Design, development and tests in real time of control methodologies for a morphing wing in wind tunnel
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In order to leave a cleaner environmental space to future generations, the international community has been mobilized to find green solutions that are effective and feasible in all sectors. The CRIAQ MDO505 project was initiated to test the morphing wingtip (wing and aileron) technology as one of these possible solutions. The main objectives of this project are: the design and manufacturing of a morphing wing prototype, the extension and control of the laminar region over the extrados, and to compare the effects of morphing and rigid aileron in terms of lift, drag and pressure distributions. The advantage of the extension of the laminar region over a wing is the drag reduction that results by delaying the transition towards its trailing edge. The location of the transition region depends on the flight case and it is controlled, for a morphing wing, via the actuators positions and displacements. Therefore, this thesis work focuses on the control of the actuators positions and displacements. \n \nThis thesis presents essentially the modeling, instrumentation and wind tunnel testing results. Three series of wind tunnel tests with different values of aileron deflection angle, angle of attack and Mach number have been performed in the subsonic wind tunnel of the IAR-NRC. The used wing airfoil consisted of stringers, ribs, spars and a flexible upper surface mad of composite materials (glass fiber carbon), a rigid aileron and flexible aileron. The aileron was able to move between +/-6 degrees. The demonstrator’s span measures 1.5 m and its chord measures 1.5 m. \n \nStructural analyses have been performed to determine the plies orientation, and the number of fiberglass layers for the flexible skin. These analyses allowed also to determine the actuator’s forces to push and pull the wing upper surface. The 2D XFoil and 3D solvers Fluent were used to find the optimized airfoil and the optimal location of the transition for each flight case. Based on the analyses done by the aerodynamic and structural teams in the MDO5050 project, the most efficient actuators and pressure sensors to integrate inside the wing were selected. \n \nThe actuators (4 in total) are attached to the ribs and placed inside of the wing to deform the upper surface thereof. The actuators are controlled by a controller whose gains were obtained with different methodologies. Pressure sensors (32 in total) were fixed in the wing upper surface in order to estimate the transition zone from the measured and analyzed data. The evaluation code for raw pressure sensors data was designed at the LARCASE using the Matlab / Simulink software.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".