Hydrodynamic study of podded propulsors with systematically varied geometry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The paper presents results of an experimental study of the effects of geometric parameters on the propulsive characteristics of puller-podded propulsors in straight course open water conditions. The geometry variations of the pod that encases the motor and shaft of a podded propulsor have been guided primarily by the size of available motors. As motor design becomes more flexible, the relationship of various geometric parameters with respect to performance becomes an important design consideration. There are a number of geometric parameters that can be used to optimize the design of a pod and five were chosen for the current study (pod diameter, length and taper length, strut distance from the propeller plane, and propeller hub taper angle). Tests with 16 different pod-strut combinations were done using a custom designed pod dynamometer, which consists of a six component global dynamometer and a three-component pod dynamometer. The system was used to measure the thrust and torque of the propellers, and forces and moments on the full unit. The aim was to identify the most significant geometric parameters that affect propeller thrust, torque and efficiency as well as unit thrust and efficiency in the puller configuration.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".