Install any skill in seconds. Free to start, no credit card required.
Get Started Free →Research, write, code, analyze, present, and develop proposals for thermal-fluid mechanical engineering work with source-aware rigor. Use for heat transfer, fluid mechanics, thermodynamics, HVAC, energy systems, turbomachinery, pumps, piping, CFD, experiments, correlations, standards, datasheets, papers, patents, AI/ML tools, computer vision, sequence regression, surrogate modeling, research coding, Overleaf, VS Code, GitHub, git, federal grant proposals, DOE/NSF/NASA-style narratives, invention
.claude/skills/ccplugins-mechanical-engineering-research/SKILL.md| Test case | Without → With | Effect | Δ tokens | Δ turns |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| case-03 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 105% | 0% |
| case-09 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 128% | 0% |
| case-14 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 173% | 0% |
| case-18 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 185% | 0% |
| case-06 | ✓→✓ | = Same ✓ | 126% | 0% |
Use this skill to research thermal-fluid systems with engineering rigor: define the question, collect reliable sources, preserve assumptions and validity ranges, and separate verified evidence from inference.
For full paper, proposal, review-article, thesis chapter, or major manuscript workflows, use an academic-research workflow as the scaffold when one is available, and use this skill as the thermal-fluid/mechanical-engineering judgment layer.
Treat the roles as:
When both are available, do not let a generic academic workflow overwrite domain judgment. Apply this skill whenever deciding whether the research question, gap, method, DOE, model assumptions, interpretation, figure narrative, or proposal significance is mechanically and thermally sound.
For a research brief, use:
For a literature review, read references/literature-review.md. Group sources by mechanism, method, design family, or unresolved question rather than listing papers chronologically.
For federal research proposals, DOE EPSCoR/National Laboratory partnership proposals, full narrative expansions, review-criteria responses, proposal figure planning, preliminary-results integration, or ready-to-submit proposal polishing, read references/proposal-development.md.
For a design comparison, include a compact decision matrix and explain the dominant physics behind each score.
For manuscript-style technical writing, read references/technical-writing-analysis.md before drafting or revising introductions, methods, modeling sections, results/discussion, data analysis, or plot narratives.
For full technical papers, journal manuscripts, or paper-style section drafting, also read references/paper-writing-style.md to match the preferred section logic, abstract style, figure-led results, and conclusion patterns.
For experiments, simulations, or parameter studies, use references/technical-writing-analysis.md to plan a detailed baseline case and hypothesis-driven DOE before proposing broad sweeps or large case matrices.
For research presentations or slide decks, read references/presentation-slides.md before creating slide outlines, slide content, speaker notes, or visual-story plans.
For AI/ML-assisted thermal-fluid research, read references/ai-tools-thermal-fluids.md before recommending computer vision, sequence regression, surrogate modeling, sensor fusion, dimensionality reduction, or data-driven control workflows.
For research code, scripts, notebooks, data pipelines, plotting code, CFD automation, or ML implementation, read references/research-coding.md before writing or reviewing code.
For research tool workflows involving Overleaf, VS Code, GitHub, or git, read references/research-toolchain.md before advising on manuscript collaboration, code/debugging workflow, repository updates, archival releases, branches, commits, tags, or reproducibility hygiene.
For innovation, invention disclosure, provisional patent support, utility patent technical content, or technology commercialization, read references/innovation-commercialization.md before drafting disclosure answers, non-confidential summaries, technical descriptions, figure lists, prior-art comparisons, market/use-case notes, inventor response emails, or commercialization briefs. Support the technical and strategic content, but do not provide legal advice; defer claim scope, filing strategy, assignments, declarations, and prosecution decisions to Technology Ventures and patent counsel.
Before finalizing, check whether the answer should account for:
When discussing CFD:
When discussing experiments:
Read references/brief-template.md when the user asks for a reusable research brief format, report outline, or deliverable template.
Read references/technical-writing-analysis.md when the user asks for technical writing, manuscript sections, data analysis, figures, plots, or results discussion.
Read references/paper-writing-style.md when the user asks to write, revise, outline, or polish a journal paper, conference paper, manuscript, abstract, introduction, methods, results/discussion, conclusion, or paper-style technical narrative.
Read references/literature-review.md when the user asks for a literature review, related-work section, research background, citation map, state-of-the-art comparison, review figure/table, future-work analysis, or paper discovery strategy.
Read references/proposal-development.md when the user asks for grant/proposal development, solicitation alignment, pre-application expansion, DOE EPSCoR or National Lab partnership narratives, collaborator document planning, review-criteria mapping, milestones, preliminary-results integration, proposal figures, reviewer-friction diagnosis, references, or ready-to-submit polish.
Read references/presentation-slides.md when the user asks for presentation slides, a research talk, conference talk, group-meeting slides, slide-by-slide narrative, speaker notes, animation/video suggestions, or figure-focused storytelling.
Read references/ai-tools-thermal-fluids.md when the user asks about AI tools, machine learning, computer vision, BubbleID, SeqReg, CFDTwin, DataDroid-LAM, MEEG-54403, sensor fusion, surrogate modeling, dimensionality reduction, thermal-fluid datasets, or ML-enhanced data analysis.
Read references/research-coding.md when the user asks for coding help, research scripts, notebooks, data processing, plotting, reproducibility, simulation automation, CFD post-processing, ML implementation, repository organization, or code review.
Read references/research-toolchain.md when the user asks about Overleaf writing/editing, VS Code coding/debugging, GitHub repo updating or archiving, git branches/commits/tags/releases, repository hygiene, manuscript-code-data synchronization, or reproducible project handoff.
Read references/innovation-commercialization.md when the user asks for invention disclosure, Technology Ventures, Sophia disclosure, provisional patent, utility patent application support, patent counsel feedback, USPTO filing support, notice of allowance/grant tracking, licensing, startup/commercialization strategy, non-confidential summaries, or translating research results into protectable/commercializable technology.
| Case | Status | Duration (ms) | Turns | Tokens | Tool calls | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | ||
case-01 | fail→fail | 49,604 | 45,212 | -9% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 8,273 | 9,986 | +21% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-02 | fail→fail | 49,787 | 44,311 | -11% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 8,269 | 9,849 | +19% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-03 | fail→pass | 17,452 | 38,723 | +122% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,616 | 5,352 | +105% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-04 | fail→fail | 14,770 | 23,730 | +61% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,247 | 5,291 | +135% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-05 | fail→fail | 18,042 | 38,606 | +114% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,453 | 6,156 | +151% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-06 | pass→pass | 15,924 | 19,472 | +22% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,259 | 5,112 | +126% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-07 | pass→pass | 34,809 | 29,001 | -17% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,294 | 7,097 | +115% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-08 | fail→fail | 16,574 | 23,799 | +44% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,416 | 5,361 | +122% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-09 | fail→pass | 13,361 | 15,187 | +14% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,890 | 4,305 | +128% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-10 | fail→fail | 16,043 | 23,790 | +48% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,846 | 6,364 | +124% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-11 | fail→fail | 19,696 | 22,272 | +13% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,880 | 5,319 | +85% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-12 | pass→pass | 22,705 | 24,153 | +6% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,202 | 5,762 | +80% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-13 | pass→pass | 15,910 | 16,150 | +2% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,018 | 4,331 | +115% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-14 | fail→pass | 15,645 | 21,615 | +38% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,087 | 5,704 | +173% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-15 | pass→pass | 13,728 | 19,114 | +39% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,051 | 4,998 | +144% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-16 | pass→pass | 10,643 | 25,467 | +139% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,823 | 6,163 | +238% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-17 | pass→pass | 18,755 | 18,205 | -3% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,703 | 4,692 | +74% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-18 | fail→pass | 17,410 | 33,325 | +91% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,637 | 7,522 | +185% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-19 | pass→pass | 16,744 | 18,262 | +9% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,498 | 4,670 | +87% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-20 | fail→fail | 16,478 | 19,534 | +19% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,335 | 4,807 | +106% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-21 | pass→pass | 42,856 | 36,115 | -16% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 4,516 | 8,746 | +94% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-22 | fail→fail | 15,110 | 29,679 | +96% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,508 | 4,254 | +70% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-23 | pass→pass | 5,807 | 15,315 | +164% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 696 | 4,230 | +508% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-24 | pass→pass | 12,187 | 21,051 | +73% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,695 | 5,035 | +197% | 0 | 0 | — |
DecimalAI ran this skill against gemini-3.6-flash twice over the same eval suite — once with the skill loaded and once without — and compared the two runs case by case. 24 cases were attempted. The headline lift of +17 percentage points is the difference between those two pass rates over the 24 comparable cases. 1 case got worse with the skill loaded, and it is included in that figure.
Without the skill loaded, the model failed this case. With it loaded, the same prompt on the same model passed. This is one improved case from the latest verified run; every case, including any that regressed, is in the table above.
Other measured skills in the registry, with their headline benchmark lift.