Aeroelastic control of non-rotating and rotating wings using the dynamic stiffness modulation principle via piezoelectric actuators
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Carleton University’s Rotorcraft Research Group is working on the development of an active rotor control system that incorporates a mechanism for helicopter blade pitch dynamic stiffness modulation at the root, the Active Pitch Link. This system overcomes stroke limitations of smart material and attains superior performance for helicopter rotor-induced vibration reduction. The system was tested at the whirl tower facility and this article reports the achievements obtained with a dynamically similar hinged rotor blade model. Up to 100% reduction in the transmitted loads occurred at the target 2/rev frequency when the blade was excited by a transversal jet to mimic the asymmetric flow of the helicopter rotor in forward flight. An open-loop control algorithm optimized to a target higher-harmonic frequency of the rotor also minimized the impact on the rotor fundamental cyclic control frequency at 1/rev. In another experiment at University of São Paulo, semi-passive control techniques using shunted piezoelectric materials were investigated for the aeroelastic control of fixed wings. Flutter oscillations of a typical section were controlled out over a range of airflow speeds. Finally, the similarity between both control techniques is discussed and recognized that they are based on a dynamic stiffness modulation control principle.
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.
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 it