MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2547685126 · doi:10.1177/1045389x16672565

Development of a morphing wing extrados made of composite materials and actuated by shape memory alloys

2016· article· en· W2547685126 on OpenAlexaff
J.-R. Poulin, Patrick Terriault, Martine Dubé, Pierre-Luc Vachon

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Intelligent Material Systems and Structures · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAeroelasticity and Vibration Control
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMorphingFinite element methodMaterials scienceShape-memory alloyComplex geometryParametric statisticsActuatorStructural engineeringWingComposite numberDisplacement (psychology)GeometryAerodynamicsMechanical engineeringEngineeringComposite materialComputer scienceMathematicsAerospace engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article focuses on the development of a shape morphing composite skin representing a wing extrados. The objective is to design and manufacture a skin capable of changing its geometry in order to improve its aerodynamic efficiency. One geometry is considered to be the nominal geometry and a deformed geometry is identified. It is obtained upon application of a displacement at the aftmost boundary of the active portion of the wing profile. The displacement is imposed on the skin by shape memory alloy wires. These actuators are combined with a self-locking transmission mechanism that maintains the deformed geometry without any further energy consumption. The lay-up of the composite skin is optimised such that the deformed profile approaches the desired geometry as closely as possible. This lay-up selection routine is done through an ANSYS Parametric Design Language sub-routine. The finite element model is validated experimentally by conducting mechanical testing on the composite skin.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.354

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.199 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations5
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Intelligent Material Systems and StructuresSame topicAeroelasticity and Vibration ControlFrench-language works237,207