Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-wxhwt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-10T02:59:34.313Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Aeroelastic tailoring of stiffened cantilever plate using composites and structural layouts: A parametric study

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 March 2024

B.I. Fraihat Open the ORCID record for B.I. Fraihat [Opens in a new window]  and
R.M. Ajaj Open the ORCID record for R.M. Ajaj [Opens in a new window]
B.I. Fraihat
Affiliation:
Department of Aerospace Engineering, Khalifa University of Science and Technology, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates
R.M. Ajaj*
Affiliation:
Department of Aerospace Engineering, Advanced Research and Innovation Center (ARIC), Khalifa University of Science and Technology, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates
*
Corresponding author: R.M. Ajaj; Email: rafic.ajaj@ku.ac.ae
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper studies the aeroelasticity of a stiffened cantilever plate using composite material and novel structural layouts. A comprehensive parametric study is conducted to determine the influence of different design parameters on the aeroelastic boundaries. Design parameters include plate sweep angle, ply orientation, stringer cross-section and stringer sweep angle. Nastran is used to run the aeroelastic analysis, and the process is automated using ${\rm{Matla}}{{\rm{b}}^{}}$. The structure of the plate is modelled using laminate elements whereas the stringers are modelled using the Euler-Bernoulli beam elements. The unsteady aerodynamic loads are modelled using doublet-lattice method (DLM) and the structural and aerodynamic meshes are connected using an infinite plate surface (IPS) spline. A mesh sensitivity analysis is conducted to ensure fine meshes for the aerodynamics and structure. The study’s findings demonstrate the benefits of employing forward swept (Fw) stringers since it increases flutter speed by almost 38% compared to the unswept stringers case and prevents divergence. Moreover, the static aeroelastic analysis illustrates that the utilisation of Fw swept stringers can reduce the average tip displacement and tip twist effectively. T-shaped stringers are recommended to stiffen the plate due to their lower impact on the total mass of the plate. In some configurations, the structural layout has a much higher effect on the aeroelastic instabilities when compared to the material effect (ply orientation). However, results suggest combining both for some cases to get balanced washin and washout effects.

Keywords

Aeroelastic TailoringAeroelastic InstabilitiesSpecial Structural LayoutsComposites
Type
Research Article
Information
The Aeronautical Journal , First View , pp. 1 - 19
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Royal Aeronautical Society

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

European Commission and Directorate-General for Mobility and Transport and Directorate-General for Research and Innovation. Flightpath 2050 : Europe’s vision for aviation : maintaining global leadership and serving society’s needs. Publications Office, 2011.Google Scholar
Jutte, C. and Stanford, B.K. Aeroelastic tailoring of transport aircraft wings:state-of-the-art and potential enabling technologies, Tech Rep TM-2014-218252, NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton, Virginia, April 2014.Google Scholar
Noll, T.E., Brown, J.M., Perez-Davis, M.E., Ishmael, S.D., Tiffany, G.C. and Gaier, M. Investigation of the helios prototype aircraft mishap, 1, 2004.Google Scholar
Collar, A. The first fifty years of aeroelasticity, Aerospace (R. Aeronaut. Soc. J.), 1978, 5, (2), pp 12–20.Google Scholar
Shirk, M.H., Hertz, T.J. and Weisshaar, T.A. Aeroelastic tailoring-theory, practice, and promise, J. Aircraft, 1986, 23, (1), pp 6–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weisshaar, T., Nam, C. and Batista-Rodriguez, A. Aeroelastic tailoring for improved uav performance, 39th AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics, and Materials Conference and Exhibit, 1998, pp 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Armstrong Flight Research Center. X-29 advanced technology demonstrator aircraft, no. FS-2015-11-008 AFRC, 2015.Google Scholar
Krone, N., Jr. Divergence elimination with advanced composites, Aircraft Systems and Technology Meeting, 1975, pp 1–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sarigul-Klijn, N. and Oguz, S. Effect of aspect ratio and ply orientation on aeroelastic response of composite plates, J. Aircraft, 1998 35, (4), pp 657–659.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kameyama, M. and Fukunaga, H. Optimum design of composite plate wings for aeroelastic characteristics using lamination parameters, Comput. Struct., 2007, 85, (3-4), pp 213–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Patil, M. Aeroelastic tailoring of composite box beams, 35th Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, 1997, pp 1–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weisshaar, T. and Foist, B. Vibration and flutter of advanced composite lifting surfaces, 24th Structures, Structural Dynamics and Materials Conference, 1983, pp 498–508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Green, J.A. Aeroelastic tailoring of aft-swept high-aspect-ratio composite wings, J. Aircraft, 1987, 24, (11), pp 812–819.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Abdelkader, A., Harmin, M., Cooper, J. and Bron, F. Aeroelastic tailoring of metallic wing structures,” 52nd AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics and Materials Conference 19th AIAA/ASME/AHS Adaptive Structures Conference 13t, 2011, pp. 1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Locatelli, D., Mulani, S.B. and Kapania, R.K. Wing-box weight optimization using curvilinear spars and ribs (sparibs), J. Aircraft, 2011, 48, (5), pp 1671–1684.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Francois, G., Cooper, J.E. and Weaver, P. Aeroelastic tailoring using rib/spar orientations: Experimental investigation, 56th AIAA/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics, and Materials Conference, January 2015, pp 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, B., Brooks, T., Leader, M., Chin, T.W., Kennedy, G., Martins, J. and Cesnik, C. Passive aeroelastic tailoring, Tech. Rep. NF1676L-34873, February 2020.Google Scholar
Hollowell, S.J. and Dugundji, J. Aeroelastic flutter and divergence of stiffness coupled, graphite/epoxy cantilevered plates, J. Aircraft, 1984, 21, (1), pp 69–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stanford, B.K. and Jutte, C.V. Aeroelastic tailoring via tow steered composites, Tech. Rep. TM-2014-218517, September 2014.Google Scholar
Gall, T. and Boyer, H. Metals Handbook. American Society for Metals, 1985.Google Scholar
Albano, E. and Rodden, W.P. A doublet-lattice method for calculating lift distributions on oscillating surfaces in subsonic flows, AIAA J., 1969, 7, (2), pp 279–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wright, J.R. and Cooper, J.E., Introduction to Aircraft Aeroelasticity and Loads. John Wiley & Sons, 2008.Google Scholar
Nastran, S. Simcenter nastran aeroelastic analysis user’s guide, Siemens, 2019.Google Scholar
Williams, J. Analysis/theory of controlled configured structures, Air Force Flight Dynamics Laboratory, Air Force Systems Command, 1974.Google Scholar
Gimmestad, D. An aeroelastic optimization procedure for composite high aspect ratio wings, 20th Structures, Structural Dynamics, and Materials Conference, 1979, pp 79–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar