Oscillating Wing Loadings with Trailing-Edge Strips
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
The dynamic-load loops of an oscillating NACA 0012 airfoil, obtained from surface-pressure measurements, fitted with small full-span trailing-edge strips, positioned on the lower (i.e., the Gurney flaps) and/or upper (the inverted strips) surface at the wing trailing edge, of height of 1.6 and 3.2% of the airfoil chord were studied at Re = 1.07 x 105. The results show that, similar to a static wing, the Gurney flap concept was also fairly generally applicable, in terms of lift performance enhancement, to an oscillating airfoil, despite the large and small increases in the peak negative pitching moment and maximum drag force, respectively, as well as a promoted dynamic stall. The increase (decrease) in the nose-down pitching moment (dynamic-stall angle) can be alleviated by the use of inverted strips at the price of a reduced maximum lift coefficient. The asymmetric strips were found to provide a compromise in the dynamic aerodynamic performance between the regular and inverted Gurney flaps, including a 49-deg flap, of an oscillating airfoil. The present passive oscillating-wing C 1 -C d -C m control can be valuable, because it can be used as an experimental guideline for the active control of the dynamic stall and/or nose-down pitching moment via a spanwise trailing-edge flap.
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