Development of a Spacial Dynamic Handling and Securing Model for Shipboard Helicopters
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Maritime helicopters have the ability to greatly increase the range of influence and utility of naval vessels.For smaller ships in rough seas, flight deck motion becomes considerable and additional infrastructure is required for securing and traversing helicopters while on-deck.The current state-of-the-art in dynamic modelling of the on-deck helicopter/ship dynamic interface includes a fully spacial securing simulation and one capable of modelling planar traversing and manoeuvring operations.A fully spacial securing and manoeuvring simulation named SSMASH (Spacial Securing and Manoeuvring Analysis for Shipboard Helicopters) has been developed to provide complete analysis capability of the on-deck helicopter/ship dynamic interface.Specifically, a new capability to model helicopter response to manoeuvring events in the presence of flight deck motion is realized.The SSMASH simulation is modeled with twelve degrees-of-freedom and mass coupling between the helicopter body and wheel carriages.A five degree-of-freedom tire model is used to extend the model capability to include ground handling characteristics.The model has been validated against the state-of-the-art securing simulation Dynaface R and experimental data from land-based manoeuvring trials.Excellent correlation with the Dynaface R simulation is achieved, while good correlation with the experimental data is observed as well.Improvements to the modelling of grip-limited tire behaviour would likely improve agreement with experimental helicopter responses for some manoeuvres.iii Dedicated to my family, for teaching me that anything is possible.I would also like to thank my fellow researchers of the Applied Dynamics Group.Whether it meant reviewing and critiquing my modeling approach, troubleshooting coding problems, sharing L A T E X knowledge, or simply lending an ear, they were always available and willing to help.I wish you all the best for your own research efforts and careers.The relentless support, encouragement, and patience from my family and the love of my life, Natasha Skanes, has helped me work through the long nights and difficult times.I am grateful to have such people in my life.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".