Ground effect on a cropped slender reverse delta wing with anhedral and Gurney flaplike side-edge strips
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The ground effect on the aerodynamic coefficients of a cropped slender reverse delta wing equipped with anhedral and Gurney flaplike side-edge strips was investigated experimentally at Re = 3.82 × 10 5 . In a free stream, the 30% cropping was found to cause a minor reduction in lift C L and drag C D coefficients but a promoted stall compared to the noncropped wing. The anhedral caused further C L decrease and C D increase. Meanwhile, the application of side-edge strips produced a significantly increased C L and C D with a minor change to the C L / C D ratio as compared to the baseline wing. In ground effect, the cropped wing was, however, found to generate more lift compared to the noncropped wing as the ground was approached. The joint anhedral and SES produced a great increment in both C L and C D but a virtually unchanged C L / C D ratio compared to their outside ground effect counterparts. The larger the side-edge strips’ height the larger the increase in C L . In short, the cropping led to a weight reduction while the addition of anhedral and SES produced a large lift augmentation of the Lippisch-type wing-in-ground effect craft.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".