Aeroelasticity

Last updated
NASA testing a scale model Lockheed Electra in a wind tunnel for flutter Nasa electra testing.jpg
NASA testing a scale model Lockheed Electra in a wind tunnel for flutter

Aeroelasticity is the branch of physics and engineering studying the interactions between the inertial, elastic, and aerodynamic forces occurring while an elastic body is exposed to a fluid flow. The study of aeroelasticity may be broadly classified into two fields: static aeroelasticity dealing with the static or steady state response of an elastic body to a fluid flow, and dynamic aeroelasticity dealing with the body's dynamic (typically vibrational) response.

Contents

Aircraft are prone to aeroelastic effects because they need to be lightweight while enduring large aerodynamic loads. Aircraft are designed to avoid the following aeroelastic problems:

  1. divergence where the aerodynamic forces increase the twist of a wing which further increases forces;
  2. control reversal where control activation produces an opposite aerodynamic moment that reduces, or in extreme cases reverses, the control effectiveness; and
  3. flutter which is uncontained vibration that can lead to the destruction of an aircraft.

Aeroelasticity problems can be prevented by adjusting the mass, stiffness or aerodynamics of structures which can be determined and verified through the use of calculations, ground vibration tests and flight flutter trials. Flutter of control surfaces is usually eliminated by the careful placement of mass balances.

The synthesis of aeroelasticity with thermodynamics is known as aerothermoelasticity, and its synthesis with control theory is known as aeroservoelasticity.

History

The second failure of Samuel Langley's prototype plane on the Potomac was attributed to aeroelastic effects (specifically, torsional divergence). [1] An early scientific work on the subject was George Bryan's Theory of the Stability of a Rigid Aeroplane published in 1906. [2] Problems with torsional divergence plagued aircraft in the First World War and were solved largely by trial-and-error and ad hoc stiffening of the wing. The first recorded and documented case of flutter in an aircraft was that which occurred to a Handley Page O/400 bomber during a flight in 1916, when it suffered a violent tail oscillation, which caused extreme distortion of the rear fuselage and the elevators to move asymmetrically. Although the aircraft landed safely, in the subsequent investigation F. W. Lanchester was consulted. One of his recommendations was that left and right elevators should be rigidly connected by a stiff shaft, which was to subsequently become a design requirement. In addition, the National Physical Laboratory (NPL) was asked to investigate the phenomenon theoretically, which was subsequently carried out by Leonard Bairstow and Arthur Fage. [2]

In 1926, Hans Reissner published a theory of wing divergence, leading to much further theoretical research on the subject. [1] The term aeroelasticity itself was coined by Harold Roxbee Cox and Alfred Pugsley at the Royal Aircraft Establishment (RAE), Farnborough in the early 1930s. [2]

In the development of aeronautical engineering at Caltech, Theodore von Kármán started a course "Elasticity applied to Aeronautics". [3] After teaching the course for one term, Kármán passed it over to Ernest Edwin Sechler, who developed aeroelasticity in that course and in publication of textbooks on the subject. [4] [5]

In 1947, Arthur Roderick Collar defined aeroelasticity as "the study of the mutual interaction that takes place within the triangle of the inertial, elastic, and aerodynamic forces acting on structural members exposed to an airstream, and the influence of this study on design". [6]

Static aeroelasticity

In an aeroplane, two significant static aeroelastic effects may occur. Divergence is a phenomenon in which the elastic twist of the wing suddenly becomes theoretically infinite, typically causing the wing to fail. Control reversal is a phenomenon occurring only in wings with ailerons or other control surfaces, in which these control surfaces reverse their usual functionality (e.g., the rolling direction associated with a given aileron moment is reversed).

Divergence

Divergence occurs when a lifting surface deflects under aerodynamic load in a direction which further increases lift in a positive feedback loop. The increased lift deflects the structure further, which eventually brings the structure to the point of divergence. Unlike flutter, which is another aeroelastic problem, instead of irregular oscillations, divergence causes the lifting surface to move in the same direction and when it comes to point of divergence the structure deforms.

Control reversal

Control surface reversal is the loss (or reversal) of the expected response of a control surface, due to deformation of the main lifting surface. For simple models (e.g. single aileron on an Euler-Bernoulli beam), control reversal speeds can be derived analytically as for torsional divergence. Control reversal can be used to aerodynamic advantage, and forms part of the Kaman servo-flap rotor design. [7]

Dynamic aeroelasticity

Dynamic aeroelasticity studies the interactions among aerodynamic, elastic, and inertial forces. Examples of dynamic aeroelastic phenomena are:

Flutter

Flutter is a dynamic instability of an elastic structure in a fluid flow, caused by positive feedback between the body's deflection and the force exerted by the fluid flow. In a linear system, "flutter point" is the point at which the structure is undergoing simple harmonic motion—zero net damping—and so any further decrease in net damping will result in a self-oscillation and eventual failure. "Net damping" can be understood as the sum of the structure's natural positive damping and the negative damping of the aerodynamic force. Flutter can be classified into two types: hard flutter, in which the net damping decreases very suddenly, very close to the flutter point; and soft flutter, in which the net damping decreases gradually. [8]

In water the mass ratio of the pitch inertia of the foil to that of the circumscribing cylinder of fluid is generally too low for binary flutter to occur, as shown by explicit solution of the simplest pitch and heave flutter stability determinant. [9]

Video of the Tacoma Narrows Bridge being destroyed through aeroelastic fluttering

Structures exposed to aerodynamic forces—including wings and aerofoils, but also chimneys and bridges—are generally designed carefully within known parameters to avoid flutter. Blunt shapes, such as chimneys, can give off a continuous stream of vortices known as a Kármán vortex street, which can induce structural oscillations. Strakes are typically wrapped around chimneys to stop the formation of these vortices.

In complex structures where both the aerodynamics and the mechanical properties of the structure are not fully understood, flutter can be discounted only through detailed testing. Even changing the mass distribution of an aircraft or the stiffness of one component can induce flutter in an apparently unrelated aerodynamic component. At its mildest, this can appear as a "buzz" in the aircraft structure, but at its most violent, it can develop uncontrollably with great speed and cause serious damage to the aircraft or lead to its destruction, [10] as in Northwest Airlines Flight 2 in 1938, Braniff Flight 542 in 1959, or the prototypes for Finland's VL Myrsky fighter aircraft in the early 1940s. Famously, the original Tacoma Narrows Bridge was destroyed as a result of aeroelastic fluttering. [11]

Aeroservoelasticity

In some cases, automatic control systems have been demonstrated to help prevent or limit flutter-related structural vibration. [12]

Propeller whirl flutter

Propeller whirl flutter is a special case of flutter involving the aerodynamic and inertial effects of a rotating propeller and the stiffness of the supporting nacelle structure. Dynamic instability can occur involving pitch and yaw degrees of freedom of the propeller and the engine supports leading to an unstable precession of the propeller. [13] Failure of the engine supports led to whirl flutter occurring on two Lockheed L-188 Electra aircraft, in 1959 on Braniff Flight 542 and again in 1960 on Northwest Orient Airlines Flight 710. [14]

Transonic aeroelasticity

Flow is highly non-linear in the transonic regime, dominated by moving shock waves. Avoiding flutter is mission-critical for aircraft that fly through transonic Mach numbers. The role of shock waves was first analyzed by Holt Ashley. [15] A phenomenon that impacts stability of aircraft known as "transonic dip", in which the flutter speed can get close to flight speed, was reported in May 1976 by Farmer and Hanson of the Langley Research Center. [16]

Buffeting

Buffeting of the fin caused by the breakdown of the vortex on the NASA HARV F/A-18 wing. 309908main EC89-0096-206 full.jpg
Buffeting of the fin caused by the breakdown of the vortex on the NASA HARV F/A-18 wing.

Buffeting is a high-frequency instability, caused by airflow separation or shock wave oscillations from one object striking another. It is caused by a sudden impulse of load increasing. It is a random forced vibration. Generally it affects the tail unit of the aircraft structure due to air flow downstream of the wing.[ citation needed ]

The methods for buffet detection are:

  1. Pressure coefficient diagram [17]
  2. Pressure divergence at trailing edge
  3. Computing separation from trailing edge based on Mach number
  4. Normal force fluctuating divergence

Prediction and cure

Mass balances protruding from an aileron used to suppress flutter Mass Balancing ME Bf110.jpg
Mass balances protruding from an aileron used to suppress flutter

In the period 1950–1970, AGARD developed the Manual on Aeroelasticity which details the processes used in solving and verifying aeroelastic problems along with standard examples that can be used to test numerical solutions. [18]

Aeroelasticity involves not just the external aerodynamic loads and the way they change but also the structural, damping and mass characteristics of the aircraft. Prediction involves making a mathematical model of the aircraft as a series of masses connected by springs and dampers which are tuned to represent the dynamic characteristics of the aircraft structure. The model also includes details of applied aerodynamic forces and how they vary.

The model can be used to predict the flutter margin and, if necessary, test fixes to potential problems. Small carefully chosen changes to mass distribution and local structural stiffness can be very effective in solving aeroelastic problems.

Methods of predicting flutter in linear structures include the p-method, the k-method and the p-k method. [7]

For nonlinear systems, flutter is usually interpreted as a limit cycle oscillation (LCO), and methods from the study of dynamical systems can be used to determine the speed at which flutter will occur. [19]

Media

These videos detail the Active Aeroelastic Wing two-phase NASA-Air Force flight research program to investigate the potential of aerodynamically twisting flexible wings to improve maneuverability of high-performance aircraft at transonic and supersonic speeds, with traditional control surfaces such as ailerons and leading-edge flaps used to induce the twist.

Notable aeroelastic failures

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Aerodynamics</span> Branch of dynamics concerned with studying the motion of air

Aerodynamics is the study of the motion of air, particularly when affected by a solid object, such as an airplane wing. It involves topics covered in the field of fluid dynamics and its subfield of gas dynamics, and is an important domain of study in aeronautics. The term aerodynamics is often used synonymously with gas dynamics, the difference being that "gas dynamics" applies to the study of the motion of all gases, and is not limited to air. The formal study of aerodynamics began in the modern sense in the eighteenth century, although observations of fundamental concepts such as aerodynamic drag were recorded much earlier. Most of the early efforts in aerodynamics were directed toward achieving heavier-than-air flight, which was first demonstrated by Otto Lilienthal in 1891. Since then, the use of aerodynamics through mathematical analysis, empirical approximations, wind tunnel experimentation, and computer simulations has formed a rational basis for the development of heavier-than-air flight and a number of other technologies. Recent work in aerodynamics has focused on issues related to compressible flow, turbulence, and boundary layers and has become increasingly computational in nature.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Tailplane</span> Small lifting surface of a fixed-wing aircraft

A tailplane, also known as a horizontal stabiliser, is a small lifting surface located on the tail (empennage) behind the main lifting surfaces of a fixed-wing aircraft as well as other non-fixed-wing aircraft such as helicopters and gyroplanes. Not all fixed-wing aircraft have tailplanes. Canards, tailless and flying wing aircraft have no separate tailplane, while in V-tail aircraft the vertical stabiliser, rudder, and the tail-plane and elevator are combined to form two diagonal surfaces in a V layout.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Tacoma Narrows Bridge (1940)</span> Suspension bridge in Washington, US, collapsed in 1940

The 1940 Tacoma Narrows Bridge, the first bridge at this location, was a suspension bridge in the U.S. state of Washington that spanned the Tacoma Narrows strait of Puget Sound between Tacoma and the Kitsap Peninsula. It opened to traffic on July 1, 1940, and dramatically collapsed into Puget Sound on November 7 of the same year. The bridge's collapse has been described as "spectacular" and in subsequent decades "has attracted the attention of engineers, physicists, and mathematicians". Throughout its short existence, it was the world's third-longest suspension bridge by main span, behind the Golden Gate Bridge and the George Washington Bridge.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Grumman X-29</span> 1984 experimental aircraft family by Grumman

The Grumman X-29 was an American experimental aircraft that tested a forward-swept wing, canard control surfaces, and other novel aircraft technologies. The X-29 was developed by Grumman, and the two built were flown by NASA and the United States Air Force. The aerodynamic instability of the X-29's airframe required the use of computerized fly-by-wire control. Composite materials were used to control the aeroelastic divergent twisting experienced by forward-swept wings, and to reduce weight. The aircraft first flew in 1984, and two X-29s were flight tested through 1991.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Vortex shedding</span> Oscillating flow effect resulting from fluid passing over a blunt body

In fluid dynamics, vortex shedding is an oscillating flow that takes place when a fluid such as air or water flows past a bluff body at certain velocities, depending on the size and shape of the body. In this flow, vortices are created at the back of the body and detach periodically from either side of the body forming a Kármán vortex street. The fluid flow past the object creates alternating low-pressure vortices on the downstream side of the object. The object will tend to move toward the low-pressure zone.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Forward-swept wing</span> Aircraft wing configuration

A forward-swept wing or reverse-swept wing is an aircraft wing configuration in which the quarter-chord line of the wing has a forward sweep. Typically, the leading edge also sweeps forward.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Stabilizer (aeronautics)</span> Aircraft component

An aircraft stabilizer is an aerodynamic surface, typically including one or more movable control surfaces, that provides longitudinal (pitch) and/or directional (yaw) stability and control. A stabilizer can feature a fixed or adjustable structure on which any movable control surfaces are hinged, or it can itself be a fully movable surface such as a stabilator. Depending on the context, "stabilizer" may sometimes describe only the front part of the overall surface.

In aeronautics, inertia coupling, also referred to as inertial coupling and inertial roll coupling, is a potentially catastrophic phenomenon of high-speed flight which caused the loss of aircraft and pilots before the design features to counter it were understood. It occurs when the inertia of a heavy fuselage exceeds the ability of the aerodynamic forces and moments generated by the wing and empennage to stabilize the aircraft. The problem became apparent as jet fighter aircraft and research aircraft were developed with narrow wingspans, that had relatively low roll inertia, caused by a long slender high-density fuselage, compared to the pitch and yaw inertias.

The dynamic stability of an aircraft refers to how the aircraft behaves after it has been disturbed following steady non-oscillating flight.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Boeing X-53 Active Aeroelastic Wing</span> Experimental aircraft

The X-53 Active Aeroelastic Wing (AAW) development program is a completed American research project that was undertaken jointly by the Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL), Boeing Phantom Works and NASA's Dryden Flight Research Center, where the technology was flight tested on a modified McDonnell Douglas F/A-18 Hornet. Active Aeroelastic Wing Technology is a technology that integrates wing aerodynamics, controls, and structure to harness and control wing aeroelastic twist at high speeds and dynamic pressures. By using multiple leading and trailing edge controls like "aerodynamic tabs", subtle amounts of aeroelastic twist can be controlled to provide large amounts of wing control power, while minimizing maneuver air loads at high wing strain conditions or aerodynamic drag at low wing strain conditions. This program was the first full-scale proof of AAW technology.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Canard (aeronautics)</span> Aircraft configuration in which a small wing is placed in front of the main wing

In aeronautics, a canard is a wing configuration in which a small forewing or foreplane is placed forward of the main wing of a fixed-wing aircraft or a weapon. The term "canard" may be used to describe the aircraft itself, the wing configuration, or the foreplane. Canard wings are also extensively used in guided missiles and smart bombs.

The term controlled aerodynamic instability phenomena was first used by Cristiano Augusto Trein in the Nineteenth KKCNN Symposium on Civil Engineering held in Kyoto, Japan, in 2006. The concept is based on the idea that aerodynamic instability phenomena, such as Kármán vortex street, flutter, galloping and buffeting, can be driven into a controlled motion and be used to extract energy from the flow, becoming an alternative approach for wind power generation systems.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Theodore Theodorsen</span>

Theodore Theodorsen was a Norwegian-American theoretical aerodynamicist noted for his work at NACA and for his contributions to the study of turbulence.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Wing configuration</span> Describes the general shape and layout of an aircraft wing

The wing configuration of a fixed-wing aircraft is its arrangement of lifting and related surfaces.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Flexible wing</span> Flexible airfoil

In aeronautics, a flexible wing is an airfoil or aircraft wing which can deform in flight.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Distributed propulsion</span> Engines placed along the wingspan of a plane

In aeronautics, Distributed propulsion is an arrangement in which the propulsive and related air flows are distributed over the aerodynamic surfaces of an aircraft. The purpose is to improve the craft's aerodynamic, propulsive and/or structural efficiency over an equivalent conventional design.

Guru Guruswamy is an American engineer working as Principal Scientist at Ames Research Center since 1988. He pioneered research in the area of computational aeroelasticity that involves Unsteady Aerodynamics, Finite Element Methods, Computational Fluid Dynamics, Parallel Computing and Problem Solving Environment. His innovative research was utilized in the first commercial 3-D computational aeroelasticity software developed by a major aerospace industry. The aeroelasticity legend Holt Ashley extensively referred to Guruswamy's research in his classical review paper. In 1988 he demonstrated the unique use of Transonic Small Perturbation based CFD for designing active controls to increase the safety of aircraft. It was followed by a break through development of Euler flow equations based Computational Aeroelasticy. It was cited by another Aeroelasticity legend John Dugundji of MIT as an important milestone in Aeroelasticity. A google search shows about 150 researchers took advantage Guruswamy's work based on the Euler equations for follow-up developments.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">General Dynamics–Boeing AFTI/F-111A Aardvark</span> American research aircraft

The General Dynamics–Boeing AFTI/F-111A Aardvark was a research aircraft modified from a General Dynamics F-111 Aardvark to test a Boeing-built supercritical mission adaptive wing (MAW). This MAW, in contrast to standard control surfaces, could smoothly change the shape of its airfoil in flight.

Aeroelastic tailoring is defined as "the embodiment of directional stiffness into an aircraft structural design to control aeroelastic deformation, static or dynamic, in such a fashion as to affect the aerodynamic and structural performance of that aircraft in a beneficial way", or "passive aeroelastic control". Objectives associated with aeroelastic tailoring include weight minimization, flutter, divergence, stress, roll reversal, control effectiveness, lift, drag, skin buckling, and fatigue.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Carlos Cesnik</span> Brazilian-American aerospace engineer

Carlos E. S. Cesnik is a Brazilian-American aerospace engineer, academic, and author. He is the Clarence L. (Kelly) Johnson Collegiate Professor of Aerospace Engineering and the founding Director of the Active Aeroelasticity and Structures Research Laboratory at the University of Michigan. He also directs the Airbus-Michigan Center for Aero-Servo-Elasticity of Very Flexible Aircraft (CASE-VFA).

References

  1. 1 2 Bisplinghoff, R. L.; Ashley, H.; Halfman, H. (1996). Aeroelasticity. Dover Science. ISBN   0-486-69189-6.
  2. 1 2 3 "AeroSociety Podcast".
  3. Theodore von Kármán (1967) The Wind and Beyond, page 155.
  4. Ernest Edwin Sechler and L. G. Dunn (1942) Airplane Structural Analysis and Design from Internet Archive.
  5. Sechler, E. E. (1952). Elasticity in Engineering. New York: McGraw-Hill. OCLC   2295857.
  6. Collar, A. R. (1978). "The first fifty years of aeroelasticity". Aerospace. 2. 5: 12–20.
  7. 1 2 3 Hodges, D. H. and Pierce, A., Introduction to Structural Dynamics and Aeroelasticity, Cambridge, 2002, ISBN   978-0-521-80698-5.
  8. G. Dimitriadis, University of Liège, Aeroelasticity: Lecture 6: Flight testing.
  9. "Binary Flutter as an Oscillating Windmill – Scaling & Linear Analysis". Wind Engineering. 37. 2013. Archived from the original on 2014-10-29.
  10. Visual demonstration of flutter which destroys an RC aircraft on YouTube.
  11. 1 2 The adequacy of comparison between flutter in aircraft aerodynamics and Tacoma Narrows Bridge case is discussed and disputed in Yusuf K. Billah, Robert H. Scanian, "Resonance, Tacoma Bridge failure, and undergraduate physics textbooks"; Am. J. Phys. 59(2), 118–124, February 1991.
  12. "Control of Aeroelastic Response: Taming the Threats" (PDF).
  13. Reed, Wilmer H. (July 1967). "Review of propeller-rotor whirl flutter" (PDF). Nasa. Retrieved 2019-11-15.
  14. "Lessons Learned From Civil Aviation Accidents" . Retrieved 2019-12-14.
  15. Ashley, Holt (1980). "Role of Shocks in the 'Sub-Transonic' Flutter Phenomenon". Journal of Aircraft. 17 (3): 187–197. doi:10.2514/3.57891.
  16. Farmer, M. G.; Hanson, P. W. (1976). "Comparison of Super-critical and Conventional Wing Flutter Characteristics". NASA Tm X-72837. doi:10.2514/6.1976-1560. hdl: 2060/19760015071 . S2CID   120598336.
  17. Golestani, A.; et al. (2015). "An experimental study of buffet detection on supercritical airfoils in transonic regime". Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part G: Journal of Aerospace Engineering. 229 (2): 312–322. doi:10.1177/0954410014531743. S2CID   110673867.
  18. "Manual on Aeroelasticity - Subject and author Index" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on December 14, 2019. Retrieved 2019-12-14.
  19. Tang, D. M. (2004). "Effects of geometric structural nonlinearity on flutter and limit cycle oscillations of high-aspect-ratio wings". Smart Materials and Structures. 19 (3): 291–306. Bibcode:2004JFS....19..291T. doi:10.1016/j.jfluidstructs.2003.10.007.
  20. Kepert, J. L. (1993). Aircraft Accident Investigation at ARL-The first 50 years (PDF) (Report). Defence Science and Technology Organisation. Archived (PDF) from the original on September 27, 2019.

Further reading