crd fighter wing design example 2 - metuyyaman/avt086/kolonay/ray_kolonay_6.pdf · crd fighter wing...
TRANSCRIPT
Kolonay 1
CRD
Fighter Wing Design Example 2
• 32,000. lbs tip load
• 17 in. z-disp allowable
• Von-Mises stress constraintσt = σc = 60,000. psi
σxy = 40, 000. psi
Nonlinear
• Flutter Only Design
Uf = 14565.46 in/sec
ωf = 17.51 Hz
designed weight = 426.91
(14.22% decrease from initial)
•Flutter, stress, and displacement Design4.8 hr YMP
Uf = 14571.53 in/sec
ωf = 18.74 Hz
designed weight = 462.91 lbs
(7.0% decrease from initial)
M∞ = 0.93,α0=0.5°, 20% Increase inUf,Stress and Displacement Constraints
Nonlinear Unsteady Aeroelastic Optimization
Kolonay 2
CRD
Fighter Wing Design Example 2
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
-0.2
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
Outer Loop Iteration Number
Nor
mal
ized
Con
stra
int/O
bjec
tvie
Fun
ctio
n V
alue
Objective Function
Flutter Constraint
Displacement Constraint Node 86
Stress Constraint CSHEAR # 9
Stress Constraint CSHEAR # 40
M∞ = 0.93,α0=0.5°, Flutter, Stress and Disp.
Nonlinear Unsteady Aeroelastic Optimization
Kolonay 3
CRD
Fighter Wing Design Example 2
X
YZ
317.
295.
274.
253.
231.
210.
189.
167.
146.
125.
103.
82.
60.
39.
18.
-3.6
X
YZ ∆v6 = +0.46 lbs
∆v7 = -0.24 lbs
∆v8 = -0.03 lbs
∆v9 = 0.06 lbs
∆v23 = -0.07 lbs
∆v26= -0.49 lbs
∆v24= +4.47 lbs
∆v25= -0.45 lbs
∆v1 = +0.42 lbs
%
M∞ = 0.93,α0=0.5°, Flutter, Stress and Disp.
Flut./Flut., Stress, Disp. % Diff.,∆w
Nonlinear Unsteady Aeroelastic Optimization
Kolonay 4
CRD
Fighter Wing Design Example 2
X
YZ
41.
38.
35.
33.
30.
27.
24.
22.
19.
16.
14.
11.
8.0
5.3
2.6
-.18
X
YZ
∆v2 = 0.00 lbs
∆v10= 0.00 lbs ∆v19= 0.00 lbs
∆v20= -0.02 lbs
∆v21= +1.32 lbs
∆v22= 0.0 lbs
∆v5 = 0.00 lbs
∆v4 = +0.26 lbs
∆v3 = 0.00 lbs
%
M∞ = 0.93,α0=0.5°, Flutter, Stress and Disp.
Flut./Flut., Stress, Disp. % Diff.,∆w
Nonlinear Unsteady Aeroelastic Optimization
Kolonay 5
CRD
Fighter Wing Design Example 2
X
Y
Z
254.
236.
218.
200.
181.
163.
145.
127.
109.
91.
73.
55.
37.
19.
.79
-17.
X
Y
Z
∆v11= +0.79 lbs
∆v12= +0.64 lbs
∆v13= +0.36 lbs
∆v14= -0.13 lbs
∆v16= -6.97 lbs
∆v17= -0.80 lbs
∆v18= -0.22 lbs
∆v15= +36.10 lbs
%
M∞ = 0.93,α0=0.5°, Flutter, Stress and Disp.
Flut./Flut., Stress, Disp. % Diff.,∆w
Nonlinear Unsteady Aeroelastic Optimization
Kolonay 6
CRD
Concluding Remarks on IRM Flutter Design
• IRM computationally efficient transonic unsteady aeroelastic designmethod.
• Did not update unsteady aerodynamics every exact analysis.
• Found nonlinear term in sensitivity analysis negligible for cases tested(fully analytic sensitivities).
• Compared linear versus nonlinear designs for transonic regime (differin both sizing and material distribution).
• IRM not restricted to TSD
Nonlinear Unsteady Aeroelastic Optimization
Kolonay 7
CRD
Potential Research Areas in NonlinearUnsteady Aeroelastic Design
• More efficient functional representation of unsteady aerodynamicforces in the Laplace domain. (ASE applications)
• Higher level CFD theory for mean flow solutions
• Include rigid body modes
• Further investigation of nonlinear term in damping sensitivities
• Alternate unsteady aerodynamic force approximations
• Investigate other nonlinear flow phenomena (tail buffet, LCO etc.)
Nonlinear Unsteady Aeroelastic Optimization
Kolonay 8
CRD
Critical Issues/Requirements• Requirements
- Accurate maneuver loads and aeroelastic response predictions are required forstructural design
- Well established linear methods exist for subsonic and supersonic flight- Linear methods are efficient, but not accurate when applied to Transonic Flow
Conditions
• Transonic Flow- Mixture of Subsonic and Supersonic Flow with Shocks at Interface- Flow Field Behavior is Highly Nonlinear across the Shock- Costly Partial Differential Equations must be Solved to Accurately Predict the
Transonic Pressure Field
Nonlinear Static Aeroelasticity For Design
Kolonay 9
CRD
Objectives/Scope
• Develop an Efficient and Accurate Analysis Technique, for the MDOEnvironment, Capable of Determining the Aeroelastic Response of aLifting Surface with an Articulated Control Surface inTransonic Flow
• Use the Technique to Predict the Rolling Performance and StaticAeroelastic Phenomena of a Lifting Surface in Transonic Flow Includ-ing Flow Nonlinearities and Aeroelastic Effects
Nonlinear Static Aeroelasticity For Design
Kolonay 10
CRD
Steady Aeroelastic Analysis
• Define Control Surface Effectiveness
• Control Surface Effectiveness
Indicates Ability of a Particular Control Surface to Generate a Rolling Moment
Control Surface Reversal Occurs whenε = 0
εCMδaflexible
CMδarigid
-------------------------=
Nonlinear Static Aeroelasticity For Design
Kolonay 11
CRD
Rectangular Wing Example[15]
Nonlinear Static Aeroelasticity For Design
120 in
18 in
Aero Model and CAP-TSD Mesh
6% Parabolic Airfoil
240 in
y
x
Elastic Axes (.33C)
C.G. (.43C)
72 in
Structural Model
Kolonay 12
CRD
Rectangular Wing Example[15]
Nonlinear Static Aeroelasticity For Design
0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5
0.005
0.010
0.015
0.020
0.025
M
CM
R
Nonlinear CAP-TSD
Linear CAP-TSD
Linear ASTROS
Mach Number
CM
rig
id
Rigid Rolling Moment vs. Mach Number
Kolonay 13
CRD
Rectangular Wing Example[15]
Nonlinear Static Aeroelasticity For Design
ε ε
Control Surface Effectiveness
M=0.90 M=1.20M=0.70
0.0 100.0 200.0 300.0-0.2
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
CM
A/C
MR
q (psf)
CM
A/C
MR
q (psf)
CM
A/C
MR
q (psf)
M=.70 Nonlinear
M=.70 Linear
M=.70 ASTROS Linear
0.0 100.0 200.0 300.0
-1.0
-0.5
0.0
0.5
1.0
M=.90 Nonlinear
M=.90 Linear
M=.90 ASTROS Linear
0.0 100.0 200.0 300.0
-0.5
0.0
0.5
1.0
CM
A/C
MR
q (psf)
M=1.2 Nonlinear
M=1.2 Linear
M=1.2 ASTROS Linear
Dynamic Pressure Dynamic PressureDynamic Pressure
ε ε ε
Kolonay 14
CRD
Rectangular Wing Example[15]
Nonlinear Static Aeroelasticity For Design
.244
.228
.211
.195
.178
.162
.145
.129
.113
.0960
.0796
.0631
.0466
.0301
.0136
-.00283
.447
.412
.377
.342
.307
.272
.237
.202
.167
.132
.0974
.0624
.0275
-.00748
-.0424
-.0774
∆Cp Distributions
Rigid Linear Rigid Nonlinear
FreestreamM = 0.90
FreestreamM = 0.90
Kolonay 15
CRD
Rectangular Wing Example[15]
Nonlinear Static Aeroelasticity For Design
.0349
.0302
.0255
.0208
.0161
.0114
.00674
.00205
-.00265
-.00734
-.0120
-.0167
-.0214
-.0261
-.0308
-.0355
.403
.358
.313
.267
.222
.177
.132
.0865
.0412
-.00400
-.0492
-.0945
-.140
-.185
-.230
-.275
∆Cp Distribution Aeroelastic Deformation
Aeroelastic Nonlinear
FreestreamM = 0.90q = 250 psf
FreestreamM = 0.90q = 250 psf
Kolonay 16
CRD
Rectangular Wing Example[15]
Nonlinear Static Aeroelasticity For Design
0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5100.0
200.0
300.0
400.0
M
q reve
rsal (p
sf)
Nonlinear CAP-TSD
Linear CAP-TSD
Linear ASTROS
Mach Number
q rev
ersa
l
Reversal Dynamic Pressure
Kolonay 17
CRD
Fighter Wing Example[15]
Nonlinear Static Aeroelasticity For Design
160 in
40.3 in
140 in
99.6 in
18.9 in
40.3 deg
y
x
Aero Model and CAP-TSD Mesh Structural Model
Kolonay 18
CRD
Fighter Wing Example[15]
Nonlinear Static Aeroelasticity For Design
0 40 80 120 160-0.10
-0.05
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
Rigid, Nonlinear
Rigid, Linear
Aeroelastic, Nonlinear
Aeroelastic, Linear
-0.1
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
Rigid, Nonlinear
Rigid, Linear
Aeroelastic, Noninear
Aeroelastic, Linear
0.25 1.000.50 0.750.00.25 1.000.50 0.750.0
Cp
Cp
x/c x/c
M = 0.70 M = 0.94
Chordwise ∆Cp Distribution
Kolonay 19
CRD
Fighter Wing Example[15]
Nonlinear Static Aeroelasticity For Design
0 40 80 120 160-0.3
-0.2
-0.1
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3Cp Upper & Lower, 0o deflection
Cp Upper, 1o Deflection
Cp Lower, 1o Deflection
Resultant ∆Cp, 1o Deflection
x/c
Cp
Chordwise Cp Distribution
Kolonay 20
CRD
Fighter Wing Example[15]
Nonlinear Static Aeroelasticity For Design
0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5
0.005
0.010
0.015
0.020
0.025
M
CM
R
Nonlinear CAP-TSD
Linear CAP-TSD
Linear ASTROS
Mach Number
Rigid Rolling Moment
0 20 40 60 80-1.0
-0.5
0.0
0.5
1.0
M=0.70, NonlinearM=0.70, LinearM=0.94, NonlinearM=0.94, LinearM=1.05, NonlinearM=1.05, Linear
Dynamic Pressure (psi)
ε
Control Surface Effectiveness
CM
Kolonay 21
CRD
Fighter Wing Example[15]
Nonlinear Static Aeroelasticity For Design
.3701
.3434
.3167
.2900
.2633
.2366
.2099
.1833
.1566
.1299
.1032
.07646
.04976
.02306
-.003639
-.03034
.3041
.2839
.2638
.2436
.2235
.2033
.1831
.1630
.1428
.1227
.1025
.08235
.06219
.04203
.02187
.001709
Rigid Linear Rigid Nonlinear
∆Cp Distributions
FreestreamM = 0.94
FreestreamM = 0.94
Kolonay 22
CRD
Fighter Wing Example[15]
Nonlinear Static Aeroelasticity For Design
.9257
.8400
.7544
.6687
.5831
.4974
.4117
.3261
.2404
.1547
.06908
-.01658
-.1022
-.1879
-.2736
-.3592
.3582
.3148
.2714
.2280
.1847
.1413
.09795
.05458
.01121
-.03216
-.07552
-.1189
-.1623
-.2056
-.2490
-.2924
∆Cp Distribution
Aeroelastic Nonlinear
Aeroelastic Deformation
FreestreamM = 0.94q = 30 psi Freestream
M = 0.94q = 30 psi
Kolonay 23
CRD
Fighter Wing Example[15]
Nonlinear Static Aeroelasticity For Design
0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.120
30
40
50
60
70
Nonlinear
Linear
Mach Number
q rev
ers
al
Reversal Dynamic Pressure
Kolonay 24
CRD
Concluding Remarks Static Aeroelastic Analysis
• Research Indicates that Flow Nonlinearities Must Be Accounted for toAccurately Predict Steady Aeroelastic Behavior in the TransonicRegime
• Inclusion of Nonlinear Aerodynamics Significantly Affects SteadyAeroelastic Behavior in the Transonic Regime
- Interaction between Shocks and Control Surface Deflection Results in a PressureRise in the Region of the Shocks
- Increased Rigid Rolling Moments- Decreased Control Surface Effectiveness- Lower Reversal Dynamic Pressures
Nonlinear Static Aeroelasticity For Design
Kolonay 25
CRD
Research Topics for Nonlinear Static Aeroelas-tic Analysis
• Are Modal Coordinates Sufficient in Capturing Aeroelastic Response?
• Is Transonic Small-Disturbance Theory Sufficient?- Flow Rotationality- Viscous Effects
• Continue Development and Validation to Ensure Maturation into aPracticed Preliminary Design Methodology
- Comparisons to Euler/Navier-Stokes, Experimental, and Flight Test Data- Integration into Preliminary Design Tools such as ASTROS- Application to Real Problems such as Active Aeroelastic Wing
Nonlinear Static Aeroelasticity For Design
26
D
r -R807, October 1995.
n e-Accurate Aeroelasticla Flow Induced Vibration
N
om eroelastic Models Usingu
e 6 Flutter Using Navier-es
lv ulse Responses for Effi-t C nce, The College of Will-an
l nsonic Flows by the Indi-7-124.
lo the Transonic Regime,”na
lo onic Indicial Response F 40. March-April 1998.
lo for Transonic Unsteadye 1, July-August 1998.
hat, C., “Special Course on Parallel Computing in CFD,”AGARD
diksen, O. O., “Fluid-Structure Coupling Requirements for Timtions,” AD-Vol. 53-3, Fluid-Structure Interaction, Aeroelasticity,
oise, Volume III ASME, 1997.
anowski, M.C., “Reduced Order Unsteady Aerodynamic and Anen-Loeve Eigenmodes,” AIAA paper 96-3981-CP.
-Rausch, E.M., Batina, J.T., “Calculation of AGARD Wing 445. Aerodynamics,” AIAA-93-3476-CP.
a, W.A., “Discrete-Time Linear and Nonlinear Aerodynamic ImpFD Analyses,” Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of Applied Scied Mary in Virginia, 1997.
lhaus, W.F., and Goorjian, P.M., “Computation of Unsteady Traethod”, AIAA Journal, Volume 16, No. 2, February 1978, pp. 11
nay, R.M., Yang, H.T.Y., “Unsteady Aeroelastic Optimization inl of Aircraft, Vol. 35, No. 1, pp 60-68, January-February 1998.
nay, R.M., Yang, H.T.Y., “Static Aeroelastic Effects on a Translutter Calculation,”, Journal of Aircraft, Vol. 35, No. 2, pp 339-3
nay, R.M., Venkayya, V.B., Yang, H.T.Y., “Sensitivity Analysis lastic Constraints,” Journal of Aircraft Vol. 35, No. 4, pp 574-58
References
Kolonay
CR
1. Fa
2. BeSimuand
3. RKarh
4. LeStok
5. Sicieniam
6. Bacial M
7. KoJour
8. KoWing
9. KoAero
27
D
o c Regime”, Ph.D. disser-n
o ynamics For Aeroelasticic
a rithm for Solution of thee aper 3129, Jan. 1992.
u o Satisfy Flutter Require-ts
a Structural Design,” Jour-f
n sal in the Transonicm
lonay, R.M., “Unsteady Aeroelastic Optimization in the TransoniPurdue University December 1996.
rland C. J., “XTRAN3S-Transonic Steady and Unsteady Aerodations,” AFWAL-TR-85-3124 Vol. 1, Jan. 1986.
tina, J. T., “A Finite-Difference Approximate-Factorization Algoady Transonic Small-Disturbance Equation,” NASA Technical P
disill S. C., Bhatia, G.K., “Optimization of Complex Structures t,” AIAA Journal, Aug. 1971, pp. 1487-1491
ftka, R. T. and Jr. Yates, C. E. “Repetitive Flutter Calculations inAircraft, Vol. 13, No. 7, 1976, pp. 454-461.
dersen, G., Kolonay R., and Eastep, F., “Control Surface revere,” AIAA Paper 97-1385.
References
Kolonay
CR
10. Ktatio
11. BAppl
12. BUnst
13. Rmen
14. Hnal o
15. ARegi