MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4245913177 · doi:10.32920/ryerson.14635626

Performance Prediction Analysis for Aero-Naut CAM Folding Propellers and its Application into CREATeV Solar Aircraft

2021· preprint· en· W4245913177 on OpenAlexaff
Hyun‐Woo Kim

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAdvanced Aircraft Design and Technologies
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPropellerFolding (DSP implementation)Parametric statisticsMarine engineeringPerformance predictionScalingEngineeringWork (physics)Computer scienceAerospace engineeringMechanical engineeringSimulationMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper investigates the performance prediction method for Aero-Naut CAM folding propellers through parametric studies of existing wind tunnel testing data. The application of the propeller into CREATeV ultra-long-endurance unmanned solar aircraft necessitated the availability of accurate performance estimates for its propeller-motor configurations. Performance coefficient prediction method based on scaling relationship of propeller geometry is discussed along with motor efficient prediction method and iterative propeller-motor performance optimization. Several important observations regarding performance scaling effect of Aero-Naut folding propellers and its impact on performance optimization are discussed. The resulting optimized propeller selections are proposed which would enhance mission capability of CREATeV. Finally, future work considerations and concluding remarks of the analysis is presented.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.220 · 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Aircraft Design and TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207