Ontology type: schema:ScholarlyArticle
1988-08
AUTHORSA. Miele, T. Wang, W. W. Melvin
ABSTRACTThis paper is concerned with the optimal transition and the near-optimum guidance of an aircraft from quasi-steady flight to quasi-steady flight in a windshear. The abort landing problem is considered with reference to flight in a vertical plane. In addition to the horizontal shear, the presence of a downdraft is considered.It is assumed that a transition from descending flight to ascending flight is desired; that the initial state corresponds to quasi-steady flight with absolute path inclination of −3.0 deg; and that the final path inclination corresponds to quasi-steady steepest climb. Also, it is assumed that, as soon as the shear is detected, the power setting is increased at a constant time rate until maximum power setting is reached; afterward, the power setting is held constant. Hence, the only control is the angle of attack. Inequality constraints are imposed on both the angle of attack and its time derivative.First, trajectory optimization is considered. The optimal transition problem is formulated as a Chebyshev problem of optimal control: the performance index being minimized is the peak value of the modulus of the difference between the instantaneous altitude and a reference value, assumed constant. By suitable transformations, the Chebyshev problem is converted into a Bolza problem. Then, the Bolza problem is solved employing the dual sequential gradient-restoration algorithm (DSGRA) for optimal control problems.Two types of optimal trajectories are studied, depending on the conditions desired at the final point. Type 1 is concerned with gamma recovery (recovery of the value of the relative path inclination corresponding to quasi-steady steepest climb). Type 2 is concerned with quasi-steady flight recovery (recovery of the values of the relative path inclination, the relative velocity, and the relative angle of attack corresponding to quasi-steady steepest climb). Both the Type 1 trajectory and the Type 2 trajectory include three branches: descending flight, nearly horizontal flight, and ascending flight. Also, for both the Type 1 trajectory and the Type 2 trajectory, descending flight takes place in the shear portion of the trajectory; horizontal flight takes place partly in the shear portion and partly in the aftershear portion of the trajectory; and ascending flight takes place in the aftershear portion of the trajectory. While the Type 1 trajectory and the Type 2 trajectory are nearly the same in the shear portion, they diverge to a considerable degree in the aftershear portion of the trajectory.Next, trajectory guidance is considered. Two guidance schemes are developed so as to achieve near-optimum transition from quasi-steady descending flight to quasi-steady ascending flight: acceleration guidance (based on the relative acceleration) and gamma guidance (based on the absolute path inclination).The guidance schemes for quasi-steady flight recovery in abort landing include two parts in sequence: shear guidance and aftershear guidance. The shear guidance is based on the result that the shear portion of the trajectory depends only mildly on the boundary conditions. Therefore, any of the guidance schemes already developed for Type 1 trajectories can be employed for Type 2 trajectories (descent guidance followed by recovery guidance). The aftershear guidance is based on the result that the aftershear portion of the trajectory depends strongly on the boundary conditions; therefore, the guidance schemes developed for Type 1 trajectories cannot be employed for Type 2 trajectories. For Type 2 trajectories, the aftershear guidance includes level flight guidance followed by ascent guidance. The level flight guidance is designed to achieve almost complete velocity recovery; the ascent guidance is designed to achieve the desired final quasi-steady state.The numerical results show that the guidance schemes for quasi-steady flight recovery yield a transition from quasi-steady flight to quasi-steady flight which is close to that of the optimal trajectory, allows the aircraft to achieve the final quasi-steady state, and has good stability properties. More... »
PAGES165-207
http://scigraph.springernature.com/pub.10.1007/bf00939681
DOIhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1007/bf00939681
DIMENSIONShttps://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1036302239
JSON-LD is the canonical representation for SciGraph data.
TIP: You can open this SciGraph record using an external JSON-LD service: JSON-LD Playground Google SDTT
[
{
"@context": "https://springernature.github.io/scigraph/jsonld/sgcontext.json",
"about": [
{
"id": "http://purl.org/au-research/vocabulary/anzsrc-for/2008/01",
"inDefinedTermSet": "http://purl.org/au-research/vocabulary/anzsrc-for/2008/",
"name": "Mathematical Sciences",
"type": "DefinedTerm"
},
{
"id": "http://purl.org/au-research/vocabulary/anzsrc-for/2008/0103",
"inDefinedTermSet": "http://purl.org/au-research/vocabulary/anzsrc-for/2008/",
"name": "Numerical and Computational Mathematics",
"type": "DefinedTerm"
}
],
"author": [
{
"affiliation": {
"alternateName": "Aero-Astronautics Group, Rice University, Houston, Texas",
"id": "http://www.grid.ac/institutes/grid.21940.3e",
"name": [
"Aero-Astronautics Group, Rice University, Houston, Texas"
],
"type": "Organization"
},
"familyName": "Miele",
"givenName": "A.",
"id": "sg:person.015552732657.49",
"sameAs": [
"https://app.dimensions.ai/discover/publication?and_facet_researcher=ur.015552732657.49"
],
"type": "Person"
},
{
"affiliation": {
"alternateName": "Aero-Astronautics Group, Rice University, Houston, Texas",
"id": "http://www.grid.ac/institutes/grid.21940.3e",
"name": [
"Aero-Astronautics Group, Rice University, Houston, Texas"
],
"type": "Organization"
},
"familyName": "Wang",
"givenName": "T.",
"id": "sg:person.014414570607.44",
"sameAs": [
"https://app.dimensions.ai/discover/publication?and_facet_researcher=ur.014414570607.44"
],
"type": "Person"
},
{
"affiliation": {
"alternateName": "Airworthiness and Performance Committee, Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA), Washington, D.C.",
"id": "http://www.grid.ac/institutes/None",
"name": [
"Delta Airlines, Atlanta, Georgia",
"Airworthiness and Performance Committee, Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA), Washington, D.C."
],
"type": "Organization"
},
"familyName": "Melvin",
"givenName": "W. W.",
"id": "sg:person.011027201155.13",
"sameAs": [
"https://app.dimensions.ai/discover/publication?and_facet_researcher=ur.011027201155.13"
],
"type": "Person"
}
],
"citation": [
{
"id": "sg:pub.10.1007/bf00938475",
"sameAs": [
"https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1005655216",
"https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00938475"
],
"type": "CreativeWork"
},
{
"id": "sg:pub.10.1007/bf00939214",
"sameAs": [
"https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1049857998",
"https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00939214"
],
"type": "CreativeWork"
},
{
"id": "sg:pub.10.1007/bf00939432",
"sameAs": [
"https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1036244035",
"https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00939432"
],
"type": "CreativeWork"
},
{
"id": "sg:pub.10.1007/bf00933463",
"sameAs": [
"https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1007322541",
"https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00933463"
],
"type": "CreativeWork"
},
{
"id": "sg:pub.10.1007/bf00939246",
"sameAs": [
"https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1016081985",
"https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00939246"
],
"type": "CreativeWork"
}
],
"datePublished": "1988-08",
"datePublishedReg": "1988-08-01",
"description": "This paper is concerned with the optimal transition and the near-optimum guidance of an aircraft from quasi-steady flight to quasi-steady flight in a windshear. The abort landing problem is considered with reference to flight in a vertical plane. In addition to the horizontal shear, the presence of a downdraft is considered.It is assumed that a transition from descending flight to ascending flight is desired; that the initial state corresponds to quasi-steady flight with absolute path inclination of \u22123.0 deg; and that the final path inclination corresponds to quasi-steady steepest climb. Also, it is assumed that, as soon as the shear is detected, the power setting is increased at a constant time rate until maximum power setting is reached; afterward, the power setting is held constant. Hence, the only control is the angle of attack. Inequality constraints are imposed on both the angle of attack and its time derivative.First, trajectory optimization is considered. The optimal transition problem is formulated as a Chebyshev problem of optimal control: the performance index being minimized is the peak value of the modulus of the difference between the instantaneous altitude and a reference value, assumed constant. By suitable transformations, the Chebyshev problem is converted into a Bolza problem. Then, the Bolza problem is solved employing the dual sequential gradient-restoration algorithm (DSGRA) for optimal control problems.Two types of optimal trajectories are studied, depending on the conditions desired at the final point. Type 1 is concerned with gamma recovery (recovery of the value of the relative path inclination corresponding to quasi-steady steepest climb). Type 2 is concerned with quasi-steady flight recovery (recovery of the values of the relative path inclination, the relative velocity, and the relative angle of attack corresponding to quasi-steady steepest climb). Both the Type 1 trajectory and the Type 2 trajectory include three branches: descending flight, nearly horizontal flight, and ascending flight. Also, for both the Type 1 trajectory and the Type 2 trajectory, descending flight takes place in the shear portion of the trajectory; horizontal flight takes place partly in the shear portion and partly in the aftershear portion of the trajectory; and ascending flight takes place in the aftershear portion of the trajectory. While the Type 1 trajectory and the Type 2 trajectory are nearly the same in the shear portion, they diverge to a considerable degree in the aftershear portion of the trajectory.Next, trajectory guidance is considered. Two guidance schemes are developed so as to achieve near-optimum transition from quasi-steady descending flight to quasi-steady ascending flight: acceleration guidance (based on the relative acceleration) and gamma guidance (based on the absolute path inclination).The guidance schemes for quasi-steady flight recovery in abort landing include two parts in sequence: shear guidance and aftershear guidance. The shear guidance is based on the result that the shear portion of the trajectory depends only mildly on the boundary conditions. Therefore, any of the guidance schemes already developed for Type 1 trajectories can be employed for Type 2 trajectories (descent guidance followed by recovery guidance). The aftershear guidance is based on the result that the aftershear portion of the trajectory depends strongly on the boundary conditions; therefore, the guidance schemes developed for Type 1 trajectories cannot be employed for Type 2 trajectories. For Type 2 trajectories, the aftershear guidance includes level flight guidance followed by ascent guidance. The level flight guidance is designed to achieve almost complete velocity recovery; the ascent guidance is designed to achieve the desired final quasi-steady state.The numerical results show that the guidance schemes for quasi-steady flight recovery yield a transition from quasi-steady flight to quasi-steady flight which is close to that of the optimal trajectory, allows the aircraft to achieve the final quasi-steady state, and has good stability properties.",
"genre": "article",
"id": "sg:pub.10.1007/bf00939681",
"isAccessibleForFree": false,
"isPartOf": [
{
"id": "sg:journal.1044187",
"issn": [
"0022-3239",
"1573-2878"
],
"name": "Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications",
"publisher": "Springer Nature",
"type": "Periodical"
},
{
"issueNumber": "2",
"type": "PublicationIssue"
},
{
"type": "PublicationVolume",
"volumeNumber": "58"
}
],
"keywords": [
"dual sequential gradient-restoration algorithm",
"quasi-steady flight",
"Bolza problem",
"Chebyshev problem",
"guidance scheme",
"trajectory optimization",
"optimal trajectories",
"abort landing",
"ascent guidance",
"optimal control problem",
"sequential gradient-restoration algorithm",
"good stability properties",
"shear portion",
"boundary conditions",
"angle of attack",
"abort landing problem",
"gradient-restoration algorithm",
"absolute path inclination",
"quasi-steady state",
"constant time rate",
"flight recovery",
"optimal control",
"control problem",
"inequality constraints",
"time derivative",
"suitable transformation",
"optimum guidance",
"stability properties",
"landing problem",
"numerical results",
"path inclination",
"transition problem",
"performance index",
"horizontal flight",
"flight guidance",
"state corresponds",
"maximum power setting",
"final quasi-steady state",
"scheme",
"time rate",
"trajectory guidance",
"final point",
"trajectories",
"optimization",
"problem",
"windshear",
"optimal transition",
"velocity recovery",
"vertical plane",
"transition",
"only control",
"horizontal shear",
"corresponds",
"algorithm",
"constraints",
"optimum transitions",
"angle",
"shear",
"ascending flight",
"aircraft",
"flight",
"plane",
"state",
"conditions",
"results",
"flight transition",
"properties",
"point",
"control",
"peak value",
"reference values",
"branches",
"transformation",
"values",
"derivatives",
"power settings",
"inclination",
"modulus",
"landing",
"reference",
"altitude",
"degree",
"sequence",
"setting",
"attacks",
"types",
"place",
"guidance",
"part",
"climb",
"considerable degree",
"presence",
"downdrafts",
"addition",
"portion",
"deg",
"index",
"rate",
"differences",
"recovery",
"yield",
"instantaneous altitude",
"recovery yield",
"type 1",
"type 2",
"paper"
],
"name": "Quasi-steady flight to quasi-steady flight transition for abort landing in a windshear: Trajectory optimization and guidance",
"pagination": "165-207",
"productId": [
{
"name": "dimensions_id",
"type": "PropertyValue",
"value": [
"pub.1036302239"
]
},
{
"name": "doi",
"type": "PropertyValue",
"value": [
"10.1007/bf00939681"
]
}
],
"sameAs": [
"https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00939681",
"https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1036302239"
],
"sdDataset": "articles",
"sdDatePublished": "2022-08-04T16:50",
"sdLicense": "https://scigraph.springernature.com/explorer/license/",
"sdPublisher": {
"name": "Springer Nature - SN SciGraph project",
"type": "Organization"
},
"sdSource": "s3://com-springernature-scigraph/baseset/20220804/entities/gbq_results/article/article_193.jsonl",
"type": "ScholarlyArticle",
"url": "https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00939681"
}
]
Download the RDF metadata as: json-ld nt turtle xml License info
JSON-LD is a popular format for linked data which is fully compatible with JSON.
curl -H 'Accept: application/ld+json' 'https://scigraph.springernature.com/pub.10.1007/bf00939681'
N-Triples is a line-based linked data format ideal for batch operations.
curl -H 'Accept: application/n-triples' 'https://scigraph.springernature.com/pub.10.1007/bf00939681'
Turtle is a human-readable linked data format.
curl -H 'Accept: text/turtle' 'https://scigraph.springernature.com/pub.10.1007/bf00939681'
RDF/XML is a standard XML format for linked data.
curl -H 'Accept: application/rdf+xml' 'https://scigraph.springernature.com/pub.10.1007/bf00939681'
This table displays all metadata directly associated to this object as RDF triples.
201 TRIPLES
21 PREDICATES
136 URIs
123 LITERALS
6 BLANK NODES
Subject | Predicate | Object | |
---|---|---|---|
1 | sg:pub.10.1007/bf00939681 | schema:about | anzsrc-for:01 |
2 | ″ | ″ | anzsrc-for:0103 |
3 | ″ | schema:author | N5bc8a426ca964edc988fbae32dc5584d |
4 | ″ | schema:citation | sg:pub.10.1007/bf00933463 |
5 | ″ | ″ | sg:pub.10.1007/bf00938475 |
6 | ″ | ″ | sg:pub.10.1007/bf00939214 |
7 | ″ | ″ | sg:pub.10.1007/bf00939246 |
8 | ″ | ″ | sg:pub.10.1007/bf00939432 |
9 | ″ | schema:datePublished | 1988-08 |
10 | ″ | schema:datePublishedReg | 1988-08-01 |
11 | ″ | schema:description | This paper is concerned with the optimal transition and the near-optimum guidance of an aircraft from quasi-steady flight to quasi-steady flight in a windshear. The abort landing problem is considered with reference to flight in a vertical plane. In addition to the horizontal shear, the presence of a downdraft is considered.It is assumed that a transition from descending flight to ascending flight is desired; that the initial state corresponds to quasi-steady flight with absolute path inclination of −3.0 deg; and that the final path inclination corresponds to quasi-steady steepest climb. Also, it is assumed that, as soon as the shear is detected, the power setting is increased at a constant time rate until maximum power setting is reached; afterward, the power setting is held constant. Hence, the only control is the angle of attack. Inequality constraints are imposed on both the angle of attack and its time derivative.First, trajectory optimization is considered. The optimal transition problem is formulated as a Chebyshev problem of optimal control: the performance index being minimized is the peak value of the modulus of the difference between the instantaneous altitude and a reference value, assumed constant. By suitable transformations, the Chebyshev problem is converted into a Bolza problem. Then, the Bolza problem is solved employing the dual sequential gradient-restoration algorithm (DSGRA) for optimal control problems.Two types of optimal trajectories are studied, depending on the conditions desired at the final point. Type 1 is concerned with gamma recovery (recovery of the value of the relative path inclination corresponding to quasi-steady steepest climb). Type 2 is concerned with quasi-steady flight recovery (recovery of the values of the relative path inclination, the relative velocity, and the relative angle of attack corresponding to quasi-steady steepest climb). Both the Type 1 trajectory and the Type 2 trajectory include three branches: descending flight, nearly horizontal flight, and ascending flight. Also, for both the Type 1 trajectory and the Type 2 trajectory, descending flight takes place in the shear portion of the trajectory; horizontal flight takes place partly in the shear portion and partly in the aftershear portion of the trajectory; and ascending flight takes place in the aftershear portion of the trajectory. While the Type 1 trajectory and the Type 2 trajectory are nearly the same in the shear portion, they diverge to a considerable degree in the aftershear portion of the trajectory.Next, trajectory guidance is considered. Two guidance schemes are developed so as to achieve near-optimum transition from quasi-steady descending flight to quasi-steady ascending flight: acceleration guidance (based on the relative acceleration) and gamma guidance (based on the absolute path inclination).The guidance schemes for quasi-steady flight recovery in abort landing include two parts in sequence: shear guidance and aftershear guidance. The shear guidance is based on the result that the shear portion of the trajectory depends only mildly on the boundary conditions. Therefore, any of the guidance schemes already developed for Type 1 trajectories can be employed for Type 2 trajectories (descent guidance followed by recovery guidance). The aftershear guidance is based on the result that the aftershear portion of the trajectory depends strongly on the boundary conditions; therefore, the guidance schemes developed for Type 1 trajectories cannot be employed for Type 2 trajectories. For Type 2 trajectories, the aftershear guidance includes level flight guidance followed by ascent guidance. The level flight guidance is designed to achieve almost complete velocity recovery; the ascent guidance is designed to achieve the desired final quasi-steady state.The numerical results show that the guidance schemes for quasi-steady flight recovery yield a transition from quasi-steady flight to quasi-steady flight which is close to that of the optimal trajectory, allows the aircraft to achieve the final quasi-steady state, and has good stability properties. |
12 | ″ | schema:genre | article |
13 | ″ | schema:isAccessibleForFree | false |
14 | ″ | schema:isPartOf | N3b4df5c964964160befb80b767389455 |
15 | ″ | ″ | N40817cc18802459f99bceeaf20f76dde |
16 | ″ | ″ | sg:journal.1044187 |
17 | ″ | schema:keywords | Bolza problem |
18 | ″ | ″ | Chebyshev problem |
19 | ″ | ″ | abort landing |
20 | ″ | ″ | abort landing problem |
21 | ″ | ″ | absolute path inclination |
22 | ″ | ″ | addition |
23 | ″ | ″ | aircraft |
24 | ″ | ″ | algorithm |
25 | ″ | ″ | altitude |
26 | ″ | ″ | angle |
27 | ″ | ″ | angle of attack |
28 | ″ | ″ | ascending flight |
29 | ″ | ″ | ascent guidance |
30 | ″ | ″ | attacks |
31 | ″ | ″ | boundary conditions |
32 | ″ | ″ | branches |
33 | ″ | ″ | climb |
34 | ″ | ″ | conditions |
35 | ″ | ″ | considerable degree |
36 | ″ | ″ | constant time rate |
37 | ″ | ″ | constraints |
38 | ″ | ″ | control |
39 | ″ | ″ | control problem |
40 | ″ | ″ | corresponds |
41 | ″ | ″ | deg |
42 | ″ | ″ | degree |
43 | ″ | ″ | derivatives |
44 | ″ | ″ | differences |
45 | ″ | ″ | downdrafts |
46 | ″ | ″ | dual sequential gradient-restoration algorithm |
47 | ″ | ″ | final point |
48 | ″ | ″ | final quasi-steady state |
49 | ″ | ″ | flight |
50 | ″ | ″ | flight guidance |
51 | ″ | ″ | flight recovery |
52 | ″ | ″ | flight transition |
53 | ″ | ″ | good stability properties |
54 | ″ | ″ | gradient-restoration algorithm |
55 | ″ | ″ | guidance |
56 | ″ | ″ | guidance scheme |
57 | ″ | ″ | horizontal flight |
58 | ″ | ″ | horizontal shear |
59 | ″ | ″ | inclination |
60 | ″ | ″ | index |
61 | ″ | ″ | inequality constraints |
62 | ″ | ″ | instantaneous altitude |
63 | ″ | ″ | landing |
64 | ″ | ″ | landing problem |
65 | ″ | ″ | maximum power setting |
66 | ″ | ″ | modulus |
67 | ″ | ″ | numerical results |
68 | ″ | ″ | only control |
69 | ″ | ″ | optimal control |
70 | ″ | ″ | optimal control problem |
71 | ″ | ″ | optimal trajectories |
72 | ″ | ″ | optimal transition |
73 | ″ | ″ | optimization |
74 | ″ | ″ | optimum guidance |
75 | ″ | ″ | optimum transitions |
76 | ″ | ″ | paper |
77 | ″ | ″ | part |
78 | ″ | ″ | path inclination |
79 | ″ | ″ | peak value |
80 | ″ | ″ | performance index |
81 | ″ | ″ | place |
82 | ″ | ″ | plane |
83 | ″ | ″ | point |
84 | ″ | ″ | portion |
85 | ″ | ″ | power settings |
86 | ″ | ″ | presence |
87 | ″ | ″ | problem |
88 | ″ | ″ | properties |
89 | ″ | ″ | quasi-steady flight |
90 | ″ | ″ | quasi-steady state |
91 | ″ | ″ | rate |
92 | ″ | ″ | recovery |
93 | ″ | ″ | recovery yield |
94 | ″ | ″ | reference |
95 | ″ | ″ | reference values |
96 | ″ | ″ | results |
97 | ″ | ″ | scheme |
98 | ″ | ″ | sequence |
99 | ″ | ″ | sequential gradient-restoration algorithm |
100 | ″ | ″ | setting |
101 | ″ | ″ | shear |
102 | ″ | ″ | shear portion |
103 | ″ | ″ | stability properties |
104 | ″ | ″ | state |
105 | ″ | ″ | state corresponds |
106 | ″ | ″ | suitable transformation |
107 | ″ | ″ | time derivative |
108 | ″ | ″ | time rate |
109 | ″ | ″ | trajectories |
110 | ″ | ″ | trajectory guidance |
111 | ″ | ″ | trajectory optimization |
112 | ″ | ″ | transformation |
113 | ″ | ″ | transition |
114 | ″ | ″ | transition problem |
115 | ″ | ″ | type 1 |
116 | ″ | ″ | type 2 |
117 | ″ | ″ | types |
118 | ″ | ″ | values |
119 | ″ | ″ | velocity recovery |
120 | ″ | ″ | vertical plane |
121 | ″ | ″ | windshear |
122 | ″ | ″ | yield |
123 | ″ | schema:name | Quasi-steady flight to quasi-steady flight transition for abort landing in a windshear: Trajectory optimization and guidance |
124 | ″ | schema:pagination | 165-207 |
125 | ″ | schema:productId | Nab9a92d97ef9419596e0b1edffe8002c |
126 | ″ | ″ | Ncbf99f48b1464fa2bb9a7dae04ca419f |
127 | ″ | schema:sameAs | https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1036302239 |
128 | ″ | ″ | https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00939681 |
129 | ″ | schema:sdDatePublished | 2022-08-04T16:50 |
130 | ″ | schema:sdLicense | https://scigraph.springernature.com/explorer/license/ |
131 | ″ | schema:sdPublisher | N949c21be14484cef9fec81ebf1c6e5de |
132 | ″ | schema:url | https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00939681 |
133 | ″ | sgo:license | sg:explorer/license/ |
134 | ″ | sgo:sdDataset | articles |
135 | ″ | rdf:type | schema:ScholarlyArticle |
136 | N0346940f514e47a3807110497acf0261 | rdf:first | sg:person.011027201155.13 |
137 | ″ | rdf:rest | rdf:nil |
138 | N3b4df5c964964160befb80b767389455 | schema:issueNumber | 2 |
139 | ″ | rdf:type | schema:PublicationIssue |
140 | N40817cc18802459f99bceeaf20f76dde | schema:volumeNumber | 58 |
141 | ″ | rdf:type | schema:PublicationVolume |
142 | N4cc078e2d9404471889b6c635ef1adfd | rdf:first | sg:person.014414570607.44 |
143 | ″ | rdf:rest | N0346940f514e47a3807110497acf0261 |
144 | N5bc8a426ca964edc988fbae32dc5584d | rdf:first | sg:person.015552732657.49 |
145 | ″ | rdf:rest | N4cc078e2d9404471889b6c635ef1adfd |
146 | N949c21be14484cef9fec81ebf1c6e5de | schema:name | Springer Nature - SN SciGraph project |
147 | ″ | rdf:type | schema:Organization |
148 | Nab9a92d97ef9419596e0b1edffe8002c | schema:name | doi |
149 | ″ | schema:value | 10.1007/bf00939681 |
150 | ″ | rdf:type | schema:PropertyValue |
151 | Ncbf99f48b1464fa2bb9a7dae04ca419f | schema:name | dimensions_id |
152 | ″ | schema:value | pub.1036302239 |
153 | ″ | rdf:type | schema:PropertyValue |
154 | anzsrc-for:01 | schema:inDefinedTermSet | anzsrc-for: |
155 | ″ | schema:name | Mathematical Sciences |
156 | ″ | rdf:type | schema:DefinedTerm |
157 | anzsrc-for:0103 | schema:inDefinedTermSet | anzsrc-for: |
158 | ″ | schema:name | Numerical and Computational Mathematics |
159 | ″ | rdf:type | schema:DefinedTerm |
160 | sg:journal.1044187 | schema:issn | 0022-3239 |
161 | ″ | ″ | 1573-2878 |
162 | ″ | schema:name | Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications |
163 | ″ | schema:publisher | Springer Nature |
164 | ″ | rdf:type | schema:Periodical |
165 | sg:person.011027201155.13 | schema:affiliation | grid-institutes:None |
166 | ″ | schema:familyName | Melvin |
167 | ″ | schema:givenName | W. W. |
168 | ″ | schema:sameAs | https://app.dimensions.ai/discover/publication?and_facet_researcher=ur.011027201155.13 |
169 | ″ | rdf:type | schema:Person |
170 | sg:person.014414570607.44 | schema:affiliation | grid-institutes:grid.21940.3e |
171 | ″ | schema:familyName | Wang |
172 | ″ | schema:givenName | T. |
173 | ″ | schema:sameAs | https://app.dimensions.ai/discover/publication?and_facet_researcher=ur.014414570607.44 |
174 | ″ | rdf:type | schema:Person |
175 | sg:person.015552732657.49 | schema:affiliation | grid-institutes:grid.21940.3e |
176 | ″ | schema:familyName | Miele |
177 | ″ | schema:givenName | A. |
178 | ″ | schema:sameAs | https://app.dimensions.ai/discover/publication?and_facet_researcher=ur.015552732657.49 |
179 | ″ | rdf:type | schema:Person |
180 | sg:pub.10.1007/bf00933463 | schema:sameAs | https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1007322541 |
181 | ″ | ″ | https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00933463 |
182 | ″ | rdf:type | schema:CreativeWork |
183 | sg:pub.10.1007/bf00938475 | schema:sameAs | https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1005655216 |
184 | ″ | ″ | https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00938475 |
185 | ″ | rdf:type | schema:CreativeWork |
186 | sg:pub.10.1007/bf00939214 | schema:sameAs | https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1049857998 |
187 | ″ | ″ | https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00939214 |
188 | ″ | rdf:type | schema:CreativeWork |
189 | sg:pub.10.1007/bf00939246 | schema:sameAs | https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1016081985 |
190 | ″ | ″ | https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00939246 |
191 | ″ | rdf:type | schema:CreativeWork |
192 | sg:pub.10.1007/bf00939432 | schema:sameAs | https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1036244035 |
193 | ″ | ″ | https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00939432 |
194 | ″ | rdf:type | schema:CreativeWork |
195 | grid-institutes:None | schema:alternateName | Airworthiness and Performance Committee, Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA), Washington, D.C. |
196 | ″ | schema:name | Airworthiness and Performance Committee, Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA), Washington, D.C. |
197 | ″ | ″ | Delta Airlines, Atlanta, Georgia |
198 | ″ | rdf:type | schema:Organization |
199 | grid-institutes:grid.21940.3e | schema:alternateName | Aero-Astronautics Group, Rice University, Houston, Texas |
200 | ″ | schema:name | Aero-Astronautics Group, Rice University, Houston, Texas |
201 | ″ | rdf:type | schema:Organization |