MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2134696443 · doi:10.5589/q09-002

Improved transonic flutter analysis in the frequency domain using computational fluid dynamics

2008· article· en· W2134696443 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sean McTavish, Ryan Beaubien, Dániel Feszty, Fred Nitzsche

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian aeronautics and space journal · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAerodynamics and Acoustics in Jet Flows
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFlutterAeroelasticityTransonicAerodynamicsFrequency domainNonlinear systemTime domainComputational fluid dynamicsAerodynamic forceBoundary (topology)Domain (mathematical analysis)MechanicsControl theory (sociology)PhysicsMathematicsComputer scienceMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<Abstract>The flutter boundary of the AGARD 445.6 wing was calculated using time domain and frequency domain methods. A frequency domain correction procedure was developed to account for nonlinear aerodynamics in the transonic regime. Nonlinear lifting pressures obtained from unsteady rigid body pitching motion time domain simulations were used to correct the linearized aerodynamic matrices in the frequency domain. It was found that time domain computational fluid dynamics adequately predicted the flutter boundary of a wing. Although uncorrected frequency domain flutter analysis predicted a nonconservative flutter boundary, the corrected frequency domain results also adequately predicted the flutter boundary of the AGARD 445.6 wing. Additionally, nonlinear aerodynamic effects and their contributions to flutter can be analyzed with the corrected frequency domain technique within a few hours, representing significant time savings compared with aeroelastic time domain techniques.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.180
Threshold uncertainty score0.833

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.188 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian aeronautics and space journalSame topicAerodynamics and Acoustics in Jet FlowsFrench-language works237,207