Dynamic modelling and stability of hingeless helicopter blades with a smart spring
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The aeroelastic stability of a uniform, untwisted hingeless ‘smart’ helicopter rotor blade in hover has been analysed. The concept of a ‘smart’ blade is achieved by implementing a piezoelectric stack at an appropriate location along a host blade such that upon actuation it enters the load path becoming an integral part of the host structure. Thus, the stiffness characteristics of the rotor are altered causing modal damping augmentation of the blade. The perturbation equations of motion for the ‘smart’ blade that describe the unsteady blade motion about the equilibrium operating condition are obtained using Galerkin’s method. These differential equations with periodic time coefficients are analysed for stability utilising the Floquet method. Six different regimes of actuation are investigated, and a parametric study is carried out by considering six different design cases. It is shown that, compared to a ‘host’ blade the stability characteristics of the ‘smart’ blade are not affected adversely. In fact, a judicious design and actuation of the ‘smart’ spring has the potential of improving the stability boundaries of individual blades.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".