Unsteady Aeroelastic Characterization and Scaling Relations of Flexible Membrane Wings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present a numerical study to characterize nonlinear unsteady aeroelastic interactions of two-dimensional flexible wings at high angles of attack. The coupled fluid–flexible wing system is solved by a body-fitted variational aeroelastic solver based on the fully coupled Navier–Stokes and nonlinear structural equations. Using the coupled fluid–structure analysis, this study is aimed to provide physical insight and correlations for the aeroelastic behavior of flexible wings in the parameter space of the angle of attack and the aeroelastic number. The phase diagrams of the aerodynamic performance are established to obtain the envelope curves of the optimal performance and determine the transition line of the drag variation. The effects of the angle of attack and the aeroelastic number on the aeroelastic behaviors are systematically examined. The time-averaged membrane deformation is positively correlated with a nondimensional number, the so-called Weber number. A new scaling relation is proposed based on the dynamic equilibrium between the aerodynamic force fluctuation and the combined inertia–elastic fluctuation. The unsteady aerodynamic force can be adjusted by manipulating the membrane vibration, the mass ratio, the Strouhal number, and the aeroelastic number. The numerical investigations provide design guidelines and have the potential to enhance the maneuverability and flight agility of micro air vehicles with flexible wing structures.
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".