MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407412982 · doi:10.2514/6.2025-0849

New Methodology for Aerodynamic Forces Calculations in Unmanned Aerial Systems Optimization Design

2025· article· en· W4407412982 on OpenAlexaff
Alexander Rubenstruk, Oscar Espinosa, Ruxandra Mihaela Botez

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAdvanced Aircraft Design and Technologies
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAerodynamicsAerospace engineeringAerodynamic forceComputer scienceDesign methodsControl engineeringEngineeringSystems engineeringMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study presents AeroStreamPy, a Python-based aerodynamic modeling tool developed to meet the specific design needs of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs). Traditional aerodynamic models like Digital Datcom and FDerivatives, while valuable, lack the flexibility and accuracy required for UAV-specific components such as tail booms and complex wing geometries. Physics-based models, including Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD), provide high fidelity but are resource-intensive, limiting their practicality for rapid UAV design and optimization. AeroStreamPy bridges this gap by combining empirical methods with physics-based potential flow techniques, offering a mid-fidelity model suited for UAV applications. Key features include OpenVSPAero and Athena Vortex Lattice (AVL) for efficient modeling of wings, fuselages, and nacelles under incompressible, inviscid flow, with adjustments for turbulence drag and compressibility effects up to Mach divergence. Validation studies demonstrate AeroStreamPy’s accuracy in calculating aerodynamic coefficients, with ongoing efforts to refine induced drag and interference modeling. Future work aims to integrate AeroStreamPy into optimization processes, and train a neural network-based surrogate model to significantly reduce computational time, enhancing UAV design and performance evaluation.

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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.192
Threshold uncertainty score0.324

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.262 · 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
GenreMethods

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Aircraft Design and TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207