19 views

Uploaded by nim1987

aeroelasticity

- Aeroelastic Analysis of AGARD 445.6 Wing
- Phd Thesis
- Aeroelastic Analysis of a wing (Pressentation)
- Aeroelasticity Project 2 Report Final Final
- Virtual Wind Tunnel
- Homework1 Solution
- Study of Flutter on UAV Composite Wing
- Aero Elasticity
- Solutions
- Power Series
- 1D-CUF
- 04-turbomachinery.pdf
- LC in Math
- Additional_Math_Notes_IGCSE.docx
- Aeroelasticity and Fuel Slosh.pdf
- A2TSkillsHandout All
- Selariu SuperMathematics Functions, editor Florentin Smarandache
- Trigonometry-Theory-JEE-Main-and-Advanced.pdf
- LPF4_09
- Errata

You are on page 1of 174

Three-Dimensional Flow

by

Department of Mechanical Engineering and Materials Science

Duke University

Date:

Approved:

Kenneth C. Hall

Donald B. Bliss

Thomas P. Witelski

Master of Science in the Department of Mechanical Engineering and Materials

Science in the Graduate School of Duke University

2012

Abstract

Linear Aeroelastic Stability of Beams and Plates in

Three-Dimensional Flow

by

Department of Mechanical Engineering and Materials Science

Duke University

Date:

Approved:

Kenneth C. Hall

Donald B. Bliss

Thomas P. Witelski

degree of Master of Science in the Department of Mechanical Engineering and

Materials Science in the Graduate School of Duke University

2012

Copyright

All rights reserved except the rights granted by the

Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial Licence

Abstract

The aeroelastic stability of beams and plates in three-dimensional flows is explored

as the elastic and aerodynamic parameters are varied. First principal energy methods are used to derive the structural equations of motion. The structural models

are coupled with a three-dimensional linear vortex lattice model of the aerodynamics. An aeroelastic model with the beam structural model is used to explore the

transition between different fixed boundary conditions and the effect of varying two

non-dimensional parameters, the mass ratio and aspect ratio H , for a beam with

a fixed edge normal to the flow. The trends matched previously published theoretical and experimental data, validating the current aeroelastic model. The transition

in flutter velocity between the clamped free and pinned free configuration is a nonmonotomic transition, with the lowest flutter velocity coming with a finite size spring

stiffness. Next a plate-membrane model is used to explore the instability dynamics

for different combinations of boundary conditions. For the specific configuration of

the trailing edge free and all other edges clamped, the sensitivity to the physical

parameters shows that decreasing the streamwise length and increasing the tension

in the direction normal to the flow can increase the onset instability velocity. Finally

the transition in aeroelastic instabilities for non-axially aligned flows is explored for

the cantilevered beam and three sides clamped plate. The cantilevered beam configuration transitions from an entirely bending motion when the clamped edge is

normal to the flow to a typical bending/torsional wing flutter when the clamped

iv

edge is aligned with the flow. As the flow is rotated the transition to the wing flutter

occurs when the flow angle is only 10 deg from the perfectly normal configuration.

With three edges clamped, the motion goes from a divergence instability when the

free edge is aligned with the flow to a flutter instability when the free edge is normal

to the flow. The transition occurs at an intermediate angle. Experiments are carried

out to validate the beam and plate elastic models. The beam aeroelastic results are

also confirmed experimentally. Experimental values consistently match well with the

theoretical predictions for both the aeroelastic and structural models.

Contents

Abstract

iv

List of Tables

List of Figures

xi

xv

2 Structural Model

2.1

10

11

2.1.1

Boundary Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

14

2.1.2

Equations of Motion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

15

2.1.3

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

15

2.1.4

16

2.1.5

17

19

2.2.1

Clamped-Free . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

19

2.2.2

Pinned-Free . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

22

2.2.3

Clamped-Clamped . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

25

2.2.4

Free-Free . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

28

2.3

29

2.4

33

2.2

vi

2.4.1

2.5

38

44

3 Aerodynamic Model

47

3.1

47

3.2

55

3.2.1

56

3.2.2

58

3.2.3

60

Code Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

61

3.3.1

Matrix Definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

62

3.3.2

62

3.3.3

67

3.4

68

3.5

69

3.6

70

3.7

72

3.7.1

75

3.7.2

Downwash Calculation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

75

3.3

4.1

4.2

77

77

4.1.1

78

4.1.2

79

79

4.2.1

80

4.2.2

81

vii

4.3

4.4

4.5

Structures Journal Submission) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

82

4.3.1

83

4.3.2

85

4.3.3

86

Plate Simulations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

90

4.4.1

90

4.4.2

94

4.4.3

98

4.4.4

Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107

4.5.1

4.5.2

5 Experiments

5.1

5.2

120

5.1.1

5.1.2

5.2.1

5.2.2

5.2.3

5.2.4

5.3

5.4

6.1

145

Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145

viii

6.2

6.2.1

Theoretical . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147

6.2.2

Experimental . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148

6.2.3

Applications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148

150

152

Bibliography

154

ix

List of Tables

2.1

30

2.2

38

4.1

98

4.2

99

4.3

5.1

5.2

5.3

5.4

5.5

5.6

5.7

and Experiment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143

A.2 Experimental vs Theoretical Error

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151

List of Figures

1.1

1.2

2.1

20

2.2

20

2.3

21

2.4

23

2.5

23

2.6

24

2.7

25

2.8

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

26

2.9

27

29

30

Mode Shapes . . . . . . . .

2.12 Pinned-Free, Clamped-Free and Large K

31

32

40

40

41

41

42

xi

42

43

44

3.1

48

3.2

50

3.3

60

3.4

63

3.5

64

3.6

65

3.7

67

3.8

67

3.9

70

71

73

74

4.1

78

4.2

78

4.3

79

4.4

79

4.5

80

4.6

81

4.7

82

4.8

84

4.9

86

87

xii

88

92

93

95

96

4.17 Configuration 2 Aspect Tension Variation Flutter Boundary . . . . .

97

97

4.20 Configuration 2 Aeroelastic Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102

4.21 Configuration 3 Aeroelastic Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103

4.22 Configuration 4 Aeroelastic Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105

4.23 Configuration 5 Aeroelastic Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106

4.24 Rotating Beam Flutter Boundary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110

4.25 Rotation Angle=0, One Period Flutter Motion . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111

4.26 Rotation Angle=6.92, One Period Flutter Motion . . . . . . . . . . . 112

4.27 Rotation Angle=11.53, One Period Flutter Motion

. . . . . . . . . . 113

4.29 Rotated Plate Aeroelastic Boundary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115

4.30 Rotated Plate Aeroelastic Boundary Mode Shapes . . . . . . . . . . . 115

4.31 Rotation Angle=0, One Period Flutter Motion . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117

4.32 Rotation Angle=45 deg, One Period Flutter Motion . . . . . . . . . . 118

4.33 Rotation Angle=60 deg, One Period Flutter Motion . . . . . . . . . . 119

5.1

5.2

xiii

5.3

5.4

5.5

5.6

5.7

5.8

5.9

5.11 Configuration 2 Dynamic Experimental Results . . . . . . . . . . . . 133

5.12 The (1,2) Mode Visualization for Configuration 2 . . . . . . . . . . . 133

5.13 Configuration 4 Dynamic Experimental Results . . . . . . . . . . . . 134

5.14 Ground Vibration Test Setup for Configuration 4 . . . . . . . . . . . 135

5.15 Laser Readout and Shaker Excitation Locations . . . . . . . . . . . . 136

5.16 Natural Frequency Results for 4 Levels of Tension: Theory and Experiment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137

5.17 Photograph of Baffle Inside the Wind Tunnel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139

5.18 Configuration 1 Aeroelastic Experimental Results . . . . . . . . . . . 140

5.19 Example Waterfall Plot for the Un-Tensioned Specimen . . . . . . . . 142

B.1 Configuration 2 Sample Spectrum Analyzer Output . . . . . . . . . . 153

xiv

Symbols

As

Ac

At

Structure thickness

Iea

Kk,l

K

L, Lx

Kernel function for the influence of the kth discrete on the

lth panel

Stiffness matrix

Structure streamwise length

Mass matrix

p(x, y, t)

~

Q

r~t

S, Ly

Ss

Number of structure elements in normal to flow(~y ) direction

xv

Sc

St

Ty , Tx

Vd

Ws

Wc

Wt

w(x, y, t)

x, y

(x , y )

W

~

(x, y)

Streamwise and span wise direction respectively

(x,y) location of the (, ) panel

vortex lattice relaxation factor

Virtual work

Discrete circulation values

Continuous circulation at (x,y)

Density

item[s ] Structural damping ratio

xvi

Superscripts

Non-dimensional

Time derivative

Spatial derivative

Vector quantity

Matrix quantity

Abbreviations

VLM

xvii

1

Introduction and Literature Review

This thesis is to outlines a technique to predict the aeroelastic instability boundary for one-dimensional beams and two-dimensional rectangular plates due to threedimensional aerodynamic forces. Specifically the linear aeroelastic instability boundary for a wide variety of configurations and parameters is explored. The most common aeroelastic instability encountered is a flutter instability. Flutter is the dynamic

instability of a structure in a moving fluid that exhibits unsteady oscillations due to

the interaction between the structure and the fluid. Such systems tend to exhibit

limit cycle oscillations (LCO) that persist even if the free stream velocity falls below

the flutter onset velocity creating what is called a hysteresis band, the possibility of

multiple states at a given velocity. However, because all of the analysis conducted in

this paper is linear, the origins of this hysteresis behavior is not explicitly discussed.

Historically, the majority of flutter research has been focused on suppressing flutter because it is catastrophic in many structures including aircraft, bridges, and

turbomachinery. Recently, attention has been refocused to gaining a better understanding of flutter, especially for the cantilevered beam configuration, due to a

growing interest in small scale energy harvesting systems. In addition to energy

1

harvesting applications, the configurations explored throughout this thesis can also

be used to understand the dynamics of human snoring [19] and to reduce the noise

generated during landing by subsonic fixed wing aircraft [26]. For this thesis, the

aeroelastic models are specifically used to:

Analyze the aeroelastic instabilities for a cantilevered beam in the transition

between pinned and clamped leading fixed edge

Analyze the aeroelastic instabilities for a beam with a clamped leading edge as

the governing non-dimensional parameters are varied

Analyze the aeroelastic instabilities for a plate with three sides fixed, a proposed

configuration to reduce airframe noise on low subsonic aircraft during landing

Analyze the aeroelastic instabilities that occur for plates as the boundary conditions are varied

Analyze the aeroelastic instabilities for axially mis-aligned flows for a one-side

clamped beam and three-sides clamped plate

Generally the motivation for the research stems from a desire to continue to

advance the understanding of the aeroelastic instabilities that occur in rectangular

structures. Developing an aeroelastic model requires developing models for both the

structural dynamics and the aerodynamics. Once an aeroelastic model is created the

model is used to analyze configurations of interest.

The first problem explored is the interaction between a cantilevered flexible elastic

beam and a uniform axial flow, a canonical fluid-structure interaction problem. It is

well known that this system exhibits a flutter instability in low subsonic flow as the

free stream velocity is increased above a critical velocity. The structure then enters a

large and violent limit cycle oscillation (LCO). Since the experimental observations

2

of the flapping flag by Taneda [30] in 1968, many scholars have explored the stability

of this system experimentally and theoretically. Although extensively explored in

the literature, a full understanding of the dynamics of this relatively simple fluidstructure interaction remains elusive. In addition to the problems inherent physical

significance, Doare and Michelin [7], Dunnmon et al. [11] and Giacomello and Porfiri

[16] have recently proposed using the phenomena for energy harvesting applications

and Eloy and Schouveiler [12] and Hellum et al. [18] have explored the potential

of using this flutter for propulsion. Furthermore, Balint and Lucey [3], Huang [20]

and Howell et al. [19] have shown that flutter in the human soft palette can explain

snoring and Watanabe et al. [38] has explored flutter in the printing industry.

Many structural and aerodynamic models have been developed or applied to

improve the understanding of the dynamics of this system. The initial models looked

at the limiting cases where either the streamwise or normal to flow dimension of the

elastic member is assumed to be infinite. For the first case, the problem approaches a

two-dimensional limit. In the two-dimensional limit the potential flow equations have

been solved to determine the aerodynamic forces using the continuous equation with

the appropriate boundary conditions [20, 22, 17, 39] and or discrete approximations.

The discrete approximations can be split into the discrete vortex models [31, 34,

35, 25, 1, 19] or numerical simulations solving the Navier-Stokes equations [3, 39].

In the latter limit, where the length is much larger than the span, a slender body

approximation has been used by Lemaitre et al. [23] to explore the dynamics. For the

two-dimensional case, Howell et al. [19] explored the influence of spatial confinement

and Michelin and Smith [24] and Tang and Padoussis [36] have modeled the influence

of cascades.

In addition to these two-dimensional aerodynamic models, researchers have coupled different structural models when exploring the response of the system. The

structural models have largely consisted of linear and non-linear models of beams

3

with simple out of plane displacements. In general linear structural models are used

to explore the stability boundary as parameters are varied. Non-linear models have

been used by Michelin et al. [25], Tang and Padoussis [35], Tang et al. [32], Tang and

Padoussis [34] and Dunnmon et al. [11] to explore the post critical behaviors such

as LCO amplitude and hysteresis loops which are observed experimentally. Recently

interest in piezoelectric energy harvesting has motivated detailed exploration of the

non-linear post critical behavior because predicting the amplitude and frequency of

the limit cycle is vital to optimizing the energy harvested from the system [11, 16, 7].

The critical velocities predicted by the two-dimensional models are remarkably

similar to each other regardless of the solution technique used. Unfortunately their

collective agreement does not match published experimental results reported by

Taneda [30], Kornecki et al. [22], Watanabe et al. [38], Yamaguchi et al. [40], Tang

et al. [32], Eloy et al. [14] and Dunnmon et al. [11]. In fact, across the range of

parameters tested the two-dimensional model predicted flutter boundaries are significantly below the experimentally observed values. Even when Huang [20] attempted

to create a two-dimensional experimental model by having test pieces span the wind

tunnel, the experimentally observed critical velocities are still much higher than the

theoretical predictions.

This discrepancy has motivated the application of three-dimensional aerodynamic

models. Many of the initial three-dimensional aerodynamic models were used to explore the flutter characteristics of a single configuration. For example Tang et al.

[32] used an unsteady three-dimensional vortex lattice model(VLM) and a non-linear

structural model to explore the flutter boundary and post critical behavior of a single aluminum plate. The success of initial three-dimensional simulations to match

the flutter boundary between theory and experiment has prompted the most recent

explorations of the stability boundary in parameter space with three-dimensional

aerodynamic models by Eloy et al. [13] and Eloy et al. [14]. In general these simula4

tions have shown much better agreement with the experimental results. Furthermore

an exploration of the three-dimensional effects of in-plane normal to the flow confinement by Doare et al. [8] demonstrates that the small distance between wind tunnel

walls and experimental specimen required to produce the two-dimensional limit experimentally would be prohibitively difficult to achieve. Three-dimensional effects

are believed to explain the systemic discrepancies between strictly two-dimensional

theoretical predictions and experimental observations for the critical flutter velocity.

With the new understanding of the importance of three-dimensional effects on the

quantitative behavior of this fluid-structure system there is a need to analyze the impact of different influences such as structural boundary conditions, confinement and

experimental support structure with a three-dimensional aerodynamic model. The

three-dimensional unsteady vortex lattice model remains a versatile means to explore the aforementioned influences. Numerical simulations have the benefit of being

able to model the effect of different configurations without changing the framework

of the analysis. The work presented for this configuration is a continuation of the

work done by Tang et al. [32]. The VLM aerodynamic model is generalized and used

to explore the stability boundary for the cantilevered beam in the non-dimensional

parameter space. Specifically the critical flow velocity as a function of mass ratio

and aspect ratio is explored and compared with new experimental results as well as

experimental and theoretical results found in the literature. In general the qualitative trends and quantitative values match the existing three-dimensional theoretical

and experimental results.

Additionally the analysis of this configuration explores the effect of the leading

edge boundary condition on the critical flutter velocity. Using a leading edge torsional spring the transition between the two limiting cases is presented, including a

surprising, non-monotonic transition in the critical flutter velocity. Finally normal to

the flow confinement in both the in plane and out of plane directions are presented.

5

Next, an aeroelastic model is created to analyze the aeroelastic stability of twodimensional rectangular plates. The project was initially motivated by a desire to

analyze a plate configuration similar to one created by NASAs proposed aircraft

noise reduction effort is explored. NASA, as a part of its strategic plan in 2000,

defined goals for designing the next generation of commercial transport aircraft with

several performance requirements, one of which is noise reduction.[26] Experimental

and numerical studies have shown that a large portion of aircraft noise during landing

is generated by the interaction of shed vortices and wing structure at the discontinuity

between the wing and the trailing edge flap.[6, 28] The noise reduction potential of

several geometries and mechanisms have been studied, but experiments showed that

the most effective method for significant noise reduction is to introduce a continuous

mold-line link (CML), a fairing surface that smoothly connects the edge of the flap

to the wing.[29] This is shown in Fig. 1.1. The experiments are performed using

a rigid fairing, but to actually implement this method on an aircraft the fairing

must be deformable. Therefore, a flexible plate, or a plate-membrane structure, is

an ideal material for the fairing structure because it can be hidden for most of the

time and extended when the trailing edge flaps are deployed. A plate has stiffness

in bending, while a plate-membrane has both bending stiffness and stiffness due to

applied tension. Both types of structures will herein be referred to as plates for

simplicity.

Despite significant progress in reducing noise from other sources, such as airframe

and propulsive devices, an assessment of the overall progress toward the next generation of aircraft showed that additional research in CMLs may be necessary for

meeting the noise reduction goal.[4] Because these structures are flexible and would

be designed to be light-weight, it is important to analyze their aeroelastic behavior

to prevent structural failure due to divergence or flutter. Rectangular panel problems have been studied extensively in the past, specifically the aircraft structural

6

panel problem with all edges clamped[9], and the flag flutter problem described earlier. However, there is less existing research on the aeroelastic behavior of panels for

non-traditional applications, where the more physically correct boundary conditions

are not necessarily those that have been extensively studied. NASAs CML project

is just one of many problems that may require the use of novel plate structure designs. As the design of aerospace structures focuses more on lighter materials and

novel configurations, analytical and experimental results for unexplored boundary

conditions and different materials will important in determining viable designs.

1

X

X

X

X X

X

X

6

X

4

X

X

2

X

X X

X

X

this paper. The diagonal marks indicate a clamped boundary and other boundaries

are free with no restraint. The arrows indicate different fluid flow directions that

are considered. The x symbols indicate the presence of a baffle next to the plate

boundary instead of free space. Each configuration considers a single fluid flow

direction.

This section analyzes the structural dynamics and linear aeroelastic instabilities

of a plate using five different sets of boundary conditions in addition to the NASA

7

1.2, in which the diagonal marks indicate clamped boundary, the absence of marks

indicate free boundary, the x symbols indicate the presence of a baffle near the plate

boundary instead of free space, and the flow direction is from left to right. The baffle

is necessary in the experimental set up - all clamped boundaries are baffled because

there must be a structure with which the clamping is applied. However, some free

boundaries are also baffled to provide structural support to the entire experimental

set up. The theory models the structural dynamics using a plate-membrane model

that accounts for flexural rigidity of the material (fourth order derivative) and tension

applied to the material (second order derivative). The structural model is coupled

to an unsteady vortex lattice aerodynamic model that accounts for the plate as well

as any baffle structure surrounding the plate. A modular baffle system is designed

around the plate and is able to apply either clamped or free boundary conditions

at any of the four edges of the plate. The baffle design and experimental data are

presented.

Next, the transition between configurations is explored as the axial alignment of

the flow is varied. This exploration is motivated by the quantitative and qualitative

transition in flutter boundary and motion as the orientation of boundary conditions

relative to the flow is changed. For example, for a plate with three sides free, if

the trailing edge is free the system becomes unstable in a flutter instability, but

if the system is rotated 90 deg so the free edge is aligned with the flow then the

dynamic flutter becomes a static divergence. For this section the appropriate mesh

and coordinate transformations are presented to analyze structures which are not

aligned with the flow. The aeroelastic stability is then solved for as the flow angle is

varied.

Experimental results are then presented to validate the theoretical models. Finally there are concluding remarks about the research conducted to this point as well

8

2

Structural Model

model will be derived and discussed. The first structural model developed is that of

a beam in bending and torsion. Although the derivation of the governing structural

equations and natural mode shapes is straight forward, finding a single source that

contains the equations of motion derivation as well as the natural mode shapes for all

boundary conditions is difficult. Because the natural modes for a uniform property

beam are used for the analysis of the plate, it is convenient to have a complete

reference for a beam with all possible combinations of boundary conditions required

for the analysis in this thesis.

The following section outlines the steps, starting with the energies of a beam,

using these energies to derive the unforced equations of motion and the associated

natural boundary conditions for a beam, applying a separation of variables technique

to determe the spatial mode shapes.

10

In order to derive the equations of motion for this structure, the first step is to

define the potential and kinetic energy equations for the system. Assuming that the

motion of the beam can be described as the linear combination of an out of plane

displacement w(x, t) and a rotation around the elastic axis of the beam (x, t) the

expression for the potential energy of the beam can be written as, where x is the

axis which runs along the length of the beam:

1

V =

2

EI

2w

x2

2

1

dx +

2

GJ

2

dx

(2.1)

Similarly, the kinetic energy for this system can be written as:

1

T =

2

m

w

t

2

1

dx +

2

Iea

2

dx

(2.2)

with m being the mass per unit length and Iea the moment of inertial around the

elastic axis per unit length. Now that the kinetic and potential energy expressions

have been written, the next step is to apply Hamiltons Principal. The principle as

stated in Dowell and Tang [10] for a conservative system, is that the time integral

of the virtual change in kinetic energy minus the virtual change in potential energy

must equal zero. This can be expressed mathematically as:

Z

t2

[T V ] dt = 0

(2.3)

t1

The next step is to rewrite the virtual changes in kinetic and potential energy in

terms of a virtual change in w(x, t), ((w)) and (x, t), (()).

Starting with the equation for potential energy and applying the virtual change

operator:

Z

t2

t2

V dt =

t1

t1

( Z

2 2

2 )

Z

1 L

w

1 L

EI

dx +

GJ

dx dt

2

2 0

x

2 0

x

11

(2.4)

Z

t2

t1

" Z

2 2

#

Z

1 L

w

w

1 L

2EI

dx +

2GJ

dx dt

2

2

2 0

x

x

2 0

x

x

(2.5)

Knowing that the final result must end up multiplying w and it is clear that the

next step is to integrate by parts. For this equation integrate by parts with respect

to x for the EI term.

2

2w

w

Let: u = EI 2 and v =

dx

x

x2

2w

w

EI 2 dx and v =

u =

x

x

x

(2.6a)

(2.6b)

Z

Z

udv = vu

vdu

(2.7)

and the transformations given in Equations 2.6, The EI portion of Equation 2.5 can

be rewritten as:

Z

t2

t1

EI w

x2

L Z L

2

w

w

w

EI 2

dx dt

x

x

x

0 x

(2.8)

L

L

Z t2

2

2

EI w w EI w (w) dt

x2

x

x

x2

t1

0

t2

+

t1

(2.9)

2w

2

EI 2 (w) dx dt

x2

x

Equation 2.9 is in a form that can be directly included into Equation 2.3. A similar

exercise can be conducted for the GJ portion of the equation. This yields

Z

t2

t1

"

L Z

#

2

L

GJ

dx dt

GJ

x

x2

0

0

12

(2.10)

Next a similar analysis must be done for the kinetic energy. Again integration

by parts is used until there is an integral statement which multiplies w and another

statement which multiplies . Substituting the kinetic energy (T) from Equation

2.2 into Equation 2.3.

t2

t1

( Z

2

2 )

Z

1 L

w

1 L

m

dx +

Iea

dx dt

2 0

t

2 0

t

(2.11)

Z

t2

1

2

t1

2m

w

t

w

+ 2Iea

dx dt

t

t

t

w

t

and

(2.12)

. In order

to reduce this to w and it is clear that one must integrate by parts with respect

to t. Integrating by parts for the w term yields the following result for the time

integral of the virtual change in kinetic energy.

"

m

w

t

t2 #

Z t2 Z L 2

w

w

w dx dt

dx

m

t2

t1

0

(2.13)

t1

Similarly, integrating by parts for the term yields the following result for the time

integral of the virtual change in kinetic energy:

Z

"

Iea

t2 #

2

Z t2 Z L

dx

Iea

dx dt

t2

t1

0

(2.14)

t1

However Equations 2.13 and 2.14 can be made even simpler by invoking a relationship that is commonly used with Hamiltons Principle. Namely it is assumed

that w and at t = t1 and t = t2 are both known and identically equal to zero.

This allows one to rewrite the virtual change in kinetic energy as:

Z

t2

t2

T dt =

t1

m

t1

2w

t2

t2

w dx dt

Iea

t1

13

2

t2

dx dt

(2.15)

Now that the individual components of the virtual changes in kinetic and potential

energies for Hamiltons principle have been calculated, Equations 2.9, and 2.15 can

be substituted into Equation 2.3 to yield the following result.

Z t2

[T V ] dt

0=

t1

t2

Z

=

t1

t2

EI w

x2

t2

2.1.1

2

2

Iea

+

GJ

dx dt

t2

x2

+

t1

2

w

2

2w

m

2 EI 2 w dx dt

t2

x

x

L

L

L

2

w

w

EI 2 (w) + GJ dt

x

x

x

x

+

t1

(2.16)

Boundary Conditions

Equation 2.16 represents the governing equation for a beam. Equation 2.16 contains

information about the boundary conditions and the equations of motion for the

system. Because the system has both out of plane and rotational degrees of freedom,

there are two sets of natural boundary conditions and two equations of motion.

Starting with the boundary terms multiplying w.

Z

t2

t1

EI w

x2

L

L

2

w

w

EI 2 (w) dt = 0

x

x

x

0

(2.17)

In order for Equation 2.17 to be satisfied both of the terms inside the integral

must be equal to zero. Moreover because each term is made up of a product of two

terms, at least one term in each product must be equal to be zero. The boundary

conditions must be satisfied at both x = 0 and x = L. Mathematically this can be

14

stated as:

2w

EI 2 = 0 or

x

w

x

=0

and

(2.18)

2w

EI 2 = 0 or (w) = 0

x

x

A similar analysis for the natural boundary conditions for the torsional coordinate

yields the following boundary conditions at both x = 0 and x = L.

= 0 or = 0

x

2.1.2

(2.19)

Equations of Motion

Equation 2.16 also contains information about the elastic equations of motion for

the system. Once the natural boundary conditions are satisfied, in order for the

integral portion of Equation 2.16 to be satisfied for every w and the fundamental

theorem of calculus of variation requires that the following differential equations must

be satisfied.

m

2w

t2

2

2w

2 EI 2 = 0

x

x

(2.20)

and

Iea

2.1.3

2

t2

+ GJ

2

x2

=0

(2.21)

In order to present a more general form of the analysis, it is common to normalize the

equations of motion into their scale invariant forms. The equations are normalized

pm

using the characteristic length L and a characteristic time T equal to L2 EI

for

q

Iea

the bending equation and L GJ

for the torsion equation. These normalizing factors

15

will also be used in the aeroelastic analysis. Substituting these normalizing factors

in and assuming the beam characteristics are constant along the beam allows the

equations of motion to be written as:

2 w 4 w

=0

x4

t2

(2.22)

2 2

+ 2 =0

x

t2

(2.23)

and

The boundary conditions remain the same except the scaling factors are removed

and the boundary conditions are satisfied at x = 0 and x = 1.

2.1.4

x, t) gives the bending natural

frequencies and the mode-shapes for the system. The equation of motion is solved

using the method of separation of variables. The following substitution is used.

w(

x, t) = q(t)(

x)

(2.24)

4

2

q(

t

)(

x

)

+

q(

t

)(

x

)

=0

t2

x4

(2.25)

x)

q(t) 0000 (

x)

+

=0

(

x)

q(t)

This can only be satisfied if both

q(t)

q(t)

and

0000 (

x)

(

x)

(2.26)

sign. With this definition the two equations can be solved separately and the value

of the constant 2 and the equations for q(t) and (

x) can be determined.

16

Looking first at the equation for q(t) and setting it equal to 2 yields:

q(t) + 2 q(t) = 0

(2.27)

q(t) = A cos(t) + B sin(t)

(2.28)

Because there are no initial conditions in the time domain, this is the closest to a

solution for the time function that can be determined. Equation 2.28 also clearly

shows that the s are the natural frequencies of the system.

The next step is to look at the equation for (

x):

0000 (

x) 2 (

x) = 0

(2.29)

This equation can best be solved by assuming a solution that is a linear combination of trigonometric and hyperbolic trigonometric functions. For convenience the

following constant is defined:

kn2 =

(2.30)

(x) = C sinh(kn x) + D cosh(kn x) + E sin(kn x) + F cos(kn x)

(2.31)

At this point the specific choice of boundary conditions determines the values of

the A, B, C and D, up to an arbitrary constant and the specific values for kn .

2.1.5

The solution to the homogeneous equation for (x, t) will give the torsional natural frequencies and mode-shapes for the system. The homogeneous version of the

equation of motion is also solved using the method of separation of variables. The

following substitution is used.

(

x, t) = A(t)(

x)

17

(2.32)

2

2

A(

t

)(

x

)

A(

t

)(

x

)

=0

2

x

t2

(2.33)

t) 00 (

A(

x)

=0

(

x)

A(t)

This can only be satisfied if both

t)

A(

A(t)

and

00 (

x)

(

x)

(2.34)

sign. With this definition the two equations can be solved separately and the value

of the constant 2 and the equations for A(t) and (

x) can be determined.

Looking first at the equation for q(t) and setting it equal to 2 yields:

t) + 2 A(t) = 0

A(

(2.35)

A(t) = G cos(t) + H sin(t)

(2.36)

Again, because there are no initial conditions for the time domain, this is the closest

to a solution for the time function that can be determined. Equation 2.36 also clearly

shows that the s are again the natural frequencies of the system.

The next step is to look at the equation for (

x). Setting the equation equal to

(2 ) and rearranging gives:

00 (

x) + 2 (

x) = 0

(2.37)

This equation can best be solved by assuming a solution that is a linear combination of trigonometric functions. For convenience the following constant is defined:

jn2 = 2

18

(2.38)

(x) = I sin(jn x) + J cos(jn x)

(2.39)

At this point the specific choice of boundary conditions determines the values for

I and J up to an arbitrary constant and the specific values for jn .

For the analysis that will be conducted throughout this paper the following mode

shapes and natural frequencies will be used.

2.2.1

Clamped-Free

For the clamped-free configuration the boundary conditions are:

=0

x

=0,t

=0

x x=0,t

(2.40)

2

=0

x2 x=1,t

3

=0

x3 x=1,t

Figure 2.1 shows the diagram of the clamped-free configuration. Applying the boundary conditions at x = 0 yields:

D+F =0

(2.41)

C +E =0

Applying the boundary conditions at x = 1 yields:

C sinh kn + D cosh kn E sin kn F cos kn = 0

(2.42)

C cosh kn + D sinh kn E cos kn + F sin kn = 0

19

C(sinh kn + sin kn ) + D(cosh kn + cos kn ) = 0

(2.43)

C(cosh kn + cos kn ) + D(sinh kn sin kn ) = 0

Using Equations 2.43 to solve for kn by setting the determinate of the coefficients C

and D equal to zero yields:

cos(kn ) =

1

cosh(kn )

(2.44)

Figure 2.2 shows the intersection of the two sides of Equation 2.44. The first non-

20

For the nth frequency where n is larger than two the natural frequency is approximately n (n 1/2)2 2 . Furthermore the mode shapes can be written in terms of

an arbitrary constant D as:

sin(kn ) sinh(kn )

(sinh(kn x) sin(kn x)) + (cosh(kn x) cos(kn x))

(

x) = D

cos(kn ) + cosh(kn )

(2.45)

The mode shapes are shown in Figure 2.3.

1

0

1

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

0

1

1

0

1

1

0

1

1

0

1

For the clamped-free configuration the boundary conditions are:

=0

x

=0,t

(2.46)

=0

x x=1,t

Applying the boundary conditions at x = 0 yields:

J =0

21

(2.47)

cos jn = 0

Equation 2.48 has the solution jn =

2n1

.

2

(2.48)

(

x) = I sin jn x

2.2.2

(2.49)

Pinned-Free

For the pinned-free configuration the boundary conditions are:

=0

x

=0,t

2

=0

x2 x=0,t

(2.50)

2

=0

x2 x=1,t

3

=0

x3 x=1,t

Figure 2.4 shows the diagram of the pinned-free configuration. Applying the boundary conditions at x = 0 yields:

D+F =0

(2.51)

DF =0

These two relationships require that D = F = 0. Knowing that D and F are equal

to zero allows on to simplify the form of the solution to:

(

x) = C sinh kn x + E sin kn x

(2.52)

C sinh kn E sin kn = 0

(2.53)

C cosh kn E cos kn = 0

22

Using Equations 2.53 to solve for kn yields:

cos(kn ) tanh(kn ) = sin(kn )

(2.54)

Figure 2.5 shows the intersection of the two sides of Equation 2.54. The first natural

frequency occurs at 0. This corresponds to the rigid body motion which has a mode

shape given as 1 (

x). The other frequencies all take the form of (n 3/4)2 2 for the

nth frequency for every n larger than 1. The mode shapes are described by:

1 = C1 x

cos kn

n (

x) = E

sinh kn x + sin kn x

cosh kn

23

(2.55)

1

0

1

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

0

1

1

0

1

1

0

1

1

0

1

For the pinned-free configuration the boundary conditions are:

=0

x

=0,t

(2.56)

=0

x x=1,t

These are the same boundary conditions as the clamped free configuration, so the

torsional mode shapes are exactly the same as discussed in the previous section.

24

2.2.3

Clamped-Clamped

For the clamped-clamped configuration the boundary conditions are:

=0

x

=0,t

=0

x x=0,t

(2.57)

=0

x

=1,t

=0

x x=1,t

Figure 2.7 shows the diagram of the clamped-clamped configuration.

D+F =0

(2.58)

C +E =0

Applying the boundary conditions at x = 1 yields:

C sinh kn + D cosh kn + E sin kn + F cos kn = 0

(2.59)

C cosh kn + D sinh kn + E cos kn F sin kn = 0

25

C(sinh kn sin kn ) + D(cosh kn cos kn ) = 0

(2.60)

C(cosh kn cos kn ) + D(sinh kn + sin kn ) = 0

Equations 2.60 can be rearranged to solve for kn :

cos(kn ) =

1

cosh(kn )

(2.61)

Figure 2.8 shows the intersection of the two sides of Equation 2.61. The ith fre-

Finally solving for C in terms of D and plugging into Equation 2.60 yields the

following equation for the mode shapes:

cosh(kn ) cos(kn )

(

x) = D

(sinh(kn x) sin(kn x)) + (cosh(kn x) cos(kn x))

sinh(kn ) sin(kn )

(2.62)

The mode shapes are shown in Figure 2.9.

26

1

0

1

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

0

1

1

0

1

1

0

1

1

0

1

For the clamped-clamped configuration the boundary conditions are:

=0

x

=0,t

(2.63)

=0

x

=1,t

J =0

(2.64)

sin jn = 0

(2.65)

Equation 2.65 has the solution jn = n. Therefore the torsional mode shapes are

described by:

(

x) = I sin jn x

27

(2.66)

2.2.4

Free-Free

For the free-free configuration the boundary conditions are:

2

=0

x2 x=0,t

3

=0

x3 x=0,t

(2.67)

2

=0

x2 x=1,t

3

=0

x3 x=1,t

Applying the boundary conditions at x = 0 yields:

DF =0

(2.68)

C E =0

Applying the boundary conditions at x = 1 yields:

C sinh kn D cosh kn + E sin kn F cos kn = 0

(2.69)

C cosh kn + D sinh kn + E cos kn F sin kn = 0

Using Equations 2.68 to simplify Equations 2.69 yields:

C(sinh kn sin kn ) + D(cosh kn cos kn ) = 0

(2.70)

C(cosh kn cos kn ) + D(sinh kn + sin kn ) = 0

Equations 2.70 can be rearranged to solve for kn :

cos(kn ) =

1

cosh(kn )

(2.71)

Figure 2.10 shows the intersection of the two sides of Equation 2.71. There is an

28

1

X: 0

Y: 1

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

X: 7.853

Y: 0.0007773

X: 14.14

Y: 0.006977

0

X: 4.685

Y: 0.01847

0.2

X: 10.99

Y: 3.371e005

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

10

15

kn

intersection at a frequency equal to zero. This crossing corresponds to the rigid body

and rigid rotation modes which can be written as:

1

(

x) = C1 + C2 ( x)

2

(2.72)

where C1 and C2 are arbitrary constants. The ith frequency from this plot can be

written as (i .5)2 2 .

Finally solving for C in terms of D and plugging into Equation 2.70 yields the

following equation for the mode shapes:

cosh(kn ) cos(kn )

(

x) = D

(sinh(kn x) + sin(kn x)) + (cosh(kn x) + cos(kn x))

sinh(kn ) sin(kn )

(2.73)

The mode shapes are shown in Figure 2.11.

Next a structural model which includes a torsional spring at the leading edge is

derived. This model is presented because it is used to model the transition between

the two fixed boundary conditions, clamped and pinned. A summary of the nondimensional (radians/non-dimensional time) natural frequencies for the pinned-free

29

1

0

1

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

0

1

1

0

1

1

0

1

1

0

1

and clamped-free beams is given in Table 2.1. Furthermore the normalized spatial

mode shapes can be seen in Figure 2.12

Mode

Pinned-Free

Number Frequency

1

0

2

(2 34 )2 2

3

(3 34 )2 2

..

..

.

.

(n 34 )2 2

n

Clamped-Free

Frequency

(.517)2 2

(1.49)2 2

(3 12 )2 2

..

.

(n 12 )2 2

Table 2.1: Non-Dimensional Natural Frequencies for a Single Edge Fixed Beam

The leading edge spring can either be modeled by incorporating the potential

energy due to the spring into the equations of motion or modifying the boundary

conditions to include the restoring moment due to the torsional spring. For this

thesis the boundary condition method is used because the resulting mode shapes are

the natural modes of the spring system and therefore the elastic portion of the aeroelastic equations remain uncoupled. This minimizes the number of modes required to

30

3 (

x)

2 (

x)

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

4 (

x)

1 (

x)

0

1

2

0.2

0.4

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

0.6

0.8

0

1

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

Figure 2.12: The solid line corresponds to the clamped-free mode shapes, dashed

= 1000 mode

line to the pined-free mode shapes, and the dotted line to the K

shapes. All mode shapes normalized to a generalized mass of one.

capture the dynamics in the aeroelastic simulations. The boundary conditions at the

pinned edge with the torsional spring can be determined by applying a force balance

at x = 0. Here the torsional force applied by the spring modeled by hooks law must

be identically equal to bending moment. Mathematically this can be written as:

2 w(0,

t)

t)

w(0,

=K

2

x

x

(2.74)

where K

as well as the three other natural boundary conditions, the assumed solution is

plugged into the boundary condition equations. This process yields the following

matrix equation.

1

1

1

1

C

0

1

K

1

D = 0

F

0

sinh cosh sin cos

(2.75)

The set of four coupled equations captured in Equation 2.75 can be used to

solve for the natural frequencies by determining the values of which make the

31

determinate of the matrix equal to zero. There are an infinite number of frequencies

that will satisfy this requirement. Depending on the number of mode shapes desired,

the Nullspace of the matrix can be used to determine the values for C, D, E, F up

to an arbitrary constant for each of the s which satisfy the determinant equation.

A common choice for the constant is one that normalizes the generalized mass to

one.

70

n [radians]

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

10

10

10

K

Figure 2.13: Structural Frequency Evolution. The solid lines are the natural frequencies of the beam with a torsional spring, the dotted lines are the pinned-free

natural frequencies and the dashed lines are the clamped-free natural frequencies.

ability of a leading edge spring to model the transition between pinned-free and

clamped-free structural modes. To evaluate the effectiveness of the method one can

look at the convergence of the frequencies as a function of non-dimensional torsional

). First, it is reassuring to see that the frequencies do converge

spring stiffness (K

to the clamped-free frequencies at high values of K . The second observation that

can be made from Figure 2.13 is that the non-dimensional spring stiffness range

where the frequencies move from the pinned-free to the clamped-free values shifts to

32

higher values of K as the mode number increases. Physically, this arises because the

stiffness of a given mode increases in proportion the natural frequency squared, so in

order for the torsional spring to affect the larger modes, its stiffness must be larger.

This also means that lower frequencies close the gap between the higher frequency

modes before these higher frequencies begin to move and restore the gap. This is

a result that could explain why increasing the torsional spring stiffness can initially

lower the flutter velocity, a result which will be shown later.

The results of this structural analysis suggest that the pinned edge torsional

spring will be an effective way to model the transition between pinned-free and

clamped-free flutter. Furthermore, being able to model both of the boundary con is an elegant way to create the model

ditions simply by varying the parameter K

of the system with arbitrary boundary conditions. In fact it is clear that modifying

the terms in Equation 2.75 will allow you to model any arbitrary boundary beam

boundary conditions.

Although the beam model is useful for plates with aspect ratios far from unity,

when this is not the case and boundary conditions in both the directions need to

be accounted for, a more complex structural model must be used. In order to do

this a two-dimensional plate structural model is used. Instead of relying on a finite

element model simulation to determine the mode shapes and natural frequencies, an

analytical approach is implemented. Because a direct solution of the plate equation

PDE with the appropriate natural boundary conditions is difficult without specific

boundary conditions and the use of special functions, a Raleigh-Ritz method is used.

The basis functions are a product of beam modes in each of the two plate dimensions

are used. Because the Raleigh-Ritz method only requires the geometric boundary

conditions and not the natural boundary conditions to be satisfied, the beam modes

33

The Raleigh-Ritz method begins with expressing the assumed form of the displacement.

w(x, y, t) =

qn (t)jk (x, y)

(2.76)

In Equation 2.76, the nth structural mode is labeled jk because the mode shape

can be broken in to two components.

jk (x, y) = j (x)k (y)

(2.77)

The energies of the system need to be derived and then placed into Lagranges

equations. The energies for a plate in tension can be written as[9]:

Z Lx Z Ly 2

w

1

dx dy

T = h

2

t

0

0

"

2

2 2

2 2

Z

Z

2

1 Lx Ly

w

w

w

w

Tx

V =

+ Ty

+ Dx

+ Dy

2

2 0

x

y

x

y 2

0

(2.78)

(2.79)

+2D0

w

x2 y 2

+ 4Dxy

w

xy

2 #

dx dy

It is at this point that the assumed form of the solution is plugged into Equations

2.78 and 2.79. The inertial term in the kinetic energy equation can be rewritten as:

1

T = h

2

Z

0

Lx

Z

0

Ly

XX

n

(2.80)

where jk is the nth mode shape and pq is the mth mode shape.

Because the generalized coordinates do not vary with position they can be pulled

outside of the integral. Furthermore, it is useful to use vector notation to represent

the double sum. The displacement w(x, y, t) can be written as a multiplication of

two column vectors as shown here:

~ =

~ T ~q

w(x, y, t) = ~q T

34

(2.81)

~q

T = ~q T M

(2.82)

= 1 h

M

2

Z

0

Lx

Ly

~

~ T dx dy

(2.83)

Because the terms in Equation 2.83 are products of beam mode shapes integrated

in each direction, the orthogonality of the beam modes means that only when both

the indices of are equal is the integral not equal to zero. Because of this the mass

matrix is a diagonal matrix.

The next term to explore is the first term in the potential energy expression.

Before witting down the substitution for w(x, y, t) it is important to discuss what

happens when a spatial derivative of the assumed mode is taken. For example the

first derivative with respect to x of the displacement is given by:

w

T

~

= ~q

x

x

(2.84)

Equation 2.84 can be further simplified by expanding out the assumed modes into

~ using the

its x and y components. This will be captured in the description of

following notation:

~

~ =

(2.85)

where the previous equation shows that the structural mode shape vector has two

components. Plugging this into Equation 2.84 and using the prime () notation to

indicate a spatial derivative with respect to the direction of the mode shape yields

the following relationship.

w

= ~q T ~0

x

35

(2.86)

Plugging in this relationship into the tension in the x-direction portion of the

potential energy expression yields:

1

Vtx = ~q T

2

Lx

Ly

T

Tx ~0 ~0 dy dx~q

(2.87)

To simplify the previous equation, the orthogonality of the y mode shapes can be

used to cancel terms where the index of the y mode shapes are not equal. Furthermore

the following notation will be used to define the integral portion of the previous

equation.

tx = 1

K

2

Lx

Ly

T

Tx ~0 ~0 dy dx

(2.88)

Using a similar method, the y direction tension term can be written as:

ty ~q

Vty = ~q T K

(2.89)

where K

ty = 1

K

2

Lx

Ly

~ 0

~ 0 T dy dx

Ty

(2.90)

Furthermore by inspection the following stiffness matrices can be defined for the

additional potential energy terms. Once the stiffness matrices are defined the form

of the associated potential energy is the same as shown in Equation 2.89. Starting

with the potentials associated with the Dx and Dy terms.

Dx = 1 Dx

K

2

Dx = 1 Dy

K

2

Lx

Ly

~ 00

~ 00 T dy dx

(2.91)

T

~00 ~00 dy dx

(2.92)

0

Lx

Ly

Dx

Because both the mode shapes and their second derivatives are orthogonal, the K

Dy matrices are diagonal.

and K

36

D0 = D

K

Lx

~ 00 T dy dx

~00

(2.93)

Dxy = 2Dxy

K

Ly

Z

0

Lx

Ly

T

~0 0 ~0 0 dy dx

(2.94)

for these two terms there is no modal orthogonality so all of the integrations of the

mode shapes must be conducted.

Now that the useful definitions have been made, the potential and kinetic energy

relationships can be rewritten in a simplified form as:

T =

T

(~q )M (~q)

t

t

tx + K

ty + K

Dx + K

Dy + K

D0 + K

Dxy ~q

V = ~q T K

(2.95)

(2.96)

With the potential and kinetic energies defined they can be plugged into Lagranges equation to yield the equations of motion. The familiar form of Lagranges

equation is:

L

d L

=0

qn dt qn

(2.97)

where L is the Lagrangian and equal to the kinetic energy minus the potential energy. After plugging in the energies given in Equations 2.95 and 2.96 the following

equations of motion in matrix form is produced.

2

t

(2.98)

The equation of motion given in Equation 2.98 can be solved in many different

ways. For example the equation could be placed into state space and solved using

numerical integration techniques. The author choose to use eigenanalysis of the

37

system. For this analysis a solution of the form q(t) = qeit is assumed. Plugging

this solution into equation 24 yields:

+K

~q = 0

2 M

(2.99)

where K

in the form of a generalized eigenvalue problem which can be solved using available

eigenvalue solvers. The resulting eigenvalues can be used to reconstruct the natural

frequencies and mode shapes of the plate system. This model allows a variation of

boundary conditions by changing the assumed solution with the appropriate beam

modes.

2.4.1

Initial plate simulations are done for a material provided by NASA for the use in

noise reduction between control surfaces and wings on the configurations outlined in

the introduction. The material properties are given in Table 2.2.

Table 2.2: NASA Membrane Properties

Property

Symbol Value

Density

s

1230 kg/m3

Youngs Modulus

E

18.4 MPa

Poissons Ratio

.5

Thickness

h

1.74 mm

Chord

152.4 mm

Span

114.3 mm

The results of the elastic simulation for each of the configurations are given in

Figures 2.14-2.19. The natural frequencies have been sorted by their y direction

mode number which is determined from the system eigenvector. Below the plot

of the natural frequencies are plots of the first four modes with the lowest natural

38

frequencies. For each mode shape, a thick line along a boundary represents a clamped

boundary condition. The title above each mode shape gives the natural frequency

followed by the mode number organized as (x Mode, y Mode). For the aeroelastic

setup corresponding to a given configuration the flow is assumed to flow along the

x-axis.

A discussion about the structural model can occur at this point. The first and second beam mode shapes for a free-free beam are a rigid body rotation and translation

and share a natural frequency of zero so it is not surprising that there is overlap in the

natural frequencies for cases where there is at least one free-free boundary condition.

Next, the more edges fixed, the higher the natural frequencies are. This is intuitive

because the structural modes constructing the plate which increase in their natural

frequency the more fixed edges they have. By looking at the mode shape figures, it

appears that the beam mode basis function assumption are a good assumption for

the natural modes of the system. This can be seen by looking at the construction

of each of the plate modes which are clearly combinations of an assumed mode in

each of the directions with only small contributions from additional modes. More

discussion of the agreement with experiment is given in the experiments section.

An alternative method to the plate model presented here would have been to use

ANSYS or another finite element package to determine the modes shapes and natural

frequencies. However, this method would have required running an external simulation any time a parameter or boundary condition is changed. Using the beam mode

combination basis functions and building this elastic model into the aeroelastic analysis allowed the author to vary the tension, dimensions and boundary conditions on

the fly which makes exploring the flutter boundary as a function of these parameters

easier.

Additionally, elastic simulations for different streamwise lengths and tension in

the normal to flow direction are conducted. These simulations are run because it

39

50

40

60

30

40

20

20

10

0

100

150

100

50

50

0

1

2

Streamwise Mode

1.689 Hz (1,1)

1

2

Streamwise Mode

4.929 Hz (1,2)

10.524 Hz (2,1)

16.374 Hz (2,2)

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.05

0.1

0.1

0.05

0 0

0.1

0.1

0.05

0 0

0.1

0.05

0 0

0 0

25

40

20

30

15

20

10

10

5

0

150

60

100

40

50

20

0

1

2

Streamwise Mode

3.004 Hz (1,1)

1

2

Streamwise Mode

5.580 Hz (2,1)

14.587 Hz (3,1)

18.709 Hz (1,2)

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.05

0 0

0.1

0.1

0.05

0.1

0.1

0.05

0 0

0 0

0.1

0.05

0 0

40

60

60

40

40

20

20

100

200

150

50

100

50

1

2

Streamwise Mode

10.808 Hz (1,1)

1

2

Streamwise Mode

13.329 Hz (1,2)

28.245 Hz (1,3)

29.627 Hz (2,1)

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.05

0.1

0.1

0.05

0 0

0.1

0.1

0.05

0 0

0.1

0.05

0 0

0 0

30

60

20

40

10

20

200

100

150

100

50

50

0

1

2

Streamwise Mode

19.215 Hz (1,1)

1

2

Streamwise Mode

20.756 Hz (2,1)

28.303 Hz (3,1)

52.669 Hz (1,2)

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.05

0 0

0.1

0.1

0.05

0.1

0.1

0.05

0 0

0 0

0.1

0.05

0 0

41

60

60

40

40

20

20

200

100

150

100

50

50

0

1

2

Streamwise Mode

12.078 Hz (1,1)

1

2

Streamwise Mode

26.358 Hz (1,2)

31.049 Hz (2,1)

45.597 Hz (2,2)

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.05

0.1

0.1

0.05

0 0

0.1

0.1

0.05

0 0

0.1

0.05

0 0

0 0

60

80

60

40

40

20

20

150

200

150

100

100

50

50

1

2

Streamwise Mode

19.816 Hz (1,1)

1

2

Streamwise Mode

26.611 Hz (2,1)

43.183 Hz (3,1)

53.443 Hz (1,2)

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.05

0 0

0.1

0.1

0.05

0.1

0.1

0.05

0 0

0 0

0.1

0.05

0 0

42

is hypothesized that these two variations may be able to largely impact the flutter

boundary for Configuration 6, the configuration of interest for the NASA noise suppression research. Figure 2.20 shows the frequency evolution as the streamwise chord

is varied. Interestingly there are natural frequency crossings. This occurs because

the natural frequency of the normal to flow direction mode remains the same, while

the streamwise frequency varies. Another trend that is observed is for a given mode

in the normal to flow direction, as the chord increases all the frequencies which share

the same normal to the flow mode number begin to converge. In the limit as the

chord goes to infinity the system appears to converge to the beam natural frequencies in the normal to flow direction. This arises because, as the streamwise length

increases, the local response at any cross section in the normal to flow direction

does not depend on the boundary conditions in the streamwise direction, essentially

turning the cross section into a beam with the normal to flow direction boundary

conditions.

200

180

160

[Hz]

140

120

100

80

60

40

20

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

0.3

Streamwise Dimension

Figure 2.20: Natural frequency evolution as the streamwise chord is varied for

Configuration 2. Solid lines correspond to first mode in the normal to flow direction,

dashed lines to the second mode in the normal to flow direction and the dotted lines

correspond to the first two beam natural frequencies for the normal to flow direction

mode shapes.

43

2.21 clearly shows that frequencies evolve differently than others. This arises due

to the fact that for a given mode in the normal to flow direction, the direction of

the applied tension, the effect of the tension is multiplied by the natural frequency

squared because the tension term is not attached to a time derivative in the equations

of motion. This means that the tension has a larger effect on the higher normal to

flow direction mode numbers. This can be seen by comparing the evolution of the

two lowest frequency solid lines, to the two dotted lines which are the two lowest

frequencies that are comprised of the second mode in the tension direction.

300

250

[Hz]

200

150

100

50

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

Figure 2.21: Natural frequency evolution as the normal to the flow tension is

varied for Configuration 2. Solid lines correspond to first mode in the normal to flow

direction, dotted lines to the second mode in the normal to flow direction.

All of the analysis done up to this point is done on an unforced elastic structures.

Before moving on to the discussion of the aerodynamic theory it is usefully to identify how the structural dynamics equations are modified to include external forcing.

Regardless of how the equations of motion are derived, whether through Hamiltons

principle for the beam equations or Lagranges equation for the beam, the final unforced equations can be written in the following form:

44

~q + K~

q = 0

M

(2.100)

is the generalized stiffness matrix, and

Where M

~q are the modal coordinates for the included mode shapes.

If the system is forced Equation 2.100 is modified by adding a generalized forcing

term to the other side of the equation.

~q + K~

q = Q

~

M

(2.101)

This ith element in the generalized force vector is determined by taking the

real force applied to the system multiplying it by the ith generalized mode shape

and integrating the result over the plate. This is a classical result that is found

throughout the literature.

Z

F i (x, y) dA

Qi =

(2.102)

force and then to solve Equation 2.101 to determine the structural response. What

makes the problem interesting is that the aerodynamic forces are tightly coupled to

the structures displacement and motion. The next section will outline in more detail

the specifics of the aerodynamic modeling which is used to model the aerodynamic

forcing due to the dynamic response of the structure.

Before moving on the the aerodynamic theory it is useful to discretize the structural equations of motion because the vortex lattice aerodynamic equations are discrete. First the elastic equations of motion are placed into state space and time

discretized. The best way to illustrate this process is to start by looking at the ith

equation for the relationship defined in Equation 2.102. This relationship can be

45

expressed as

N

X

j,i qi + K

j,i qi = Q

~i

M

(2.103)

j=1

two state variables y1 = qi and y2 = qi and discretized the variables as follows:

n+1/2

y2n+1 y2n

=

t

(2.104a)

n+1/2

y1

y1n+1 + y1n

=

2

(2.104b)

y n+1 y1n

y2n+1 + y2n

= 1

= y1 n+1/2

2

t

(2.104c)

y2

y2 n+1/2 =

The last equation is just a discrete relationship between y1 and y2 . Moving both of

the discrete representations of the half time step to one side and setting equal to

zero one can obtain the following relationship.

y1n+1 y1n y2n+1 + y2n

=0

t

2

(2.105)

2.103 as:

N

X

j=1

"

j,i

M

t

!

j,i

+K

2

46

#

~ n+1/2

=Q

i

(2.106)

3

Aerodynamic Model

As mentioned earlier, the forcing on the elastic model is due to the flow of the

surrounding fluid. For this application the aerodynamic forces are calculated using

a vortex lattice method. This method is a lattice method of accounting for discrete

vortex filaments (tubes of constant circulation) as they progress through time. For

this specific application, a certain type of vortex filament called a horseshoe vortex is

used. The reason to track the vortex filaments is that the strength of the circulation

inside the filament corresponds to the applied forces. The general explanation of

the method is that a set of vortex elements are fixed to stationary points on the

structure. These elements allow the structure to interact with the fluid. Their

strength is governed by a requirement that the downwash they create satisfy the noflow through boundary condition at what are known as the collocation points on the

structure. Additional vortex elements that are free to move are introduced behind

the structure and are used to account for the influence of the unsteady wake. All of

the models used in this thesis include a flat prescribed wake which makes tracking

47

the convected vorticity in the wake significantly easier. The flat prescribed wake

behind a rectangular structure is shown in Figure 3.1.

Figure 3.1: Visualization of Structural Mode Shapes with Vortex Lattice Wake

Before discussing the specifics of the VLM, it is useful to define some general

properties of the vortex filament. A vortex filament is a tube of flow that has a

vorticity, which, in the limit as the tube diameter becomes small, contains a fixed

circulation . The vortex filament represents a fundamental solution to Laplaces

Equation, the governing equation for a constant density inviscid, irrotational flow.

The vortex tubes must also satisfy the Helmholtz Vortex Theorems. First the circulation around a vortex filament is constant all along the tube. Mathematically this

RR

can be stated as

~ ~n ds = 0 where

~ is the vorticity. Second, a vortex tube

c.s

can never end in a fluid, but must close on itself, end at a boundary, or go to infinity.

And third a fluid element that is initially irrotational remains irrotational.

48

The velocity induced by a vortex filament at any position in the fluid is governed

by the Biot-Savart Law. This vector equation dictates both the direction and the

strength of the induced velocity from a vortex filament with circulation strength .

Specifically the velocity at point t is:

Vt =

4

Z

c

r~t d~s

r~t 3

(3.1)

the velocity field of a specific vortex element at other positions in the flow. To do this

one must define a carefully constructed vortex filament, such as the horseshoe vortex,

that satisfies the three Helmholtz Vortex Theorems, and analytically calculate the

induced velocity at a point (x, y, z). The kernel function for common vortex elements

(rings, horseshoe vortices, infinite vortex filaments) can be found in the aerodynamics

literature.

The discussion of the aerodynamic theory begins with a discussion of the mesh

on the elastic structure and in the wake. In this derivation the simple square mesh

on a rectangular plate as shown in Figure 3.2 is used. The information shown in

the figure can be stated in words with the following set of definitions that must be

made before proceeding. First it is assumed that the streamwise dimension all of

the elements is uniformly x. Second is defined as the index of the row and is

defined as the index of the column in the mesh. Third, the horseshoe vortex (, )

passes through the

1

4

3

4

column. It is at this collocation point on the panel that we require that no induced

velocity through the panel.

For this case the following numbering convention is used: the element in the th

row and th column is defined to be the (( 1) Sc + )th element. This allows

the transformation of an by matrix that contains the strength of the individual

49

Wake Span

(Ws Elements)

Plate Chord

(Sc Elements)

Plate Span

(Ss Elements)

Wake Chord

(Wc Elements)

i'th Element

Colocation

point

x

i

(, )s to a column vector ~.

Solving for the circulation (~) in this method is achieved by solving a matrix

equation that relates the circulation at time n+1 to the known circulation at time

n. In order to do this a set of equations equal to the number of unknown circulation

strengths (St +Wt ) must be derived. The set of governing equations for the vortex

lattice method can be segmented into four types of equations that govern the circulation on a given element. Furthermore, for the square lattice that is constructed for

this problem the equations for a given column are the same for all of the elements

in that column. For more complicated structures or to model additional effects the

same types of fundamental equations are modified as needed. The four types of

equations are:

A11 Over the structure (St equations)

This set of equations relates the downwash caused by horseshoe vortex

elements to the motion of the elastic structure at the collocation points.

W11 First column of the wake (Wc equations).

50

This set of equations relates the circulation in this first column of the wake

to the change in circulation on the structure.

W12 Second to second to last column in the wake ((Wt 2 Wc ) equations)

For this set of equations by specifying a time step shown in Equation 3.2

the circulation for a given element at a given time step can be assumed to be

convected circulation of the element in the same row, but previous column at

the previous time step.

t =

1

x

U

L

T

(3.2)

for the velocity. Plugging in the

1 m U and the non-dimensional, scale invariant time step definition given in

EI

Equation 3.3.

t =

(3.3)

Because there are a finite number of elements in the computational model

the last column includes the convection from the previous column at the previous time step plus an added relaxation factor applied to the circulation at the

given element from the previous time step.

First: Explore circulation over the wing (A1)

The circulation strength () over the panel elements is constrained by a boundary

condition at the

3

4

the horseshoe vortex creates a resultant velocity everywhere in the fluid which is

described by the kernel function. At the

3

4

51

the sum of the downwash from all the circulations in the vortex mesh be identically

equal to the vertical velocity of the panel at the given time, in the reference frame

of the fluid. For the th row and th column this is described as:

Vd

n+1

(, ) =

SX

+Ws

c +Wc Ss

X

i=1

K(,),(i,j) n+1

(i,j)

(3.4)

j=1

where K(,),(i,j) is the kernel function which transforms the downwash caused by the

horseshoe vortex at (i, j) at a point (, ) and whose form can be found in many

aerodynamic textbooks. The kernel function for horseshoe vorticies can be found

in Katz and Plotkin [21]. In this document both dimensional and non-dimensional

analysis is conducted. For the non-dimensional case Equation 3.4 also makes it clear

that the normalized circulation must normalized by the velocity scaling factor times

the length scale. Use of the ( ) notation will denote a non-dimensional parameter

or result.

At this point it is necessary to use the numbering convention defined earlier to

write the governing equation for the normalized circulation strength on the panel.

Let k = (( 1) Sc + )

l = ((i 1) Sc + j)

(3.5)

Vdn+1 (k) =

SX

t +Wt

n+1

Kk,l (l)

l=1

where k goes from 1 to the number of elements on the panel St and l goes from 1 to

the total number of elements in the lattice of horseshoe vortices(St + Wt ).

The matrix form of this equation for all of the elements on the structure can be

52

written as:

K1,1 K1,2

..

.

.

..

KSt ,1

..

.

..

.

..

.

..

.

..

.

K1,St +Wt

Vd (1)

.

..

..

.

..

..

.

.

Vd (St )

St +Wt

The horseshoe elements in the wake left behind the elastic member are treated differently from the elements on the elastic structure. In the wake, there is no boundary

condition to govern the strength of the circulation. Instead, in the wake the equations account for the horseshoe elements as they move with the fluid. For the first

column in the streamwise direction following the elastic structure the governing equation states that the circulation at time step n + 1 is the change in the strength the

circulation in the same row as the given element on the elastic structure between

time step n and n + 1. Mathematically this can be written as shown in Equation 3.6

given in the global index notation with j = ((i 1) Ss + ).

n+1 (St + ) =

Sc

X

n+1 (j)

n (j)]

[

(3.6)

j=1

After re-arranging and setting equal to zero this can be written in matrix form as

n+1 + W12~

n = 0

W11~

(3.7)

Note, for these relationships the non-dimensional and dimensional forms are the

same.

53

The calculation of the vorticity in the wake uses the understanding that the vortex

is convected through the wake at the free stream velocity U . Because the time step

is defined to be the free stream velocity divided by the chord length of the mesh the

vorticity of an element in the th row is shed a distance U t = x in the process of

one time step. At this point it is important to note that setting a t that is a given

fraction of the fastest structural frequency of structural oscillation effectively sets

the streamwise dimension of the mesh. Mathematically the convection relationship

can be written as:

n+1 (i) =

n (i Ws )

(3.8)

n+1 (i)

n (i Ws ) = 0

(3.9)

n , which look

This creates two matrices, W2,1 for the

like the identity matrix and the negative of an offset identity respectively.

Fourth: Explore circulation in the last column of wake (W3)

While the hypothetical wake for the vortex lattice method extends indefinitely, in

order to construct an efficient model, a finite wake size is used. To deal with the

finite nature of the modeled wake a relaxation factor is introduced to capture the

effect of the horseshoe vortices that leave the wake. This relaxation factor is often

denoted as . For the last column in the wake the equation is much the same as

the rest of the wake with the addition of the relaxation term. Mathematically this

is written as

n+1 (i) =

n (i Ws ) +

n (i)

(3.10)

n+1 (i)

n (i Ws )

n (i) = 0

(3.11)

n , which

This again creates two matrices, W3,1 for the

look like the identity matrix and the negative of an offset identity with alpha on the

54

diagonal respectively.

Now that the set of relationships have been defined the final step is to create a

final set of matrix equations that represents a set of St + Wt equations which govern

Using the matrix identifiers defined earlier this can be written

the strength of the s.

as:

n+1 + ~

n = Vd~n+1

(3.12)

Where

A11

W11

W21

, =

W31

W12

W22

W32

Finally the downwash vector V~d is zero everywhere except for on the panel where it

is equal to the vertical velocity of the elastic member. This represents the coupling

term for the aerodynamics and will require determining the convective derivative of

the panel velocity.

Now that the non-dimensional governing aerodynamic equations has been defined

it is possible to construct the non-dimensional aeroelastic system. This requires a

discussion of the way that the governing equations are coupled. For this method

the equations are coupled in two places: the downwash state relationship in the

aerodynamics and the generalized force term in the elastic equation of motion.

55

3.2.1

The no flow through boundary condition on the structure allows the VLM aerodynamic model to interact with the structural model. This downwash relationship is

governed by the actual movement of the elastic plate. Further complicating the system is the fact that the coordinate system for the downwash is the coordinate system

of the moving vortex, while the global coordinate system is fixed on the plate. The

relationship between the moving flow and the fixed plate requires specifying both

the reference frame and the quantity that is required for the downwash.

dw

Vd =

dt

(3.13)

plate moving in the reference frame of flow

Note, this equation would be the same in dimensional form. In order to find this

relationship one has to note that the position of the plate (w(

x, t)) is a function of

both the position (

x) and time (t). In order to compute the velocity one has to apply

the chain rule to the position

dw

fluid

w

=

x

plate

w

d

x+

t

dt

(3.14)

plate

The downwash for the vortex lattice derivation is the time rate of change of the

vertical location w so it is necessary to divide both sides of the equation by dt

dw

dt

fluid

w

=

x

plate

d

x w

+

dt

t

plate

dt

dt

(3.15)

Considering the above equation two simplifications can be applied directly. The first

is to note that

dt

dt

d

x

dt

is a statement

of how fast the plate is moving in the streamwise direction in the reference frame of

the fluid flow. From this statement it follows that the

56

d

x

dt

velocity of the fluid U . Using these relations the downwash Vd is equal to:

d

w

Vd =

dt

fluid

w

=

x

plate

U +

t

(3.16)

plate

At this point there is a continuous definition (in time and space) for the downwash

velocity. However, because the VLM is discrete in both space in time, it is necessary

to derive a representation of the downwash at the discrete collocation points and

finite time steps. Invoking the separation of variables used to solve the homogeneous

P

equation as discussed earlier (w(

x, t) =

i (

x)qi (t)) and examining the kth term

the time and space derivatives can be written as:

w k (

x, t) = k (

x)qk (t)

(3.17a)

wk0 (

x, t) = 0k (

x)qk (t)

(3.17b)

Vd,k (

x) = U 0k (

x)qk (t) + qk (t)k (

x)

(3.18)

where Vd,k (

x) is the downwash due to the motion of the kth mode at position x.

This relationship can now be written in a matrix form that is useful for solving the

system.

qk (t) n+1

n+1

0

Vd,k (

x) = U k (

x) k (

x)

qk (t)

There is one of these equations for every element on the structure and for every

eigenmode. The complete matrix equation can be written as:

~Vd n+1 =

~

57

(3.19)

where

i) = U 0 (

(:,

xi )

k xi ) 1 (

q1

q1

0

~

U k (

xi ) n (

xi ) , = ...

qn

qn

(3.20)

where xi is the x location location of the collocation point of the ith panel.

3.2.2

The final coupling equation is the generalized force caused by the aerodynamics. In

order to calculate the generalized force a transformation from the circulation to the

induced pressure must be defined. An application of Bernoullis equation yields the

following pressure field due to a continuous circulation field (x, t):

p(x, t) = U (x, y) +

t

(xi , t)dxi

(3.21)

However, Equation 3.21 is not particularly useful because the VLM requires a discrete

description. Discretising the previous equation in terms of (i) for each of the i

elements on the panel gives:.

P (i)n = y U n (i) +

ceil(i/Ss )

n (k Ss + (i ceil(i/Ss )))x

(3.22)

k=0

Where P is now the pressure force per unit length caused by the aerodynamics. With

this definition it is clear that an approximation of the time derivative must be made

to allow the equation to become completely discrete. Using the limit definition of a

derivative

(k)

t

(k)n+1 (k)n

(k) =

t

t

58

(3.23)

This approximation is a good approximation for the time derivative centered on the

time step n + 1/2. Therefore it is common to define the pressure at the half step

using the fact that for a value only defined at discrete time steps the value at the half

time step is the average of the values at time n and time n + 1.Using the relationship

in Equation 3.23 and the simplification that c(k) = k Ss + (i ceil(i/Ss )) and noting

that

x

t

1

yU (n (i) + n+1 (i)) +

2

P (i)(n+1/2) =

ceil(i/Ss )

(3.24)

k=0

The dimensional form of the pressure force written above in used for the dimensional aeroelastic analysis. Before moving on it is important to discuss the nondimensionalization of Equation 3.24. From the normalizing of the elastic equations

of motion previously discussed in the torsional spring section, the non-dimensional

pressure per unit length is given by p(x, t) =

EI

p(

x, t).

L2

normalizing factors into Equation 3.24 yields two non-dimensional parameters that

define this aeroelastic system. The first one is the aspect ratio of the system H

which is equal to the normal to flow direction dimension divided by the streamwise

dimension. The second is the mass ratio which is defined as a ratio of the mass

of the air to the mass of the beam, specifically, =

a L

.

s h

P (i)(n+1/2) =

ceil(i/Ss )

X

1 n

n+1 (i)) +

n+1 (c(k))

n (c(k)))

y U (

(i) +

(

H

2

k=0

59

(3.25)

3.2.3

Finally the pressure defined in Equation 3.25 is used in the governing aeroelastic

equations through the generalized force terms Q which are written using a sum in

place of the integral in the original definition:

Qn = qn (t)

St

X

P (i)n (i)

(3.26)

i=1

y

Top of

Wind Tunnel

Rigid Airfoil

Flat Plate

Vortex Wake

Air Flow

Horshoe

Vortex

Span

X

Plate Chord

Bottom of

Wind Tunnel

Airfoil

Chord

Equation 3.26 is then plugged into the matrix structural equation of motion,

Equation 2.106 and then combined with the time discretized equations for the aerodynamics to yield a matrix equation of the form given in Equation 3.27.

n=0

n+1 +

(3.27)

In this case

and

60

C1

D1

=

,

C2

D2

, =

(3.28)

and D2

contain the elastic terms and C1

and C2

contain the generalized force

D1

relationships.

The theory established in the previous sections is incorporated into a code used to

produce vortex lattice based aeroelastic simulations. The capability of the code has

grown from a simple time history based analysis of a dimensional cantilevered plate

with a user observation of the result to deduce the frequency and damping to a

fully automated system that can run multiple types of simulations and analysis for

frequency and flutter velocity. Specifically the system can be analyzed in either the

frequency or the time domain. For both simulations the frequencies and damping

for the system are determined automatically. Furthermore analysis can either be run

in a velocity sweep method to get a clean response evolution of the system, or an

intelligent flutter velocity discovery method when the flutter boundary as a function

of a structural or aerodynamic parameter is required.

The code is written in Matlab and includes a text based user interface. Depending

on the user choices, the code then creates the appropriate data storage structure and

runs the analysis. The code is structured in a way that common tasks such as

building the aerodynamic and elastic matrices are in self-contained modules which

can be called by different types of analysis.

61

3.3.1

Matrix Definition

After the text based interface determines the configuration and type of analysis that

will be run, the parameters that are required to create the aeroelastic vortex lattice

matrices are generated. At this point a matrix definition code is called. Using the

defined parameters and relations established in the theory, the matrix definition

matrices.

subroutine generates the

and

This setup is extremely useful for expanding the vortex lattice analysis module

to include different configurations. For example, instead of using the analytic mode

shapes which are derived in the structural theory derivation section, ANSYS finite

element modes can be used without changing the aerodynamic matrix definition

code. This is done by modifying the position at a given (x,y) coordinate for a given

mode to return the position from an interpolation of the ANSYS result whenever

called.

3.3.2

One of the elegant aspects of the vortex lattice method is that for any similar geometry and aerodynamics the motion is governed by Equation 3.27. Because of this,

matrices have been defined the analysis methods remain the same

once the

and

regardless of the configuration that is being simulated. Regardless of how the matrix equation is built the analysis methods presented proceed in a common manner.

Because the system defined is strictly linear, both an eigenvalue solution and an

analysis of the time history simulation will yield the same aeroelastic results.

Time History: Frequency

The first analysis that is done is based on the time history method. A time history

of the solution can be constructed by time stepping Equation 3.27 from an arbitrary

initial condition. The time history can then be analyzed to determine the system

62

damping and frequency for a specific flow velocity. Figure 3.4 shows a typical time

history result for a cantilevered beam that is slightly above its flutter velocity.

transform (FFT) of the time history. Figure 3.5 shows the FFTs of the individual

mode time histories. These FFTs reveal the relative strength of the modes. For

example it is clear that the second structural mode drives the aeroelastic instability

for this system. The minimal contribution of the 3rd and 4th mode also suggestions

that the number of structural modes used to represent this system is adequate. It is

also clear at this above flutter speed that the peak frequency for all of the modes has

been driven to the flutter frequency of system and the individual modal frequency

content has been lost.

63

The time history is also used to determine the system damping. This is an important

parameter because it indicates when the system goes from a decaying oscillation

(positive damping) to a growing oscillation (negative damping). The damping for

the system is estimated by first making the assumption that the solution has an

oscillatory behavior:

q(t) = er +ii

(3.29)

This interpretation leads to the conclusion that the time history is the product of

an exponential and oscillatory solutions. To isolate the exponential portion of the

solution to discover r , it is convenient to look at the peak to peak decay near the

end of the time history. Looking at two adjacent peaks and defining qr (t) = er t and

qr (t + t) = er (t+t) and then dividing qr (t + t) by qr (t) yields:

qr (t + t)

= er t

qr (t)

64

(3.30)

This clearly gives rise to the definition of the damping of the system as:

r =

t

(3.31)

looking at the peak to peak slope of the natural log of the time history. Figure 3.6

includes the natural log of the time history with the slope of the peaks drawn on for

each of the modes. It is clear from this plot that the system is above its flutter speed

because the second mode has a positive slope which corresponds with a growing

exponential and negative damping. This figure also shows that the cleanest way to

determine the system damping is to look at the natural log of the time history of the

mode which is driving the flutter. Because this signal is growing the fastest it will

65

Frequency Domain Analysis

For the entirely linear system that is analyzed, all of the information that is gleaned

from the time history analysis can be determined from an eigenanalysis without time

stepping the solution. The eigenanalysis for this system is conducted on Equation

3.27 assuming a solution for the circulation and the state variables of:

t

= e

(3.32)

=0

et

+

(3.33)

once one defines = exp[t]. As before, the real and imaginary parts of the eigenvalues are the values that will determine the stability and frequency of the system.

Fortunately the eigenvalues of the system with the largest magnitude correspond to

the structural motion found from time marching. After determining = ln()/t

the values are sorted by their proximity to the eigenvalues of the previous velocity

and the real and imaginary parts directly correspond to the damping and frequency

of the system, respectively. The flutter velocity is determined by running a series

of different velocities and tracking the modal damping and frequency. The velocity at which the damping becomes positive represents the flutter velocity and the

corresponding frequency from the eigenvalue is the flutter frequency.

The eigenanalysis for the strictly linear system has two advantages over a time

history analysis. First, the frequency and damping values found through the eigenanalysis can be recovered for each of the individual modes for all velocities. This

allows a clear definition of the mode which drives the system unstable and the creation of a root locus plot to analyze how frequencies evolve with damping. Second,

66

because only the largest eigenvalues are important for the analysis, Matlabs eigs

function can be used to solve for the largest eigenvalues quickly.

The speed of the eigenanalysis allows for the creation of a velocity sweep for the

stability of the system for a range of different parameters. Figure 3.7 shows the

damping of the structural modes as the velocity is increased from below to above

the flutter velocity for a fixed leading edge beam configuration. This velocity sweep

clearly shows that the second mode is the mode that drives the system unstable.

Figure 3.8 shows how the frequency changes as the damping changes. Again this

shows that the second mode drives the system unstable at a frequency that is close

the frequency of second structural mode.

3.3.3

Although the eigenanalysis is often chosen for the linear case to speed up the analysis,

post-critical visualization of the structure motion can give insight into the nature of

an instability. In order to visualize this for the eigenvalue solution, the complex eigenvectors, specifically the complex eigenvector associated with the least stable mode,

is used to reconstruct the motion. Starting from the definition of the displacement:

w(x, t) =

X

n

67

qn (t)n (x)

(3.34)

~q = ~v et

(3.35)

Where and ~v are the eigenvalue and corresponding eigenvector determined through

the aeroelastic analysis. Both the eigenvalue and the eigenvector can be written in

terms of real and imaginary parts:

~v = ~vR + i~vI

(3.36)

= R + iI

Plugging this form into the definition of the generalized coordinates and using

Euler identities to separate the real and complex parts of Equation 3.35.

~q = (~vR cos I t ~vI sin I t)eR t + i(~vR sin I t + ~vI cos I t)eR t

(3.37)

Using the just the real part of the generalized coordinates for the eigenvalue with

the largest real part allows one to reconstruct the time history of the displacement.

Furthermore if the real part is ignored the motion at the flutter boundary can be

reconstructed to a good approximation. This process is used to generate time histories and videos from eigenanalysis results. Again the value of using an eigenanalysis

can be seen through this exercise. After finding the eigenvalue and eigenvector time

histories of arbitrary lengths may be generated by plugging in the desired time vector

into Equation 3.37.

Because of the way that the vortex lattice theory is developed, it is simple to include

the influence of rigid support structures that are used for testing to ensure smooth

flow. This is done by including vortex elements on the support structure and requiring that the downwash be equal to the zero. In practice, the (0,0) coordinate

68

remains on the bottom leading edge of the elastic panel and circulations elements

are added to on the sides of the structure. Therefore any element between 0 and Lx

in the streamwise direction and 0 and Ly in the normal to flow direction are known

to be on the elastic structure, while elements outside of this range are assumed to

be on the support structure or in the wake.

Based on observations of the experiments there is a possibility that the wind tunnel

wall confinement has a strong influence of the motion of the cantilevered panel. A

common technique for simulating the existence of the wind tunnel wall with the

vortex lattice method is called mirroring. The basic principal of this technique is

are introduced to ensure that the induced velocity from

that phantom circulations ()

the circulation elements on the real panel are exactly canceled out by the phantom

circulation elements at the wind tunnel wall locations.

When implementing the mirrored technique into the vortex lattice analysis module the first task is to identify where the vortex lattice code will be modified by the

inclusion of the wind tunnel wall. It is important that if the mirrored circulation

i is the same distance from the wall the original circulation element i and has

the opposite sign the vertical component of the velocities at the wind tunnel wall

(directly between them) will be zero. This result is because the influence function

is a function of the circulation strength and the distance implying that points equal

distant (in a given direction) but opposite signed and with the same magnitude circulations have an induced velocity in the given direction equal to zero. A picture

of the mirrored panel configuration for confinement in the normal to the flow out of

plane displacements is given in Figure 3.9.

Mathematically this effect is captured by modifying the kernel function to include

69

Wind Tunnel

Diameter

Figure 3.9: Schematic of the airfoil/panel geometry with the wind tunnel wall

simulated by a single pair of mirrored elements

Vdn+1 =

X

n+1 n+1

K(i,j) + K(i,j)u + K(i,j)d

(3.38)

where the subscripts u and d correspond to the upper and lower mirrored influences.

This method can also be used to simulate the impact of normal to the flow in plane

confinement, a method that is used experimentally to recreate two dimensional aerodynamics. The model can also be improved by including multiple levels of mirrors

that counteract the induced velocity by the mirrored circulations at the far wall. This

is an elegant method of simulating the influence of the walls which demonstrates the

VLM methods ability to incorporate additional effects with minimal effort.

Another aspect of the vortex lattice method is that the elastic model can be modified to include a different structural models without a large change to the overall

70

architecture of the analysis. In order to validate the ability of the code to be applied

to a system with numerically determined structural modes, the code is modified to

include the ANSYS structural modes for a flat plate in a wing like configuration

shown in Figure 3.10. This configuration is convenient because there is an extensive

library of existing research which allowed for the comparison of the theoretical simulations to existing experimental and analytical results. Because the elastic model

remains the same with the only difference being the structural mode shapes, the only

modifications to the code required to implement this analysis is a new way to predict

the displacement at a point (x,y) for a given mode shape.

The modal displacement at the collocation and circulation locations ((x, y)) is

calculated by interpolating the ANSYS numerical modes. By instructing the code to

use the new function to calculate the modal positions for the creation of the generalized force matrices C1 and C2 and the downwash matrix , the code is effectively

modified from a code that analyzed the cantilevered plates in a flapping flag configuration with only bending modes to a code that uses ANSYS modes to analyze the

panel in the wing configuration.

The ability to switch quickly the configuration of the elastic model without large

modifications to the code and additional theory derivation is promising for developing

71

the ability to use the code to run analysis on flat plates in fluid flow with a wide

range of boundary conditions for which there is less understanding of the flutter

characteristics.

In the study of the aeroelasticity of beams and plates, the flow is usually assumed

to be axially aligned with the structure. For example, a simple plate with one edge

clamped the two axially aligned configurations have been explored extensively in the

literature. Air flowing parallel to the clamped edge has been explored because this

configuration looks very similar to an aircraft wing. The flutter motion for this configuration is known to be a combination of the first torsion and first bending modes

for normal parameters. If the wing is rotated 90 deg, so the airflow is perpendicular

to the clamped leading edge the instability is dominated by a second bending mode

flutter, an instability which has been labeled flag flutter in the literature.

However, even though both of these cases have been discussed in the literature

the flutter at flow configurations that occur between the wing flutter and flag flutter

have not been explored. This story is also true for the other configurations explored

in this thesis. During this process the sensitivity of frequency and flutter velocity to

small deviations from the perfectly normal or perfectly axial cases are explored.

First, it is clear that the existing structural models can be used, and the changes

to the theory to capture this transition are all aerodynamic mesh changes. The first

step in developing the aerodynamic theory for a structure that is not axially aligned

with the flow is to decide what type of vortex elements are used. For the initial

model typical horseshoe elements are used and the mesh is determined by including

all horseshoe elements which have a collocation point that are on the elastic structure.

In order to implement this model with the existing structural model, two coordinate

systems are used as shown in Figure 3.11. For this system the prime notation dictates

72

y'

x

x

quantities that are measured in the structure coordinate system. By thinking of the

system in two separate coordinate systems, the strictly aerodynamic and strictly

elastic portions of the aeroelastic equations can be treated exactly the same. The

rotation is captured in the downwash and generalized force equations where a careful

accounting of the coordinate system is used. The relationship between the two

coordinate systems can be written as:

x = (Ly 0 y 0 ) sin + x0 cos

y = y 0 cos + x0 sin

(3.39)

system ([x,y]) to the the structure coordinate system ([x,y]). In order to use the

typical horseshoe elements and a square mesh, the first step is to define a square

box aligned with the flow that completely encompasses the rotated structure. A

rectangular grid in the flow coordinate system is then defined that has Ss element

in the normal to flow direction and Sc elements in the flow direction. With this grid

defined, the code loops though all of the collocation points and checks if they lie on

73

the structure. Practically this is done by transforming all of the collocation points to

their coordinates in the structure coordinate system and checking that 0 x0c Lx0

and 0 yc0 Ly 0 . While looping through the points, if the collocation point is on

the structure the [x,y] location of the collocation point and the [x,y] location of the

top and bottom of the horseshoe element for that panel are stored as well as the row

in the mesh that the element falls in.

3

2.5

2

1.5

1

0.5

0

0.5

1

0

Figure 3.12: Mesh for = 450 . The red xs are the collocation points, the green

.s are the top and bottom of the circulation elements on the the structure and the

black .s are the top and bottom of the circulation elements in the wake

After the structure circulation elements have been constructed the location of the

wake elements are also determined. Figure 3.12 shows the mesh that is generated for

a panel at a = 450 . The trailing edge of the wake directly mirrors the trailing edge

of the panel to allow simple convection and relaxation relations derived earlier to be

74

used. A concern with this method is that, there is a discretization error associated

with keeping the circulation elements square and not having the elements mirror the

leading and trailing edge. This fact can lead to sawtooth instability frequency and

velocity results, especially at angles near 0 or 90 degs. For the preliminary analysis

it is determined that implementing a finer mesh until a smooth boundary is found is

more efficient than deriving complex vortex elements that change in shape for every

flow angle.

3.7.1

The pressure force is again calculated using the application of Bernoullis principal

stated in Equation 3.24. However the summation limits are different. The summation incorporates the pressure induced by all of the circulations prior to the given

circulation, but in the same row. For the axially aligned cases, the elements in the

same streamwise row as a given element can be determined by the dimensions of

the aerodynamic mesh. For the case of the rotated mesh for this analysis, while the

initial aerodynamic mesh is created a separate vector containing the row of bound

circulation elements is created, and the pressure is determined by summing up all of

the elements that are in the row of the given circulation element, but have an index

smaller than the given circulation element.

Next it is assumed that the force caused by the circulation acts on the horseshoe

vortex halfway between the two trailing elements. The x and y locations in the fluid

coordinate system at this point are transformed to the panel coordinate system and

the mode shape used to calculate the generalized force is evaluated at this point.

3.7.2

Downwash Calculation

The downwash calculation, like the generalized force calculation, required transforming the x and y coordinates of the collocation points for the bound vorticies in the

75

fluid coordinate system to their panel coordinate system equivalents. Once this transition is made the dimensional form of Equation 3.18 is used.

76

4

Results from Aeroelastic Simulations

Now that the methodology and analysis techniques have been described the accuracy

of the aeroelastic model must be validated. Fortunately there is an existing literature which contains both analytical and experimental results for the cantilevered

beam configuration. A paper by Tang et al. [33] contains experimental data for a

rectangular aluminum panel that is .39mm thick, has a 266.7mm streamwise dimension, and a 76.2mm normal to the flow dimension. The aluminum panel is made of

7075 aluminum which has a density(s ) of 2.84 103 kg/m3 and a stiffness (E) of

72 109 kg/m2 . The density of air is assumed to be 1.2kg/m3 and the vortex lattice

relaxation factor () is set to .992.

With these material properties the first four natural frequencies of the structure

found using the presented beam model are 4.46 Hz, 27.79 Hz, 78.24 Hz, and 153.35 Hz

which are nearly identical to the published values in Tang et al. [33] of 4.57 Hz, 28.62

Hz, and 80.15 Hz. With these material properties it is expected that the system will

have a flutter velocity of 29.5 m/s and a frequency of 22.5 Hz. The figures presented

77

earlier such as Figures 3.7 and 3.8 are the plots that are generated for the system

analyzed with 4 structural modes, the number of streamwise elements required for a

time step of 1/40th the period of the fastest structural frequency and 10 elements in

the normal to the flow direction. The plots show a typical flutter velocity prediction

of 27.5 m/s and a flutter frequency of 23.5. Both of these results are well within 10%

of the experimental value and represent a good aeoroelastic prediction.

For all the simulations that are run, convergence studies are conducted to ensure

that the length of the wake, the number of structural modes included, and the

aerodynamic mesh are well converged. For the initial dimensional model of the

flapping flag 10 elements in the normal to the flow direction, 100 elements in the

streamwise direction and 6 structural modes proved to be adequate.

4.1.1

Another study that is conducted to validate the model is to compare the frequency and damping values calculated from the eigenanalysis versus a time history.

It is expecteted that for the linear model these two results should be exactly the

same. Looking at Figures 4.1 and 4.2 it is clear that this assumption is correct.

The only divergence between the two curves comes from the fact that the damping and frequency determination from the time history is susceptible to noise which

78

4.1.2

The comparison of the eigenanalyses with and without a fixed leading airfoil for

the cantilevered configuration is shown in Figures 4.3 and 4.4 and clearly indicates

that including the fixed airfoil does not change the result in any noticeable manner.

This result implies that the fixed leading airfoil does not affect the motion of the

panel which is what one would intuitively believe. Furthermore, running an analysis

which does not include the leading airfoil reduces the number of elements and is

therefore more computationally efficient. The support structure impact is explored

in more detail for the NASA plate configuration later in this section.

The influence of confinement effects in both the in plane and out of plane direction

is explored using the non-dimensional aeroelastic model. A beam which is clamped

free in the streamwise direction, has an aspect ratio of 0.5 and a mass ratio of .232

is simulated with 100 streamwise, 10 normal elements and 8 structural modes.

79

4.2.1

16

14

12

10

8

6

4

2

0

10

10

20

18

16

[Radians]

14

12

10

8

6

4

2

0

10

10

The distance of the simulated top and bottom wind tunnel walls is varied from

3/10ths to 10 times the streamwise length of the panel. Once the top and bottom

wind tunnel get closer than this numerical instabilities occur because of the singularities that make up the vortex lattice mesh. The wind tunnel wall influence is clearly

very small for the parameter range considered. However, for the actual wind tunnel wall configuration the spacing between the elastic structure and the wind tunnel

wall is usually slightly larger than the streamwise dimension of the structure. At this

80

distance, the influence of the wall is negligible suggesting that it does not influence

the linear flutter boundary in experiments. Once the non-linear structural model

has been included, it will be interesting to observe if there is a larger influence of the

wind tunnel walls on the LCO amplitude because the observed LCO amplitude is

quite large, rapidly closing the gap between the structure and the wind tunnel walls.

Finally these results confirm that if an experiment is conducted with wind tunnel

walls that are closer than the streamwise length of the elastic panel then confinement

effects should be included even when calculating the linear stability boundary.

4.2.2

15

10

0

4

10

10

10

10

10

10

The in-plane axial confinement in the normal to the flow direction can also be

modeled using the method of images. This is an interesting case because a method to

recreate two-dimensional theoretical results experimentally is to have the structure

you are evaluating span the entire cross section of the wind tunnel. Figures 4.6 and

4.7 show that the wind tunnel walls must be less than 1/10th of the streamwise

dimension away from the side of the panel before any effects of the wall are felt. It

81

20

18

16

[Radians]

14

12

10

8

6

4

2

0

4

10

10

10

10

10

10

is conceivable that you would be able to get this close experimentally. However, in

order to reach the confined, two-dimensional asymptote, the wind tunnel wall must

be less than 1/1000th the streamwise dimension away from the elastic panel. It

is unlikely that the experiments would be able to get this close, as for a typical 1

meter streamwise length this would require less than 1 mm separation which would

be almost impossible to achieve experimentally. This result may give some insight

into why two-dimensional theory has always significantly under predicted the flutter

boundary even when experiments have attempted to simulate a two-dimensional

airflow.

and Structures Journal Submission)

This section contains a theoretical study of the flutter characteristics of clamped-free

and pinned-free beams with varying mass ratios and aspect ratios. The simulation

configuration is given in Figure 3.3. As shown in the figure the rigid airfoil which

is present in the experimental configuration shown in Figure 5.1 is not included in

82

the vortex lattice mesh and therefore not included in the aeroelastic simulations.

The influence of the airfoil can be included in the aeroelastic model by including

bound circulation on the fixed airfoil which is governed by Equation 3.16, where the

downwash on the rigid structure is equal to zero. The airfoil is not included to allow

for theoretical results that could be compared to previous theoretical simulations.

However, initial simulations done comparing the flutter velocity with and without the

airfoil show that the airfoil can act to destabilize the system and lower the theoretical

flutter velocity by up to 20 percent for small mass ratio. A further exploration of

the influence of the leading edge airfoil, which is present in experiments, will not be

explored in this paper, but could be the subject of future research.

4.3.1

The first question studied in detail is the change in flutter characteristics from the

pinned-free to clamped-free boundary conditions. Using = .277, H = .5, and N

= 10 appropriate in-vacuum beam modes, a set of simulations is run with a varying

magnitude pinned edge torsional spring. The simulation is run using 150 panel

elements and 300 wake elements in the streamwise direction and 10 elements in the

normal to flow direction.

Figure 4.8b shows the transition between pinned-free and clamped-free flutter.

The analysis suggests a monotonic transition for the flutter frequency between the

pinned-free and clamped-free configurations. This result matches the transition in

frequency behavior observed in the structural model, an unsurprising result. Fur are in the same range as they are for the transition

thermore the critical values for K

in the natural frequency analysis for the flutter mode. The result also demonstrates

that for this configuration flutter arises from an interaction between the first and

second modes for both the pinned-free and camped-free case.

However the flutter velocity transition from pinned-free to clamped-free does not

83

14

13

12

11

10

9

8

7

2

10

10

10

10

10

10

K

(a)

25

n [radians]

20

15

10

5

0

2

10

10

10

10

10

10

K

(b)

Figure 4.8: Flutter Velocity (a) and Frequency (b) vs. K . Small values of K

correspond to a pinned-free case (dotted) and large values correspond to a clampedfree case (dashed). The first and second natural frequency evolution results are also

included as the thin lines in (b). The thick lines correspond to the aeroelastic results.

84

monotonically move from the pinned-free case to the clamped-free case, see Figure

4.8a. This unexpected result shows that a small torsional spring at the leading edge

of a pinned-free beam will actually drive the flutter velocity below the pinned-free

critical velocity. In fact, for small values of torsional spring stiffness, making the

spring stiffer will actually drive down the flutter velocity. It is hypothesized that

the larger effect on the natural frequencies of the lower modes at small torsional

spring stiffnesses initially brings the first two natural frequencies closer which leads

to a reduction in the flutter boundary. Because of the inherent torsional stiffness

for many pinned systems, this is a significant result because it suggests that using

the pinned-free model may not be a conservative estimate, and therefore an effort to

quantify the torsional stiffness of the pinned connection must be explored. This result

could also be significant for applications in energy harvesting where a lower flutter

velocity is desired. Looking closer at the inflection point of the flutter velocity curve,

which corresponds with the spring stiffness required

it appears to occur at a K

to start the transition from pinned-free to clamped-free frequencies from the elastic

simulation. It is at this critical point where the torsional spring begins to become

strong enough to force the response to behave more like the clamped-free case.

4.3.2

Another key parameter to explore with this model is the Aspect Ratio (H ). Figure

4.9 shows the current theoretical prediction for a = 0.6 beam as the aspect ratio is

varied. Again, for this set of simulations, 150 panel elements and 300 wake elements in

the streamwise direction, 10 normal to flow elements and 10 clamped-free modes are

used. The result shown in Figure 4.9 matches previous theoretical results published

by Eloy et al. [14]. Also shown in the figure are the experimental data points collected

by Eloy et al. [14]. For the linear analysis presented here the only experimental data

that the theoretical model should be compared to is the unfilled squares because the

85

gap down to the filled in squares represents a hysteretic effect which is not captured

by the current linear model.

25

20

15

10

5

1

10

10

H

Figure 4.9: Flutter velocity as a function of the aspect ratio at a mass ratio () of

0.6 and clamped-free boundary conditions. The thick line corresponds to the current

researchers theoretical predictions, the dashed line is taken from Eloy et al. [14]. The

squares are previously published experimental data points [14]. The empty squares

correspond to the velocity at which the system becomes unstable as the velocity

increases and the filled in squares correspond to the velocity where the response

returns from unstable oscillations to stable as the flow velocity is decreased.

4.3.3

The next set of simulations which is conducted provides a comparison between the

pinned-free and clamped-free flutter as a function of the mass ratio. This is explored

both from a frequency and a flutter velocity perspective. Aspect ratios of 0.5, 1.0

and 1.5 are simulated. This set of simulations is conducted with the same lattice

properties as the previous analyses.

Figure 4.10a also shows the comparison between the flutter velocities of the

pinned-free and clamped-free beams. It is clear from the results that for mass ratios between .1 and 1, the pinned-free and clamped-free flutter boundaries are very

86

22

20

Clamped S = 0.5

18

Clamped S = 1.0

16

Pinned S = 0.5

Clamped S = 1.0 from [25]

14

12

10

8

6

4

2

0

1

10

10

10

(a)

60

50

[radians]

40

30

20

10

0

1

10

10

10

(b)

Figure 4.10: Flutter Velocity (a) and Frequency (b) vs. . The thick solid line corresponds to the Clamped-Free beam with S = 1.0, the thin dashed line to ClampedFree beam with S = 0.5, and the thick dotted line to a Pinned-Free beam with

S = 0.5. Also included in the velocity figure is theoretical predictions for a ClampedFree beam with S = 1.0 from Eloy et al. [13]

87

[Radians]

=.537

=.9349

=1.628

=2.834

70

70

70

70

60

60

60

60

50

50

50

50

40

40

40

40

30

30

30

30

20

20

20

20

10

10

10

10

0

10

0

0

0

0

10 10

0

10 10

0

10 10

0

10

Damping

Damping

Damping

Damping

(a)

Damping

=.537

=1.628

=.9349

=2.834

10

10

10

10

10

10

10

15

10

10

15

10

10

15

10

15

(b)

Figure 4.11: The two figures show the evolution as the mass ratio is increased over

the range where the flutter characteristics move from second bending to third bending

for the clamped-free configuration. (a) shows the root locus evolution and (b) shows

the velocity vs damping evolution. The triangles correspond to first bending, the xs

to second bending and the dots to third bending. The solid line is the zero damping

and the open circle identifies where a mode becomes unstable.

88

similar. This is also the case for the frequency comparison shown in Figure 4.10b.

For both cases the flutter mode, as identified by the frequency is second mode flutter (second mode for pinned-free is often called its first bending mode, because the

first mode is a rigid body motion). Also for both cases the frequency of the flutter

falls below the respective in-vacuum second mode frequency. Another common trend

which is observed is that the frequency of oscillation begins to decrease as the mass

ratio increases.

A phenomenon observed both using the lattice method discussed here and in

alternate analysis done with more traditional aerodynamic theory, see Eloy et al.

[13] and Guo [17], is a transition in flutter mode to third mode flutter at a higher

frequency and velocity as the mass ratio increases above a critical value. At the

mass ratios where there is flutter in both modes, there is an interesting behavior in

the modal damping evolution. At the lower velocity the second mode goes unstable

in its normal manner. However, instead of having an aeroelastic damping value

whose magnitude continues to grow, the damping levels out. Simultaneously the

third mode begins to become less negatively damped and the frequencies of the

second and third mode begin to come together. At the velocity corresponding to the

third mode flutter, the third mode becomes unstable and the second mode becomes

stable again. This transition is shown in Figures 4.11a and 4.11b If a time marching

analysis was done, all that would be observed is the jump in frequency and flutter

shape at the upper flutter velocity, while the eigenanalysis allows the tracking of the

stability of the individual modes. As with previous works, this transition occurs at

a lower mass ratio for the pinned-free case. Unfortunately the current experimental

model would not allow for testing of mass ratios where higher mode flutter would be

expected to be observed.

It is clear from Figures 4.10a and 4.10b that the difference between the pinnedfree and clamped-free cases would be more noticeable in the flutter frequency than in

89

the flutter velocity. In fact the difference between the clamped-free and pinned-free

flutter velocity values is so small, it may not be observable during experiments.

Overall, this implementation of the vortex lattice method for modeling the aerodynamics produced results similar to the theoretical results of previous researchers.

Although the vortex lattice method may take longer to create a simulation, it has

value in that it produces results that compare well with experimental data and can be

directly modified to capture aerodynamic nonlinearities and other real world considerations such as wind tunnel walls and experimental support structures. For example

see Preidikman and Mook [27] or Attar [2].

Next aeroelastic simulations using the plate (versus beam) structural model are presented.

4.4.1

The aeroelastic simulations for the NASA configuration, three sides clamped and

the trailing edge free, are done both to predict the nature and onset velocity of

the instability as well as explore the sensitivity to factors such as the tension in

the structure, the size of the support structure relative to the elastic member and

the effect of changing the aspect ratio. Before discussing the sensitivities to these

parameters, the results of a typical aeroelastic simulation are presented. The typical

analysis is done using the parameters listed in Table 2.2 with the inclusion of a

structural damping ratio equal to 0.01. Six structural modes in the streamwise

direction and three in the normal direction are used giving the system 18 structural

degrees of freedom. The analysis considered rigid support structures on all four sides

of the elastic membrane with lengths equal to 1/2 the streamwise length of the elastic

membrane. The aerodynamic mesh is comprised of 150 elements in the streamwise

90

direction and 10 elements in the normal to the flow direction. The wake extends 400

elements in the streamwise direction behind the trailing edge of the rigid support

structure.

As with the elastic simulations, the linear system is analyzed in the frequency

domain and the stability of the system is assessed using the aeroelastic eigenvalues at

different discrete flow velocities. In Figure 4.12 the typical aeroelastic eigenvalues are

presented in three different forms. First is the damping ratio versus the flow velocity

which can be used to determine the critical velocity where the aeroelastic system

becomes unstable and small perturbations to the system would grow exponentially.

Next, is a root locus plot which is used to determine the frequency at which this

instability occurs. Finally a plot of the frequency evolution as the velocity changes

gives insight into the interactions between the frequencies that occur to cause the

instability. In this case the interaction between the first and second frequencies is

the cause of the instability. The fourth plot includes snapshots of the mode shape

of the instability. The mode shape is reconstructed using the magnitude of the

complex eigenvector associated with the unstable eigenvalue. For this configuration

the mode shape confirms that the the instability motion is a combination of the first

and second structural modes in the streamwise direction and the first mode in the

normal or spanwise direction.

Before analyzing methods of increasing the stability of the system convergence

studies are conducted on the size of the aerodynamic mesh, wake length and the

number of structural degrees of freedom included in the model. Specifically the

modal convergence as more modes in the streamwise direction is of interest due to

previous studies of the system which suggested higher mode flutter [5]. Figure 4.13

clearly shows that the stability boundary for this configuration does not depend on

the number of structural modes included provided at leas four modes are included.

Although the boundary does increase slightly with the inclusion of more modes there

91

100

0.2

80

0.1

60

[Hz]

0

0.1

40

0.2

0.3

20

0.4

0.5

10

12

14

16

18

0

10

20

10

Real(Eigenvalue)

U[m/s]

(a) Damping Ratio vs Flow Velocity

100

0.2

80

[Hz]

0.1

60

0

40

0.1

0.2

0.15

20

0.15

0.1

0.1

10

12

14

16

18

20

0.05

U[m/s]

(c) Frequency vs Flow Velocity

0.05

0

Figure 4.12: Configuration 6 aeroelastic results which demonstrates the plots created during a typical plate aeroelastic simulation

is not the jump to a higher mode that was presented in the previous work. The

present theory only includes a finite size support structure and therefore includes

an aerodynamic wake which the previous author did not account for. Even though

the influence of the support structure given in Figure 4.14 suggests that further

increasing the support structure dimensions past one chord length would not change

the aeroelastic boundary it is conceivable that in the limit of the boundary going to

infinity the previous results could be recovered.

92

18

25

16

20

12

[Hz]

U[m/s]

14

10

8

15

10

6

4

2

0

0

4

10

10

Streamwise Modes

Streamwise Modes

20

25

20

[Hz]

U[m/s]

15

10

15

10

5

5

0

0

1

1.5

2.5

3.5

4.5

5.5

1.5

2.5

3.5

4.5

5.5

25

16

14

20

[Hz]

U[m/s]

12

10

8

6

4

15

10

5

2

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

50

100

150

200

250

300

Streamise Elements

Figure 4.13: Flutter boundary as the number of streamwise modes, normal modes,

and streamwise elements included in the structural model is varied

Similar studies are conducted for the aerodynamic mesh size and modes in the

normal direction. The studies clearly revealed for this configuration, the solution has

converged for the following values:

Streamwise Mesh Elements on Elastic Structure : 100

Normal Mesh Elements on Elastic Structure : 10

Streamwise Modes Included : 6

Normal Modes Included : 3

The solution is said to be converged if an asymptote is reached when plotting the

flutter characteristics versus the parameter. The values determined from this analysis

are used for the remainder of the simulations discussed in this section unless otherwise

stated.

93

One of the reasons for using the VLM method to analyze this system is the capability to model a finite size support structure and analyze the influence of the size and

inclusion of the support structure on the aeroelastic stability. Figure 4.14 shows the

results of varying the size of support structure while maintaining the unvaried support structures nominal size of 1/2 of the streamwise chord of the elastic structure.

In general the aeroelastic results are not sensitive to the inclusion of the support

structure which suggests that their inclusion in aeroelastic models of plates may

not be necessary. Interestingly it appears that the inclusion of the leading airfoil

increases the instability onset velocity slightly while including the top and bottom

rigid support structures (varied simultaneously) has the impact of lowering the instability onset velocity. The trailing support structure, unless it is small relative to

the structure does not appear to impact the velocity in either direction. For all cases

the impact on the frequency of the aeroelastic instability is even less pronounced.

4.4.2

Two methods of increasing the flutter velocity are explored. Higher onset instability

velocities are desired for this application because the current predicted flutter velocity is sufficiently low that if a similar configuration is implemented to reduce the

acoustic signature of an aircraft during landing, flutter would be encountered. The

first parameter to explore is the flutter boundarys dependence on aspect ratio. To

visualize this dependence all of the parameters are held constant while the streamwise dimension is varied. Figure 4.15 shows the instability boundary frequency and

velocity as the parameter is varied.

The plot demonstrates two interesting behaviors. First, for lengths shorter than

0.15 m, it is possible to raise the flutter velocity and frequency by continuously

94

18

25

16

20

14

15

[Hz]

U[m/s]

12

10

8

10

6

4

2

0

0

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

16

25

14

20

10

[Hz]

U[m/s]

12

15

10

6

4

5

2

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

18

25

16

14

20

[Hz]

U[m/s]

12

10

8

15

10

6

4

5

2

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

Figure 4.14: Flutter boundary as the support structure size (chord normalized) is

varied. For each plot the size of the support structures not being varied is 1/2 the

streamwise chord of the elastic structure

95

40

100

90

35

80

30

[Hz]

U[m/s]

70

25

20

15

60

50

40

30

10

20

5

0

10

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

0.3

0.05

0.1

0.15

Chord [m]

0.2

0.25

0.3

Chord [m]

Figure 4.15: Flutter boundary as the streamwise chord is varied. In the frequency

plot, the solid line without xs correspond to the first three elastic natural frequencies

of the unforced system

0.2

0.2

0.2

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.2

0.2

0.2

0.2

0.1

0.1

0.05

0.05

0

0.15

0.1

0.1

0.05

0.2

0.1

0.05

0

0.1

0.05

Figure 4.16: Snapshot of the mode shape at the aeroelastic instability for three

different streamwise chord lenghts

shortening the length. For the CML design this suggests that designs that are able

to minimize the streamwise length of flexible structure will be best able to avoid

flutter. The other behavior is a jump in flutter frequency and velocity at a length of

0.20 m. From Figure 4.15 it is clear that the instability frequency jumps from being

between the first and second natural frequencies to between the second and third

natural frequencies. This change can be seen more clearly by comparing (b) and (c)

form Figure 4.16 where the shape has clearly gone from a second to third bending

mode in the chordwise direction. This transition is very similar to a phenomenon that

is observed in the cantilevered beam analysis literature as the mass ratio(a Ly /s h)

96

50

100

45

90

40

80

35

70

30

60

[Hz]

U[m/s]

Tension Variation

25

50

20

40

15

30

10

20

10

5

0

0

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Ty [N/m]

Ty [N/m]

Figure 4.17: Flutter Boundary as the tension in the normal to streamwise direction.

In the frequency plot, the dashed lines correspond to the first three elastic natural

frequencies of the unforced system

0.2

0.2

0.2

0.2

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.2

0.15

0.2

0.15

0.15

0.1

0.2

0.15

0.15

0.1

0.1

0.05

0.05

0

0.2

0.15

0.15

0.1

0.1

0.05

0.05

0.05

0

0.15

0.1

0.1

0.05

0

0.1

0.05

0.05

0

(a) Tension = 0 N/m (b) Tension = 90 N/m (c) Tension = 400 N/m(d) Tension = 700 N/m

Figure 4.18: Snapshot of the mode shape at the aeroelastic instability for three

different normal tension values

The next parameter which could reasonably be varied for the CML design, if

the streamwise length is fixed, is the tension in the clamped-clamped normal to flow

direction. Furthermore, it is reasonable to expect than when a flap is deployed it will

induce a tension in the CML plate/membrane. For the analysis all values are the

nominal values for the plate as the tension value (T y) is varied. The results of the

simulation are shown in Figure 4.17. The first thing that is clear is that the initial

increase in the tension has an impressive capability to rapidly increase the flutter

boundary.

97

Another trend is the change in flutter mode and subsequent leveling of the flutter

boundary once the tension reaches 90 N/m. The frequency plot in Figure 4.17 and the

transition in mode shape from (a) to (b) and (c) in Figure 4.18 clearly demonstrates

a qualitative and quantitative transition from a combination of first and second mode

to a primarily second mode flutter. More significantly from a design perspective is

the leveling off of the flutter boundary once the transition in flutter mode occurs. If

this theoretical result is confirmed experimentally, it suggests that once a critical level

is reached, flutter suppression cannot be achieved by further increasing the tension.

Instead different parameters such as the stiffness of the system must be changed.

Additionally this confirms that for the three sides clamped flexible membrane/plate

with these parameters, flutter may occur at a velocity that will be encountered during

the landing of a transport aircraft.

4.4.3

Configuration

1

2

3

4

5

6

Type

Flutter

Flutter

Divergence

Flutter

Divergence

Flutter

Velocity [m/s]

8.55

8.09

16.04

18.89

19.25

15.09

Frequency [hz]

8.54

3.95

17.54

23.21

The plate aeroelastic model that has been developed up to this point, is general

enough, that by simply using the correct beam mode shapes which satisfy the geometric boundary conditions, any rectangular configuration may be studied. This

capability and the existence of certain configurations which have not been explored

extensively in the literature for low subsonic flow (Configurations 3-6 from Figure

98

and 2 are used to validate the model against previous three-dimensional aeroelastic

simulations and experiments. For each configuration the instability type, velocity

and frequency are of interest. Table 4.1 outlines the aeroelastic results that have

been collected using the originally estimated structural damping ratio of 0.01. The

structural and aerodynamic parameters remain the same as those used for the previous plate analysis, with the material properties being those outlined in Table 2.2,

6 streamwise and 3 normal to the flow structural modes, and an aerodynamic mesh

comprised of 10 elements in the normal direction and 100 in the streamwise direction.

A baffle 1/2 the streamwise length is included on all sides with xs from Figure 1.2.

Table 4.2: Plate Aeroelastic Simulation Summary (s = 0.05)

Configuration

1

2

3

4

5

6

Type

Flutter

Flutter

Divergence

Divergence

Divergence

Flutter

Velocity [m/s]

10.15

8.77

16.25

32.45

19.62

21.40

Frequency [hz]

7.54

3.64

21.37

The detailed exploration of the material during the elastic experimental tests for

Configuration 6 revealed that the actual structural damping of the material was closer

to 0.05 than the 0.01 used in the initial simulations. Table 4.2 shows the updated

aeroelastic stability boundaries with the higher structural damping ratio included.

For Configuration 1, 2 and 6, the flutter velocity is increased slightly by increasing the

structural damping. For the configurations that diverged, the addition of structural

damping does not change the instability boundary. Finally the addition of structural

damping to Configuration 4 caused the instability to move from a dynamic flutter to

a static divergence. This arose because the original flutter mode for this configuration

99

is a hump mode. The addition of the structural damping caused a suppression of the

hump mode leaving the first instability as a divergence instability at a significantly

higher velocity. The implications of the increased structural damping for the detailed

simulations for Configuration 6 includes a shift higher in flutter boundary although

qualitatively the trends remain. The discussion of the individual configurations will

be limited to a discussion of the instabilities that arise using the initial, lower estimate

for the structural damping ratio.

Configuration 1 Flutter Results

Configuration 1 is clamped-free in the streamwise direction and free-free in the normal direction. This is the same configuration that has been described as the flag

flutter problem. Not surprisingly, even though a different structural model in the

normal direction is used the same aeroelastic behavior is captured by this model.

Specifically the root locus given in (b) of Figure 4.19 shows the interaction of two

roots that correspond to the first and second bending modes in the streamwise direction.

Another feature of the aeroelastic instability for this configuration is the relatively sharp crossing of the zero axis in (a). This slope signifies that effects such

as structural damping, which are at best just approximations, will not largely effect the flutter boundary. This may explain while historically, the VLM theoretical

aeroelastic models have matched well the experimental results for this configuration.

Configuration 2 Flutter Results

Configuration 2 has free-free boundary conditions in the streamwise direction and

clamped-free boundary conditions in the normal direction. This configuration is often explored in the literature because it is a simplified version of an aircraft wing.

This model differs slightly from the normal wing configuration because it has an

100

0.5

40

0.4

35

0.3

30

0.2

25

[Hz]

0.1

0

0.1

20

15

0.2

10

0.3

5

0.4

0.5

6.5

7.5

8.5

9.5

10

0

10

U[m/s]

10

Damping (Real(Eigenvalue))

20

18

16

0.2

[Hz]

14

0.1

12

10

8

0.1

6

0.2

0.15

4

2

0.15

0.1

0.1

0.05

6.5

7.5

8.5

9.5

10

U[m/s]

0.05

0

Figure 4.19: Aeroelastic results for Configuration 1. The analysis clearly shows a

coupling between the first and second bending modes in the streamwise direction

aspect ratio which is less than 1, while aircraft traditionally are designed with higher

aspect ratios. Nonetheless the instability of this system occurs due to the interaction

between the first bending and first torsion mode in the normal to flow direction. Because torsion modes are not explicitly modeled with the employed structural model,

the coupling in this model is between the first bending in the normal direction and

the rigid body rotation in the streamwise direction.

Interestingly, although Configuration 2 can be described as a 90 degree rotation

from Configuration 1 with respect to the flow, the differences in the flutter instability

101

0.5

60

50

[Hz]

40

30

0.5

20

10

6.5

7.5

8.5

9.5

10

0

6

10.5

U[m/s]

Real(Eigenvalue)

60

50

0.2

40

[Hz]

0.1

30

0

0.1

20

0.2

0.15

10

0.15

0.1

0.1

0.05

6.5

7.5

8.5

9.5

10

U[m/s]

10.5

0.05

0

Figure 4.20: Aeroelastic results for Configuration 2. The analysis clearly shows

a coupling between the first bending and first bending mode in the normal to flow

direction and the antisymetric rigid body displacement mode in the streamwise direction

are significant, something that is easily seen by comparing the mode shapes for each of

the configurations. In a later section the transition between these two configurations

by rotating the flow is explored in detail.

Configuration 3 Flutter Results

Configuration 3 represents a configuration which has not received as much exploration in the literature, especially in the context of three-dimensional aerodynamic

theories. For this configuration there is a noticeably different governing dynamics

102

0.25

50

0.2

45

0.15

40

0.1

35

[Hz]

0.05

0

0.05

30

25

20

0.1

15

0.15

10

0.2

0.25

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

0

5

20

10

Real(Eigenvalue)

U[m/s]

50

45

40

0.2

[Hz]

35

0.1

30

25

20

0.1

15

0.2

0.15

10

0

13

0.15

0.1

0.1

0.05

14

15

16

17

18

19

U[m/s]

20

0.05

0

Figure 4.21: Aeroelastic results for Configuration 3. The analysis shows a diverge

of the first bending motion in the streamwise direction and rigid body translation in

the normal direction

for the aeroelastic instability. Figure 4.21 (c) clearly shows that at the instability

onset velocity the frequency of the first mode goes to 0. This correlates to a static

post-critical response for the system that is called divergence. This figure also shows

that this divergence is not the result of the interaction of two of the natural modes

of the system. Instead it is a aeroelastic instability dominated by the first mode.

Divergence is often considered the more benign form of aeroelastic instability

because it does not lead to limit cycle oscillations which can induce life cycle fatigue.

Furthermore, non-linear simulations for the dynamics of post buckled beams show

103

that they retain the ability to maintain a load and encounter deflections that are

only on the order of the thickness of the plate near the divergence speed. In fact,

panels on aircraft which are often clamped on four sides can experience divergence

and not threaten the aerodynamic performance or structural integrity of the aircraft.

The three-dimensional results confirms the two-dimensional results presented by Guo

[17].

Configuration 4 Flutter Results

Configuration 4 is another configuration which has not received as much attention

in the literature. The results of the analysis shown in Figure 4.22 demonstrate that

flutter is again the dynamic instability that dominates the motion is a flutter instability. For this configuration there are two branches that become unstable near each

other. The first branch that becomes unstable appears to do so without interacting

with any other frequencies. Furthermore this modes crossing of the zero damping

axis is much shallower than the other instabilities encountered so far. This shallow crossing means that structural damping could largely change the theoretically

predicted flutter boundary.

The second instability which occurs when the damping ratio of the third mode

becomes positive near 20.75 m/s is a more typical coalescence flutter type instability

with interactions between the first and second bending modes in the streamwise

direction and rigid body translation in the normal to flow direction. Furthermore

when the branch corresponding to this instability crosses the zero damping axis in

Figure 4.22 (a), it does so with a significantly steeper slope than the earlier instability.

The combination of this with the shallow slope of the first instability leads the author

to speculate that in an experimental test the second instability may be the dominant

instability. Looking at the root locus in 4.22 (b) and (c) it is clear that the first three

natural frequencies are incredibly close to begin with. This could lead rise to a mode

104

0.1

0.05

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

0.3

0.35

0.4

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

U[m/s]

(a) Damping Ratio vs Flow Velocity

60

60

50

50

40

[Hz]

[Hz]

40

30

30

20

20

10

10

0

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

0.2

0.2

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.2

0.15

0.2

0.15

0.15

0.1

0.15

0.1

0.1

0.05

0.1

0.05

0.05

0

Real(Eigenvalue)

U[m/s]

0.05

0

(d) Aeroelastic Mode Shape for the first branch(e) Aeroelastic Mode Shape for the second branch

going unstable

going unstable

Figure 4.22: Aeroelastic results for Configuration 4. The analysis shows two unique

aeroelastic instabilities which occur in the same region

105

that theoretically will become unstable very quickly while in practice it will be a

benign instability which will be readily damped by either structural or aerodynamic

damping.

Configuration 5 Flutter Results

60

0.6

50

0.4

0.2

[Hz]

40

0

0.2

30

20

0.4

10

0.6

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

U[m/s]

10

15

20

Real(Eigenvalue)

60

50

0.2

40

[Hz]

0.1

30

0

0.1

20

0.2

0.15

10

0.15

0.1

0.1

0

17

0.05

18

19

20

21

22

U[m/s]

23

0.05

0

a static divergence

Just like Configurations 3 and 4 can be thought of as being in the same family

when rotated, Configuration 5 is a rotation of Configuration 6 which is analyzed in

detail when discussing the NASA noise suppression efforts. Similarly to the previous

106

boundary condition pairs, as one moves the free edges from being normal to the flow

to being axially aligned with the flow and therefore causing the leading and trailing

edges to be fixed, the instability transitions from a dynamic instability observed

for Configurations 4 and 6 to the static instability seen for this configuration and

Configuration 3. However, unlike the previous result, the static instability in this case

occurs at a higher velocity than the rotated dynamic instability for Configuration 6.

4.4.4

Discussion

The aeroelastic model deployed for this set of simulation have the interesting capability of varying the structural boundary conditions as if it is a parameter of the

system. By developing this model it is easy to identify the aeroelastic instabilities

which will arise for different configurations. This effort both provides insight into the

type of instabilities that arise for different boundary conditions as well as identify

some interesting trends. First, the model identified that for configurations with both

the leading and trailing edge free, a divergence instability is to be expected.

Second, looking back at the summary of the results given in Table 4.1, an interesting comparison can be made between Configuration 4 and the NASA configuration.

The only difference between these two configurations is whether or not the leading

edge is clamped. Intuitively one would expect that an extra edge clamped would

increase the instability onset velocity. From the table it is clear that the opposite

actually occurs. In fact, by moving from a clamped to a free leading edge the flutter

boundary increases by more than 20%. This result has consequences in the preliminary design phase for this system as it suggests that constraining as many edges as

physically possible may not be the best way to create the most stable configuration.

107

As mentioned in the previous section, it is clear that for a fixed number of clamped

boundary conditions, rotating the flow by 90 deg will drastically change the type of

instability that is experienced. In order the quantitatively look at this transition

the aeroelastic model which allows for axially misaligned flows is deployed. The

simulations are conducted to determine at what angle the transition occurs and

what the transition looks like in terms of the flutter velocity and flutter frequency.

4.5.1

Property

Thickness

Density

Youngs Modulus

Poissons Ratio

Symbol

h

s

E

Clamped-Free Dimension

Free-Free Dimension

Air Density

Value

1 mm

2700 kg/m3

69 GPa

.3

600 mm

300 mm

1.2 kg/m3

The first transition that is explored uses a beam model with a single edge clamped.

As we have seen before the transition between the leading edge clamped and the

side edge clamped corresponds with a transition between a flutter instability that is

dominated by a coalescence flutter between the first and second bending modes for

the first case and a first bending, first torsion coalescence in the latter case. Because

the flutter boundaries for Configuration 1 and 2 are too similar, different structural

parameters are used to explore the transition. Furthermore, in order to have a

model which could be validated at both extrema positions (clamped leading edge and

clamped side edges), values are selected which had existing theoretical predictions

108

for both. These values are given in Table 4.3. Furthermore as mentioned in the

theory section, a significantly finer aerodynamic mesh is implemented. Specifically,

44 elements in the normal to the flow direction and 120 elements in the streamwise

direction and a wake extending 2.5 times the longer dimension are used.

Figure 4.24 shows the flutter velocity and frequency boundaries as the flow is

rotated with respect to the beam. The transition is somewhat surprising. As you

can clearly see from the frequency transition, the large jump in frequency occurs

at a small rotation angle. Physically, this means that the instability begins to look

like the wing flutter coupling of the first bending and first torsional modes at this

small angle. This can clearly be seen by looking at the snapshots of the mode shape

for a rotation angle of 11.53 deg shown in Figure 4.27. In these snapshots from the

time history, it is clear that there is a large contribution from the first torsional

mode which is indicative of wing flutter. The immediate implications for this low

angle transition are for the energy harvesting applications of the cantilevered beam

configuration. As energy harvesters are nominally optimized to capture energy at

a specific frequency, the precipitous drop in frequency for non-axially aligned flows

can drastically reduce the energy captured by the system. Designers of such systems

must be certain that the incoming flow will remain axially aligned or attempt to

create an energy harvesting system that is able to capture energy over the wider

band of frequencies.

To the best knowledge of this researcher this is the first time these non-axially

aligned configuration has been explored either experimentally or theoretically. There

is currently an effort to confirm these theoretical results experimentally. If these

trends are confirmed in experiment it suggests that additional care must be taken

when conducting aeroelastic analysis for systems which may have deviations from

axially aligned flow when deployed.

109

40

35

30

U(m/s)

25

20

15

10

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

70

80

90

Rotation Angle

20

18

16

14

[Hz]

12

10

10

20

30

40

50

60

Rotation Angle

Figure 4.24: Flutter boundary as the wing is rotated from the flapping flag configuration to the wing configuration. In the frequency plot, the solid line without xs

correspond to the first three elastic natural frequencies of the unforced system

110

0.2

0.2

0.2

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.2

0.2

0.2

0.5

0.5

0 0

0.5

0.5

0 0

0.5

0.2

0.2

0.2

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.2

0.2

0.2

0.5

0.5

0 0

0.5

0.5

0 0

0.2

0.2

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.2

0.2

0.2

0.5

0 0

0.5

0 0

0.5

0.5

0 0

0.5

0.2

0.5

0.5

0 0

0.5

0.5

0 0

111

0.2

0.2

0.2

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.2

0.2

0.2

0.5

0.5

0 0

0.5

0.5

0 0

0.5

0.2

0.2

0.2

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.2

0.2

0.2

0.5

0.5

0 0

0.5

0.5

0 0

0.2

0.2

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.2

0.2

0.2

0.5

0 0

0.5

0 0

0.5

0.5

0 0

0.5

0.2

0.5

0.5

0 0

0.5

0.5

0 0

112

0.2

0.2

0.2

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.2

0.2

0.2

0.5

0.5

0 0

0.5

0.5

0 0

0.5

0.2

0.2

0.2

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.2

0.2

0.2

0.5

0.5

0 0

0.5

0.5

0 0

0.2

0.2

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.2

0.2

0.2

0.5

0 0

0.5

0 0

0.5

0.5

0 0

0.5

0.2

0.5

0.5

0 0

0.5

0.5

0 0

113

0.2

0.2

0.2

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.2

0.2

0.2

0.5

0.5

0 0

0.5

0.5

0 0

0.5

0.2

0.2

0.2

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.2

0.2

0.2

0.5

0.5

0 0

0.5

0.5

0 0

0.2

0.2

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.2

0.2

0.2

0.5

0 0

0.5

0 0

0.5

0.5

0 0

0.5

0.2

0.5

0.5

0 0

0.5

0.5

0 0

114

4.5.2

35

30

30

25

25

20

[Hz]

U[m/s]

20

15

15

10

10

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

10

20

Rotation Angle

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Rotation Angle

Figure 4.29: Flutter boundary as the plate is rotated from the leading edge clamped

to the top edge clamped. In the frequency plot, the solid line without xs correspond

to the first three elastic natural frequencies of the unforced system

0.2

0.2

0.2

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.2

0.15

0.2

0.15

0.15

0.1

0.2

0.15

0.15

0.1

0.1

0.05

0.05

0

0.15

0.1

0.1

0.05

0.05

0

0.1

0.05

0.05

0

(a) Rotation Angle = 0 deg (b) Rotation Angle = 45 deg (c) Rotation Angle = 90 deg

Figure 4.30: Snapshot of the mode shapes at the aeroelastic instability for three

different streamwise rotation angles

A trend that is observed when exploring the different plate boundary conditions

is that a static divergence is encountered when both the leading and trailing edges

are clamped. Again it is of interest to explore how the instability transitions from a

dynamic flutter to a static divergence, and at what critical incident flow angle does

the transition occur. Figure 4.29 shows this transition. It is clear that the transition

115

occurs near 45 deg and there is a transition range that extends from 30 to 60 deg.

This central transition range is what was originally expected for all configurations

when the incident flow angle is varied. The images taken from the time simulation

of the plate at different rotation angles confirms the transition to a divergence mode

once the angle is at 60 deg.

116

0.2

0.2

0.2

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.2

0.2

0.2

0.1

0.1

0.1

0 0

0.1

0.1

0 0

0.2

0.2

0.2

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.2

0.2

0.2

0.1

0.1

0.1

0 0

0 0

0.2

0.2

0.2

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.2

0.2

0.2

0.1

0.1

0 0

0.1

0.1

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

117

0.2

0.2

0.2

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.2

0.2

0.2

0.1

0.1

0.1

0 0

0.1

0.1

0 0

0.2

0.2

0.2

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.2

0.2

0.2

0.1

0.1

0.1

0 0

0 0

0.2

0.2

0.2

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.2

0.2

0.2

0.1

0.1

0 0

0.1

0.1

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

118

0.2

0.2

0.2

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.2

0.2

0.2

0.1

0.1

0.1

0 0

0.1

0.1

0 0

0.2

0.2

0.2

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.2

0.2

0.2

0.1

0.1

0.1

0 0

0 0

0.2

0.2

0.2

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.2

0.2

0.2

0.1

0.1

0 0

0.1

0.1

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

119

5

Experiments

To validate the non-dimensional beam model vibration and aeroelastic experiments are conducted on samples of varying sized 3003 aluminum plates. For the .381

mm thick aluminum the length is varied from 200mm to 300mm in increments of 25

mm, and an aspect ratio of 0.5 is used. For the .25 mm thick aluminum the length

is varied between 225 mm and 275 mm in 25mm increments and again the aspect

120

ratio of 0.5 is used. The properties for this material are assumed to be the common

values for the alloy given in Table 5.1.

Table 5.1: Beam Experimental Parameters

Property

Elastic plate properties

Alloy

Thickness

Density

Youngs Modulus

Symbol

Airfoil Normal to Flow Length

Air Density

Value

h

s

E

3003

.381 mm, .25 mm

2840 kg/m3

72 GPa

101 mm

550 mm

1.2 kg/m3

Source

Series

Size

Measurement Specialty

DT Series Patch

30mm by 12mm

Manufacturer

Name

Scientific Atlanta

Spectral Dynamics SD380

To record the frequency content of the plate movements two methods are used.

First, a small piezoelectric patch is attached at the root of the plate. The properties

of the piezoelectric patch are given in Table 5.1. The piezoelectric patch is chosen to

be small enough that it will not affect the motion of the system. This is verified by

the ground vibration experiments. For the second method an accelerometer is placed

at the root of the plate. Results are not sensitive to the measurement device and

they are interchanged throughout the experimental process. For both methods, the

sensor signal is collected and analyzed in real time by the Spectral Dynamics SD380

spectrum analyzer for frequency content.

121

5.1.1

Vibration testing is done to ensure that the plate frequencies, which are used in

the theoretical aeroelastic model, are accurate representations of the actual natural

frequencies of the test specimens. Furthermore the structural testing ensures that the

test apparatus and frequency measuring piezoelectric patch or accelerometer do not

have a large effect on the test specimens behavior. Figure 5.1 shows the experimental

apparatus, described in the previous section, which is used to measure the frequency

of the plate. The natural frequencies of the plate are determined by applying an

impulse in force at the tip of the beam and observing the frequency content of the

response.

Overall the natural frequencies measured in experiment match the expected

clamped-free natural frequencies over the range of test specimens as can be seen

in Figure 5.2. This experiment also helps validate the time scaling because it is clear

that for all of the mass ratios the non-dimensional frequencies do in fact remain

constant. Finally this experiment shows that the frequency measuring devices do

70

60

[radians]

50

40

ClampedFree Theory

ClampedFree Experiment

30

20

10

0

0.2

0.22

0.24

0.26

0.28

0.3

0.32

0.34

0.36

0.38

122

0.4

not change the natural frequencies and therefore do not affect the response of the

system. This confirms that the effect of the measuring device does not need to be

explicitly dealt with in the structural model.

5.1.2

The aeroelastic experiments are carried out in the Duke University wind tunnel. The

specimen is mounted in the wind tunnel using a rigid airfoil that spans the height

of the wind tunnel to provide the leading edge clamping of the elastic plate. The

leading airfoil is used both to mount the elastic panel, as well as to ensure smooth

flow over the elastic panel. As with the structural experiments, the flutter frequency

is calculated from the signal of the attached piezoelectric patch or accelerometer

during at the flutter velocity.

The flutter velocity is measured by slowly incrementing the flow velocity in the

wind tunnel up until the specimen entered an oscillation. As the velocity of the wind

tunnel came close to the flutter velocity, a peak in the frequency response begins to

appear. At this point the increment in the flow velocity is reduced to around .25

m/s per increment. At each flow speed the velocity is held for 2-3 seconds before

incrementing again. At a certain velocity, the oscillations grow and the specimen

enters a large oscillation. The velocity where the beam entered this oscillation is

recorded as the flutter velocity and the frequency at this speed is read from the

spectrum analyzer. For each specimen the test is repeated three times and the

average flutter velocity and frequency is recorded.

The goal of the wind tunnel testing is to validate the theoretical model with

experimental data points. Specifically, a study of flutter as a function of the mass

ratio for the clamped-free configuration is presented. Good agreement between the

clamped-free experiment and theory helps validate the aeroelastic model and suggests

that simulations outside of the experimental test suite are also valid.

123

25

20

15

10

5

0

1

10

10

(a)

30

[Radians]

25

20

15

10

5

0

1

10

10

(b)

Figure 5.3: Mass Ratio Variation with Experiment. This figure includes new experimental data (x), previous experimental data from Huang [20] for S = .6 to 1.5(*),

Eloy et al. [14] for S = 1.0 (), and Eloy et al. [15] S = 0.5 (). Also included in

the figure are theoretical results for S = 0.5 (thick line) and S = 1.0 (thin line).

124

The experimental testing for the mass ratio variation is done for the clamped-free

configuration because the Duke University wind tunnel has an established experimental setup and test protocol for this configuration. As one can see by looking at Figure

5.3, there is very good agreement between theory and experiment. Quantitatively

this is shown by a small average error and standard deviation of the error from the

experiments given in Table A.2. The averages are calculated by subtracting the theoretical value from the experimental value and then dividing the difference by the

theoretical values. This small error is consistent with previous comparisons with

dimensional vortex lattice simulations and experiments carried out by Tang et al.

[32] and Dunnmon et al. [11]. For the frequency results presented in Figure 5.3 there

is a consistent bias for the experimental values to be under the theoretical values.

This may be because a beam is used in the simulations while a plate is used in the

experimental setup. An initial exploration of the inclusion of the leading edge airfoil

in the theoretical model also suggest that the experimental apparatus may also be a

cause of the lower flutter frequencies and lower flutter velocities. This impact would

also explain the increasing error as the mass ratio increases which corresponds to

a relatively larger support structure compared to the size of the elastic specimen.

Regardless, the good agreement between theory and experiment is encouraging and

suggests that for the flutter velocity and frequency, the vortex lattice aerodynamic

method is an accurate model for the linear response of the system.

The experimental work to validate the plate structural and aeroelastic model is primarily conducted to support the NASA continuous mold link project, and therefore

the material tested in the experiment is a red polymer plate-membrane that is supplied by NASA. Although the CML configuration is three sides clamped, one side

free, care is taken to use an experimental setup that is capable of simulating all of

125

the 5 additional boundary conditions explored in the theory section. At this point

the author wishes to formally acknowledge fellow graduate student Ivan Wang for

his significant contributions to the design of the experimental support structural and

the collection of experimental data.

5.2.1

The primary experimental apparatus is a modular baffle structure that can implement a clamped boundary condition on one or more sides of a rectangular plate, in

addition to providing a means to streamline the flow that goes over the plate. A

CAD rendering of the baffle design is shown in Figure 5.4. The figure shows (1) the

top baffle, (2) the bottom baffle, (3) the leading edge baffle, (4) the trailing edge

baffle, and (5) the connector pieces that link the individual baffle sections. Each

baffle section consists of a front and back structure, as well as a clamp that can be

screwed on to constrain the plate.

126

Each baffle section also has a flange that can be secured to a stable structure

outside the wind tunnel. Therefore, each baffle section can be mounted in the wind

tunnel individually, allowing all combinations of boundary conditions to be tested.

This modular design revolves around the connector, which is shown in Figure 5.5.

The T-shape design and the slot allows the top and bottom baffles to slide relative

to the leading and trailing edge baffles, such that plates of different spans (top

to bottom dimension) can be tested. Specifically, the T-shape allows an extended

back section of the baffle, on which additional bolt holes can be tapped for securing

additional clamps. Also, the slot on the connector allows the connector to slide

without worrying about matching up bolt holes for securing the connector. To test

a plate with a larger span, the only modifications are to make a new clamp piece to

extend the boundary and to tap bolt holes on the back side of the baffle to mount

the new clamp.

It is also not difficult to test plates with larger streamwise lengths by making

additional top and bottom baffle sections, which are designed with symmetric edges

on the leading and trailing edge sides such that additional sections can be secured

together using the same connector design.

Finally, the baffle allows the plate to be tensioned by setting the strain. Figure

5.6 shows three different strain settings, each corresponding to a level of tension.

127

Because the top and bottom baffles are designed to be able to slide, the bottom

baffle can slide down to a different strain setting in order to tension the plate before

the remaining clamps are applied. From a practical point of view, some tensioning is

necessary in order to avoid free play nonlinearities, but the material may also have

nonlinear stiffness under different tensile loads. This is especially important for the

NASA CML project since the structures will be tensioned during flap deployment.

2

3

1

Figure 5.6: Different Strain Settings Allowing for Varying Span-wise Tension

5.2.2

The nominal properties from Bloomhardt and Dowell [5] of the red plate-membrane

are the values used in the aeroelastic simulations listed in Table 2.2.

Before designing the actual wind tunnel experiment, some static tension tests were

conducted by Ivan Wang to obtain estimates of the elastic modulus and Poissons

ratio in order to validate the given material properties. A material sample is secured

in an axial load cell, and the load cell is used to pull on the sample to apply a

measurable amount of tension. The sample has a length of 0.1135 m and a width

of 1.27 cm. The axial strain (change in length) and transverse strain (change in

cross sectional width) are then measured to calculate a stress-strain curve as well

as estimate Poissons ratio. Figure 5.7 (a) shows the stress-strain plot for one of

the trials of the tensile test. The results are shown up to a strain of 5%. Some

nonlinearity can be observed in the curve.

128

30

0.25

25

Youngs Modulus (MPa)

Stress (MPa)

0.2

0.15

0.1

0.05

0

0

20

15

10

5

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04

0

0

0.05

Strain

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04

0.05

Strain

(a)

(b)

Figure 5.7: (a) Measured Stress Strain Curve for One Tensile Test Trial. (b)

Estimated Elastic Modulus vs Axial Strain

The variation in the elastic modulus with respect to strain is calculated from

taking the derivative of the stress-strain curve obtained from the axial load cell data.

The results are summarized in Figure 5.7 (b). On average, the stiffness is about 17

MPa for strain less than .3%, and then varies around 6 MPa for higher strains. It

is interesting to note that the reported value is less than 2 MPa. It is postulated

that there is a typographical error in Bloomhardt and Dowell [5], and that the actual

value is 18.4 MPa. This is explored further in the following section in which dynamic

(natural frequency) testing results are discussed. The sample length is measured with

a set of calipers with 0.03-mm precision after the tensile test and no measurable

plastic deformation occurred after reaching at least 5% axial strain. Therefore, the

baffle tension mechanism is designed with three built-in strain settings: 2%, 5%.

Poissons ratio is estimated by measuring the transverse dimension (width) of the

sample cross section under tension, and calculating the ratio of transverse strain to

axial strain. Three separate trials are conducted. This is a rough estimate because

it does not account for the curvature of the sides of the test sample as it is stretched.

Nevertheless, the results for Poissons ratio, shown in Figure 5.8, suggest that the

Poissons ratio is near 0.5, which is expected of elastic polymers.

129

0.8

0.7

Poissons Ratio

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

Trial 1

Trial 2

Trial 3

Mean

0.1

0

0

0.02

0.04

0.06

Axial Strain

0.08

0.1

5.2.3

Ground vibration experiments are conducted to measure the natural frequencies and

confirm the mode shapes for four of the six configurations. Figure 5.9a shows a

far view photograph of the experimental set up for the ground vibration test for

Configuration 6, including 1) the test specimen, 2) clamps that secure the baffle

to a fixed structure, 3) the electromagnetic shaker, and 4) the laser vibrometer.

Figure 5.9b shows the excitation mechanism in more detail, specifically showing 1)

the test specimen, 2) the shaker, and 3) the aluminum tape onto which the shaker

tip is affixed. A laser vibrometer is used to measure the velocity at one point on

the membrane. A shaker is used to excite another point on the opposite side of

the membrane. The shaker is specified to excite the structure over a sine sweep

from 0.25 Hz to 100 Hz, and a spectrum analyzer is used to calculate the frequency

response function using the shaker force transducer signal as the input and the laser

vibrometer signal as the output.

Small pieces of aluminum tape, approximately 1 cm long on each side, are placed

at the locations where velocity measurements are desired because the laser vibrometer

requires a reflective surface to function properly. Because the mass of the aluminum

tape is much less than the mass of the plate-membrane specimen, the added inertial

effects of the tape are ignored. Aluminum tape is also used as a mounting surface

130

(a) Far View of Ground Vibration Test(b) Close View of Ground Vibration Test

Setup

Setup

Component

Brand

Model

Signal amplifier

Bruel & Kjaer

Type 2635

Spectrum analyzer Scientific Atlanta

SD380

Shaker

Bruel & Kjaer

Type 4810

Force transducer

Bruel & Kjaer

Type 8200

Laser vibrometer

Ometron

VPI4000

for the shaker tip. The wax used for attaching the shaker tip does not stick to the

test specimen, so aluminum tape is first placed on the specimen, and the shaker

tip is attached to the aluminum tape with wax. Again, the added inertial effects

are ignored. Table 5.2 summarizes the equipment used for conducting the ground

vibration experiments.

The natural frequencies are the peaks in the frequency response function. To

determine the mode shapes, the specimen is excited at the measured natural frequencies, and the response of the specimen is observed and compared to theoretical

predictions of mode shapes. A strobe light is used to make it easier to visualize the

mode shape at higher frequencies.

131

20

18

40

80

35

70

30

60

25

50

20

40

15

30

10

20

10

16

14

12

10

8

6

4

2

0

1

2

Streamwise Mode

1

2

Streamwise Mode

1

2

Streamwise Mode

natural frequencies. The xs correspond to the theoretical predictions, and the os

are the average experimental results and error bars are included.

Configuration 1

Configuration 1 has the short edge clamped and all other edges free. Figure 5.10

shows the comparison between the ground vibration experimental data and the theoretical predictions. The trends and magnitude of the natural frequencies are very

good. This experiment confirms that the structural model is a valid model, and that

the use of a poisons ratio of .5 and a stiffness of 18.4 MPa is correct.

Configuration 2

Figure 5.10 shows the predicted and measured natural frequencies, organized by the

mode shape for Configuration 2. Each sub-figure lists the natural frequencies versus

the streamwise mode number for a fixed normal to the flow mode number. The

normal direction is perpendicular to the clamped edge. The results show that the

theory is able to predict the natural frequencies within 10% of the measured values.

Figure 5.12 shows an image captured durring the mode identification stage of the

experiment. After the natural frequencies are determined the plates are forced at

132

20

18

40

80

35

70

30

60

25

50

20

40

15

30

10

20

10

16

14

12

10

8

6

4

2

0

1

2

Streamwise Mode

1

2

Streamwise Mode

1

2

Streamwise Mode

natural frequencies. The xs correspond to the theoretical predictions, and the os

are the average experimental results and error bars are included.

133

the natural frequencies so the mode shape associated with every frequency can be

determined. For this picture the system is forced at 25 Hz and the system responded

in the rigid body translation in the streamwise direction and the second bending in

the normal direction.

It is important to note that again the theoretical calculations use an elastic modulus of 18.4 MPa instead of the 1.84 MPa reported in Bloomhardt and Dowell [5].

As mentioned previously, it is possible that there is a typographical error in the

reference.

Configuration 4

Normal to Flow Mode 1

40

70

35

60

30

50

25

40

20

30

15

20

10

10

5

0

1

2

Streamwise Mode

1

2

Streamwise Mode

natural frequencies. The xs correspond to the theoretical predictions, and the os

are the average experimental results and error bars are included.

in the streamwise direction. Figure 5.14 shows the setup for this configuration. Attached to the near side of the membrane is the shaft attached to the shaker and

seen in the background is the large box that makes up the laser vibrometer. Setting

up Configuration 4 so there is no tension in the streamwise direction and keeping

the undisturbed membrane flat proved difficult. The experimental results in Figure

134

5.13 are uniformly below the theoretical values. This can either be caused by overestimating the modulus of the material, or the presence of axial compression in the

initial setup. Reducing the modulus to 16.4 MPa or including a compression of 4

N/m causes the experimental values to exactly match the theoretical predictions.

Configuration 6

For this series of tests, the measurements were taken at a combination of 2 laser

locations and 3 shaker locations, for a total of 6 measurements. Figure 5.15 shows

the locations of laser vibrometer readings and shaker excitations. In addition, impact

tests were used as another method to obtain natural frequencies because shakers are

known to affect the structural dynamics of flexible structures.

For this ground vibration test the frequency peaks and the half power bandwidths

are recorded for calculating the natural frequencies and the damping ratios. Depending on the location of the shaker, the sine sweep results for the (1,1) mode can vary

by 30% from the impact test results, though the frequencies of the other modes vary

135

Side

Side

at most by 10% from the impact test results. This confirms the expectation that

the shaker introduces mass and stiffness that affects the overall structural dynamics.

Therefore, the experimental data presented in this paper averages the impact test

data, but the shaker is still used to determine the mode shapes.

The data is collected and averages and standard deviations are calculated for

each tension level and each natural mode. The frequency response does not give

any information about the mode shapes, so additional testing is done to match each

frequency to a mode shape by exciting the specimen at the natural frequency and

comparing the resulting response to theoretically predicted mode shapes. Finding the

mode shapes allows the natural frequencies to be organized by the mode number in

the cross-flow direction, which is the top-bottom direction. The results are presented

in Fig. 5.16 in 4 subfigures, one for each tension level. In each subfigure, the left

half shows the first 3 natural frequencies that exhibit the first mode in the cross-flow

direction - the (1,1), (2,1), and (3,1) modes - and the right half shows the first 3

natural frequencies that exhibit the second mode in the cross-flow direction - the

(2,1), (2,2), and (3,2) modes.

The damping ratio can be estimated from the transfer function using the half

power method[37]. Table 5.3 lists the estimated modal damping for the first 3 modes.

136

60

80

70

70

60

90

50

80

Natural Frequency [Hz]

60

40

50

30

40

30

20

20

Experiment

Theory

1

2

Streamwise Mode

50

50

30

40

30

20

10

60

40

10

Experiment

Theory

10

1

2

Streamwise Mode

1

2

Streamwise Mode

1

2

Streamwise Mode

70

70

20

10

100

110

70

120

100

60

90

80

50

60

70

40

60

50

30

40

20

30

Experiment

Theory

20

10

100

50

80

40

60

30

40

Experiment

Theory

20

20

10

10

0

1

2

Streamwise Mode

1

2

Streamwise Mode

1

2

Streamwise Mode

1

2

Streamwise Mode

Figure 5.16: Natural Frequency Results for 4 Levels of Tension: Theory and Experiment

Note that the results do not take multiple-degrees-of-freedom behavior into account

and the calculations treat each frequency peak as a single-degree-of-freedom system.

Nevertheless, the results suggest high damping ratio compared to typical isotropic

elastic materials.

Table 5.3: First Three Modal Damping Ratios with No Tension

Mode Number Damping Ratio Std Dev

(1,1)

3.6%

1.1%

(2,1)

5.9%

1.6%

(3,1)

5.8%

2.0%

137

Summary

The experimental results confirmed the validity of the structural model to capture

the dynamics of the plate and validated the parameters of the plate. Based on the

results from the configurations tested it appears that the 18.4 MPa material modulus

is correct. Additionally the more detailed experiments conducted for Configuration

6 suggest that the material has higher structural damping then was assumed for the

aeroelastic simulations.

5.2.4

Flutter experiments are conducted in the Duke university wind tunnel, which is a low

speed wind tunnel, at a Mach number on the order of 0.1. The air speed is steadily

increased and the response of the membrane is measured using a strain gauge that

is attached to the specimen. The strain gauge does not protrude from the specimen,

so it has little effect on the flow field. The strain gauge signal is analyzed using

LabVIEW as well as the spectrum analyzer to obtain frequency content and a time

history of the response amplitude. From the data, it is possible to determine the

flutter speed and flutter frequency. Table 5.4 summarizes the equipment and software

used for conducting the membrane flutter experiments. The laser vibrometer was

not used because the reflection of the acrylic wind tunnel door resulted in poor data

resolution. Figure 5.17 shows a photograph of the aeroelastic experiment set up,

specifically showing the baffle mounted inside the wind tunnel cross section, with air

flow from right to left.

Table 5.5 gives a summary of the aeroelastic experiments. If there is a range given

in the experimental values then a significant hysteresis behavior was observed. The

first number given for both the frequency and velocity is the lower flutter boundary as

the wind tunnel velocity is decreased from fluttering to stable behavior. The second

number is the upper flutter boundary corresponding to the velocity and frequency

138

Component

Brand

Model

Signal amplifier

Bruel & Kjaer

Type 2635

Spectrum analyzer

Scientific Atlanta

SD380

Strain gauge

Micro-Measurements CEA-06-125UN-350

Data acquisition National Instruments

NI 9219

that the system goes from stable to unstable as the wind tunnel velocity is increased.

Configuration 1 is the same configuration as the beam experiments. During the

experiments for this configuration significant hysteresis behavior were observed. This

resulted in a wide range between the velocity at which the system originally becomes

unstable as the wind tunnel velocity is increased and the velocity at which the system

returns to being stable as the wind tunnel velocity is decrease. Figure 5.18 (a) shows

the time history of the acceleration and the time history of the velocity side by side

and clearly demonstrates this behavior.

139

0.1

20

0.05

15

0

0.05

10

0.1

5

0.15

30

40

50

60

Time [s]

70

30

40

50

60

Time [s]

70

0.06

0.06

0.05

0.05

0.04

0.03

0.04

0.03

0.02

0.02

0.01

0.01

8

10

12

Frequency [Hz]

14

16

18

20

8

10

12

Frequency [Hz]

14

16

18

20

Figure 5.18: Aeroelastic experimental results for Configuration 1. This configuration experiences a significant hysterisis behavior during experiment

140

Configuration

1

2

6

Theory

Velocity Frequency

[m/s]

[hz]

8.55

8.54

8.09

3.95

15.09

23.21

Experiment

Velocity

Frequency

[m/s]

[hz]

5.94 17.50 3.78 8.18

7.77 8.90 4.15 3.70

24.05

29.05

Run

1

2

3

4

Avg

Lower

Velocity Frequency

[m/s]

[hz]

5.96

3.66

5.99

5.80

3.91

6.00

3.78

5.94

3.78

Upper

Velocity Frequency

[m/s]

[hz]

17.05

7.93

18.29

8.55

18.24

8.18

16.43

8.06

17.50

8.18

Interestingly only the frequency at the upper flutter boundary matches the theoretical predictions while only the velocity at the lower flutter boundary is similar to

theoretical predictions. The second result can be explained by the motion seen near

the lower flutter boundary. As the velocity decreases the motion of the flag begins

to contain a significant torsional component as the flag attempts to buckle under

its own weight due to its lack of stiffness. A proposed remedy to this problem is to

include a lightweight support string at the trailing edge of the cantilevered system

to support the weight of the the structure and avoid the buckling. This sag may also

explain the high initial flutter velocity as the sag induces a curvature which may act

to stiffen the system before the motion begins.

141

The aeroelastic tests are done for the un-tensioned case. For each test, the air speed

is increased in increments, and the frequency response is taken at those specific

air speeds. Because 3 of the sides are clamped, the aeroelastic response is not easily

observed by eye. Instead, the flutter boundary is determined based only on the strain

gauge data. A waterfall plot of the frequency response functions over a range of air

speeds is created for each test run, and the flutter boundary is the combination of air

speed and frequency at which the strain gauge response begins to noticeably increase.

An example waterfall plot is shown in Fig. 5.19. For this particular example, the

flutter speed is approximately 23 m/s, and the flutter frequency is approximately 28

Hz.

28

26

0.02

24

0.01

22

0

40

20

18

30

20

16

10

(Hz)

U (m/s)

Five trials are conducted for the un-tensioned specimen. The experimentally

measured flutter speed and frequency are compared to the theoretically predicted

142

values in Table 5.7. Two sets of theoretical values, one computed with 1% structural

damping, and one computed with 5% structural damping, are shown in the Table.

The experimental results agree better with the high damping theoretical results. This

corroborates with the high structural damping measurements from the ground vibration tests, and suggests that the flutter boundary is sensitive to structural damping

for this configuration. The aeroelastic results for this particular configuration show

Table 5.7: Flutter Speed and Frequency for the Un-Tensioned Specimen: Theory

and Experiment

Damping

Flutter

Flutter

Ratio

Speed (m/s) Frequency (Hz)

Low Damping Theory

1.0%

15.5

23.1

High Damping Theory

5.0%

21.6

21.3

Experiment Average

5.1%

24.1

29.1

Experiment Stdev

1.3%

0.47

0.55

High Damping Theory Error

-10%

-27%

the effect of structural damping. The theoretical flutter speed increases by 30%

when the structural damping is increased from a typical value of 1% to the experimentally estimated value of 5%. The error in flutter speed compared to experiment

is 10%. However, the error in flutter frequency is 27%. One possible source is error

is unintended tension in the membrane, which if introduced would cause the flutter

speed and frequency to increase. The usage of structural damping in the aeroelastic

calculations can also be improved. Using a different value for each mode may affect

the aeroelastic results.

Another effect is static deformation due to initial angle of attack of the baffle

structure. It is very difficult to align the baffle perfectly with the flow, and a nonzero

static angle of attack leads to aerodynamic loads on the specimen, static displacement, and additional tensioning. This behavior is observed when starting the experiment as the strain measurement steadily increases as the air speed is increased.

However, the extent to which the baffle is misaligned has not been quantified, and

143

Lastly, the small aeroelastic deformations make it difficult to determine when

flutter occurs. Typically for wing or panel flutter, a drastic increase in displacement

of the test specimen occurs over a very small range of air speeds, making it easier to

determine the flutter speed. Therefore, the low oscillation amplitude as well as the

slow rate of increase in amplitude are possible causes of overestimating the flutter

speed and frequency when looking at the waterfall data.

144

6

Conclusion and Future Work

6.1 Conclusions

This thesis is a survey of the linear aeroelastic behavior of beams and plate/membranes

in low subsonic three-dimensional flow. The aerodynamics are modeled using a linear vortex lattice model, and various beam and plate/membrane structural models

are used. The work included the confirmation and expansion of existing theoretical

and experimental results as well as an exploration of configurations and parameters

which have not been explicitly explored in the aeroelastic literature. While much

of the research is motivated by potential applications such as energy harvesters or

noise reduction for subsonic transport aircraft, the analysis was conducted for very

simplified configurations to try and isolate the fundamental dynamics of the systems

that are explored.

First the cantilevered beam configuration aeroelastic model was non-dimensionalized

and shown to be dependent on two non-dimensional parameters, the aspect ratio H

and the mass ratio, , a result which was consistent with previous theoretical explorations of the system.[13, 14] Furthermore, the trends as the parameters were

145

varied also matched well with previous theoretical and experimental results as well

as new experimental results collected in the Duke University wind tunnel. A novel

aeroelastic result was also discovered during this work by exploring the transition

between a pinned and clamped leading edge using a torsional spring. The theoretical

exploration exposed the non-trivial leading edge spring stiffness corresponded to the

lowest flutter velocity.

Next the structural model was changed to allow the modeling of plates with

arbitrary boundary conditions. Six configurations, including one that is a simplified

model of the NASA CML design were explored. For the three sides clamped, trailing

edge free configuration, the configuration corresponding to the NASA CML design,

an exploration of including tension in the clamped-clamped direction and varying

the streamwise dimension is presented. The simulations demonstrate that the flutter

velocity can be increased by either decreasing the streamwise dimension or increasing

the tension in the normal to flow direction, however doing so yields non monotonic

trends as the flutter motion experiences qualitative transitions as the parameters are

varied.

In addition to a detailed exploration of the NASA configuration, the flutter type

and boundary for the five additional configurations was presented. For configurations

with more than 1 fixed boundary condition, clamping the leading and trailing edge

caused a divergence instability while a free trailing edge boundary condition leads to

a flutter instability.

Finally the transition between boundary conditions was explored by implementing

a vortex lattice model that allowed for axially misaligned flows. The transition for

the single side clamped configuration occurred at a low flow angle, much differently

than is expected, while the transition between flutter and divergence for the three

sides clamped case occurred at an intermediate flow angle.

Overall the vortex lattice aerodynamic model coupled with first principals struc146

tural model proves to be a powerful tool in analyzing the aeroelastic stability of plates

and beams in three-dimensional flow. The body of work presented in this document

is a comprehensive review of the aeroelastic instabilities and trends that occur for

simple plate and beam like structures subject to aerodynamic flows. While a specific application is not targeted the implications of the research have been discussed

throughout the document.

6.2.1

Theoretical

There are many additional theoretical avenues which have yet to be explored. One

of the first things that could be explored is the post critical aeroelastic response,

specifically the limit cycle oscillations that are seen experimentally. In order to capture this response, non-linear structural or aerodynamic models need to be included.

Structural non-linearities could be modeled by including a cubic stiffening in the

structure or modeling free play at the fixed edges. Aerodynamic non-linearities can

be included by allowing for a free wake evolution, and allowing the bound circulation

elements to move with the structure instead of remaining fixed in the plate plane.

By including non-linearities, it will no longer be possible to analyze the system in

the frequency domain, and instead time simulations will be used. In order to speed

up these time simulations if a structural non-linearity is modeled, a reduced order

aerodynamic model built around the linear eigenmodes of the aerodynamic matrix

equation could be developed. The non-linear model is especially interesting because

of hysteresis seen experimentally. Neither, the non-linearity which is responsible

for this hysteresis, nor the type of bifurcation underlying this behavior have been

satisfactorily explained in the literature,

Another theoretical development relates to analysis of non-axially aligned flow.

The existing theory approximates the angled edges of the structures as step functions,

147

which allows simple horseshoe vortex elements to be used. In order to model the

actual geometry, developing an aerodynamic mesh which uses parallelogram elements

instead of square elements would be an improvement. Specifically modeling flow

angles near 0 and 90 deg may be accomplished without using a fine mesh.

6.2.2

Experimental

There is a significant amount of experimental work that will be done to support the

existing theoretical predictions. First, the leading edge torsional spring result which

suggested that a finite strength torsional spring at the leading edge will correspond to

the lowest flutter velocity has not been confirmed experimentally. Before the result

is fully believed this experiment must be conducted.

Next, the ability to conduct experiments on models with axially misaligned flows

is desirable. There is currently an undergraduate research project at Duke focused on

building an experimental apparatus that will allow the rotation of a one side clamped

plate which will attempt to confirm the theoretical results presented earlier in this

document. Finally, experiments on beams and plates with additional parameter values for all configurations would be useful as they would help validate the theoretical

model over a larger region of parameter space.

6.2.3

Applications

Finally, the author is interested in solving real problems using the methods and

techniques developed. The model could be used to improve the understanding of the

aeroelastic instabilities that have hindered the development of High Altitude Long

Endurance (HALE) aircraft, as exhibited by the high profile crash of NASAs Helios

prototype in 2003. HALE combines the low-cost relocation and storage of aircraft

with the persistence and vantage point of a satellite system. However, in order to

achieve mission success, these aircraft must have a high fuel fraction leading to flex-

148

ible designs that are susceptible to aeroelastic instabilities. Currently the DARPA

program, Project Vulture, has funded the Boeing Company to build an experimental

HALE aircraft and my research group is part of this team with significant responsibility for nonlinear aeroelastic analysis and testing of wind tunnel models. One

could improve the existing Nonlinear Aeroelastic Trim and Stability for HALE aircraft (NATASHA) code, developed by D.H. Hodges and others to study the dynamics

of HALE aircraft, by incorporating a nonlinear VLM module. This 3D aerodynamic

model will complement the existing geometrically exact nonlinear structural model

to provide more accurate aeroelastic predictions required for HALE design and analysis. This will improve the validity of this tool and help HALE aircraft become a

vital tool for maintaining an operational advantage for US defense and intelligence

operations around the world.

Additional applications include conducting more detailed analysis of the NASA

CML configuration and providing design support for the project or developing an

free wake aeroelastic wind turbine model.

149

Appendix A

Beam Aeroelastic Experimental Data Points

This appendix contains the data collected from the Duke University wind tunnel

testing. All velocities are in the units of normalized velocity and all of the frequencies

are in the units of radians/non-dimensional time.

Table A.1: Experimental Datapoints for a Clamped-Free Plate

0.185

0.208

0.222

0.231

0.254

0.277

0.277

0.312

0.333

0.347

0.381

Theory

Uf lutter

f lutter

15.50

14.69

14.27

14.03

13.47

12.98

12.98

12.36

12.05

11.85

11.44

17.45

17.42

17.40

17.39

17.35

17.31

17.31

17.25

17.21

17.18

17.11

Experiment

Uf lutter

f lutter

13.11

13.15

13.54

12.60

12.46

11.98

12.90

8.96

12.03

8.67

8.62

150

17.42

16.47

17.40

17.20

17.73

17.95

17.43

14.58

17.43

13.56

15.66

Error (%)

Uf lutter

f lutter

15.40

10.50

5.12

10.22

7.44

7.69

0.64

27.53

0.17

26.89

24.72

0.21

5.50

0.04

1.11

-2.19

-3.70

-0.68

15.46

-1.28

21.06

8.48

Velocity

Frequency

Error

12.39%

4.0%

Error

Standard

Deviation

9.51%

7.57%

151

Appendix B

Configuration 2 Raw Data

This appendix shows the type of raw data that is collected from the plate ground

vibration tests presented in the experimental section. The transfer function between

the shaker input and laser vibrometer output is calculated on the fly by the spectrum analyzer. After a set of sweeps a plot such as the one presented below for

Configuration 2 is generated and used to determine the natural frequencies. For

all configurations the location of the shaker and the laser vibrometer is varied and

multiple sine sweeps are carried out. Only one data set is shown here as the data

collected during different runs is qualitatively the same.

152

Figure B.1: Sample transfer function created by the spectrum analyzer after a sine

sweep from 0 Hz to 100 Hz has been conducted.

153

Bibliography

[1] Alben, S. and Shelley, M. (2008), Flapping states of a flag in an inviscid fluid:

bistability and the transition to chaos, Physical Review Letters, 100, 74301.

[2] Attar, P. (2003), Experimental and theoretical studies in nonlinear aeroelasticity, Ph.D. thesis, Duke University.

[3] Balint, T. and Lucey, A. (2005), Instability of a cantilevered flexible plate in

viscous channel flow, Journal of Fluids and Structures, 20, 893912.

[4] Berton, J., Envia, E., and Burley, C. (2009), An Analytical Assessment

of NASAs N+1 Subsonic Fixed Wing Porject Noise Goal, in Proc. 15th

AIAA/CEAS Aeroacoustics Conference, Miami, Florida, AIAA-2009-3144.

[5] Bloomhardt, E. and Dowell, E. (2011), A Study of the Aeroelastic Behavior of

Flat Plates and Membranes with Mixed Boundary Conditions in Axial Subsonic

Flow, in Proc. 52nd AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structural, Structural Dynamics and Materials Conference, Denver, Colorado, AIAA-2011-1995.

[6] Choudhari, M., Neubert, G., Berkman, M., et al. (2002), Aeroacoustic Experiments in the Langley Low-Turbulence Pressure Tunnel, NASA/TM-2002-211432.

[7] Doare, O. and Michelin, S. (2011), Piezoelectric coupling in energy-harvesting

fluttering flexible plates: linear stability analysis and conversion efficiency, Journal of Fluids and Structures.

[8] Doare, O., Sauzade, M., and Eloy, C. (2011), Flutter of an elastic plate in a

channel flow: Confinement and finite-size effects, Journal of Fluids and Structures, 27, 7688.

[9] Dowell, E. (1975), Aeroelasticity of Plates and Shells, Noordhoff International

Publishing, Leyden, The Netherlands.

[10] Dowell, E. and Tang, D. (2003), Dynamics of very high dimensional systems,

World Scientific Pub Co Inc.

[11] Dunnmon, J., Stanton, S., Mann, B., and Dowell, E. (2011), Power extraction

from aeroelastic limit cycle oscillations, Journal of Fluids and Structures.

154

[12] Eloy, C. and Schouveiler, L. (2010), Optimisation of two-dimensional undulatory swimming at high Reynolds number, International Journal of Non-Linear

Mechanics.

[13] Eloy, C., Souilliez, C., and Schouveiler, L. (2007), Flutter of a rectangular

plate, Journal of fluids and structures, 23, 904919.

[14] Eloy, C., Lagrange, R., Souilliez, C., Schouveiler, L., et al. (2008), Aeroelastic instability of cantilevered flexible plates in uniform flow, Journal of Fluid

Mechanics, 611, 97106.

[15] Eloy, C., Kofman, N., and Schouveiler, L. (2012), The origin of hysteresis in

the flag instability, Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 691, 583.

[16] Giacomello, A. and Porfiri, M. (2011), Energy harvesting from flutter instabilities of heavy flags in water through ionic polymer metal composites, in Proceedings of SPIE, vol. 7976, p. 797608.

[17] Guo, C. (2000), Stability of rectangular plates with free side-edges in twodimensional inviscid channel flow, Journal of applied mechanics, 67, 171.

[18] Hellum, A., Mukherjee, R., and Hull, A. (2011), Flutter instability of a fluidconveying fluid-immersed pipe affixed to a rigid body, Journal of Fluids and

Structures, 27, 10861096.

[19] Howell, R., Lucey, A., Carpenter, P., and Pitman, M. (2009), Interaction between a cantilevered-free flexible plate and ideal flow, Journal of Fluids and Structures, 25, 544566.

[20] Huang, L. (1995), Flutter of cantilevered plates in axial flow, Journal of Fluids

and Structures, 9, 127147.

[21] Katz, J. and Plotkin, A. (2001), Low-speed aerodynamics, vol. 13, Cambridge

Univ Pr.

[22] Kornecki, A., Dowell, E., and OBrien, J. (1976), On the aeroelastic instability

of two-dimensional panels in uniform incompressible flow, Journal of Sound and

Vibration, 47, 163178.

[23] Lemaitre, C., Hemon, P., and De Langre, E. (2005), Instability of a long ribbon

hanging in axial air flow, Journal of Fluids and Structures, 20, 913925.

[24] Michelin, S. and Smith, S. (2009), Linear stability analysis of coupled parallel

flexible plates in an axial flow, Journal of Fluids and Structures, 25, 11361157.

[25] Michelin, S., Llewellyn Smith, S., and Glover, B. (2008), Vortex shedding model

of a flapping flag, Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 617, 110.

155

[26] NASA (2000), National Aeronautics and Space Administration: Strategic Plan

2000, .

[27] Preidikman, S. and Mook, D. (2000), Time-domain simulations of linear and

nonlinear aeroelastic behavior, Journal of Vibration and Control, 6, 1135.

[28] Streett, C., Lockard, D., Singer, B., Khorrami, M., and Choudhari, M. (2003),

In Search of the Physics: The Interplay of Experimental and Computation in Airframe Noise Research: Flap-Edge Noise, in Proc. 41st AIAA Aerospace Sciences

Meeting and Exhibit, Reno, Nevada, AIAA-2003-977.

[29] Streett, C., Casper, J., Lockard, D., et al. (2006), Aerodynamic Noise Reduction on High-Lift Devices on a Swept Wing Model, in Proc. 44th AIAA Aerospace

Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, Reno, Nevada, AIAA-2006-212.

[30] Taneda, S. (1968), Waving motions of flags, Journal of the Physical Society

of Japan, 24, 392401.

[31] Tang, D. and Dowell, E. (2002), Limit cycle oscillations of two-dimensional

panels in low subsonic flow, International journal of non-linear mechanics, 37,

11991209.

[32] Tang, D., Yamamoto, H., and Dowell, E. (2003a), Flutter and limit cycle

oscillations of two-dimensional panels in three-dimensional axial flow, Journal of

Fluids and Structures, 17, 225242.

[33] Tang, D., Yamamoto, H., and Dowell, E. (2003b), Flutter and limit cycle

oscillations of two-dimensional panels in three-dimensional axial flow, Journal of

Fluids and Structures, 17, 225242.

[34] Tang, L. and Padoussis, M. (2007), On the instability and the post-critical

behaviour of two-dimensional cantilevered flexible plates in axial flow, Journal of

Sound and Vibration, 305, 97115.

[35] Tang, L. and Padoussis, M. (2008), The influence of the wake on the stability

of cantilevered flexible plates in axial flow, Journal of Sound and Vibration, 310,

512526.

[36] Tang, L. and Padoussis, M. (2009), The coupled dynamics of two cantilevered

flexible plates in axial flow, Journal of Sound and Vibration, 323, 790801.

[37] Wang, I. (2011), An Analysis of Higher Order Effects in the Half Power

Method for Calculating Damping, Journal of Applied Mechanics, 78, 014501,

doi:10.1115/1.4002208.

[38] Watanabe, Y., Suzuki, S., Sugihara, M., and Sueoka, Y. (2002a), An experimental study of paper flutter, Journal of fluids and Structures, 16, 529542.

156

[39] Watanabe, Y., Isogai, K., Suzuki, S., and Sugihara, M. (2002b), A theoretical

study of paper flutter, Journal of fluids and structures, 16, 543560.

[40] Yamaguchi, N., Sekiguchi, T., Yokota, K., and Tsujimoto, Y. (2000), Flutter

limits and behavior of a flexible thin sheet in high-speed flow-II: Experimental

results and predicted behaviors for low mass ratios, Journal of Fluids Engineering,

122, 7483.

157

- Aeroelastic Analysis of AGARD 445.6 WingUploaded byMuhammad Aamir
- Phd ThesisUploaded byHarsh Sharma
- Aeroelastic Analysis of a wing (Pressentation)Uploaded byMuhammad Aamir
- Aeroelasticity Project 2 Report Final FinalUploaded bySean Nanivadekar
- Virtual Wind TunnelUploaded byv2brother
- Homework1 SolutionUploaded byJames Steven Haney
- Study of Flutter on UAV Composite WingUploaded byJamilah Bt Mohd Rafi
- Aero ElasticityUploaded byAndy He
- SolutionsUploaded byShivam
- Power SeriesUploaded byJerwil Carin
- 1D-CUFUploaded byalbsteinpor
- 04-turbomachinery.pdfUploaded byManoj Kumar
- LC in MathUploaded byGapmil Noziuc Nylevuj
- Additional_Math_Notes_IGCSE.docxUploaded byStephen
- Aeroelasticity and Fuel Slosh.pdfUploaded byHome
- A2TSkillsHandout AllUploaded byNicholas Yates
- Selariu SuperMathematics Functions, editor Florentin SmarandacheUploaded bymarinescu
- Trigonometry-Theory-JEE-Main-and-Advanced.pdfUploaded byDebanjan Dey
- LPF4_09Uploaded bymazni2002
- ErrataUploaded byMastercn1997
- 1-s2.0-S0889974612001405-main.pdfUploaded bySanthosh Mamidala
- mat140ckernsfall2018Uploaded byapi-238365771
- Solomon K QP - C2 EdexcelUploaded byArchit
- Geodinamika RPKPM Minggu IXUploaded bygunadi Suryo
- 9709_w12_qp_33Uploaded byZanfalawy Basha
- AssignmentUploaded byNaomiHyuga
- Aerodyn Theor 1Uploaded byStefanoMarchetti
- Reflections de 041Uploaded byRobert Walusimbi
- 1893465-AQA-MPC3-QP-JUN14.pdfUploaded byastargroup
- unit 7 calendarUploaded byapi-410390619

- Statement of PurposeUploaded byNima Mirhadi
- Read_MeUploaded bynim1987
- NFEM.ch01.SlidesUploaded bynim1987
- Integration Using the Gauss Quadrature Rule - Method 8Uploaded bynim1987
- werwaer.pdfUploaded byBharath Nadimpalli
- How to Write Effective CodesUploaded byksjoseph
- Motivation PDFUploaded byGodswill Umah Okorie
- MotivaatiokirjeohjeetUploaded byGodswill Umah Okorie
- Jvet Cw 264 Letter 1Uploaded bynim1987
- ICAE UNIT01 W00 PreliminariesUploaded bynim1987
- Guidelines MotivationUploaded bynim1987
- fasle 6Uploaded bynim1987
- Section Viii Div 1 Div 2 Div ComparisonUploaded byapparaokr
- ch1Uploaded bynim1987
- Advances in Nonlinear Vibration Analysis of StructuresUploaded byMehmet Eren
- Sample.inpUploaded byEvgeny Shavelzon
- 19 - References.pdfUploaded bydanzan1
- api 6d specUploaded bynim1987
- 47435Uploaded bySagarias Albus
- ANSYS-3D Space Frame ExampleUploaded byJeeva L T Dharma
- Solid Works to Ansys Awesome!!Uploaded byale80ing
- Variational Calculus and Discrete AltereenativesUploaded bynim1987
- Repeated EigenvaluesUploaded bysofelsbaba
- Protection From Space RadiationUploaded bynim1987
- gavgbUploaded byapi-3712774
- Genetic ProgrammingUploaded bynim1987
- Equations of Motion for an Anisotropic Nonlinear Elastic Continu,,m in a Gravitational FieldUploaded bynim1987
- NASA 2000 Assslc JyUploaded bynim1987
- RayLeigh Rittz MethodUploaded bynim1987
- Al-Li Alloy 1441 for Fuselage ApplicationsUploaded byPhung Tuan Anh

- A Clustering Based Approach to Perceptual Image HashingUploaded byAhmet Yarımçam
- Biometric SystemsUploaded bygajanansid
- 271 Mensuration Notes OH1Uploaded byJoyjoy C Lbanez
- Cavallo - Using Matlab Simulink and Control Toolbox - ToC (1996)Uploaded byhindukusc80
- Techniques of Differentiation and IntegrationUploaded byAndreLim
- Exercise 4 cUploaded byStanley
- Maths MethUploaded bynila
- Hamiltonian GaugeUploaded byDewy Dea Poerba
- Algebra 1Uploaded byDiana Carolina Quintero
- Self Assessment problemsUploaded byShikhar Mittal
- Mohammed RafiUploaded byMR.EDUCATOR
- mc graw hill ryerson calculus and vectors 12, chapter 7 answers with stepsUploaded bytrachea459
- CMHUploaded byRio Pranata
- Theories and Paradigms in SociologyUploaded byAngel Dela Cruz-Kim
- ahmed raza bioUploaded byISLAMIC LIBRARY
- 8- S.Y.B.Sc. MathematicsUploaded byshrreyak
- Numerical Ch17Uploaded byVinodh Kumar
- Introduction About the Ccp[1]Uploaded byRajnarayan Dutta
- On Growth and Form Darcy Wentworth Thompson - Cambridge University Press - 1942Uploaded bySilvia Titotto
- 5-Distance & AngleUploaded byMurali Krishnan Selvaraja
- 0503024v2Uploaded byAibert Einstein
- Quotes by NitshzeUploaded bySaurabh Singh
- a-minimum-quadratic-unbiased-estimation-minque-of-parameters-in-a-linear-regression-model-with-sperical-disturbancesUploaded byIJSTR Research Publication
- Vertex Form of ParabolasUploaded byMadhavi Vangipurapu
- r.s.agarwal Page 16-20.pdfUploaded byrubal dheeman
- Intractable PptUploaded byGauri
- module 406Uploaded byapi-349554893
- 2. TolerancingUploaded byAngie C. Joya
- 2003AMC10BUploaded bygzautan
- I WEEK. Lecture 1 ppt.pptUploaded byNataliAmiranashvili