Professional Documents
Culture Documents
INTRODUCTION
Aeroelasticity concerns the interaction of flexible structures with
the surrounding air flow. Since aircraft structures are particularly flexible due to weight
restrictions, aeroelasticity is commonly addressed by aeronautical engineers. As an
aircraft moves through the air, loads will act on the structure and on the surrounding air,
leading to a perturbation of the flow field, but also causing deformations of the flexible
structure. These deformations change the geometry of the structure, which in turn leads
to a change of the flow field and the aerodynamic loads, resulting in a closed loop of
loads and deformations. This loop can develop in different ways. Under most flight
conditions, the aerodynamic loads and the internal elastic loads in the structure will
converge to some equilibrium, ie. a statically deformed structure in steady air flow.
There are cases, however, where the loop becomes unstable, causing increasing
deformations with or without oscillations, finally leading to structural failure of the
aircraft. Even though the basic physics behind most aeroelastic phenomena were
understood very early, the research on this topic is still very active, aiming at higher
accuracy in the predictions and increased efficiency of the analysis tools.
Aeroelasticity is the branch of physics and engineering that
studies the interactions between the inertial, elastic, and aerodynamic forces that occur
when an elastic body is exposed to a fluid flow. Although historical studies have been
focused on aeronautical applications, recent research has found applications in fields
such as energy harvesting and understanding snoring. The study of aeroelasticity may be
broadly classified into two fields: static aeroelasticity, which deals with the static or
steady response of an elastic body to a fluid flow; and dynamic aeroelasticity, which
deals with the bodys dynamic (typically vibrational) response. Aeroelasticity draws on
the study of fluid mechanics, solid mechanics, structural dynamics and dynamical
systems. The synthesis of aeroelasticity with thermodynamics is known as
aerothermoelasticity, and its synthesis with control theory is known as aero-servoelasticity.
2. AEROELASTIC PHENOMENA
The aeroelastic phenomena considered as problems in current
aircraft industry are similar to those at the very beginning of flight. In general, two
classes can be defined: static and dynamic aeroelastic phenomena. Static aeroelasticity
concerns all phenomena that do not involve oscillations, and that are independent of the
mass properties of the aircraft. All the phenomena can be shown by Venn diagram as
shown in Fig. 1
same time, however, the wing experiences a nose-down moment due to the lift produced
in the trailing edge region. This moment twists the entire wing, causing negative lift. In
fact, depending on wing stiffness and geometry, there is a certain airspeed, called the
reversal speed, where the positive lift of the aileron deflection is compensated by
negative lift due to wing twist, making any control input on the aileron ineffective. At
airspeeds exceeding the reversal speed, the aileron efficiency will have a negative value,
i.e. the airplane rolls in the direction opposite to the pilot input. A problem often
experienced in the early days of aviation was wing divergence.
Divergence characterizes the phenomenon where an initial
deformation of the wing leads to aerodynamic loads that increase the deformation
further, finally leading to failure of the structure. Eventhough the deformation increases
with time, this phenomenon is commonly classified as a static phenomenon, since there
are no oscillations involved, and since it is independent of the mass properties of the
wing. One of the most important dynamic phenomena is flutter. Flutter occurs when the
unsteady aerodynamics cause forces that tend to increase the total energy involved in
the motion of the structure and the surrounding air. In other words, flutter is a fluidstructure interaction with negative damping, leading to oscillations with a magnitude
increasing with time. Virtually all aircraft structures will suffer from flutter at some
airspeed, and this phenomenon is one of the greatest concerns related to aeroelasticity in
the aircraft industry today. The flutter phenomenon can be particularly difficult to
predict due to the complex physics involved. Factors such as control surface free play,
structural imperfections or slight changes in the mass distribution may be enough to
cause flutter.
Other subjects, closely related to the flutter phenomenon, are gust
response and vibration. Especially when aircraft operate in the vicinity of the flutter
speed, the damping of the fluid-structure interaction may be very low, making the
aircraft very sensitive to turbulence in the air. Even though stability may be guaranteed,
the ride quality may not be acceptable and the structure will be subject to larger
deformations leading to higher loads and reduced lifetime due to structural fatigue.
3. HISTORY
Aeroelastic loads created by lifting surface distortion have been an
important part of aeronautical engineering from the very beginning of controlled,
powered flight. In the late 1890s and early 1900s, Professor Samuel P. Langley
developed an airplane, the Aerodrome, capable of being launched from a houseboat
anchored in the Potomac River near Washington, D.C. This airplane failed on each of
two attempts.
The first failure, on October 7, 1903, ( Fig. 2 ) the disaster was
probably due to a front-wing guy post catching on the catapult launch mechanism. The
failure of the second (and final) Aerodrome flight. For a number of years this failure
was attributed to insufficient wing torsional stiffness that led to structural static
divergence, an instability that leads to excessive torsional deformation of the wing.
pilot, but the wings are also easily distorted by the airstream that may produce self
excited, unintended airloads. During the first decade of powered flight, airplane speeds
were low enough and structural stiffness large enough that loads due to aeroelastic
deformation were inconsequential for most airplanes.
exceptions. Like the Wright Brothers Flyer, the effectiveness of Bleriots wing warping
roll control required relatively low wing torsional stiffness. As engine power and
airspeed increased, low torsional stiffness created aeroelastic problems that led to wing
failures at high speeds.
During World War I a self-excited, vibratory aeroelastic instability,
later called flutter, occurred on the horizontal tail of the British Handley Page O/400 biplane bomber. Flutter is a dynamic, oscillatory structural instability enabled by
interactions between unsteady aerodynamic forces and moments created by vibratory
motion of lifting surfaces and the vehicles to which these surfaces are attached.
Following World War I, engines continued to become more powerful and horsepowerto-weight ratios increased. As airspeeds increased, monoplane designs reappeared, this
time as low drag, semi-monocoque designs. A new type of aeroelastic instability, called
wing-aileron flutter plagued aircraft designs. Just as the wing warping type of control
had led to wing divergence, the new aileron control surfaces led to dynamic aeroelastic
failures. Wing-aileron flutter is a self-excited vibration that occurs when lift generated
by the oscillation of an aileron creates wing bending or torsion deformation. The
oscillation frequency depends on airspeed because the aileron acts like a weathervane;
its rotational stiffness and natural frequency increase as airspeed increases. The aileron
acceleration, as well as the airloads transmitted to the wing, force the wing oscillations
and create interactive coupled vibration.
4.1 Flutter
Flutter belongs to a special class of mechanics problems called nonconservative problems.
airspeed and altitude to allow two or more aircraft vibration modes to interact or couple
together. Flutter is categorized into at least five different areas, each with its own
characteristic modes of motion: 1) classical flutter wing bending & torsion; 2) control
surface flutter surface rotation and wing bending; 3) empennage flutter fuselage
torsion and tail torsion; 4) stall flutter wing torsion; 5) body freedom flutter wing
bending and fuselage pitch. Aircraft and missile resonant natural frequencies, depend on
stiffness, mass distribution, airspeed, altitude and Mach number.
Disturbances decay with time at an airspeed corresponding to
point A (Fig.4.1.1) where the resonant natural frequencies are well separated. As
airspeed is increased to point B, an initial disturbance produces (after some transient
motion) harmonic oscillatory motion at a fixed amplitude. An attempt to operate at the
airspeed associated with point C will lead to disaster, since the amplitude of the
response to the initial disturbance grows rapidly with time. The motions associated with
airspeeds at A, B, C are classified as stable, neutrally stable and unstable, respectively.
Flutter is not forced resonant response. The airstream causing flutter is steady and nonoscillatory until the system is disturbed.
damping, resonance response amplitude grows linearly with time, while the flutter
dynamic response has an exponential increase until the structure is destroyed or some
nonlinear mechanism limits the response amplitude.
One of the simplest interactions that is found in a fixed wing aircraft is the
flexure of the wing relative to the rigid fuselage. For aircraft with slender straight
cantilever wings two typical modes of motion exist. The first is a bending mode where
the wing tip flexes up and down relative to the fixed wing root. The second is a twisting
mode where the wing rotates about its stiffness axis, which is typically the spar.
Normally there is minimal effect of these two modes on structural
behaviour, with only a slight vibration being seen for each motion. The bending mode
shows up as a relatively low frequency flapping effect while twisting mode is found to
be a much higher frequency vibration. However, with the application of high-speed
airflow as a source of excitation energy, these two modes can produce motions with will
severely distort or break the wing.
The first effect is called divergence. In this case the moment produced
by the air load is greater than the structural torsional stiffness of the wing and thus it
will be twisted off the vehicle. The threshold speed for this type of failure to occur is
called divergence speed and will hopefully be much higher than any normal operating
speeds of the vehicle. Particular problems occur with swept forward wings as these have
a relatively low divergence speed.
The second effect is called flutter. In this case there is a synchronised
interaction between both modes so that energy is absorbed from the airflow in one mode
to increase the amplitude of the other. At this point the frequency of each mode has
converged to the same value so that only one combined mode is possible. The wing will
absorb energy from the airflow and will behave as an ever increasing bending and
torsion flexure until sufficient displacement is reached and the wing breaks. When the
airflow is increased to the critical point to cause this failure, it is called the flutter speed.
Again flutter should only occur at speeds much higher than operating speeds of the
aircraft, but may be induced by inappropriate ratio of wing torsion and bending
stiffness, or by addition of wing mass at points a long way behind the wing spar.
An estimate of the occurrence of these conditions and the interaction of airflow on a
wing can be obtained using a simple 2-degree of freedom (2dof) dynamic model of the
wing.
symmetrical aileron rotation produces rolling acceleration and roll rate. The ability to
create a terminal or steady-state roll rate is the primary measure of aileron effectiveness.
10
11
12
6. NONLINEAR AEROELASTICITY
High-Altitude Long-Endurance (HALE) aircraft have wings with
high aspect ratios. During operations of these aircraft, the wings can undergo large
defections. These large deflections can change the natural frequencies of the wing
which, in turn, can produce noticeable changes in its aeroelastic behavior. This behavior
can be accounted for only by using a rigorous nonlinear aeroelastic analysis. Results are
obtained from such an analysis for aeroelastic behavior as well as overall fight dynamic
characteristics of a complete aircraft model representative of HALE aircraft. When the
nonlinear fexibility effects are taken into account in the calculation of trim and fight
dynamics characteristics, the predicted aeroelastic behavior of the complete aircraft
turns out to be very different from what it would be without such effects. The overall
fight dynamic characteristics of the aircraft also change due to wing flexibility.
Nonlinear aeroelastic analysis has gathered a lot of momentum in the
last decade due to understanding of nonlinear dynamics as applied to complex systems
and the availability of the required mathematical tools. The studies conducted by
Dugundji and his co-workers are a combination of analysis and experimental validation
of the effects of dynamic stall on aeroelastic instabilities for simple cantilevered
laminated plate-like wings.
ONERA stall model was used for aerodynamic loads. Tang and
Dowell have studied the flutter and forced response of a fexible rotor blade. In this
study, geometrical structural nonlinearity and free-play structural nonlinearity is taken
into consideration. Again, high-angle-of-attack unsteady aerodynamics was modelled
using the ONERA dynamic stall model. Virgin and Dowell have studied the nonlinear
behaviour of airfoils with control surface free-play and investigated the limit-cycle
oscillations and chaotic motion of airfoils. Gilliatt, Strganac and Kurdila have
investigated the nonlinear aeroelastic behavior of an airfoil experimentally and
analytically. A nonlinear support mechanism was constructed and is used to represent
continuous structural nonlinearities.
13
14
7. ANALYSIS
Historically, aeroelastic problems were first encountered when
airplane design aimed at higher airspeed and lower weight. As a result of this,
aeroelastic problems occurred repeatedly during test flights, and the need for analysis
tools was established since it was both expensive and dangerous to investigate the
aeroelastic behavior of aircraft by flight testing only. In many cases, rules of thumb
were applied due to lack of knowledge. In the 1930s, scientists started to research the
theory behind many aeroelastic phenomena and simple analysis tools were established.
Any analysis was based on the so-called equations of motion relating elastic, inertial,
damping and aerodynamic loads to describe the motion of the system. The theoretical
model made it possible to understand the physics, but it was hard to apply the theory to
real aircraft. To do this, a numerical model of the aircraft structure was coupled with
forces from an aerodynamic model. But due to simplifications in both the structural
model and in the aerodynamics, errors were always present.
Due to the complexity of the unsteady aerodynamics, most
simplifications were made for the aerodynamic forces. One of the simplest models
known as strip theory is still used today. In strip theory, the three-dimensional
aerodynamics are approximated by section-wise two-dimensional flow. This method
yields typically good results for long slender wings. Due to the two-dimensional
aerodynamics, the aerodynamic forces are over predicted, in most cases leading to
conservative results for stability. Aircraft configurations, however, have changed, and
many aircraft wings became shorter with lower aspect ratios and could no longer be
assumed to be slender, making the strip theory too conservative. Also, the structural and
aerodynamic modeling capabilities were improved. In the recent years, entire software
packages were developed for relatively user-friendly modeling and analysis of aircraft
structures. ZAERO, for example, uses an aerodynamic method based on linear unsteady potential flow, with the possibility to model bodies. In modern aviation,
properties of flight control systems are commonly included in the analysis as well, since
the closed-loop nature of such systems can interact with aeroelastic phenomena. This
research area, having the objective of analyzing control systems considering aeroelastic
interactions, is commonly referred to as aero-servo-elasticity (ASE).
15
16
This can be done in several ways. Many active aeroelastic concepts aim primarily at
reducing the structural weight, and compensate for the resulting flexibility increase by
active means. Other concepts aim directly at increasing aircraft performance by means
that would not be possible with stiff structures. A few examples are presented in the
following.
In the US, the Active Aeroelastic Wing (AAW) research project was
initiated for investigation of a leading-edge control surface on a flexible wing. The
aircraft considered is the F-18 ( Fig.5).The F-18 in its original configuration suffered
from severe problems with low aileron efficiency due to a highly flexible wing
structure. The solution to this problem was a stiffer, but also heavier wing. In the AAW
project, however, the original wing was reused, equipped with a leading edge aileron.
Leading edge ailerons usually are not very efficient when applied to stiff structures.
Applied to flexible structures, however, leading edge ailerons cause aeroelastic twist
that actually increases the aileron efficiency, hence improving maneuverability
especially at high airspeeds. The main advantage of the active concept is a considerably
lighter wing.
Similar research is going on in Europe, where the Active
Aeroelastic Aircraft Structures project focuses on different concepts for improving
aircraft performance by means of active aeroelasticity. Different concepts in the areas of
aerodynamic control surfaces, all-movable control surfaces and active and passive
structures are investigated. The concepts are demonstrated in laboratory or wind tunnel
tests using several demonstrators. The most frequently used demonstrator within the
project is the European Research Aeroelastic Wind Tunnel Model (EuRAM) at the
TsAGI Institute for Aeroelasticity in Moscow. The model is a 1/10 length scale model of
a 57 meters span transport aircraft. Similar to the AAW concept, a wing-tip control
surface was attached to the wing. To increase the efficiency compared to a conventional
leading edge flap, however, the control surface was placed upstream.
17
18
suppression using actively controlled ailerons was demonstrated on a B-52 test aircraft.
19
9. APPLICATIONS
Flow induced vibrations appear in many circumstances in nature and
in different engineering concepts. Trees and flowers move in the wind, and flags flutter.
Wind harps give an enjoyable sound and is an example of "positive" flow induced
effects. Civil engineering structures, such as bridges and tall buildings, are typical
constructions where flow induced vibrations must be taken into account. Flow induced
vibrations are of major concern in the design of modern tube and shell heat exchangers
(the problem is especially critical in nuclear steam generators that often are designed to
last 30 years or more). Fluid flow through a flexible pipe, submarine periscopes, oil pipe
lines, television antennas and telephone wires often encounter vibration troubles of
aeroelastic origin.
20
Sluices for the regulation of water flows in rivers and dams vibrate
under some circumstances, and blades in hydraulic and thermal turbomachines (both
axial and centrifugal flow machines) are subject to large time-dependent variations in
the oncoming flow. Vibrations of measurement instruments or their supports, such as
long tubes holding neutron flux and temperature sensors in nuclear power plants reactor
cores, are of concern.
vibrations are of importance, harbor and marine piles, offshore drilling and production
platforms, smoke stacks and chimneys, missiles on launch pads, heat shields in
afterburners of jet engines, propellers of aircraft and rotor blades of helicopters, can be
mentioned. In other cases unsteady flow effects and induced vibrations lead to high
noise levels, which can today be of major environmental concern.
From the above it is clear that flow induced vibrations can appear
in any sort of fluid (such as, for example, air, water, oil), but also in mixtures such as,
for example, two- phase flows.
21
22
11. CONCLUSION
This thesis summarizes investigations performed within design,
analysis and experimental evaluation of flexible aircraft structures. Not only the
problems, but rather the opportunities related to aeroelasticity are discussed.
Aeroelasticity concerns the interaction of flexible structures with the surrounding
airflow. The two classifications, say, static and dynamic aeroelasticity causes instability
to the various flight conditions and even the structural failure. Aeroelastic effects were
affected since the time of invention of aerodrome by Prof. Samuel P Langley. Several
analysis tools and numerical models coupled with forces from aerodynamic model also
introduced. Later Strip theory introduced which could provide changes to many aircraft
configurations. Thus, aircraft designing begins to incorporate the aerodynamic effects.
Many researches shows several remedial measures to aeroelastic problems like
restricted weight of wing, modifications of structural and aerodynamic properties, study
on active aeroelasticity and many others. Even though the basic physics behind most
aeroelastic phenomena were understood very early, scaling possibilities of actuators and
materials have to be considered, as well as energy consumption, reliability, and other
details that often remain unaddressed in research projects. And several researches on
this topic is still very active, aiming at higher accuracy in the predictions and increased
efficiency of the analysis tools.
23
12. REFERENCE
D.H. Hodges and G.A. Pierce, Introduction to Structural Dynamics and
Aeroelasticity , Cambridge University Press, 2002, ISBN: 0521806984.
E.H. Dowell, E.F. Crawley, H.C. Curtiss, Jr, D.A. Peters, R.H. Scanlan, F.
Sisto, A Modern Course in Aeroelasticity , Kluwer Academic, 1995, ISBN
0792327888.
J.R. Wright and J.E. Cooper, Introduction to Aircraft Aeroelasticity and Loads,
Wiley, 2008, I6SBN: 0470858400
24