MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389584897 · doi:10.17118/11143/20891

RANS simulation and validation of self propulsion test of a bulkcarrier

2023· article· en· W4389584897 on OpenAlexafffund
Emre Cilkaya, Heather Peng, Mohammed Islam, Wei Qiu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicReal-time simulation and control systems
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council CanadaMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersTransport Canada
KeywordsReynolds-averaged Navier–Stokes equationsPropulsionComputer scienceTest (biology)Marine propulsionAerospace engineeringComputational fluid dynamicsEngineeringGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract: This paper presents numerical simulations of bare-hull resistance, open-water propeller performance, and self-propulsion of a PANAMAX bulk carrier model with a four-bladed fixed-pitch propeller using the RANS solver in the open-source Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) package OpenFOAM. The computational domains were generated using Star CCM+ and converted to OpenFOAM format using the ccm26ToFoam utility, except for the self-propulsion study, which was generated using the snappyHexMesh utility in OpenFOAM. Then the numerical results were compared with the available experimental data. The unsteady simulations were run in OpenFOAM and Star CCM+ for the bare hull at F n = 0.178 in order to compare the trim, sinkage, and free surface elevation. Secondly, the open-water hydrodynamic characteristics of the propeller were simulated with the Moving Reference Frame (MRF) and compared with the simulation results using Star CCM+. The OpenFOAM results for the resistance and open-water curve agree quite well with the StarCCM+ solutions and the experimental data. In addition, the predicted trim angles by OpenFOAM and StarCCM+ are very close, however, large discrepancies were found in trim and sinkage in comparison with experimental data. As a result, uncertainty analysis must be performed to understand the source of these discrepancies in the next stage of the study. Finally, a steady-state self-propulsion simulation was conducted for one rotational speed. It was observed that the predicted thrust and total resistance were very close, indicating the self-propulsion point.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score0.175

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 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
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicReal-time simulation and control systemsFrench-language works237,207