MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3034259591 · doi:10.2514/6.2020-2646

Mainstream Flow Prediction for the Thermal Risk Assessment of Aircraft Systems in Conceptual Design

2020· article· en· W3034259591 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAIAA AVIATION 2020 FORUM · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAdvanced Aircraft Design and Technologies
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConceptual designComputer scienceRisk assessmentThermalSystems engineeringEngineeringMechanical engineeringMeteorology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The capability to assess thermal aspects early in aircraft design is a key enabler for unconventional, more-electric, hybrid-electric or all electric aircraft configurations. This paper presents an extended version of a so-called thermal risk assessment approach for aircraft conceptual design. The assessment of thermal risk and the definition of a suitable cooling strategy during the conceptual design phase enables the anticipation of changes in the design process within a multidisciplinary design and optimization framework. In a previous paper, the application of dimensionless numbers was proposed as a way to assess the thermal environment of a considered aircraft zone and to predict the thermal risk of the systems with a limited number of inputs. This research paper investigates the relations between the locations of the aircraft systems within an equipment bay and the inlet and outlet sizes and locations. The concept of mainstream flow is introduced and new dimensionless numbers are established. The streamwise and the cross-stream numbers help to assess the cooling effectiveness due to the mainstream for a particular system in an equipment bay. Several case studies with different levels of complexity are presented to demonstrate the effectiveness of thermal risk assessment methodology. The results are validated using computational fluid dynamic simulations. The therefore enhanced thermal risk assessment approach will enable a more accurate definition of system thermal requirements within the aircraft conceptual design phase and will reduce the risk of potential thermal issues later in the design process.

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.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.965
Threshold uncertainty score0.340

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.222 · 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