Design of an Experimental Test Rig for Shrouded and Open Rotors for Small Rotary Wing Unmanned Aerial System
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study details the design and testing of a custom test rig for evaluating the performance of both open and shrouded rotors. The rig includes a two-axis load cell that is directly connected to the rotor to measure the rotor thrust separated from the total thrust when testing shrouded rotors and ensure accurate torque measurements, independent of external structural influences. Moreover, a main load cell is used to measure the total thrust for both configurations (open and shrouded rotor), as it is connected to the entire setup. Rotor RPM is monitored by capturing the voltage frequency from the BLDC motor, controlled using a Pololu Maestro Controller through the electronic speed controller. A shunt resistance is used to calculate the current through the electric Brushless Direct Current (BLDC) motor and by measuring the voltage, the electric power is calculated. By combining both mechanical and electrical power measurements, the BLDC motor’s efficiency is calculated. Automated data collection is conducted using National Instruments DAQ systems, with averaged measurements of thrust, torque, RPM, current, and voltage. Two rotors are tested to obtain performance data for both open and shrouded configurations. Additionally, a computational study is carried out to account for the aerodynamic effects of the rig’s structural elements. Uncertainty analysis is employed to assess the reliability of the experimental results by quantifying the numerical errors associated with both random and systematic errors encountered during the rotor’s performance evaluation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".