Conuduction Heating for Adhesive Bonding of Rotorcraft Primary Structure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A final stage in the manufacturing of a rotorcraft structural article is presented. A single-part composite skin is stiffened with a series of pre-cured composite frames. Legacy designs feature either mechanically fastened metallic skin and frames, or longitudinally split composite skin bonded and fastened to composite frames. In the new design, all frames are simultaneously bonded using a high-performance, thermally-activated film adhesive. No fasteners are used. This approach improved the load transfer, damage tolerance, and part count. The success of this complex bonding operation is highly dependent on the control of the process parameters, mainly the bondline temperature. Required temperature uniformity across all bondlines was achieved by independently controlled conductive Heat Transfer Tiles (HTT's) dedicated to each frame. The National Research Council's HTT technology delivers non-uniform heat flux based on variable thermal boundary conditions which results in improved temperature uniformity compared to traditional heater blankets. Custom HTTs, control system and fixturing were evaluated and used to manufacture seven test articles. The success of the exercise was confirmed by process data, non-destructive, destructive, and full-scale testing.
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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
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".