Parametric study of an aircraft wing hot air anti-/de-icing system using numerical tools
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To design efficient anti/-de-icing systems for wing, appropriate conjugate heat transfer (CHT) methodology is helpful. Based on a design of experiment methodology, a parametric study of the heat ratio according to three design variables of the anti-icing system is presented. The anti-icing system geometry consists of a piccolo tube with three rows of round jets inside a swept wing based on NACA23014 airfoil. To model the anti-icing system, a conjugate heat transfer procedure from commercial CFD software is used to solve a cold air external flow, a compressible internal flow and the thermal conduction in the airfoil skin. Based on results available in literature, an appropriate test case for model validation is selected. Then, a description of the RANS equation model applied to a CHT problem and a short description of the finite volume based method are presented. Numerical results are compared against numerical results for a 3D hot air anti-icing. The Box-Behnken design of experiment methodology for three variables will be used to build a second order quadratic model of the heat ratio at the inlet and at the wing leading edge inner wall.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".