On strength and aeroelastic characteristics of a large-scale model of an airplane wing section

DOI: 10.34759/vst-2019-4-51-65

Аuthors

Amir'yants G. A.^*, Malyutin V. A.^**, Soudakov V. G.^***, Chedrik A. V.^**

Central Aerohydrodynamic Institute named after N.E. Zhukovsky (TsAGI), 1, Zhukovsky str., Zhukovsky, Moscow Region, 140180, Russia

*e-mail: amiryants@mail.ru
**e-mail: stataer@tsagi.ru
***e-mail: vit_soudakov@tsagi.ru

Abstract

The article presents the computational and experimental results of aeroelasticity issues studies accompanying design and testing in wind-tunnel of a large-scale model of a passenger aircraft-demonstrator wing element the 7-th European framework program AFLoNext. The goal of the project consists in developing advanced flow control technologies for new aircraft configurations to achieve a quality leap in improving their aerodynamic performance.

Design, manufacture and assembly of a large-scale model, which serves for visual presentation of typical phenomena of flow separation in the fixation area of the wing with engine with high degree of bypass, were performed. However, such engines application on arrowhead wings causes undesired phenomenon of flow separation on the wing at low speeds and high angles of attack, which may lead to deterioration of the aircraft overall aerodynamic characteristics. To avoid these phenomena, the two newest types of technologies for active flow control are studied within the framework of the project. The pipe tests of the model were performed on the aerodynamic balance of the ADT-101 TSAGI pipe.

Based on the developed demonstrator CAD-model, detailed mathematical model of a demonstrator was built to compute the strength and safety of the pipe tests. Preliminary calculations of the structure stress- strain state indicated the need to strengthen the attachment area of the caisson spar to the beam of the supporting device. Comparison of natural frequencies and shapes of the first tones of mathematical model oscillations with the results of ground frequency tests was performed prior to testing. The difference between experimental and computed natural frequencies of the first oscillation tones did not exceed 10%.

Analysis of the structure behavior in the flow revealed the most loaded elements, in which minimum safety margin was η = 3, which corresponds to the ADT-101 TSAGI requirements. To control the nacelle and slat oscillations at the start-ups, computation of overloads limit values on nacelle and slat for understated strength margin of η = 2 with reference of the “stall” phenomena and turbulence was performed.

Critical flutter and divergence speeds were determined for ensuring safety of the demonstrator mathematical model tests performance in the pipe. The obtained values were out of the bounds of the velocities realized during the tests.

High measurements accuracy of the wing flow control systems efficiency was ensured by a comparative analysis of the local angles of attack of the structure under the impact of the ADT flow.

Keywords:

static aeroelasticity, flutter, structure elastic deformations, wing flow-around control

References

1. Bolsunovskii A.L., Buzoverya N.P., Lyapunov S.V., Skomorokhov S.I., Chernavskikh Yu.N., Chernyshev I.L. Polet, 2018, no. 11, pp. 14-29.

2. Bolsunovskii A.L., Buzoverya N.P., Skomorokhov S.I., Chernyshev I.L. Trudy MAI, 2018, no. 101. URL: http://trudymai.m/eng/published.php?ID=96601

3. Petrov A.V. Energeticheskie me tody uvelicheniya pod"emnoi sily kryla (Energy methods of the wing lift increasing), Moscow, Fizmatlit, 2011, 404 p.

4. Rudnik R. Stall Behaviour of the EUROLIFT High Lift Configurations. 46th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, AIAA Paper 2008-836, 2008. DOI: 10.2514/6.2008-836

5. Bauer M., Lohse J., Haucke F., Nitsche W. High-Lift Performance Investigation of a Two-Element Configuration with a Two-Stage Actuator System. AIAA Journal, 2014, vol. 52, no. 6, pp. 1307–1313. DOI: 10.2514/1.J052639

6. Lengers M. Industrial Assessment of Overall Aircraft Driven Local Active Flow Control. 29th Congress of the International Council of the Aeronautical Sciences, ICAS Paper 2014-0175, St. Petersburg, Russia, 2014.

7. Soudakov V., Amiryants G., Schloesser P., Bauer M., Weigel P., Bardet M., Ciobaca V., Gebhardt A., Wild J. Full-scale wind-tunnel test of active flow control at the wing/pylon/engine junction. 6^th CEAS Conference. 16-20 October 2017, Bucharest, Romania.

8. Fricke S., Ciobaca V., Krohnert A.,Wild J., Blesbois O. Active Flow Control Applied at the Engine-Wing Junction. 5th CEAS Air and Space Conference, CEAS Paper 249, Delft, The Netherlands, 2015.

9. Fricke S., Ciobaca V., Wild J., Norman D. Numerical Studies of Active Flow Control Applied at the Engine­Wing Junction. In Advances in Simulation of Wing and Nacelle Stall, Notes on Numerical Fluid Mechanics and Multidisciplinary Design. Springer International Publ., Cham, Switzerland, 2016, vol. 131, pp. 397–411. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-21127-5

10. Schlösser P., Bauer M. Design of a Pulsed Jet Actuator for Separation Control. CEAS Aeronautical Journal. 2018, pp. 1-8. DOI: 10.1007/s13272-018-0328-x

11. Schueller M., Schippers H., Stefes B., Meer T., Wiegel P., Vrochta P., Wallin S., Meyer M. Aerodynamic Design & System Development of Synthetic Jet Actuation for Flow Control at the Engine/Wing junction. 5^th CEAS Air & Space Conference in Delft, Netherlands, 7-11 September 2015.

12. Weigel P., Schüller M., ter Meer T. Design of a Synthetic Jet Actuator for Separation Control. 6th CEAS Air & Space Conference in Bucharest, Romania, 16-20 October 2017.

13. Amiryants G.A, Kulesh V.P., Malyutin V.A., Chedrik A.V. Aeroelastic Analysis of the Adaptive Wing Wind Tunnel Demonstrator of the SADE Project. 29-th Congress of ICAS, St-Petersburg, 2014.

14. Monner H.P., Riemenschneider J. Background and recent results of the European project "Smart High Lift Devices for Next Generation Wings. 1st EASN Association Workshop on Aerostructures (7-8 October Paris, France aerodynamics). Sensors and Systems, 2004, no. 3, pp. 22-27.

15. Monner H.P., Riemenschneider J. Morphing high lift structures: Smart leading edge device and smart single slotted flap. Aerodays – 2011 (30th March – 1st April Madrid, Spain).

16. Kintscher M. 5 Years research on Smart Droop Nose devices at DLR-FA – a retrospective. Wissenschaftstag FA, DLR, 18 October 2012, Braunschweig, Deutschland.

17. Kirn J., Lorkowski T., Baier H. Development of Flexible Matrix Composites (FMC) for Fluidic Actuators in Morphing Systems. International Journal of Structural Integrity, 2011, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 458-473. DOI: 10.1108/17579861111183948

18. Ameduri S., Concilio A., Daniele E. A droop nose laboratory demonstrator: Experimental characterization and validation. ICAS 2012:23rd International Conference on Adaptive Structures and Technologies (11-13 October 2012, Nanjing, China).

19. Tyutyunnikov N.P., Shklyarchuk F.N. On effectiveness of turn winglets using in the capacity of wing mechanization elements. Aerospace MAI Journal, 2015, vol. 22, no. 4, pp. 21-31.

20. Dolzhikov V.I., Nikolaev A.V. Determination of aerodynamic characteristics of rotating aircraft in the uncontrolled flight by means of engineering analysis systems. Aerospace MAI Journal, 2015, vol. 22, no. 3, pp. 47-53.

21. Wright J.R. and Cooper J.E. Introduction to Aircraft Aeroelasticity and Loads. John Wiley and Sons, The Atrium, Southern Gate, Chichester, West Sussex, PO19 8SQ. 2007, 499 p.

22. MSC.Nastran Version 68, Aeroelastic Analysis, User’s Guide, 2002.

23. Kulesh V.P., Fonov S.D. Uchenye zapiski TsAGI, 1998, vol. 29, no. 1-2, pp. 165-176.

24. Lobanov A.N. Fotogrammetriya (Photogrammetry). Moscow, Nedra, 1984, 552 p.

25. Burner A.W., Tianshu Liu. Videogrammetric model deformation measurement technique. Journal of Aircraft, 2001, vol. 38, no. 4, pp. 745-754. DOI: 10.2514/2.2826

26. Kulesh V.P. Datchiki i sistemy, 2004, no. 3, pp. 22-27.