MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Load monitoring of aerospace structures utilizing micro-electro-mechanical systems for static and quasi-static loading conditions

2012· article· en· W2008957043 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Marcias Martinez, B. Rocha, Manhong Li, Guoqing Shi, Angela Beltempo, Robert G. Rutledge, Marko Yanishevsky

Bibliographic record

VenueSmart Materials and Structures · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Health Monitoring Techniques
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
FundersNational Research Council CanadaDefence Research and Development Canada
KeywordsQuasistatic processAerospaceStructural engineeringMaterials scienceMechanical engineeringEngineeringComputer scienceAerospace engineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The National Research Council Canada (NRC) has worked on the development of structural health monitoring (SHM) test platforms for assessing the performance of sensor systems for load monitoring applications. The first SHM platform consists of a 5.5 m cantilever aluminum beam that provides an optimal scenario for evaluating the ability of a load monitoring system to measure bending, torsion and shear loads. The second SHM platform contains an added level of structural complexity, by consisting of aluminum skins with bonded/riveted stringers, typical of an aircraft lower wing structure. These two load monitoring platforms are well characterized and documented, providing loading conditions similar to those encountered during service. In this study, a micro-electro-mechanical system (MEMS) for acquiring data from triads of gyroscopes, accelerometers and magnetometers is described. The system was used to compute changes in angles at discrete stations along the platforms. The angles obtained from the MEMS were used to compute a second, third or fourth order degree polynomial surface from which displacements at every point could be computed. The use of a new Kalman filter was evaluated for angle estimation, from which displacements in the structure were computed. The outputs of the newly developed algorithms were then compared to the displacements obtained from the linear variable displacement transducers connected to the platforms. The displacement curves were subsequently post-processed either analytically, or with the help of a finite element model of the structure, to estimate strains and loads. The estimated strains were compared with baseline strain gauge instrumentation installed on the platforms. This new approach for load monitoring was able to provide accurate estimates of applied strains and shear loads.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.275 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations15
Published2012
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSmart Materials and StructuresSame topicStructural Health Monitoring TechniquesFrench-language works237,207