MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3214540259 · doi:10.1115/imece2000-1711

Wind-Tunnel Determination of Aeroelastic Response of Piezoelectric and Aileron Controlled 3-D Wing

2000· article· en· W3214540259 on OpenAlexaff
Afzal Suleman, Curran Crawford, António P. Costa

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAeroelasticity and Vibration Control
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAileronAeroelasticityWingWind tunnelStructural engineeringAerodynamicsActuatorVibrationFlight control surfacesElevatorVibration controlEngineeringWing configurationAerospace engineeringAcousticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper presents the results of wind tunnel testing performed on a true three dimensional adaptive wing structure. The focus of this study was to test the aeroelastic response and control of a wing built with conventional stressed skins. The aeroelastic performance of the wing using traditional aerodynamic surface control methods is compared to the results obtained using piezoelectric actuators on the skins of the wing. Results are presented for the system identification, free stream vibration and buffeting tests performed in the wind tunnel. The design of the adaptive wing and control interface is discussed in addition to the experimental setup.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.862
Threshold uncertainty score0.455

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.192 · 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
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAeroelasticity and Vibration ControlFrench-language works237,207