MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6904833518 · doi:10.14621/ce.20160202

A fuel saving way in aerospace engineering based on morphing wing technology: a new multidisciplinary experimental model

2016· article· en· W6904833518 on OpenAlexfundvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueNPARC · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPlasma and Flow Control in Aerodynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaConsortium de Recherche et d’innovation en Aérospatiale au Québec
KeywordsMorphingWingAirfoilAileronDragWind tunnelAerospaceAirplaneWing loading

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The research presented in this present paper was done within the framework of the international CRIAQ MDO505 Morphing Wing project, developed as a collaborative research project between academia, research centres and industry partners. The work exposed in the paper is related to the development of an experimental morphing wing model and its performance evaluation by using some wind tunnel tests. This collaborative research aimed at the drag reduction over a wing by morphing it, conducting in this way at fuel savings and low emissions. The association between the drag reduction and wing morphing comes from the fact that if the wing airfoil shape is changed in a specific way then the laminar to turbulent flow transition point position can be moved toward its trailing edge. The model designed, fabricated and tested during our project is based on the dimensions of a full scale wing tip structure, equipped with a morphable flexible upper surface made from composite materials and deformed by using four miniature electrical actuators, with an array of 32 Kulite pressure sensors to monitor the air flow behaviour over the upper surface, and with an aileron also electrical actuated. The first specific objective for our research team in this project was to develop a new morphing mechanism for the wing by using miniature electrical actuators; these actuators should deform the upper wing surface, so that the laminar-to-turbulent transition point moves closer to the wing trailing edge reducing in this way the drag force as a function of flow condition by changing the wing shape. The flow conditions were univocally defined by mean of Mach numbers, airspeeds, angles of attack and aileron deflection angles. The second specific objective was to develop a control system for the morphing actuators to obtain the desired morphed shape of the wing for each studied flow case, while the third specific objective was to develop a monitoring system able to detect and visualize the airflow characteristics using pressure sensors installed on the upper surface of the morphing wing, evaluating in this way the gains brought by the proposed architecture. During the paper sections are successively exposed the project description, the morphing wing model instrumentation and the mechanisms used to control it. Finally, a wind tunnel aerodynamic results analysis is performed, discussing the extension of the laminar region of the flow over the wing by using the morphing wing technology.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.197 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations2
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNPARCSame topicPlasma and Flow Control in AerodynamicsFrench-language works237,207