MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2089278583 · doi:10.1115/imece2006-14464

Design and Dynamical Analysis of a SAR Membrane Antenna Deployable Structure

2006· article· en· W2089278583 on OpenAlexaff
Yu Shen, Steeve Montminy, Wanping Zheng

Bibliographic record

VenueAerospace · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Analysis and Optimization
Canadian institutionsCanadian Space Agency
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAntenna (radio)Computer scienceMechanism (biology)Synthetic aperture radarFrame (networking)RadarLinkage (software)SoftwareAerospace engineeringEngineeringPhysicsTelecommunicationsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Large deployable membrane antennas for Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) satellites have attracted much attention for their low mass, high packaging efficiency, and low fabrication cost. An extendible support structure (ESS) could be used to deploy and support a multi-layer membrane antenna in a precise configuration once it is deployed on orbit. In this paper, an ESS for a membrane antenna with several foldable frames is designed. The ESS can be synchronously deployed by a six-bar-linkage mechanism and several closed-cable loops. A kinematical model of the deployable mechanism is developed to obtain the optimal design of the mechanism for a goal of all foldable frames locked in a same plane after they are fully deployed. A dynamic model of the ESS is developed to investigate its dynamical performance. The goal of the simulation is to compare the dynamic performances of the ESS when the frames are regarded as rigid and flexible. The simulation results are obtained with symbolic dynamic analysis software DynaFlexPro.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

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 integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.178
Teacher spread0.174 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations4
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAerospaceSame topicStructural Analysis and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207