MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2070461558 · doi:10.2514/6.2004-1588

Variable Stiffness Spar Wind-Tunnel Model Development and Testing

2004· article· en· W2070461558 on OpenAlexaff
James R. Florance, Jennifer Heeg, C. Victor Spain, Thomas G. Ivanco, Carol D. Wieseman, Peter Lively

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAerodynamics and Fluid Dynamics Research
Canadian institutionsLockheed Martin (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSparVariable (mathematics)StiffnessWind tunnelMarine engineeringEngineeringGeologyStructural engineeringAerospace engineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The concept of exploiting wing flexibility to improve aerodynamic performance was investigated in the wind tunnel by employing multiple control surfaces and by varying wing structural stiffness via a Variable Stiffness Spar (VSS) mechanism. High design loads compromised the VSS effectiveness because the aerodynamic wind-tunnel model was much stiffer than desired in order to meet the strength requirements. Results from tests of the model include stiffness and modal data, model deformation data, aerodynamic loads, static control surface derivatives, and fuselage standoff pressure data. Effects of the VSS on the stiffness and modal characteristics, lift curve slope, and control surface effectiveness are discussed. The VSS had the most effect on the rolling moment generated by the leading-edge outboard flap at subsonic speeds. The effects of the VSS for the other control surfaces and speed regimes were less. The difficulties encountered and the ability of the VSS to alter the aeroelastic characteristics of the wing emphasize the need for the development of improved design and construction methods for static aeroelastic models. The data collected and presented is valuable in terms of understanding static aeroelastic wind-tunnel model development.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.194 · 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

Citations23
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAerodynamics and Fluid Dynamics ResearchFrench-language works237,207