MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2792315056 · doi:10.1088/1361-665x/aab860

Dynamic analysis of an SDOF helicopter model featuring skid landing gear and an MR damper by considering the rotor lift factor and a Bingham number

2018· article· en· W2792315056 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueSmart Materials and Structures · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicVibration Control and Rheological Fluids
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEngineeringBingham plasticLift (data mining)Structural engineeringLanding gearMagnetorheological fluidDamperControl theory (sociology)Computer sciencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The present study addresses the performance of a skid landing gear (SLG) system of a rotorcraft impacting the ground at a vertical sink rate of up to 4.5 ms −1 . The impact attitude is assumed to be level as per chapter 527 of the Airworthiness Manual of Transport Canada Civil Aviation and part 27 of the Federal Aviation Regulations of the US Federal Aviation Administration. A single degree of freedom helicopter model is investigated under different values of rotor lift factor, L . In this study, three SLG versions are evaluated: (a) standalone conventional SLG; (b) SLG equipped with a passive viscous damper; and (c) SLG incorporated a magnetorheological energy absorber (MREA). The non-dimensional solutions of the helicopter models show that the two former SLG systems suffer adaptability issues with variations in the impact velocity and the rotor lift factor. Therefore, the alternative successful choice is to employ the MREA. Two different optimum Bingham numbers for compression and rebound strokes are defined. A new chart, called the optimum Bingham number versus rotor lift factor ‘ <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" overflow="scroll"> <mml:mi>B</mml:mi> <mml:msup> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi>i</mml:mi> </mml:mrow> <mml:mi>o</mml:mi> </mml:msup> <mml:mo>−</mml:mo> <mml:mi>L</mml:mi> </mml:math> ’, is introduced in this study to correlate the optimum Bingham numbers to the variation in the rotor lift factor and to provide more accessibility from the perspective of control design. The chart shows that the optimum Bingham number for the compression stroke is inversely linearly proportional to the increase in the rotor lift factor. This alleviates the impact force on the system and reduces the amount of magnetorheological yield force that would be generated. On the contrary, the optimum Bingham number for the rebound stroke is found to be directly linearly proportional to the rotor lift factor. This ensures controllable attenuation of the restoring force of the linear spring element. This idea can be exploited to generate charts for different landing attitudes and sink rates. In this article, the response of the helicopter equipped with the conventional undamped, damped, and MREA based SLG are numerically simulated using three sets of Bingham numbers. Namely, an underestimated, optimum, and overestimated Bingham number for every stroke. The simulation results depict that the only feasible solution is when the MREA generates the optimum damping force corresponding to the optimum Bingham numbers. Under this circumstance, the MREA utilizes the available energy absorption stroke to attain a soft landing. Furthermore, in the rebound stroke, the optimum damping force resettles the helicopter to its equilibrium position and prevents oscillations after the end of the rebound stroke.

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.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.867
Threshold uncertainty score0.387

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.231 · 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