MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3009338800 · doi:10.1017/aer.2020.19

Comparison and analyses of a variable span-morphing of the tapered wing with a varying sweep angle

2020· article· en· W3009338800 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Aeronautical Journal · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAeroelasticity and Vibration Control
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChord (peer-to-peer)WingWing twistAirfoilSwept wingAngle of attackMorphingCamber (aerodynamics)AerodynamicsWing configurationLift-to-drag ratioSpan (engineering)Structural engineeringStall (fluid mechanics)Lift coefficientWingspanWing loadingAircraft flight mechanicsAerospace engineeringComputer scienceEngineeringPhysicsMechanicsReynolds number

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT This work presents a comparative study of design and development, in addition, of analyses of variable span morphing of the tapered wing (VSMTW) for the unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV). The proposed concept consists in the sliding of the inner section into the fixed part along the wing with varying the angle of the inner section inside the fixed part (parallel with the leading edge and the moving-wing axis is coincident to the fixed-wing axis) within two configurations. The wing design is based on a NACA 4412 aerofoil with the root chord of 0.675m and the tip chord of 0.367m for the fixed segment and 0.320m for the moving segment. Morphing wing analysis occurs at three selected locations that have been specified for extending and modifying span length by (25%, 50%, and 75%) of its original length to fulfill various flight mission requirements. The main objective of this paper is to compare the aerodynamic characteristics for several span lengths and sweep angles and to find their most efficient combinations. The wing is optimised for different velocities during all phases of flight (min speed, loiter, cruise, and max speed) which are 17, 34, 51, and 68m/s, respectively. The analyses are performed by computing forces (drag and lift) and moments at various altitudes, such as at the sea level, at 5,000 and 10,000ft. Two-dimensional aerodynamic analyses are carried out using XFLR5 code, and the ANSYS Fluent solver is used for investigating the flow field on the three-dimensional wing structure. It has been observed that a variable span morphing of tapered wing technology with a variable sweep angle can deliver up to 32.93% improved aerodynamic efficiency. This concept design can also be used for the aircraft roll motion technique instead of conventional control devices. Furthermore, the range flight mission increases up to 46.89% when the wing is placed at its full length compared to an original position. Finally, it has been concluded from this study that the wing design is more sensitive to the changing angle of the inner section and more efficient in terms of aerodynamic characteristics.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.344
Threshold uncertainty score0.185

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.224 · 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