Hybrid Laminar Flow Control Activities within the Frame of Clean Sky 2
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Reducing the environmental footprint of passenger aircraft is one of the most important challenges the aircraft industry is facing today. A decrease of fuel burn and consequently also CO2 plays an essential role in defining next generation aircraft. Obviously, any means to lower cruise drag are to be explored, where Hybrid Laminar Flow Control (HLFC) is one promising option. By influencing the boundary layer of a wing section in a way that delays the transition of the flow from laminar to turbulent, i.e. by increasing the laminar flow wing surface region, a significant drag reduction can be achieved. Within the Clean Sky 2 programme HLFC activities were focused on maturing existing HLFC principles with the goal to provide solutions which can be easily adapted for industrial needs of aircraft manufacturers. During the last eight years the HLFC activities concentrated on developing and maturing manufacturing technologies for HLFC up to a Technology Readiness Level (TRL) 5/6. Moreover, an innovative and simplified HLFC system was elaborated and its system integration into a wing was demonstrated with a final maturity of TRL 4. This paper aims to give an overview of the work performed and describe the chosen design approach to achieve an overall solution for an HLFC wing. In the end, the final overall solution and its key features is explained on a ground-based demonstrator manufactured within the programme.
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".