MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W56783536

ESTIMATION OF AERODYNAMIC CHARACTERISTICS OF A LIGHT AIRCRAFT

2006· article· en· W56783536 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Iskandar Shah Ishak, Shabudin Mat Lazim, Tholudin Mat Lazim, Mohd. Khir Muhammad, Shuhaimi Mansor, Mohd. Zailani Awang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAerospace and Aviation Technology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWind tunnelAerodynamicsComputational fluid dynamicsLift (data mining)DragEngineeringPitching momentFluentSubsonic and transonic wind tunnelAerodynamic forceAerospace engineeringAerodynamic dragAngle of attackLift-to-drag ratioMarine engineeringStructural engineeringSimulationComputer science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents the aerodynamic estimation carried out on a three-dimensional aircraft model by conducting wind tunnel tests and Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) simulation. The test model is a 15% scaled down from a two-seater light aircraft that is closed to the Malaysian made SME MD3-160 aircraft. This aircraft model has been tested at two different low speed tunnels, namely at Universiti Teknologi Malaysia’s tunnel (UTM-LST) test section sized of 2.0 x 1.5 m 2 , and at Institute Aerodynamic Research, National Research Council of Canada (IAR-NRC) sized 3.0 x 2.0 m 2 tunnel. The speed during testing at UTM-LST and IAR-NRC tunnels was up to 70 m/s, which corresponds to Reynolds Number of 1.3 x 10 6 . The longitudinal and lateral directional aerodynamic characteristics of the aircraft such as coefficients of pressure, forces (lift, drag and side force) and moments (roll, pitch and yaw moment) had been experimentally measured either using direct force measurement or pressure measurement method. The data reduction methods included the strut support interference factor using dummy image and the blockage correction had been applied in this wind tunnel tests. On top of the experimental study, simulation was also performed using a commercial CFD code, FLUENT. Experimental works at UTM-LST and IAR–NRC tunnel showed that the aerodynamic characteristics of this light aircraft were in good agreement with each other. Simultaneously, the aerodynamic forces obtained from the experimental works and CFD simulations had been compared. The results proved that they were agreeable especially at a low angle of attack.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.313
Threshold uncertainty score0.157

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.002
GPT teacher head0.175
Teacher spread0.173 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAerospace and Aviation TechnologyFrench-language works237,207