The Evolution of Dragonfly's Design Using CFD at Titan
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents the development and application of a computational fluid dynamics (CFD) modeling approach for the Dragonfly rotorcraft lander, a NASA New Frontiers mission to study prebiotic chemistry on Titan, Saturn's largest moon. The primary CFD approach uses Siemens Digital Industries Simcenter STAR-CCM+ to generate a large database of aerodynamic loads for various flight phases, including Preparation for Powered Flight (PPF), Transition to Powered Flight (TPF), and surface flights. The mid-fidelity CFD approach relies on a steady-state Reynolds Averaged Navier Stokes (RANS) and Virtual Disk Blade Element Momentum Theory (BEMT) model to produce the aerodynamic loads for more than 3000 flight conditions. The CFD was used with Gaussian Process Regression (GPR) to create a surrogate model for predicting aerodynamic loads, aerodynamic performance, handling qualities and control margins; the surrogate is queried over 10 billion times during flight dynamics analyses. Higher fidelity CFD runs, using CREATE-AV Helios, were conducted to build confidence in the midfidelity approach and understand its limitations. The results demonstrate the effectiveness of the CFD approach in supporting the design and maturation of the Dragonfly lander from Preliminary Design to Critical Design and provide valuable insights into the complex aerodynamics of the vehicle during various flight phases.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it