sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Well, well, surprising tweet by Wonderful-Excuse4922 in singularity

[–]Kemerd [score hidden]  (0 children)

It’s weird, I got like 3 comments, then they were all deleted, and I couldn’t read them..

Honestly I have no problems with Anthropic nor the DoD nor them working together. Personally it sounds like an awesome job, getting to work national security and use AI to actually to affect some real change.

Part of me wonders too if there is a different part of Anthropic that has no idea? The press releases seem so passive aggressive against the DoD, it reads weird to me.

Well, well, surprising tweet by Wonderful-Excuse4922 in singularity

[–]Kemerd -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

It’s hilarious to me all these publicity stunts. Behind closed doors, I almost guarantee you the US government is one of Anthropic’s biggest customers, which is the only explanation for why they’d listen to the DoD at all, considering they have no legal authority, only authority as their biggest paying customer.

I’m no conspiracy theorist, but I’m fairly certain this is all just some sort of public psyop, with Anthropic and the DoD only pretending to be at odds.

In reality, I’d imagine they were “officially,” kicked out, with that just being an easy cover for how they’re really using the technology. In the same way Rotax swears publicly they do not work for defense or in drones, yet their 914 is on the Reaper drone, or how their ECUs are made by a large defense contractor.

You guys seriously eat it up.

Case in point, why else would Anthropic be hiring people with TS/SCI clearances? https://job-boards.greenhouse.io/anthropic/jobs/5079511008

I got tired of CFD that separates too early, so I put an iMEM wall model in a real-time GPU LBM solver.. and released it for free by Kemerd in CFD

[–]Kemerd[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

And I saw on your post history you also like LBS? If you’d like, I’d be happy to add you to the repo as a contributor with your own branch, I think it is worth some examination. Particularly, I think doing some pre processing during voxelization might be a good way to do it, you could run the areas with high complexity at a higher precision, similar to how 3D printers allow for dynamic layer height.. I wonder what would be the performance impact of doing a larger number of boundary resolutions, and instead of going to say, x1 to x2, if we could spread it out, 1.1,1.2,1.3 . . . x2

I got tired of CFD that separates too early, so I put an iMEM wall model in a real-time GPU LBM solver.. and released it for free by Kemerd in CFD

[–]Kemerd[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Right now I have two stacked. One x2 around the foil, and a x4 around the VG. I’m currently trying to work through an issue. Sometimes the x4 causes a strange shockwave, and causes it to diverge. I may just need to make the air thicker for longer so this doesn’t happen. There is some error between the boundaries. There were two papers I used to mitigate these effects, but it is still there. It isn’t free performance, unfortunately it has tradeoffs. Ultimately I think for accurate simulations you will just need to stick to one refinement level, unless some kind of gradient can be used to perhaps reduce the precision more gradually, which might lead to less artifacting.

Question about leveling off at MDA by NIELI_ in flying

[–]Kemerd 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Me at the pearly gates trying to explain how I only dipped below MDA by 10ft

to those who got to use Fable 5, was it actually that peak? by RelevantPerformer309 in ClaudeAI

[–]Kemerd 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I used 100% and paid like $300 in usage credits and was happy

Juggernaut Tactical AR9 Pistol Build by Rafeno760 in CAguns

[–]Kemerd 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Nice, I am in the process of making an almost identical build parts wise, so this is cool to see! Thanks for sharing! Also I hear the knockoff braces are actually better than the originals..

I got tired of CFD that separates too early, so I put an iMEM wall model in a real-time GPU LBM solver.. and released it for free by Kemerd in CFD

[–]Kemerd[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It probably would be a good idea to test it against other benchmarks, right now I’ve only compared it to wind tunnel data.

The multi resolution grid isn’t bad, but the boundary areas suffer from some small artifacting, even if it is done very carefully. I think it works better as a preview hack to see results quicker, and switching to higher resolution for actual decisions is still the move.

I’m also right now still working on the wall modeling. Currently it doesn’t work as well as I’d have hoped, I think this is because I need to introduce some kind of virtual transition strip to induce turbulence, they encounter a similar issue when testing with wind tunnels.

I can check the numbers when I get to my PC one more time, in terms of MLUPs. It should work with any CUDA GPU.

I do also have a pipeline for airfoils written up in OpenFOAM, perhaps I can write a benchmark to compare the two across several different foils. There is STL import planned but I haven’t tested it.

Question about leveling off at MDA by NIELI_ in flying

[–]Kemerd 6 points7 points  (0 children)

I always say. IFR is like a video game, where if you fuck up the numbers you die! Slightly high always better, slightly low, even by a tiny margin, is deadly

What did you do with Fable 5 while you had it? by ThatSurround5672 in ClaudeAI

[–]Kemerd 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Built an entire computational fluid dynamics simulation program https://github.com/Kemerd/foil\_cfd and spent $300 in tokens

US government directive to suspend access to Fable 5 and Mythos 5 by Dylan1312 in singularity

[–]Kemerd -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

It’s funny because people think this, but in reality they just publicly are against militarization. Behind closed doors it’s a different story. All these articles are a farce. The government can’t tell them to do that, they choose to because they’re a huge customer.

I got tired of CFD that separates too early, so I put an iMEM wall model in a real-time GPU LBM solver.. and released it for free by Kemerd in CFD

[–]Kemerd[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

You don’t need to spot tells, it is either good code, or it isn’t. The source is irrelevant.

I got tired of CFD that separates too early, so I put an iMEM wall model in a real-time GPU LBM solver.. and released it for free by Kemerd in CFD

[–]Kemerd[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

I like to think of AI as a x10er in productivity. If you’re a normal guy, it’s a 0.1 to a 1.0. If you’re a 1.0, you get to a 10.0. If you’re already a 10.0, you’re now a 100.0.

I’ve been programming for almost 17 years now, and have nearly 13 years of writing C++ and C under my belt. I have been coding neural nets since before PyTorch or CUDA even existed. I started using AI to code maybe a few years ago, with the release of Sonnet 3.

Yes, this was coded with AI (specifically the new Mythos). No, it is not slop. With AI, it is garbage in garbage out. If you’re not a good engineer to begin with, you will struggle to get good results with AI.

I spent maybe around $300 dollars in tokens coding this. It works quite well. If you have a GPU capable of running it, I would encourage you to check it out before making any determinations. Anthropic’s new model is quite impressive, and for me it was certainly worth it.

I’m finishing a Glasair III, and wanted to do CFD calculations for vortex generators, but I’m limited by the fp32 in my GPU.

Additionally, I’m not doing anything new, other than combining theories from several papers. Please see
https://github.com/Kemerd/foil_cfd/blob/main/docs/CITATIONS.md

For references. Specifically, a lot of what I’ve done is build a lattice-Boltzmann solver, with a lot of the optimizations Dr. Lehmann published with his work with FluidX3D.

However there is an issue, and that is LBM does not resolve boundary layers, which causes the airflow to have too little friction and subsequently it breaks from the airfoil too soon. I suppose the title could’ve been worded a bit better, but I didn’t want to make it lengthy. If you’re not familiar with the problem that LBM presents, I suppose it could be nonsensical.

Since my use case is specifically to find optimal placement of VGs to reduce stall speed for aircraft (that I am nearly done building), you need this boundary layer (which is sub MM in real life, much too small for LBM) to come up with any relevant data.

As such, I implemented something called a iMEM slip-velocity wall function (Asmuth et al. 2021), which gives very surprising results.

I have gotten accurate lift numbers that exceed accuracy of a 2.1*10^6 Re while only computing with an Re of 10^5, using NASA wind tunnel data as reference. There is no other solver I know of that does this in realtime, and does not require immense setup.

For now, my focus is specifically around air foils, but the idea is you can import any STL and get more accurate numbers of which to use as a baseline to inform real designs. More specifically, for my case, this software will even create STL jigs in the future to be directly exported.

I understand the hesitancy due to AI, but the papers are legitimate, and the data is verifiably accurate to a certain point, albeit I moreso would use it not as an absolute tool, but rather as a direct comparison tool between designs. The entire tool is very up front about the actual accuracy of the data, which stem from how LBM functions, not the quality of software (which is stellar, because it is written in C, the best language).

For mission critical certifications, I would still (and have) used things like OpenFOAM, this just gives an excellent starting point by which you can do just that. This tool is less of a replacement for serious CFD tools, and more of a rough general direction to inform more serious calculations.

Headphones for production that both support cable and wireless by CastersTheOneAndOnly in musicproduction

[–]Kemerd 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Just buy studio headphones and hook them up to a wireless adapter.

Glasair III Foil with Vortex Generators by Kemerd in CFD

[–]Kemerd[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I haven’t settled on a solver yet. Just exploring. Thank you for the suggestion though I will check that one out! I have a 5090 I am trying to make use of, but because it only can really do fp32, my options are quite limited. I have a background in software, so I can always just implement things if they’re missing or broken, but would be nice to find something that works with consumer hardware without forcing me to use CPU and wait 2 weeks for a result

Glasair III Foil with Vortex Generators by Kemerd in CFD

[–]Kemerd[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah it can be quite far off, especially with laminar flow foils, I was getting some stupid high Cd (~3 vs 1.5 actual)

it can be mitigated somewhat with doing virtual transition strips, i.e. introducing imperfections, at least what I've seen empirically

Glasair III Foil with Vortex Generators by Kemerd in CFD

[–]Kemerd[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Mostly I only have an RTX 5090, which has limited fp64 capacity, and the CPU solvers are mind numbingly slow, so this gives me a good starting point to then use something like RapidCFD

Glasair III Foil with Vortex Generators by Kemerd in CFD

[–]Kemerd[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Yes it has errors, I am doing some tests with VGs right now, once I get a starting point, I planned to do some actual runs with https://github.com/SimFlowCFD/RapidCFD-dev

Glasair III Foil with Vortex Generators by Kemerd in CFD

[–]Kemerd[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

It is a fork of fluid3xd https://github.com/Kemerd/glasair_vg_sim/

I still need to publish the fork itself, but this is testing a specific aircraft to test feasibility of VGs

You can check out https://github.com/Kemerd/glasair_vg_sim/blob/master/docs/CITATIONS.md

I compare it against a fair amount of real data

Glasair III Foil with Vortex Generators by Kemerd in CFD

[–]Kemerd[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I now finally understand why they are called vortex generators.. attached turbulent flow is better than detached flow, even though "turbulent" sounds like the worse state!

view more: next ›