Performance Wind Tunnel Testing of an X2 Technology® Mach-Scaled Powered Model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A 1/5th scale powered coaxial rotor and propeller system has been developed and tested in the National Full Scale Aerodynamic Complex (NFAC) 40x80 ft Wind Tunnel. Test conditions include airspeeds in excess of 250 kts, the highest recorded for a rotor in edgewise flight at the NFAC. The system was studied in four configurations: a powered coaxial rotor, a powered coaxial rotor with a propeller wake rake, a powered coaxial rotor with a powered propeller, and a bare hub rotor with a propeller wake rake. The high-quality data from the test included propeller, fuselage and main-rotor performance; aerodynamic-interactions between the rotors, fuselage, empennage, and propeller; acoustics and handling-qualities attributes. These results have been used to validate physics-based rotorcraft modeling tools and enhance the quality of full-scale X2 Technology® aircraft designs. Innovative solutions to test measurement challenges included rotor shaft strain gages, balance thermal control systems, and a dual arm rotating rake to measure inflow at the propeller plane. Main rotor hub and blade system performance trends are presented as functions of speed, thrust, and body attitude. Time-averaged and unsteady pressure measurements on the fuselage, empennage, and propulsor plane characterized the interactions between the fuselage, rotor hubs and blades, empennage, and propeller over a wide range of operating conditions.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".