Window sensor for the A350 and A380 aircraft

When lightning strikes an aircraft, the current distribution and the attachment points are of interest. Simple window sensors mounted in different windows along the fuselage provide signals over the local magnetic field due to lightning current, its orientation and time behavior

In-flight measurements of high-energy radiation from thunderstorms

Lightning – the bright flashes that put the thunder in thunderstorm – is just one of several mysterious atmospheric phenomena perplexing scientists today. Only recently, scientists learned that thunderstorms sometimes emit bursts of X-ray and gamma-ray radiation. They are now looking at how lightning and these bursts of radiation might be related and what threat the radiation could pose to airliners

Lightning current distribution and hard radiation in aircraft, measured in-flight

The In-flight Lightning Damage Assessment System ILDAS has been presented in EMC Europe in 2012. ILDAS can determine the lightning current distribution on an aircraft with high resolution in time and amplitude. Later the system was extended and included two x-ray detectors to measure the high-energy radiation that is generated in thunderstorms and by lightning proper. It has been flown for many times now. The paper presents a few selected data

In-flight measurement of high-energy lightning-related atmospheric phenomena

The results of lightning interaction with an aircraft are shown in this paper. An in-flight lightning strike damage assessment system has been developed, installed and tested. The data obtained from it was then compared to the worldwide and European ground-based lightning detection networks. High energy radiation bursts were detected inside the cabin synchronously with lighting current pulses. Their origin and possible threat are unknown and need further investigation

Duas abordagens artroscópicas para a articulação escapulo umeral no cão Two arthroscopic approaches for the shoulder joint in dog

O objetivo deste trabalho foi estudar em cadáveres de cães a exeqüibilidade do exame das estruturas intra-articulares através de duas diferentes abordagens artroscópicas da articulação escápulo-umeral. As articulações constituíram dois grupos: (A) o portal artroscópico foi estabelecido cranial e o portal instrumental caudal ao processo acromial; (B) o portal artroscópico foi confeccionado caudal e o portal instrumental cranial ao processo acromial. Durante o exame, procurou-se avaliar a possibilidade de visibilização concomitante com o toque através de sonda nas estruturas intra-articulares: cartilagem da cabeça do úmero (cranial, media e caudal), cavidade glenóide, tendão do músculo bíceps braquial, tendão do músculo subescapular, ligamento glenoumeral medial e lateral e bolsa articular caudal. As estruturas localizadas na porção cranial e média da articulação foram mais bem examinadas pela abordagem artroscópica realizada no grupo B, enquanto que aquelas estruturas situadas na porção média e caudal da articulação foram mais bem acessadas pela técnica utilizada no grupo A. Em nenhuma das abordagens, o ligamento glenoumeral lateral foi satisfatoriamente examinado.<br>This research was aimed at studing in dog corpses the feasibility of the exam of the intrarticular structures by using two different arthroscopic shoulder approaches. The joints were assembled in two groups: (A) the arthroscopic portal was established cranially and the instrumental portal caudally to the acromial process; (B) the arthroscopic portal was established caudally and the instrumental portal cranially to the acromial process. At the time of the exam the possibility of arthroscopic visualization concurrently with the touch with the probe of the intra articular structures was evaluated: humeral head cartilage (cranial, midlle and caudal), glenoid cavity, brachial biceps muscle tendon, subscapularis muscle tendon, medial and lateral glenohumeral ligament and caudal joint pouch. The intra articular structures situated in the cranial and middle side of the joint were better examined by approaching used in B group. On the other hand the structures localized in the caudal and middle portions of the joint were better inspected by approaching used in A group. However the lateral glenohumeral ligament was not completely checked neither using the A group approach nor using the B group approach