Aerodynamic Flow-Off of Partially Evaporated Aircraft Ground Anti-Icing Fluids
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Holdover Time Guidelines published by Transport Canada for ground aircraft de/anti-icing fluids under different forms of freezing precipitation show that in frost conditions an SAE Type IV fluid can protect a wing from frozen deposits for up to 18 hours. If the forecast humidity is absent, however, then the fluid may dry out and may not flow off the wing a t take-off as prescribed. Three methods of drying out fluids were investigated and the aerodynamic acceptance of the partially evaporated fluids was assessed: (1) Fluids were dried out to a 20% weight reduction and their viscosity measured as per an existing fluid certification test. Results showed that one low viscosity measurement does not ensure aerodynamic performance at all temperature intervals; (2) Fluids were left overnight in a wind tunnel. Unfortunately, the humidity could not be controlled in this set-up; however, results showed that the aerodynamic performance of the exposed fluids was acceptable; and (3) Proportional dry out in a controlled temperature and humidity environment. This method was the most representative of real-life conditions. Results showed no change in the Boundary Layer Displacement Thickness for the fluids that had been dried out compared with fluids that had not been dried out. These tests suggest that fluids that are left exposed on an airplane wing overnight when no frost occurs, under low or reasonable humidity, will have acceptable aerodynamic flow-off, based on the AS5900 aerodynamic acceptance test.
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".