Abstract
The traditional approach for the design of aeroelastically scaled models assumes that either there exists flow similarity between the full-size aircraft and the model, or that flow non-similarities have a negligible effect. However, when trying to reproduce the behavior of an airliner that flies at transonic conditions using a scaled model that flies at nearly-incompressible flow conditions, this assumption is no longer valid and both flutter speed and static aerodynamic loading are subject to large discrepancies. To address this issue, we present an optimization-based approach for wing planform design that matches the scaled flutter speeds and modes of the reference aircraft when the Mach number cannot be matched. This is achieved by minimizing the squared error between the full-size and scaled aerodynamic models. This method is validated using the Common Research Model wing at the reference aircraft Mach number. The error in flutter speed is computed using the same wing at model conditions, which are in the nearly-incompressible regime. Starting from the baseline wing, its planform is optimized to match the reference response despite different conditions, achieving a reduction of the error in the predicted flutter speed from 7.79% to 2.13%.
Highlights
The search for more efficient aircraft configurations leads aircraft designers to explore new aircraft concepts such as the blended wing body, the box wing, or the strut-braced wing
We investigate the introductions of slight variations on the wing planform of flight demonstrators to minimize the discrepancies on the dynamic aeroelastic behavior despite the differences in compressibility conditions (i.e., Mach number)
We focus in the Mach number only since the formulation of the aerodynamic model used — the doublet lattice method (DLM), included in Nastran — only considers corrections based on the Mach number
Summary
The search for more efficient aircraft configurations leads aircraft designers to explore new aircraft concepts such as the blended wing body, the box wing, or the strut-braced wing. While the classical wing-body configuration is well known and understood, little is known about the in-flight behavior of these new aircraft concepts. The design, construction, and testing of unmanned, aeroelastically scaled models presents itself as a means of acquiring experimental knowledge on these new concepts. This mitigates the risk of manufacturing and testing a full scale aircraft both from the economical and operational point of view. We investigate the introductions of slight variations on the wing planform of flight demonstrators to minimize the discrepancies on the dynamic aeroelastic behavior despite the differences in compressibility conditions (i.e., Mach number)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
