Methodology for the design and optimization of a morphing wing droop-nose structure for greener aircraft
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Droop-Nose Leading Edge (DNLE) morphing wings are one of the most promising devices in order to achieve aerodynamic drag and noise reduction during take-off and landing phases. An accurate design of these structures could lead to the decrease of aircraft fuel consumption in the perspective of reaching a greener aviation, following the objectives indicated by Flightpath 2050 issued by the E.U. However, due to the challenges related to the realization of this technology and TRL reached, DNLE are more likely implemented in Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) for testing and evaluation purposes. In the present study, an optimization methodology for the DNLE composite laminate skin and morphing mechanism structure is proposed and applied to a study case represented by the UAS-S45 aircraft. The work starts from the morphing leading edge structure developed by the LARCASE laboratory at ETS Montreal. The results showed that by means of the optimization strategy adopted, the force required on the actuator mechanism is 88% lower than the original design. A significant improvement on the profile smoothness along its section and in the spanwise direction in morphing conditions has been obtained too. However, further investigations are still needed in order to achieve a more appropriate morphing shape. Despite this, it appears from the results obtained that the proposed methodology can be useful to tackle the DNLE design problem in an effective and efficient way. What developed in this work has been conceived to support the investigation of DNLE in the small leading edge profiles typical of the UAS. In this way, an easier procedure for the set up of the design flow, and a decrease in the computational effort for the optimization process can be obtained. An experimental validation of the results obtained is currently being performed at ETS, and future development regards the assessment of the errors of the numeric procedure herein presented respect to real data.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.007 | 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".