MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2333994778 · doi:10.2514/6.2009-6140

Comprehensive Aerodynamic Modeling of a Small Autonomous Helicopter Rotor at All Flight Regimes

2009· article· en· W2333994778 on OpenAlexaff
Sepehr P. Khaligh, Farbod Fahimi, Mehdi Saffarian

Bibliographic record

VenueAIAA Modeling and Simulation Technologies Conference · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAerospace and Aviation Technology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAerodynamicsAerospace engineeringRotor (electric)AeronauticsHelicopter rotorFlight dynamicsComputer scienceEnvironmental scienceEngineeringMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Helicopter aerodynamic modeling has always received growing attention especially in the applications such as model-based control design for the helicopter UAVs, in which the vehicle model is of utmost importance to obtain a satisfactory performance. This article is an attempt to derive a general aerodynamic model for the small helicopters in the steady flow regimes. The actuator disc concept together with blade-element theory has been widely used in the helicopter performance calculations for many years. Based on this approach, a more comprehensive analytical model of the blade aerodynamics has been developed in this paper, by incorporating the vehicle velocity and angular velocity vectors into the model, which makes it suitable for the rotorcraft modeling and control in general flight scenarios. The simulation results for different flight regimes verified the correctness of the proposed model, and an experimental setup is used to verify the helicopter aerodynamic model around hover.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.211 · 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

Citations7
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAIAA Modeling and Simulation Technologies ConferenceSame topicAerospace and Aviation TechnologyFrench-language works237,207