MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3204383421 · doi:10.4271/01-15-01-0002

Linearization of Aircraft Landing Equations of Motion with Airframe Flexibility Effects

2021· article· en· W3204383421 on OpenAlexaff
Terrin Stachiw, Fidel Khouli, Robert Langlois, Fred F. Afagh

Bibliographic record

VenueSAE International Journal of Aerospace · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAerospace Engineering and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAirframeFlexibility (engineering)AeronauticsLinearizationAerospace engineeringLanding gearEquations of motionMotion (physics)Computer scienceEngineeringMathematicsPhysicsClassical mechanicsNonlinear systemArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The conventional approach in aircraft landing loads analysis, such as for shock absorber development, is using a nonlinear set of equations and a modal representation of the airframe. For preliminary shock absorber design studies, a linearized set of equations may provide a highly efficient simulation method to limit the parameter space of linear shock absorber models. This article develops a set of linearized equations of motion to simulate the landing touchdown event while capturing airframe flexibility effects using a transfer function. The linearized flexible model demonstrates the ability to generally capture flexibility effects and output responses of interest with a significantly reduced simulation time compared to both fully flexible and nonlinear reduced-order models. The linearization of a Fiala tire model is accomplished by scaling the longitudinal tire stiffness such that the peak tire drag force matches that of the nonlinear model, and the vertical tire stiffness is obtained from a linear regression of a nonlinear vertical force versus deflection curve through an expected range of tire deflection.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSAE International Journal of AerospaceSame topicAerospace Engineering and Control SystemsFrench-language works237,207