a ducted fan, with the aim to improve the handling quality of an unmanned aerial vehicle targeted for operations in confined spaces. In order to do this, flow field at different configurations of the fan-ground-wall is visualized computationally in Fluent. Herein the standard k-ε model and the non-equilibrium wall function are used to model the turbulence while the fan is modeled using the Virtual Blade Model (VBM). It is shown that in ground effects thrust is larger at distances relatively close to the ground. Adding a wall introduces an asymmetry to the flow which produces a considerable amount of horizontal force attracting the fan towards the wall. Moreover, in presence of the wall, the total thrust reduces slightly. The paper also describes the observation that at sufficiently close distances between the fan and the wall/ground, a large portion of the downwash re-enters to the fan which causes significant performance loss.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".