MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2318926968 · doi:10.2514/6.2008-2266

Structural Dynamic Effects of Cables on a Sparse Aperture Deployable Optical Telescope

2008· article· en· W2318926968 on OpenAlexaff
Douglas Coombs, Roger M. Glaese, Vít Babuška, Lawrence Robertson, Brea Ingram

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Analysis and Optimization
Canadian institutionsCanadian Standards Association
FundersAir Force Research LaboratoryAir Force Office of Scientific Research
KeywordsTelescopeAperture (computer memory)Computer scienceRemote sensingOpticsPhysicsGeologyAcoustics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper will look at the quantitative effects of cables on a complex structure representative of stable optical metering structures. With the areal density of spacecraft decreasing while both the mass of cables and model accuracy requirements increase, it is increasingly important to understand the structural dynamic effects of cables. A ground based telescope test bed has been tested in both cabled and uncabled states. A system ID A, B, C, D model has been derived for both configurations and changes to modal parameters are examined. The effect of cables on the performance and stability of a controller designed around an uncabled structure is looked at. Changes to the structural dynamics were found to be dependent on the cable to base structure mass ratio. Small mass ratios on the order of 1⁄2% resulted in no appreciable modal changes. A mass ratio on the order of 3% resulted in a doubling of damping at specific modes, but no change in the natural frequencies. RMS responses varied, with piston decreasing from 8-19% and tip/tilt responses remaining mostly unaffected. At these small mass ratios the stability and performance of a low authority controller were unaffected.

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)0.001
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.183
Teacher spread0.178 · 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

Citations3
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicStructural Analysis and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207