MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2621585124 · doi:10.4050/f-0070-2014-9638

AFP Monocoque Composite Tailboom Full Scale Fatigue Testing

2014· article· en· W2621585124 on OpenAlexaffabout

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMechanical Engineering and Vibrations Research
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council CanadaBell Helicopter Textron (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComposite numberScale (ratio)Structural engineeringMaterials scienceComposite materialComputer scienceEngineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes two phases of full scale testing performed on a Bell Helicopter Textron Canada Limited (BHTCL) composite monocoque tailboom manufactured using Automated Fiber Placement (AFP). This technical demonstrator tailboom was designed for use on a Bell 407 model as part of a collaboration program with Bombardier Inc., Composite Atlantic Ltd. and the National Research Council Canada (NRC). The tailboom cone consisted of a skin made from an AFP layup of carbon epoxy fiber tape combined to a hand layup made from fabric. The skin is then bonded to six hand layup frames. The fatigue test objectives were to validate the component to flaw tolerant safe life requirements and establish damage tolerance to light and medium caliber ballistic impacts. The test article, containing embedded flaws, impact damages, and representative repairs, was subjected to a full four lifetime fatigue test at NRC. All testing during this phase was conducted at 250 °F 'hot-dry' conditions to simulate operating temperatures seen in service. The test article successfully sustained four lifetimes of fatigue testing, followed by residual strength testing to both limit and ultimate loads. In the second phase of the full scale testing, the article was subjected to six ballistic impacts with deadweights replicating a critical load condition in the field, interspersed with short 'go-home' fatigue cycling in the laboratory. Regular inspections and near-real-time data analyses were performed throughout testing. No permanent deformation, new damage or existing damage growth was sustained by the tested composite components during the fatigue tests, subsequent residual strength tests, or fatigue loads following ballistic impact, thereby proving the flaw and damage tolerance capability of the structure.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMechanical Engineering and Vibrations ResearchFrench-language works237,207