Study of Helicopter Optimal Autorotation Landing Procedure in Tail Rotor Drive Failure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper investigates the optimal landing trajectory and control procedure when a helicopter undergoes autorotation due to tail rotor drive failure (TRDF), in which an optimal control methodology is proposed. First, a helicopter flight dynamics model with TRDF was developed. Then, the autorotation in TRDF was converted to be a nonlinear optimal control problem, solved by direct node collocation method and sequential quadratic programming algorithm. Finally, a model helicopter (Z11) with single main rotor and tail rotor was used to demonstrate the proposed approach. An optimal autorotation landing procedure in TRDF was determined accordingly. Results indicate that the airframe will immediately respond to the excess torque generated by the main rotor via yawing, sideslip and rolling when TRDF occurs. The pilot is recommended to shut down the engine and perform a series of critical operations to stabilize the violent yaw and roll movements. In addition, flight test data were used to validate the numerical simulations of autorotation landing. The proposed optimal control approach provides a useful tool to investigate helicopter TRDF autorotation landing procedure.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".