MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3130083703 · doi:10.1115/1.4050242

A Computationally Low-Cost Method for Capturing Airframe Flexibility Effects in Landing Dynamic Simulations

2021· article· en· W3130083703 on OpenAlexafffund
Terrin Stachiw, Fidel Khouli, Robert Langlois, Fred F. Afagh, Joseph Ricciardi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Computational and Nonlinear Dynamics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMechanical Engineering and Vibrations Research
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council CanadaCarleton University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMitacs
KeywordsAirframeTransfer functionFlexibility (engineering)Frequency responseFinite element methodAccelerationFrequency domainModalComputationFunction (biology)EngineeringComputer scienceControl theory (sociology)Structural engineeringAerospace engineeringMathematicsPhysicsAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Airframe flexibility effects have typically been captured by modal reduction of the airframe. Although efficient, this model may still be prohibitively expensive for preliminary design studies. This paper employs time- and frequency-domain system identification techniques to form a multi-objective optimization (MOO) problem to identify equivalent transfer functions representing airframe flexibility effects. Pareto-optimal sets are first identified for an equivalent transfer function of a force element between the landing gear (LG) attachment point and the center of gravity (CG) of a 150-passenger regional jet, and a second transfer function from the input LG force to the cockpit acceleration. The reduced models demonstrate the ability to generally capture flexibility effects with reduced computation times. The combination of time-domain and frequency-domain information ensures the positive time-history matches while the model remains physically realizable as it is rooted to frequency response obtained from the finite element model (FEM). It is hypothesized that this physical link allowed the model to be robust to the landing initial conditions.

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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.455
Threshold uncertainty score0.421

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.307 · 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
GenreMethods

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
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Computational and Nonlinear DynamicsSame topicMechanical Engineering and Vibrations ResearchFrench-language works237,207