2019
DOI: 10.1016/j.ast.2018.11.051
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Preliminary aeroelastic design of composite wings subjected to critical gust loads

Abstract: Including a gust analysis in an optimization framework is computationally expensive as the critical load cases are not known a priori and hence a large number of points within the flight envelope have to be analyzed. Model order reduction techniques can provide significant improvement in computational efficiency of an aeroelastic analysis. In this paper, after thorough analysis of 4 commonly used model order reduction methods, balanced proper orthogonal decomposition is selected to reduce the aerodynamic syste… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
12
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 26 publications
(14 citation statements)
references
References 40 publications
1
12
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Such operations are computationally expensive, and therefore it is often difficult to include transient analysis in an optimisation process (Kang et al 2006). Nonetheless, this process has been implemented in dedicated tools like the TU Delft Proteus aeroelastic code (Rajpal et al 2019) and Airbus Lagrange tool (Petersson 2009). The equivalent static load method formalised by Kang et al (2001) is used in this paper to bypass this issues.…”
Section: Dynamic Loads and Equivalent Static Loadmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Such operations are computationally expensive, and therefore it is often difficult to include transient analysis in an optimisation process (Kang et al 2006). Nonetheless, this process has been implemented in dedicated tools like the TU Delft Proteus aeroelastic code (Rajpal et al 2019) and Airbus Lagrange tool (Petersson 2009). The equivalent static load method formalised by Kang et al (2001) is used in this paper to bypass this issues.…”
Section: Dynamic Loads and Equivalent Static Loadmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Since the wing has to be tested in a wind-tunnel environment, the load cases are defined in terms of static angle of attack with the aim of mimicking the usual 1g, 2.5g and −1g load conditions. Besides, given that dynamic wind-tunnel tests are envisioned by means of the gust generator available at TUD, a critical gust assessment is performed for the first load case [27]. This means that on top of the static load, the effect of several 1-cosine gusts on the wing is assessed.…”
Section: Fig 5 Wing Planform With Layout Of Spars Ribs and Tip Massmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For this task, the code was enabled with a Fluid-Structure Interaction (FSI) algorithm responsible for coupling the structural and aerodynamic models by recurring to a loosely coupled scheme (where despite fluid and structure models being solved separately, the solution only advances in time when convergence between fluid and structure models is reached) that ensures consistency, but not energy conservation. Despite the use of low-medium fidelity aerodynamic (3D panel method with viscous and compressibility corrections) and structural (3D condensed beam model based on wing-box mass and inertia calculations) models, their applicability to preliminary design is adequate since they capture the main physical phenomena and allow exploring the design space [35,36]. The aerodynamic, structural and aeroelastic models were benchmarked [33,34] with existing data available in the literature.…”
Section: Aeroelastic Frameworkmentioning
confidence: 99%