MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Generating Pre-swirl Using Mesh Deformation

2024· article· en· W4404688503 on OpenAlexaffabout

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Heat Transfer
Canadian institutionsDefence Research and Development Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDeformation (meteorology)Computer scienceMaterials scienceComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Orca-class vessels of the Royal Canadian Navy are equipped with an open shaft arrangement that consists of three foil-shaped brackets: two that extend from the hull to support the propeller and shaft and a third that extends downwards from the hub. All brackets are located slightly forward of the propeller disc and therefore affect the propeller inflow. By manipulating the radial pitch distribution of these brackets, pre-swirl can be generated to counteract propeller induction and potentially reduce the energy lost to flow rotation. Rather than manually rotating the brackets using a computer-aided-design tool, mesh deformation is employed to twist the brackets using a single baseline geometry and mesh. The pitch distributions of the brackets are parameterized to facilitate a simplified design space exploration to determine if performance benefits can be realized in terms of power delivered and cavitation generation. Coupled viscous and potential flow calculations are used to consider the influence of the rotating propeller on the aft-ship region. Furthermore, a simplified one-way alternative is shown to provide similar results with a reduced computational requirement when compared to the typical iterative approach. In the preliminary design space exploration, it was found that applying twist to the outboard bracket permits a slight power reduction over the baseline case but comes with an associated penalty in cavitation behaviour.

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 score0.481
Threshold uncertainty score0.205

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 head0.223
Teacher spread0.212 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicFluid Dynamics and Heat TransferFrench-language works237,207