Convergence acceleration to a periodic steady state for aeroelastic simulations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A structural model in the frequency domain is developed to obtain aeroelastic solutions of a NACA64A010 in the transonic regime. Results from a fully nonlinear frequency domain flow solver and the structural model are compared to a state of the art time accurate flutter code. The prohibitive cost of using time accurate methods to solve problems in transonic aeroelasticity is introduced and then followed by an analysis of using a Non-Linear Frequency Domain (NLFD) approach. The computational cost and accuracy associated with using the NLFD method are compared with already established time accurate methods. In this work, an accurate representation of the transonic flutter boundary is obtained and compared to pre-existing numerical results, further substantiating the NLFD method's ability to account for strong nonlinearities in the flow field. The flight conditions considered herein are of a swept wing in the transonic regime, a test case extensively studied by Isogai. This research has further validated the NLFD method as an accurate and efficient alternative for computing aeroelastic solutions in the transonic regime.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".