Analysis of the Dynamics and Vibrations of Structures Subjected to Unsteady Aerodynamic Loads for Crack Detection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper is devoted to the analysis of the dynamics and vibrations of wing-like structures with bonded piezoelectric strips and subjected to unsteady aerodynamic loads for crack detection. Pairs of piezoelectric strips, acting as strain sensors, are bonded at the same locations on the opposite sides of a thin structure executing flexural oscillations. In this crack detection strategy, the measured voltage outputs of the two piezoelectric sensors forming a pair are conveniently subtracted in order to eliminate the voltage corresponding to the same level of strain on both sides. This differential voltage output is used to indicate the presence of a crack in the structure. The nonlinear mechanical behavior of the crack in the compression and extension phases of the oscillatory cycle increases substantially the sensitivity of this detection procedure. Furthermore, this crack detection method can take advantage of the aeroelastic oscillations of the wing structures, which are always present during normal flight evolutions of an aircraft. The numerical analysis of the dynamics of structure subjected to unsteady aerodynamic loads uses a finite element formulation for the structure and the piezoelectric strips and a panel method is used to compute the unsteady aerodynamic loads acting on the oscillating wing structure. Numerical simulation results are presented in the paper to explore the feasibility of this crack detection strategy by using the aeroelastic oscillations of the wing-like structures with bonded piezoelectric strips.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".