MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2972694487 · doi:10.4050/f-0075-2019-14481

Preliminary Design of a Highly Efficient VTOL System Based on Tethered Fixed-Wing Aircraft

2019· article· en· W2972694487 on OpenAlexaffabout
John Bass, Etienne Demers Bouchard, Nicolas Courtois, Francis Marois, Dino Mehanovic, Richard-Alexandre Peloquin, David Rancourt, Andrew Bellocchio, Arthur Murphy, Michel Lacerda, Daniel Schrage

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRocket and propulsion systems research
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFuselagePayload (computing)Fixed wingWingControl reconfigurationAerospace engineeringElevatorAutomotive engineeringTrajectoryEngineeringRotor (electric)Computer scienceSimulationMechanical engineeringEmbedded system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

2016, to form their 34th Student Design Competition around designing an aircraft capable of hovering for a duration of 24 hours with a 176 lb (80 kg) payload. This paper presents the preliminary design of the Swarm, a configuration of the Electric Powered Reconfigurable Rotor (EPR2 ) concept, drafted by the joint Universite de Sherbrooke and Georgia Tech team. The Swarm, comprised of a central fuselage tethered to three electrically propelled unmanned fixed-wing aircraft flying in a circular trajectory, achieves its goal through rotor reconfiguration. Throughout the flight, the fixed-wing aircraft modify their trajectory and airspeed to optimize performance and minimize fuel burn rate. A hybrid-electric powerplant in the fuselage supplies power via conductive tethers to the fixed-wing aircraft. The design and reconfiguration were optimized using a 2-step time-marching optimization. The designed system greatly exceeds the competition requirements by accomplishing 31 hours of hover flight using readily available technologies and COTS components. The Swarm, weighing a maximum of 2,700 lb (1,224 kg), requires only between 62 and 120 hp (46-89 kW) to perform hover out of ground effect. Safety, reliability and maintenance analyses were also conducted, in addition to estimating production and operational costs of the system.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.152
Threshold uncertainty score0.722

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)0.0000.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRocket and propulsion systems researchFrench-language works237,207