MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6980700254

Conceptual design of a hard landing indication system using a flight parameter sensor simulation model

2010· article· en· W6980700254 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueBristol Research (University of Bristol) · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicModernist Literature and Criticism
Canadian institutionsSafran Electronics (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNucleofectionGestational periodTSG101DysgeusiaLiquationDiafiltrationTriacetinEmperipolesisDurvalumab
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A Flight Parameter Sensor Simulation (FPSS) model has been developed to assess the conservatism of the landing gear loads calculated using a hard landing analysis process. Conservatism exists due to factors of safety that are added to the hard landing analysis process to account for uncertainty in the measurement of certain flight parameters. The FPSS model consists of: (1) an aircraft and landing gear dynamic model to determine the 'actual' landing gear loads during a hard landing; (2) an aircraft sensor and data acquisition model to represent the aircraft sensors and flight data recorder (FDR) systems to investigate the effect of signal processing on the flight parameters; (3) an automated hard landing analysis process, representative of that used by airframe and equipment manufacturers, to determine the 'simulated' landing gear loads. Using a technique of Bayesian sensitivity analysis, a number of flight parameters are varied in the FPSS model to gain an understanding of the sensitivity of the differencebetween 'actual' and 'simulated' loads (measured as Mean-Square Error (MSE)) to the individual flight parameters in symmetric, two-point landings. This study shows that the tyre-runway friction coefficient and aircraft vertical descent velocity (Vz) contributed the most to the spin-up and spring-back drag axle response load MSE and bending moment MSE. It was also found that aircraft vertical descent velocity, mass, centre of gravity position and tyre type had significant influences on the maximum vertical reaction vertical axle response load MSE. Due to the modelling technique, it was also found that vertical acceleration was as significant as Vz in reducing the MSE. While ground speed and aircraft pitch did not change considerably from the 'actual' to the 'simulated' landings, their interactions with tyre-runway friction coefficient and aircraft vertical descent velocity contributed to the MSE in all cases. Of equal importance, it was also shown that within the range studied, shock absorber servicing state and tyre pressure do not contribute significantly to the MSE and learning the true value of these flight parameters would not reduce the MSE.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.941
Threshold uncertainty score0.510

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
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 head0.225
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.094 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBristol Research (University of Bristol)Same topicModernist Literature and CriticismFrench-language works237,207