Technical Project

A NALYTIC I NVESTIGATION OF B I -S TABLE W INGLETS T O
E XPAND AVAILABLE F LIGHT R EGIMES
William Simpkins
A BSTRACT
The application of morphing, and to a lesser extent bi-stable, parts to improve the efficiency and
extend the range of flight regimes available to aircraft has been the subject of extensive research for
many years. These systems can offer many advantages over traditional aircraft parts in both reducing
weight and the ability to dramatically change elements of the aircraft’s geometry. For this reason,
the field of solid body mechanics is of great interest to the aeronautical industry. In this report some
modern and historical applications of morphing and bi-stable aircraft parts are reviewed, in particular
focusing on a proposed design for a bi-stable Winglet. Then two different ways to model such a
system are proposed and the ability of these models to predict the bi-stability of the proposed system
is analysed.
1 Introduction
The first investigations into the theory of elasticity arose in the 1800s [1]. Elasticity may be broadly defined as the
ability for a deformed body to return to its original unperturbed configuration after the forces causing the deformation
have been removed. Any body which possesses this quality is said to behave elastically [2]. Practically every material
in nature and manufacturing exhibits some degree of elasticity, along with the other main solid quality Plasticity, which
is defined as the ability for a body to remain in its deformed configuration after forces have been removed [3]. Most
materials can be observed to behave elastically up to some level of applied force, after which point the deformations
often become more plastic in nature. For this report all dynamics will be considered within the elastic limit of the
materials, therefore no plastic effects will be considered.
The Euler-Bernoulli Beam Equation, first proposed around 1750 [4], was one of the first studies made into the theory
of elastic beams. This equation is a partial differential equation in time and space, and shares similarities to the
wave equation, though it is of a higher order in space. One of the main assumptions used for this equation is that
the relationship between the strain applied to a body and the stress felt by that body is linear, and that this limits the
application of this theory to small levels of applied strain. The theory of elastic beams has been applied to a range of
different fields, such as engineering [5], climbing plants [6], Bacterial Fibers [7], polymers [8, 9], and extensively to the
modelling of DNA [10–15].
One area of interest within the theory of elastic structures is the area of bi-stability, a bi-stable elastic system is one in
which the system can attain two distinct stable configurations, with the system able to transition between these two states
with some applied force, and then able to maintain the alternate configuration after the force has been removed [16].
The onset of this transition and resulting dynamics are called the snap-through dynamics of the system. This concept
has been the focus of much research [17–19], with the engineering possibilities of such dynamics being of particular
interest [20–24], for example for creating morphable aircraft parts as discussed in section 2.1.2. Of particular interest in
this area is in predicting when the loss of stability occurs and what the resultant modes of deformation are [25]. This
is understandable since this allows for systems to be designed which can be tailored to change stability under certain
favorable conditions.
There are many examples in nature that take advantage of bi-stable systems, such as in carnivorous plants such as
the waterwheel and Venus Fly Trap [26]. Another example is the children’s toy known as the ”popper” which takes
advantage of a bi-stable rubber spherical Cap [27].
Research Project
This report will be structured as follows, section 2 will cover the applications of morphable structures within aircraft,
starting with the historical developments made in this area and then focusing more specifically on modern investigations
into the efficacy of bi-stable parts in aircraft. I will then move on to look more specifically at a particular bi-stable
system, the modelling of which is the primary aim of this report, and finishing the section with a statement of the
reasons why I believe this area requires more investigation. Section 3 will cover some of the basics of the theory of
elasticity and will serve primarily to introduce the material constants of importance to our analysis, and the particular
methods I will make use of, such as the energy method used later in the report. In section 4 I will propose the first
model I have used to analyse the proposed system, which is a reduced two-dimensional model, which I will then model
and try and find an expression for the total elastic energy, which is then used to investigate the potential bi-stability of
the system. After this, in section 5, I propose a more complicated three-dimensional model of the proposed system and
carry out similar analysis to try and obtain a closed form expression for the potential energy. Finally, I present some
concluding remarks and analysis in section 6, along with two appendices of constants used and a bibliography.
2 Applications
2.1 Morphing Parts for Aircraft
In this section I will review some of the historical and modern applications found for morphable systems within aircraft,
with particular emphasis in the modern developments section to the use of bi-stable parts in aircraft design.
2.1.1 Historical Uses of Morphing Parts

The application and feasibility of morphable systems to the design of aircraft has been of interest to aircraft designers
since practically the dawn of aviation, it can be seen that the Wright brothers use of differential twisting in the wings
of their aircraft with the aim of generating additional control forces [28], could be considered as an application of
morphing systems. Control surfaces such as ailerons and elevators have since been extensively used for providing
stability and control to aircraft, and now almost all aircraft are fitted with retractable landing gear systems in order to
reduce drag.
Figure 1: Different aircraft designed for different flight regimes, figure taken from [29]
Though these systems fit with a broad definition of a morphable system, in which morphing is simply defined as the
ability for an aircraft or aircraft part to change shape during flight, it can be seen that the main aim of these systems is
to aid control or improve aerodynamic performance. For this report, a more specific definition of a morphable system is
of interest. If instead the definition given in [30] is taken:
”Morphing may be broadly defined as the real-time in-flight adaptability of aircraft systems to
optimize and configure themselves to achieve maximum efficiency over a wide range of flight
regimes.”
Then it can be seen that more important than an aircraft part being able to change shape is the idea that this corresponding
change in shape ought to allow the aircraft to perform optimally in a different flight regime. The idea being that aircraft
which are optimised for different flight regimes would be able to complete different mission types and would therefore
reduce the need for different types of specialist aircraft. In [29] they give the example that a long endurance aircraft,
such as a Global Hawk, may have the necessary control surfaces to optimise its ability to loiter over a target for a long
time, but its systems are not sufficiently morphable to allow it to fly at high speeds like the X-45, examples of these
aircraft can be seen in figure 1, as can be seen in the figure the designs of these planes differ significantly.
Though morphable parts have application to a wide range of aircraft parts, such as the Concords moving fuselage, used
to improve landing visibility [31], or the V22 Ospreys morphable engine, used to change its thrust vectoring [32], the
2
Research Project
main focus of much current research in the area is on morphable wings for aircraft [33]. In particular there is interest in
whether morphable wings which are able to radically change there structures could eliminate the need for specialised
aircraft more usually required for specific flight regimes [34].
This is due to the reliance of aircraft flight capabilities on the shape and size of the wing they possess, figure 2 shows
some of the effects of changes in wing shape or configuration to the flight capabilities of the given aircraft. One of the
first attempts to make use of such systems for aircraft was by H. F. Parker of NASA in 1920, he made use of a variable
camber wing designed for bi-planes and tri-planes [35], and carried out wind tunnel testing to validate his designs. The
aim behind this design was to use a flexible wing to generate additional lift while the plane is landing or taking off. It
worked by using aerodynamic forces at low speeds and high angles of attack (i.e. the conditions during landing) to
cause the flexible section of the wing to deform upwards and share some of the weight of the aircraft.
Figure 2: Table given in [29] showing the effect of different wing geometry’s.
In the same report Parker discussed the benefits and drawbacks of using a changing wing surface area and angle-of-
incidence to reduce landing and take-off distance and increase flight speeds, this idea was later used in several morphing
designs. For example in 1937 in the USSR, G. I. Bakashaev designed a telescopic wing for an aircraft, consisting of six
cord-wise overlapping wing sections which were extended manually from the cockpit during take-off and landing [36].
Another good example of a morphable aircraft part is the so called ”swing wing”, also known as a variable sweep
wing [37]. This is considered the most successful and popular morphing design, this is because different sweep angles
are required for subsonic and supersonic speeds, and in addition to this decreasing wing sweep can be beneficial for
an aircraft in take-off and landing [38]. This concept was first developed in 1944 by the company Messerschmitt for
the P-1101, this aircraft was able to alter its wing sweep from 35◦ to 45◦ , though it never left the prototype stage. The
first aircraft with the ability to change wing sweep angle mid-flight was the X-5 built in 1952 by the Bell Aircraft
Company in the USA, this aircraft was able to change its sweep angle from 20◦ to 60◦ in 20 seconds, and successfully
demonstrated that increased performance can be achieved by changing wing sweep as the aircraft approaches the speed
of sound [39]. A computer rendition of the Messerschmitt P-1101 and the Bell X-5 can be seen in figure 5.
Though during the course of testing and development of this design the engineers realised that the change in centre of
gravity and pressure caused by the movement of the wings caused balance issues with the aircraft, this was remedied by
using a system to move the whole wing assembly during the sweep change in order to maintain a consistent centre.
This shows how morphable systems can introduce further design challenges, which may not be fully appreciated before
development.
2.1.2 Modern Examples of Morphing Systems: Bi-Stability

As has been discussed, morphable parts for aircraft have been an area of interest to researchers for some time, at
least since the early twentieth century. Another more recent area of interest is the application of bi-stable parts to
aircraft design [40]. A bi-stable part is simply a morphable part which has the ability to attain two different stable
3
Research Project
Figure 3: Public Domain artists rendition of the

Messerscmitt P1101 Figure 4: Picture of the Bell X-5 taken from
https://www.nasa.gov/centers/armstrong/news/FactSheets/FS-
081-DFRC.html
Figure 5: Images of the Messerschmitt P1101 and Bell Aircrafts X-5.
configurations [41]. This is of interest to aircraft designers since this offers them the ability to switch the configuration
of a part using only properties of its geometry and materials, usually with a low energetic cost. The dynamics of the
transition between the stable states of a bi-stable system is called the snap-through dynamics.
In the paper [42] the authors investigate a cosine arch profile, both as an individual morphable part and as part of an
integrated lattice. The aim of this design was a system which could be used to extend the cord of the wing section,
the effect of this being to increase the lift of the wing [43]. The authors first used the software ANSYS, which is a
finite element simulation software, to analyse the snap through dynamics of the arch system they had proposed. Then
the authors constructed a test model of the arch system and carried out experimental investigations, these were found
to have a high level of agreement with the numerical simulations. Then the authors carried out an analysis into the
effect of the system parameters, such as the arch height and arch thickness, and investigated there effects on the snap
through dynamics. From this analysis they were able to determine conditions on the force required to initiate the change
between the different stable configurations of the system.
Investigations have also been made into the effect of changing the twist of an aerofoil, for example in [44]. The twist
of an aerofoil can effect its aerodynamic efficiency at different angles of attack [45]. In [44] the authors proposed a
structure made out of two rectangular-planform convex shells, with the convex surfaces facing away from each other.
Two of these were then constructed, one out of steel shells, and another from bi-stable graphite/epoxy shells. The
authors then carried out experiments on the different stable twist configurations of the system, these results were then
compared with a numerical model using ABAQUS, which used a dynamic explicit-integration to solve the equations
of motion for the system. These methods were then compared and found to have high levels of agreement, this was
then used to carry out a parametric study to investigate the effects of different system parameters on the nature of the
bi-stability of the system.
In the paper [46] the authors investigate the applicability of a bi-stable part in the blades of a helicopter, the authors
first propose a theoretical design for a bi-stable trailing edge flap. This is designed to alternate between two different
states, one optimised for hovering and another for forwards motion. Another challenge considered by the authors of this
paper is the design and location of the actuator, which would be the device which facilitates the change in states of the
bi-stable part, with particular attention paid to how to fit this device within the existing blade shape. The authors then
designed and produced a prototype of such a device and carried out wind tunnel testing upon it. It was found that this
device increased the effectiveness of the blade in producing lift, when integrated into the helicopters blade. However the
effect of the added weight and complexity introduced by the implementation of this system would have to be considered
by engineers wishing to take advantage of such a system. A similar investigation was made in [47] in which the authors
used a novel optimisation technique to investigate the effect of thermally induced bi-stability to the system.
One other bi-stable system was investigated in the paper [48] , in which the authors propose a concept for a morphable
air-inlet structure which had two stable configurations. One of which was an ’open’ configuration consistent with a
typical air-inlet, which works to capture and decelerate air before it is passed to the compressor section of the aircraft’s
engine [49], and a ’closed’ configuration which conforms to the aerodynamic optimum for the hull of the aircraft. The
idea of this system is that an actuator could change the inlet between closed and open when extra air was needed by
4
Research Project
the compressor and vice versa. In order to carry out there analysis the authors used an analytic model to describe the
different shapes of the air inlet and then used this to form an expression for the total potential energy of the system.
They follow this up with a finite element investigation using ABAQUS. They then construct a physical model of the
proposed system and test there analytic and numerical results against the force needed for there physical model. These
separate models were found to have a high level of agreement, though it was found that the snap through loads needed
for the physical model were lower than those required by the numerical model.
It can be seen from the breadth and diversity of these papers that the area of bi-stable parts for aircraft is an active field
of investigation. With the opportunity to apply these ideas and techniques to a wide range of different aircraft parts and
systems. Some of the designs discussed in this section can be seen in figure 10.
Figure 6: Bi-stable Arch to effect the chord of a wing, Figure 7: Bi-Stable Aerofoil designed to change twist
figure taken from [42] angle, figure taken from [44]
Figure 9: Bi-Stable Air-inlet to improve aerodynamic

efficiency, figure taken from [48]
Figure 8: Bi-Stable Aerofoil for a helicopter blade,
figure taken from [46]
Figure 10: A range of different bi-stable parts proposed for aircraft.
2.2 ”Experimental Investigation of Bi-Stable Winglets to Enhance Take-Off Capacity”
Of particular importance to this Report is a paper by A. Gatto, F. Mattioni, and M. I. Friswell, entitled ”Experimental
Investigation of bi-stable Winglets to Enhance Take-Off Capacity” [30]. This paper investigates, both through numerical
and experimental means, the feasibility of a bi-stable winglet, which has the ability to change configurations depending
of the requirements of the aircraft at the time, this configuration is displayed in fig. 11.
The paper begins by outlining some current investigations and applications of morphable systems for aircraft, the paper
then goes on to outline some of the different flight regimes required by modern aircraft, specifically mentioning loiter
and take-off requirements. This is important for our considerations since to efficiently loiter in level flight an aircraft
requires a swept winglet to eliminate vorticies and reduce lift induced drag [50]. However during take-off maximum
lift is required, this is because this is normally the time during operation when a plane is at its greatest weight, since
it is usually before it has used up any of its fuel. This necessitates larger runways, particularly for large commercial
aircraft [51]. This generally requires systems on the aircraft to increase lift, usually in the form of devices to increase
the camber of the wing [52]. However as the paper points out these systems can be bulky and heavy, sometimes adding
6-10% to the weight of the wing [53].
The authors then discuss how bi-stability will be introduced into the proposed system, and they decide to introduce
thermal stresses into the layup as discussed in [54]. They also specifically draw attention to the fact that one benefit of
bi-stable parts is that the load required to change the shape of the system is only required momentarily to initiate the
change in configuration.
The authors then used the non-linear finite element package ABAQUS [55] to simulate the desired system. Two
stages were simulated, using 336 double curvature shell elements. The first stage in the numerical investigation was
5
Research Project
Figure 11: Theoretical Wing Shape Proposed in [30]
Figure 12: Different fibre orientaions proposed in ref. [30]
to simulate the effect of the thermal stresses placed on the lamina during the manufacturing process, this was done
by linearly increasing the temperature of the model by 2-5◦ C per min, up to 170◦ C increase from room temperature.
This temperature was then naturally allowed to dissipate back down to room temperature. The second step of the
investigation was then to apply a concentrated force acting upwards on the midpoint of the wingtip to simulate wind
tunnel conditions on the system.
The authors used here a clamped condition on the root section of the system to simulate how the experiments would be
carried out in a wind tunnel, throughout this paper I will be making use of the same boundary conditions for the parts
of our proposed systems which would theoretically be attached to the wing. Though in reality for a full system this
boundary condition would be expressed as a continuity condition between the winglet and the main wing body, with
additional aerodynamic conditions on the wing considered. However, since the paper in question is more concerned
with just the winglet design and dynamics it chooses to ignore such considerations, and for the rest of this report I will
to.
In order to asses different parameters for their proposed system the authors first selected the design criteria that they
wished there system to satisfy. These conditions were reduced to three main concerns for the authors:
1. In the unsnapped configuration the shape of the winglet should be such so as to provide a measurable increase
in lift generated.
2. The magnitude of the load required for snap through should be achievable within the experimental apparatus
used.
3. When in the snapped configuration the winglet geometry should resemble a standard winglet design, with
corresponding aerodynamic benefits.
With these requirements in hand the authors then considered a range of manufacturing parameters. The first consideration
was on the number of lamina layers used in the layup, layups consisting of 2, 4, 8, and 12 lamina’s were considered
and tested using the numerical procedure described above. It was found by the authors that a layup consisting of 8
layers satisfied their requirements the best. Another manufacturing consideration for the authors was the direction of
the fibers within the layup. Three different possibilities were proposed for the fiber orientation: one with fibres parallel
and perpendicular to the leading edge, one with fibers parallel and perpendicular to the line bisecting the midpoints
of the root tip and cord, and one with fibers parallel to the line of intersection between the two layup sections. These
different systems are shown in fig. 12, taken from figure 2 in [30].
The three different fibre alignments were then assessed according to these requirements, and one was selected which
best satisfied these criteria, for the authors this was the second of the three proposed fibre orientations. This design was
then manufactured so that the authors could carry out wing tunnel testing upon it to validate the numerical model. After
manufacturing the design simulated using ABAQUS the authors found that the snapped and un-snapped configurations
6
Research Project
for the winglet differed slightly from those predicted by the numerical model. The authors admit that total agreement
between the simulated and actual states for the winglet would be extremely difficult in practice, with many factors
effecting the final manufactured design, including imperfect tooling, small levels of fibre misalignment, and the general
effect of outside influences, such as temperature gradients and moisture levels.
After carrying out a series of numerical and practical experiments the authors conclude that though the concept of a
winglet with two stable configurations is viable, the dynamic load induced during the snap through of the part would
pose a significant operating risk. As the authors point out a pilot having to correct a sudden nose pitch-up moment
shortly after take off would pose an unacceptable risk to passenger’s and aircraft. The imperative therefore is for the
process of the snap through dynamics to be better understood in order for new systems to be developed which would be
able to control the snap through process.
2.3 Impetus to Investors
As has been discussed in the previous two sections, the applicability of morphable systems to improved aircraft design
has been known and understood for some time and recently there has been an interest in how morphable parts can be
used to increase the range of operating modes of modern aircraft. As the paper discussed in the previous section makes
clear, a morphable winglet consisting of two stable modes, one optimised for a take-off regime and one optimised for
high efficiency loitering, would help a single aircraft satisfy multiple different mission objectives.
For example, a typical aircraft carrier has only around 4.5 acres of space on deck on which to carry out take-off, landing,
and support capabilities [56]. Added to this is the need for military aircraft to carry out long-term observation mission,
requiring high efficiency loitering aircraft [57]. These two requirements taken together require an aircraft which is
optimised both for high lift at take-off, allowing for smaller runways and therefore for larger craft to take off from the
same sized runway, and high loitering efficiency, allowing for longer loiter periods between refuelling.
Though, as discussed in section 2.1.2, much work has been done on the experimental side of bi-stable parts for aircraft,
the analytical side of such systems has not seen as much development. Such insight would be useful as it would allow
more direct optimisation of the system parameters to the type and nature of the different modes of stability for the
system. For this reason the analysis in this paper has been carried out, with the hope that a greater analytic understanding
of the different configurations an elastic systems can achieve, and a better understanding of the loads required together
with the snap through dynamics generally. In the hope that new designs can be proposed for morphable winglets, along
with better control systems to allow for their safe and managed implementation for aircraft
3 Mathematical Theory: Beam Equations
This section will lay out some of the theory’s of solid mechanics that will be useful in the following sections. First
discussing some classic ideas and methods in solid mechanics, beginning with a discussion of Hookes Law and an
introduction to the most important material parameters for the problem. Then moving on to discuss how energetic
approaches can be used to analyse physical systems, and show how these methods can obtain equivalent results under
identical assumptions.
3.1 Classical Beam Theory
The classical theory of solid mechanics, particularly in relation to Beam Theory, in general makes use of displacement
control to derive the equilibrium equations for the system being analysed. This is the process of using variable
displacements to describe the strain placed on the elastic body in the described configuration. Constitutive relations are
then used to relate these strains to the stresses felt by the system, these can then be balanced with any forces on the
system to derive equilibrium equations which can then (hopefully) be solved to determine the exact form of the variable
displacements.
The first step, therefore, when wishing to analyse such a system is to assign variables to the space you wish to analyse,
i.e. the position in space of the point of interest. These act as the independent variables for the system, and for much of
this report I will be using the Cartesian coordinate system (x, y, z). Though note that in section 4 I will instead take as
our independent variable the angle along the arch θ. Secondly, the dependent variables, i.e. the displacements of the
system, must be assigned, again the convention for the Cartesian coordinate system is to denote the displacements by
(u, v, w), and this in general is the notation used herein.
The next step in this process is to find the relationship between the displacements and the strains these displacements
place on the system, the most common form of these is the theory of linear elasticity. In this formulation the strain is
7
Research Project
assumed to be linearly related to the partial derivatives of the displacements. Therefore if the strains are denoted by ϵ
the relationship between the displacements and the strains is given, in Cartesian coordinates, by:
∂u ∂v ∂w
ϵx = , ϵy = , ϵz = (1)
∂x ∂y ∂z

1 ∂u ∂v 1 ∂u ∂w 1 ∂v ∂w
ϵxy = + , ϵxz = + , ϵyz = + (2)
2 ∂y ∂x 2 ∂z ∂x 2 ∂z ∂y
note that currently there are no conditions on which of the independent variables the dependent variables depend, i.e. it
is not known whether u is a function of x, y, z, or some combination of these. It will later be seen that assumptions can
be made about the nature of the beam which will allow us to reduce the dependence of the displacements. Another
point to note here is that in assuming a linear relationship between displacement and strain, as has been done above, this
theory will only apply to small strain regimes. A more complex relations between displacement and stress can be used
to expand the domain of definition for a given model.
The next step in this process then is to find a relationship between the strain applied to a body and the stress felt by that
body, which will be denoted by σ. These relationships are usually characterised by two material constants, the Young’s
Modulus E, and the Poissons Ratio ν, which will be discussed in the following section.
Once a representation of the stresses felt by the body can be found, these can be balanced with any forces being applied
to the system, this then defines an equation to solve for the stresses which can then be worked backwards through the
constitutive relation to define the strains which can then be used to solve for the displacements.
3.1.1 Hookes Law

The beginnings of the theory of elasticity are in De Potentia restitutiva [58] written by Robert Hooke in 1678, in this
work he proposed a linear relationship between the force applied to a spring and the change in length observed in the
spring. This relationship, known as Hookes Law [59], assumes a linear relationship between T , the tensile force applied
to the spring, and the change in length of the spring, L − l. Where L is the springs natural length and l is the new
deformed length. This equation can therefore be given by:
T = k(L − l) (3)
where k is a constant that changes depending on the material in question. In reality this equation simply represent a first
order Taylor approximation to the true non-linear relationship between the forces applied and the change in length,
however this linear approximation has been used effectively for many problems in solid mechanics. If this equation is
restated in the context of a rod with constant cross sectional area A it can be found that:

T kl L − l L−l
= =E (4)
A A l L
where the new material constant E has been introduced, which is called the Young’s Modulus. Under this formulation
the far RHS of the above equation, the change in length of the bar with respect to its current length, is equivalent to the
strain applied to the body. With the far LHS, which is the force applied per unit area, being equivalent to the strain felt
within the rod. Therefore this equation implies that for a solid rod of constant cross section and Young’s modulus the
following is true:
σ = Eϵ (5)
This again is a linear relationship which simplifies the calculations required to solve for the strains in a system.
Another constant of interest is found by considering a circular rod with radius R. If the rod is again stretched from a
unperturbed length L to a new length l then the change in radius of the rod is given by:

r−R l−L
= −ν (6)
R L
8
Research Project
where ν is another constant called the Poisson’s Ratio, which is usually constant for a given material [60]. This constant
is a measure of the Poisson effect, which is the deformation of a material in the plane perpendicular to the direction of
the applied load [61]. Both the Young’s Modulus and the Poisson’s Ratio are physical quantities which have been found
experimentally for a large range of materials and as such are the standard material properties used for the analysis of
elastic systems [62].
3.1.2 Dimensional Form

In order to gain some physical insight into the problems under analysis, the dimensional form of the quantities involved
must be considered. In this section, and indeed for this whole report, a spatial dimension will be denoted using L, i.e. a
length (cm), a mass dimension using M , i.e. a weight (kg), and a temporal dimension using T , i.e. time (seconds).
The most basic quantities for the system will be the independent variables, these will be spatial quantities for the
problems in this report and therefore will be measured using some spatial measure, such as centimeters, and so they
will have dimension L. The same is true for the dependent variables which will also represent spatial quantities. The
strains are defined as derivatives of the displacements in space, see for example eq. (1), this implies that strains are
inherently dimensionless quantities, this can also be seen in eq. (4) where the far RHS fraction is a length divided by a
length and therefore has no dimension.
It can be seen in eq. (4) that the far LHS is a force divided by an area, a force in SI units, see for example Table 1.1
in [63], is measured in Newtons (N), which has dimensional form M LT −2 . And so from this it can be deduced that
the Young’s Modulus must have dimension M L−1 T −2 . Indeed from eq. (5) it can be seen that the Young’s modulus
must have the same dimension as stress since the strain is dimensionless, and so stress must have dimensional form
M L−1 T −2 .
The final quantity of interest in the analysis for this report is the energy of the system of interest, as is discussed in the
following section this report will be making use of energy methods in its analysis. The SI unit for energy is the Joule,
again see [63], this has dimension of force along a length, given in dimensional form by M L2 T −2 . From this it can be
noticed that the dimension of the energy is equivalent to the Young’s modulus multiplied by an area, this relationship
will be important later when non-dimensionalising.
The process of non-dimensionalisation is an important one in the area of solid mechanics, as will later be seen, removing
the dimensions of a problem allows for the reduction of the numerous material and geometric constants of a problem
to a smaller number of dimensionless ratios. From this the important relationships within a system which govern its
dynamics can be found. It also allows the simplification of the equations which need to be solved for the dimensionless
variables.
3.1.3 Euler Bernoulli Beam Theory

Euler Bernoulli Beam Theory, also known as classical beam theory, was a theory proposed around 1750 to describe the
equations governing the deformation of a solid beam [4]. A beam is defined as a solid structure in which one of its axis
is far greater than the other two, in this report this longer dimension will be defined as the beams length and will be
assumed to lie parallel to the x axis of the coordinate system. Many engineered structures can be modelled loosely as a
collection of different beams.
The Euler Bernoulli Beam Theory is based on three assumptions relating to the cross section of the beam under the
deformations applied to it, these three assumptions are given by [64]:
1. The cross-section is infinitely rigid in its own plane.

2. The cross-section of the beam remains plane after deformation.
3. The cross-section remains normal to the deformed axis of the beam.
These assumptions have been found through experiments to be valid for long thin beams of solid cross section made of
an isotropic material. In addition to these assumptions it will further be assumed that the cross section of the beam is
constant along its length [65], i.e. has constant area which will be denoted with A, and that the Young’s modulus is
constant along the length of the beam.
3.1.4 Beam Loading Example: Classical Approach

A classical example of a beam with a distributed transverse load will now be considered. where the proposed beam is of
length L, height h, and width b, where the independent variables are defined such that:
9
Research Project
p(x)
z w
y x u
v
L
Figure 13: A Beam subject to transverse loads
x ∈ [0, L], y ∈ [−b/2, b/2], and z ∈ [−h/2, h/2] (7)
also considered is a distributed transverse load, defined by p(x), where the load acts in the z direction, this system is
shown in Figure 13. The assumption that transverse loads only cause transverse displacements, i.e. displacements in the
w direction, and curvature in the long axis, will also be made, this gives a displacement field for this problem given by,
see [66]:
dw(x)
u(x, y, z) = −z (8)
dx
v(x, y, z) = 0 (9)
w(x, y, z) = w(x) (10)
The strain displacement relations from eq. (1) can then be used to find that the only non-zero stress component is the
one in the x direction, which is given by:
∂u d2 w(x)
ϵx (x, y, z) = = −z (11)
∂x dx2
note that since the function w depends only on x the partial derivative can be converted to a ordinary derivative. It is
interesting to note that the derivative given on the RHS of this equation is the sectional curvature about the y axis. If the
assumption of a linear relationship between the stress and strain is now used, from eq. (4) it can be seen that the stress
along the x axis must be given by:
d2 w(x)
σx = Eϵx = −Ez (12)
dx2
Now the axial force at each point along the beam can be considered, this is given by the integral of the strain over an
area, recall from the previous section that taking a strain over an area results in a force. And so the axial force at each
point x, is given by:
Z 2b Z h2 (Z b Z h )
d2 w(x)
Z 2 2
N (x) = σx dA = σx dzdy = −E zdzdy (13)
A − 2b − h
2 − 2b − h2
dx2
clearly it can be seen that this is identically zero due to the linear dependence of the stress on the z coordinate, this
implies that purely transverse forces do not cause axial forces within the beam. Now the moments felt along the beam
as the load is applied can be considered, the moment displacement relationships for a beam is given by, again see [66]:
d2 w(x) d2 w(x)
Z Z
M (x) = − zσx dA = E z 2 dA = EIx (14)
A A dx2 dx2
where Ix is a geometric quantity known as the second area moment of the section, for the system under analysis here it
can be seen that Ix = bh3 /12. This equation gives a relation between the displacements and bending moment felt by
the beam.
10
Research Project
dM
M+ dx dx
M
z V p(x)dx
y x
dV
V + dx dx
dx
Figure 14: Forces on infinitesimal slice of a beam
The final force of interest is the transverse shear force felt by the beam, which will be denoted by V (x), in order to
balance these forces and therefore find a governing equation an infinitesimal slice of the beam of length dx will be
considered. This is shown in fig 14, it can be seen from this figure that balancing the vertical forces gives us the
relationship:
dV
= −p(x) (15)
dx
And then by balancing the bending moments for this section and taking the limit as dx → 0 it can be found that the
relationship between the bending moment and the shear force is given by:
dM
= −V (x) (16)
dx
then by differentiating this expression and using the previous identity for the shear force it can be found that the bending
moment is related to the applied load via the expression:
d2 M
= p(x) (17)
dx2
or given in terms of the displacements as:
d4 w(x)
EIx = p(x) (18)
dx4
since the form of the applied load p is assumed to have been given, this problem is reduced to one of finding the solution
to a fourth order ordinary differential equation. In order to solve this system exactly four boundary conditions are
required. Some typical boundary conditions are:
1. Clamped or Fixed ends which allow no transverse displacement or rotation of the section, which means that at
the clamped end:
dw
w = 0, =0
dx
2. A simply supported, or pinned end also requires zero transverse displacement, but can have arbitrary slope.
However the pin cannot support a bending moment implying a second boundary condition: M = 0. This
implies that at the simply supported end:
d2 w
w = 0, =0
dx2
11
Research Project
3. Free or Unloaded ends, this means that both the bending moment and the shear force must vanish at the given
end, which is expressed mathematically as:
d2 w d3 w
= 0, EIx =0
dx2 dx3
4. If the end of the beam is subject to some concentrated transverse load P , then the boundary condition is that
the bending moment must vanish but the shear force must be equal to the applied load which implies that at
the loaded end:
d2 w d3 w
2
= 0, EIx 3 = P2
dx dx
This section therefore illustrates the standard techniques used to find the governing equations for the displacements of
a physical system, which are to find the relation between the displacements and the forces on the beam, and then to
balance these forces.
3.2 Energy Methods
Another method for determining the deformation of a physical system is an energy approach, this is similar to the
previously discussed method in that the first step is to find the relationship between the displacements, the strains, and
the stresses. However this method then uses these relations to form an expression for the total energy of the system and
then uses this to deduce properties of the system and its deformations.
This technique is of more interest to this report since alternate stable configurations for a given physical system are
being looked for. These can be expressed as minimas of the total energy of the system as these are configurations that
are stable up to small perturbations of the system [67]. Therefore it is beneficial to us to have expressions for the energy
of our system related to the perturbed configurations of our system.
For a general elastic system the full potential energy of the system can be defined as:
Z Z Z
Ue = W dV − Ti ui dST − Fi ui dV (19)
V ST V
where W is the strain energy density function, V is the volume of the system, Ti is the ith component of the surface
traction, ui is the ith component of the displacement, Fi is the ith component of the body force, and ST is the part
of the surface the surface traction is applied to. Note that Einstein summation convention is being used here, which
implies a sum over the three components of T and u, this convention will be used throughout this report whether Latin
indices are used.
The first term on the RHS is the most important and will be dealt with shortly, the second term describes surface forces
on the system, in the situations of interest to this report this normally means loads applied to the system. The final term
will not be analysed within this report but represents forces which act on the whole system, for example gravitational or
magnetic forces.
The energy principle which will be used in this and later sections of this report is called The Theorem of Minimum
Potential Energy, which can be stated, as in [68] as:
“Of all the displacements satisfying compatibility and the prescribed boundary conditions, those that
satisfy the equilibrium equations make the potential energy a minimum.”
This can be described using notation from The Calculus of Variations as:
δUe = 0 (20)
where the δ is a mathematical operator known as a variation. The strain energy density function W can be defined in
Cartesian coordinates as:
1
W = σij ϵij (21)
2
where the indices i and j take on the values x, y, z. Therefore in order to use this method the same techniques as in the
previous section must be used, in order to find the relationship between the displacements, strains, and stresses.
12
Research Project
3.2.1 Beam Loading Example: Energy Approach

If the analysis from the previous section is now repeated using the method described above the differences in approaches
can be observed. the same displacement field can be used and also the same strain-displacement and stress-strain
relations, this gives the form of the strain energy density function for the system as:
2
d2 w

1
W = E z2 (22)
2 dx2
and the surface traction term will be given by the expression:
Ti ui = q(x)w(x) (23)
Therefore the full form of the potential energy is given by:
2
d2 w
Z Z
1
Ue = E z 2 dV + q(x)w(x)dST (24)
V 2 dx2 ST
where the surface along which the traction is being applied is the x axis from 0 to L. now if the integral of the strain
energy density is computed, and the constant Ix from earlier is used it can be seen that:
L 2
d2 w
Z
EIx
Ue = − q(x)w(x)dx (25)
0 2 dx2
the variation of this equation can now be taken and set it to zero, doing this gives:
L 2
d2 w
Z
EIx
δUe = δ − q(x)δw(x)dx (26)
0 2 dx2
where since the function q(x) is assumed to be specified in the problem formulation it is not effected by the variational
operator. If just the first term of the resultant integral is considered and integrate by parts after applying the variational
operator it can be seen that:
L 2 L
d2 w d2 w d2 (δw)
Z Z
EIx
δ dx = EIx dx (27)
2 0 dx2 0 dx
2 dx2
L L Z L 4
d2 w d(δw) d3 w

d w
= EIx 2 − EIx 3 δw + EIx 4
δwdx (28)
dx dx 0 dx 0 0 dx
The end goal of this procedure is to have an expression for the potential energy which is an integral with an integrand
whose only virtual parameter is δw. If this integral is then combined with the term describing the effect of the load q it
can be seen that:
L L L
d4 w d2 w d(δw) d3 w
Z
EIx − q(x) δwdx + EIx − EIx δw =0 (29)
0 dx4 dx2 dx 0 dx3 0
In order for this to be true it must be that:
d4 w
EIx = p(x) (30)
dx4
which is the same as the equation derived using the classical approach, this is to be expected since the same assumptions
were used for the energy approach as for the classical approach. The power of the energy approach however comes
when analysing more complex shapes of elastic structures for which different, often non-linear, strain-displacement
relations must be assumed.
13
Research Project
4 Two dimensional arch model

In order to begin the analysis of the proposed bi-stable winglet a reduced two dimensional arch system is considered,
where the model is meant to represent a slice of the morphable section of the wing given in fig 11, taken along the long
axis of the wing. In such a system it is natural to use polar coordinates, which will be denoted (r, θ). This allows the
perturbations to the arch to be described using two dependent coordinates, denoted here as v and w for the radial and
axial displacements respectively. And one dependent coordinate to describe the position along the arch, denoted here as
θ, measured in radians.
The dependence of the displacements on only one variable means that the resultant equations of motion will have the
form of ordinary differential equations, rather than partial differential equations which will be dealt with in section 5.
The proposed arch structure is circular and spans the angles between ±Θ,
R with radius given by R. The area of our arches
cross section will be denoted as A, which will be defined as A = A dA, the young’s modulus will R also be denoted
using E as before, and the second area moment of the section as Ix , which is defined here as: Ix = A (R − r)2 dA. In
addition to this the following four assumptions will be made:
1. The cross section remains plane and perpendicular to the arch axis during oscillation and deformation.
2. The arch has uniform cross section, Young’s Modulus, and second moment of inertia.
3. The lateral and torsional torsional deformation of the arch are fully prevented.
4. The dimension of the cross section are much smaller than the length and radius of the arch.
w(r, θ)
v(r, θ)
R r
0
Figure 15: Arch with single pinned end at θ = −Θ
With these assumptions being roughly equivalent to those made for the beam in section 3.1.3, an equation defining the
potential energy of the arch will then be derived from these and other assumptions in order to investigate the stability of
such an arch system.
4.1 Non-Dimensionalisation
The first variables which needs to be made dimensionless are the radial and axial displacements, to do this they will
both be divided by the radius of the arch R, this gives the new variables:
v(θ) w(θ)
ṽ(θ) = , and w̃(θ) = (31)
R R
Along with these later both the energy of the system and the applied force will need to be non-dimensionalised,
energy has dimension M L2 T −2 and force has dimension M LT −2 . Recall that the Young’s modulus has dimension
14
Research Project
M L−1 T −2 , it will later be found that the non-dimensionalisation given by:
Ue F
Uee = , and Fe = (32)
EAR AE
is needed.
4.2 Model Formulation
In order to describe the system an expression for the energy of our system under different perturbations is needed, since
only the static analysis of our system is of interest the contribution from the kinetic energy can be ignored. This leaves
only the potential energy, this can be expressed in terms of the membrane and bending strains of our system, multiplied
by the Young’s Modulus and integrated over the total volume of our system.
where the expressions for the bending and membrane strain for a circular arch used by Levitas et al [69] will be used
here, these are given as:
ṽ ′2 r − R ′′
ϵm = w̃′ − ṽ + , and ϵb = ṽ (33)
2 R
where r is the coordinate of the point in the arches cross section, and the prime indicates differentiation with respect to
the angular coordinate θ. From these the potential energy of the system can be expressed as:
Z Z Θ Z
1 1
Ue = E(ϵ2m + ϵ2b )dV = ER (ϵ2m + ϵ2b )dAdθ (34)
2 V 2 −Θ A
Where it has already been assumed that ṽ and w̃ do not change over the cross sectional area of the arch, therefore the
integral over A does not affect the membrane strain and just introduces a prefactor A.
For the bending strain however there is an explicit dependence on the radial coordinate r, this means that as this is
integrated over the arches cross section the parameter described in section 3.1.4, namely the second moment of the area,
denoted Ix , appears. This means that the potential energy can be given by:
Θ 2
ṽ ′2
Z
1 EIx ′′2
Ue = ERA w̃′ − ṽ + + ṽ dθ (35)
2 −Θ 2 R
The non-dimensionalisation discussed in the previous section can now be used to find the dimensionless form of the
potential energy:
Θ 2
ṽ ′2
Z
1 ′ 1 ′′2
Uee = w̃ − ṽ + + ṽ dθ (36)
2 −Θ 2 λ2
Where a new dimensionless ratio has been introduced as λ, this ratio is given by:
AR2
λ2 = (37)
Ix
The theorem of minimum potential energy, from section 3.2, can now be applied to this to give us:
( Z )
Θ ′2 2

1 ′ ṽ 1 ′′2
δ Uee = δ w̃ − ṽ + + 2 ṽ dθ = 0 (38)
2 −Θ 2 λ
If the variation is taken inside the integrals the system deformations can be found to satisfy the equation:
Θ
ṽ ′2
Z
1
w̃′ − ṽ + (δ w̃′ − δṽ + ṽ ′ δṽ ′ ) + 2 ṽ ′′ δṽ ′′ dθ = 0 (39)
−Θ 2 λ
15
Research Project
This equation must be integrated into a form from which the equations of motion can be extracted, the aim here is to
collect together terms which depend on the virtual displacements δṽ and δ w̃ rather than their derivatives.
Since the virtual displacements are by definition arbitrary they can be assigned any value consistent with the constraints
of the system and so conditions for the actual displacements ṽ and w̃can be derived. In order to derive these conditions
the integrals must be separated and integrated by parts to extract terms with a dependence on the virtual displacements
only:
Θ Θ Z Θ ′
ṽ ′2 ṽ ′2 ṽ ′2
Z
′ ′ ′ ′
w̃ − ṽ + δ w̃ dθ = w̃ − ṽ + δ w̃ − w̃ − ṽ + δ w̃dθ (40)
−Θ 2 2 −Θ −Θ 2
Z Θ Θ Z Θ ′
ṽ ′2 ṽ ′2 ṽ ′2

′ ′ ′ ′ ′ ′
w̃ − ṽ + ṽ δṽ dθ = w̃ − ṽ + ṽ δṽ − w̃ − ṽ + ṽ ′ δṽdθ (41)
−Θ 2 2 −Θ −Θ 2
Z Θ Z Θ
Θ
ṽ ′′ δṽ ′′ dθ = [ṽ ′′ δṽ ′ − ṽ ′′′ δṽ]−Θ + ṽ iv δṽdθ (42)
−Θ −Θ
These results can then be inserted into eq. (39), which gives the full condition on the real and virtual displacements as:
Z Θ
" ′2
′ ′2
# "
′2 ′
#
1 iv ṽ ṽ ṽ
2
ṽ − w̃′ − ṽ + ṽ ′ − w̃′ − ṽ + δṽ + w̃′ − ṽ + δ w̃dθ
−Θ λ 2 2 2
Θ
ṽ ′2 ṽ ′2

+ w̃′ − ṽ + ṽ ′ − ṽ ′′′ δṽ + ṽ ′′ δṽ ′ + w̃′ − ṽ + δ w̃ =0 (43)
2 2 −Θ
From this the conditions for the displacements can be derived, since the virtual displacements can take on any value the
prefactors of the virtual displacements in the first line in eq. (43) must be equal to zero across the whole length of the
arch. This gives a system of two coupled ODEs for the displacements, these are given in dimensionless form by:
′
ṽ ′2

′
w̃ − ṽ + =0 (44)
2
′
ṽ ′2 ṽ ′2

ṽ iv − λ2 w̃′ − ṽ + ṽ ′ − λ2 w̃′ − ṽ + =0 (45)
2 2
From these equations it can be seen that the term in brackets in the first equation must be a constant, which will be
denoted by N
e0 , and is given by:
′2

e0 = −ϵm = − w̃′ − ṽ + ṽ
N (46)
2
This corresponds to the dimensionless axial compressive force felt by the arch, as in [70] . Therefore the system given
in eq. (44) has been reduced to the following system:
ṽ ′2
w̃′ − ṽ + −N
e0 = 0 (47)
2
e0 ṽ ′′ + λ2 N
ṽ iv + λ2 N e0 = 0 (48)
This therefore is a single fourth order differential equation for the radial displacements which can be solved and then
used to solve the corresponding first order differential equation for the axial displacements. In order to obtain a solution
16
Research Project
for these equations conditions are required for the boundaries of our system, which are discussed in the following
section.
4.3 Boundary Conditions
The system under consideration in this report has two boundaries, given when the angle θ = ±Θ in the plane. The
physical application for this system is for a winglet for an aircraft, thinking heuristically this implies that one end
of the arch would be attached to the end of the aircraft wing while the other end would be free to move within the
plane. Taking first the side attached to the wing, which will be defined to be the end located at −Θ, without loss of
generality. The arch will be assigned fixed boundary conditions at this point. As discussed briefly in section 2.2 a
more sophisticated model of the aircraft’s wing would model the section of the wing to which the winglet is attached
and would be based on the continuity of the displacements and their derivatives at this point, but these effects are not
considered within the scope of this work. These conditions can be defined mathematically as:
ṽ(−Θ) = ṽ ′ (−Θ) = w̃(−Θ) = 0 (49)
The other end of the arch is defined as free to move within the plane, the standard condition for a free edge in a physical
system is that it cannot sustain a bending moment at that point, this implies that the second derivative of the radial
displacement must be zero, i.e. ṽ ′′ (Θ) = 0. Then in order to model the effect of the aerodynamic forces acting upon the
proposed winglet a point force acting only at the point given by θ = Θ is considered.
ṽ ′′′ (Θ) = λ2 F̃

1.
Ñ (Θ) =0
ṽ(−Θ) = ṽ ′ (−Θ) = w̃(−Θ) = 0

ṽ ′′′ (Θ) = λ2 F̃ sin α

3.
Ñ (Θ) = F̃ cos α
α
ṽ ′′ (Θ) = 0
ṽ ′′′ (Θ)

=0
2.
Ñ (Θ) = F̃
Figure 16: examples of different boundary conditions for our system
This is inspired by the experimental analysis carried out in Gatto et al [30], in which they first investigate the effect of a
point force on the constructed elastic winglet and then move on to dynamic tests using aerodynamic forces. An analysis
of such effects is not presented in this work but could be investigated with the addition of a forcing function on the RHS
of eq. (47) describing the aerodynamic forces on the winglet. This would then need to be analysed using a method such
as Greens Functions, but this was deemed to be beyond the scope of this work.
For the analysis presented in the next section the application of a dimensionless point force given by Fe will be analysed,
the application of this force is separated into three possible cases, dependent on the direction the force is applied in,
these are:
1. The force acts purely in the radial direction.
2. The force acts purely in the axial direction.
3. The force acts at an angle α between the axial and radial directions.
These are shown in fig 16, where the prefactor λ2 appears due to the process used to non-dimensionalise the force.
These six boundary conditions taken together give a sufficient number of conditions to solve the system given in eq.
(47) in a closed form.
4.4 Results
In this section the solutions to the equations described in section 4.2 are presented according to the boundary conditions
laid out in section 4.3. The process for the three different cases was largely similar, all three involved first redefining the
17
Research Project
fourth order ODE for the radial displacement given in eq. (47), into a second order ODE for the second derivative of the
radial displacement ṽ ′′ .
This is solved first since upon analysis of eq. (36) it can be seen that the energy is only dependent on the second
derivative of the radial displacement and the constant N e0 and it is the energy of the different arch configurations that is
of interest to this analysis since this gives the condition for bi-stability. However in order to represent graphically any
states found from this analysis an explicit expression for the displacements ṽ and w̃ is needed. therefore the solution for
the second derivative of ṽ is used to find the explicit solution. This expression can then be used along with the first
equation in eq. (47) to solve the resultant first order ODE for the axial displacement w̃.
These analytic results are then used to investigate if any of the deformed configurations that result from the application
of the force satisfy the conditions for bi-stability within the domain of definition for the model.
4.4.1 Case 1
The first case, which is when the force acts purely radially, is the easiest to analyse and solve in a closed form. This is
due to the fact that since the force acts perpendicularly to the axial direction of the arch the axial compressive force
must be identically zero, recall the calculation made in eq. (13). This reduces the second equation in eq. (47) to just:
ṽ iv = 0 (50)
which can then easily be integrate twice according to the boundary conditions given previously, to find that the form of
the second derivative is equal to:
ṽ (1)′′ = λ2 Fe(θ − Θ) (51)

And then this can be integrate twice more to find that the full solution for the radial displacement is given by:
1 2e 3 1 2 3 5
ṽ (1) (θ) = λ F θ + λ F̃ Θθ2 + λ2 F̃ Θ2 θ + F Θ3 (52)
6 2 2 6
Which can then be simplified to:
1 2e
ṽ (1) (θ) = λ F (θ + Θ)2 (θ − 5Θ) (53)
6
This can then be used to solve for the axial displacement, which in this case is given by:

(1) 1 e 2 3 1 e 2 2 2
w̃ (θ) = F λ (θ + Θ) F λ (3θ − 24Θθ + 53Θ ) − (θ − 7Θ) (54)
24 3
From eq. (51) the total potential energy of this system can then be expressed in terms of the integral:
Z Θ
1
Ũe(1) = λ2 F̃ 2 (θ − Θ)2 dθ (55)
2 −Θ
this integral can then be solved in an exact form to get the expression for the dimensionless energy which is solely
dependent on geometric properties of the arch and the applied force, this is given by:
4 2 3 e2
Ũe(1) = λ Θ F (56)
3
recall that a bi-stable system is one in which there are multiple minima’s of the potential energy with respect to the
applied force, i.e. a point where the system is stable up to small perturbations in Fe. Clearly this is not possible here, the
potential energy is proportional to the square of the applied force meaning that the function is monotonically increasing
from zero and so cannot have a minimum. The only point of stability is when Fe = 0 which is simply the original arch
configuration.
A range of different configurations for different applied forces can be seen in Figure 17, with the energy plot with the
different configurations labelled given in Figure 18
18
Research Project
(a)F̃ = 0 (b)F̃ = 0.0001 (c)F̃ = 0.0005
(d)F̃ = 0.001 (e)F̃ = 0.002 (f)F̃ = 0.0025
(g)F̃ = 0.003 (h)F̃ = 0.004 (i)F̃ = 0.005

Figure 17: Different arch configurations for increasing levels of applied force for case 1, with λ = 20 and Θ = 0.8
4.4.2 Case 2
The second case is considerably more difficult to solve in a closed form, due to the axial compressive force N e0 being
non-zero, this necessitates a solution in terms of trigonometric functions rather than a purely polynomial representation.
The solution for the second derivative of the radial displacement is given by:
p
1 e 2
ṽ (2)′′ = −2 sin2 F λ (θ − Θ) (57)
2
This allows the explicit radial motion to be solved for, which is found to be:
1 p p (θ + Θ)2 (θ + Θ) p
ṽ (2) (θ) = cos 2 Feλ2 Θ − cos Feλ2 (θ − Θ) − + p sin 2 Feλ2 Θ (58)
Feλ2 2 Feλ2
This result can then be used to find the axial displacement for the system, which is found to be:
19
Research Project
Figure 18: Energy vs Force plot for case 1 with the different configurations given in Figure 17 labelled
1 p 1 (2)
p
w̃(2) (θ) = sin 2 F̃ λ2 (θ − Θ) − (θ − µ1 ) cos F̃ λ2 (θ − Θ)
8(F̃ λ2 )3/2 4F̃ λ
 2 
(2)
θ 3 µ 1 1 
(2)  (2) (2)
− + µ1 θ2 + µ2 − − F̃ −  θ + µ3 (59)
3 2 4F̃ λ
(2)
Where µ1,2,3 are constants that can be found in appendix A. Using the expression from eq. (57) the total energy in our
system can be expressed as the integral:
Z Θ p
1 4 1
Ũe(2) = F̃ + 2 sin4 2
F̃ λ (θ − Θ) dθ (60)
2 −Θ λ 2
which can then be solved in a closed form to find the energy in terms of the force applied as:
1 p 1 p 3Θ
Ũe(2) (F̃ ) = ΘF̃ 2 + p sin 4 F̃ λ2 Θ − p sin 2 F̃ λ2 Θ + 2 (61)
8λ3 F̃ λ3 F̃ λ
From the form of this equation it looks more possible for this case to have points of stability outside of the original
unperturbed configuration. It can again be seen in Figure 19 a series of different configurations for this case, along with
the associated energies in Figure 20.
It can be seen that for the lower values of the energy as seen in Figure 20 the energy appears to monotonically increase
as with case 1, however if the derivative with respect to the applied force Fe is taken the following expression is obtained:
1 e−3/2 p Θ
e−1 cos 4λΘ Fe + 1 Fe−3/2 sin 2λΘ Fe − Θ Fe−1 cos 2λΘ Fe
p p p
Uee′ (Fe) = 2ΘF̃ − F sin 4λΘ F
e + F
16λ3 4λ2 2λ3 λ2
(62)
Repeating this process it can be found that the second derivative of the energy with respect to the applied force is given
by:
20
Research Project
(a)F̃ = 0 (b)F̃ = 0.0001 (c)F̃ = 0.0005
(d)F̃ = 0.001 (e)F̃ = 0.002 (f)F̃ = 0.0025
(g)F̃ = 0.003 (h)F̃ = 0.004 (i)F̃ = 0.005

Figure 19: Different arch configurations for increasing levels of applied force for case 2, with λ = 20 and Θ = 0.8
Figure 20: Energy vs Force plot for case 2 with the different configurations given in Figure 19 labelled
21
Research Project
3 p Θ −2 p
Ũe′′ (F̃ ) = 2Θ + F̃ −5/2
sin 4λΘ F̃ − F̃ cos 4λΘ F̃
32λ3 8λ2
2
Θ −3/2 p Θ p
− F̃ sin 4λΘ F̃ − 2 F̃ −2 cos 4λΘ F̃
2λ 4λ
3 −5/2 p Θ p
− 3 F̃ sin 2λΘ F̃ + 2 F̃ −2 cos 2λΘ F̃
4λ 2λ
Θ2 −3/2 p Θ p
+ F̃ sin 2λΘ F̃ + 2 F̃ cos 2λΘ F̃ (63)
λ λ
It is now important to identify any minimas of the energy of the system, since there is now an expression for the
dimensionless energy which depends only on three parameters, λ, Θ, and Fe. Therefore it now remains to find a set of
values (F̃ ∗ , λ∗ , Θ∗ ) when eq. (62) is equal to zero and eq. (63) is greater than zero. Recall also that the parameters λ
and Θ are strictly positive, then the condition Uee = 0 can now be rearranged to become:
3 5/2
p p
32Θ∗ λ∗ F̃ ∗ − sin 4λ∗ Θ∗ F̃ ∗ + 8 sin 2λ∗ Θ∗ F̃ ∗ +
1/2
p 1/2
p
4λ∗ Θ∗ F̃ ∗ cos 4λ∗ Θ∗ F̃ ∗ − 16Θ∗∗ F̃ ∗ cos 4λ∗ Θ∗ F̃ ∗ = 0 (64)
This can then be rearranged to get:
3 5/2 1/2
p 1/2
p p p
32Θ∗ λ∗ F̃ ∗ +4λ∗ Θ∗ F̃ ∗ cos 4λ∗ Θ∗ F̃ ∗ −16Θ∗ F̃ ∗ cos 4λ∗ Θ∗ F̃ ∗ = sin 4λ∗ Θ∗ F̃ ∗ −8 sin 2λ∗ Θ∗ F̃ ∗
(65)
And now this equation can be used to simplify the inequality for the stationary point to be a minima to:
λ∗ ∗3/2
∗ ∗
p
∗ − sin 4λ∗ Θ∗
p
10 F̃ + sin 2λ Θ F̃ F̃ ∗ > 0 (66)
Θ∗
These conditions can now be used to solve for the stationary points for certain physical parameters, as can be seen in
Fig. 21 and 22, for the parameter values (λ, Θ) = (20, 0.8) there can be a minima of the energy at an applied force of
Fe = 0.0318. For the parameter values (λ, Θ) = (25, 1.2) there is also a minima of the energy at an applied force of
Fe = 0.00273.
However these minima’s both occur at relatively high levels of the applied force, and therefore in a large deformation
regime for the system. If the model formulation given in section 4.2 is recalled, and in particular the form of the strain
assumed in eq. (33) it can see that a linear relationship between the bending strain and the radial displacement was
assumed. This in general is only applicable for small perturbations and specifically small values of the bending strain,
which are taken here to be values of the bending strain less than 0.15. If the explicit form of the radial displacement
given in eq. (57) is inserted into eq. (33) and rearranged, it can be seen that the condition that the bending strain is less
that 0.15 can be expressed as:
r !
p 0.15
Feλ2 Θ < sin−1 ≈ 0.2774 (67)
2
And so for example if the first case is taken, where λ = 20 and Θ = 0.8, the maximum admissible level of the applied
force for which the chosen model applies is Fe = 0.0003 which is less than the values of the applied force at the minima
found for these parameters by several orders of magnitude. It can easily be confirmed that the other minima discussed
previously does not satisfy this condition and therefore our model does not describe the dynamics at this level of
deformation. Indeed no minima was found for any set of physical parameters which satisfied these conditions.
22
Research Project
(a) Energy vs Force Plot with maxima and minima labelled
(b) The configuration corresponding to point A (c) The configuration corresponding to point B
Figure 21: The energy and different arch configurations corresponding to the minima and maxima of the energy
respectively.
23
Research Project
(a) Energy vs Force Plot with maxima and minima labelled
(b) The configuration corresponding to point A (c) The configuration corresponding to point B
Figure 22: The energy and different arch configurations corresponding to the minima and maxima of the energy
respectively.
24
Research Project
4.4.3 Case 3
The third case was certainly the most difficult to solve and analyse due to the extra parameter α and extra computation
this necessitated. The solution for the second differential of the radial displacement can be found to be:
q q
(3)′′
p sin(α) 2 1
ṽ = λ2 F̃ p sin 2
λ F̃ cos(α)(θ − Θ) − 2 sin 2
λ F̃ cos(α)(θ − Θ) (68)
cos(α) 2
This can then be used to find the explicit representation of the radial displacement at each point along the arch:
q q
1
ṽ (3) (θ) = cos 2 λ2 F̃ cos(α)Θ − cos λ2 F̃ cos(α)(θ − Θ)
λ2 F̃ cos(α)
q q
tan(α) 2 2
− q sin 2 λ F̃ cos(α)Θ − sin λ F̃ cos(α)(θ − Θ) (69)
λ2 F̃ cos(α)
 
q q
1
+ (θ + Θ)  q sin 2 λ2 F̃ cos(α)Θ + tan(α) cos 2 λ2 F̃ cos(α)Θ 
2
λ F̃ cos(α)
1
− (θ + Θ)2
2
Which can then be used this to solve for the axial displacements:

(3) (3) (3) (3) (3) (3) (3) (3)
w̃(3) (θ) =µ2 sin 2µ1 (θ − Θ) + µ3 cos 2µ1 (θ − Θ) + µ4 θ cos µ1 (θ − Θ) + µ5 θ sin µ1 (θ − Θ)
θ3
(3) (3) (3) (3) (3) (3) (3)
+ µ6 sin µ1 (θ − Θ) + µ7 cos µ1 (θ − Θ) − + µ8 θ2 + µ9 θ + µ10 (70)
3
(3)
where µ1,10 are material constants given in appendix A. The explicit representation of the energy of the system for the
third case can then be found, to do this the following integral must be solved:
Z Θ q q
1 4F̃ sin(α) 1
Uee(3) = F̃ 2 cos2 (α) − q sin λ2 F̃ cos(α)(θ − Θ) sin2 λ2 F̃ cos(α)(θ − Θ)
2 −Θ 2
λ2 F̃ cos(α)
q q
2 2
4 4 1 2
+ F̃ sin(α) tan(α) sin λ F̃ cos(α)(θ − Θ) + 2 sin λ F̃ cos(α)(θ − Θ) dθ (71)
λ 2
From this the explicit form of the energy can be found to be:
q q
2
sin 2 λ F̃ cos(α)Θ 2
sin 4 λ F̃ cos(α)Θ
3Θ 1
Uee(3) =F̃ 2 cos2 (α)Θ + 2 − q + q + F̃ sin(α) tan(α)Θ
2λ 2
λ2 λ2 F̃ cos(α) 8λ2 λ2 F̃ cos(α)
q q
2 4 2
F̃ sin(α) tan(α) sin 4 λ F̃ cos(α)Θ 2F̃ sin(α) sin λ F̃ cos(α)Θ
− q + (72)
8 λ2 F̃ cos(α) λ2 F̃ cos(α)
25
Research Project
Figure 23: Initial Configuration for the proposed Wing-let
Which can again be used to investigate the presence of bi-stable configurations for the arch system. As with the
previous section whenever minima of the potential energy were found they were found to be within a domain where the
assumptions of the model do not hold. As with the previous section it was found that over the range of force values for
which our model is applicable the total energy simply increased monotonically as higher levels of force were applied.
5 Three dimensional Polynomial Approach

In this section of the report a different approach from the previous section will be employed to now analyse a full
three dimensional system for the proposed winglet. To do this an initial unstressed configuration for the winglet is
assumed and then perturbations to this shape and their effect on the elastic energy for the system were analysed. The
key difference between this section and the last section is that in the last section the system had only one independent
variable, the angle along the arch, θ, on which two different variables depended, v and w. This means that the system
could eventually be expressed as a system of coupled ordinary differential equations. However in this section there are
two independent variables, x and y, which represent points in a plane, and then a single dependent variable w, which
denotes the height above the plane of the system at that point. This means that rather than solving a system of ODEs
our problem becomes that of solving a single general PDE.
5.1 Model Formulation
Here a thin plate with projected length L and width b within the plane is considered, this plate has thickness h which is
defined as being much smaller than either the length or the width, h ≪ L, b. A two dimensional third order polynomial
was chosen as the initial unstressed configuration for the proposed winglet, see Appendix B for a derivation of the
specific unstressed configuration, this initial configuration is given in Cartesian coordinates as:

b b
S0 = (x, y, z = w0 (x, y)), 0 < x < L, − < y < (73)
2 2
where the initial vertical displacement w0 (x, y) is given by:
1 2 1 2 2
w0 (x, y) = x + x y (74)
2R 2R3
This initial configuration is shown in Fig. 23. From this framework every possible configuration of the winglet can be
defined as:
26
Research Project

b b
S= (x, y, z = w(x, y)), 0 < x < L, − < y < (75)
2 2
And then if the assumption that this perturbation must also be a polynomial is made in order to simplify the calculations
the boundary conditions for the system can be used to describe perturbations of our system in a way that makes explicit
calculation of the energy’s possible, for a similar approach but applied to a spherical cap see [71].
5.2 Boundary Conditions and Non-Dimensionalisation
The first step here is to non-dimensionalise the quantities involved, this will help make the calculations involving the
boundary conditions easier. To do this the following non-dimensionalisation is proposed:
2w 2w0 x y Ue
w
e= , w
e0 = , ξ= , η= , and Uee = (76)
L L L b ELbh
L h Lb2
λ2 = , λ1 = , λ1 = , (77)
b L R3
Within this framework the initial configuration for the arch is now given by:
L 2
w
e0 (ξ, η) = ξ + λ1 ξ 2 η 2 (78)
R
Lb2
where the dimensionless ratio λ1 = R3 has been introduced to simplify the proceeding notation.
And it remains to determine the boundary conditions for the system. For all the boundaries of interest the conditions
will be on the difference between the initial and perturbed configurations for the system, i.e. the conditions will be
e−w
placed on the difference w e0 rather than just on the perturbed configuration w.
e
The first conditions which will be discussed will be on the section of the winglet which would theoretically be attached
to the wing of the aircraft, in choosing our initial configuration it has already been decided that this will be on the side
where x, and therefore ξ, are equal to zero. As was discussed in section 4.3 for a more accurate physical description
this condition would be a continuity condition between the wing and the winglet, but such a consideration was deemed
to be beyond the scope of the work in this project. Therefore as with the arch model a fixed boundary at this side will be
assumed, this gives the conditions:

e−w
∂(w e0 )
e−w
(w e0 )|ξ=0 = 0, and =0 (79)
∂ξ
ξ=0
And then as with the arch system the other three edges of the system are defined to be free and unattached to anything,
as they would be with a real life winglet. This first implies that the system cannot maintain a bending moment at these
edges, this can be expressed as the condition:
∂ 2 (w ∂ 2 (w

e−w e0 ) e−w e0 )
= 0, and =0 (80)
∂ξ 2
ξ=1 ∂η 2
η=± 1
2
And finally it also implies that the system cannot maintain a shear force at these edges either, this can be described with
the condition:
∂ 3 (w ∂ 3 (w

e−w e0 ) e−w e0 )
= 0, and =0 (81)
∂ξ 3
ξ=1 ∂η 3
η=± 1
2
The aim now then is to find the simplest possible description for perturbations of the system which satisfy the preceding
boundary conditions and also allows the system to deform in an interesting way in both x and y, this implies that the
perturbed configuration will need two scalar parameters to describe the full range of perturbations. The simplest form
of this polynomial was found by taking a fifth order two dimensional Taylor expansion of the perturbed height w e and
then using the boundary conditions above to solve for the coefficients. This was found to be given by:
27
Research Project
(a) s = −0.1 (a) s = 0 (a) s = 0.1
(a) t = −0.1 (a) t = 0 (a) t = 0.1

Figure 24: A range of different configurations as the scalar parameters vary.
L 2 2 3 1
w
est (ξ, η) = ξ + sξ 3 + tξ 2 η + λ1 ξ 2 η 2 − sξ 4 − tξ 3 η + sξ 5 + tξ 4 η (82)
R 3 10 6
It can be seen that when s = t = 0 the initial unperturbed configuration w e0 is recovered. In this form the scalar s can
be seen to describe perturbations which are symmetric about the line y = 0 (which is equivalent to η = 0), since it only
multiplies terms containing x, these will be referred to as symmetric perturbations from now on. The scalar t can be
seen to describe perturbations which are not symmetric in y as it is a coefficient to the terms containing y, these will be
referred to as non-symmetric perturbations from here on, a range of different perturbations for different values of s and
t can be seen in Fig 24.
5.3 Bending Energy
Now it remains to find a way to describe the energy of the system for this range of configurations, as with the previous
sections the analysis is restricted to the static regime and there is therefore no contribution from the kinetic energy
within the system. First the bending energy must be derived for each possible configuration of our system, this can be
found in [72], and is equal to:
b
Z L Z
1 2
Ub = D(K − K0 ) · (K − K0 )dxdy (83)
2 0 − 2b
Where K is the standard curvature field for our perturbed system, where the assumption has been made that all
deflections are small which allows us to use the small slopes curvature tensor which is given by: K = (wxx , wyy , 2wxy )
and K0 is the same but for the initial configuration, and D is the bending stiffness matrix for an isotropic material, see
for instance [67], and is given by:
1 ν 0
!
Eh3
D= ν 1 0 (84)
12(1 − ν 2 ) 0 0 1−ν
where again E is the Young’s modulus and ν is the Poisson’s ratio. Now a non-dimensionalisation for the curvature
field must be considered, it can be seen that since the curvature is defined in terms of the second derivative of a position
it must have dimension L−1 . If theses equations are now converted into the proposed dimensionless form given in eq.
28
Research Project
(76) it can be seen that the form of our curvature field changes to:
1
Lw
 
eξξ
 
1
 L2 w

K= b e ηη 
 (85)
2


2
bweξη
which indeed has dimension L−1 , therefore if the rescaling K = L2 K e is used, the components of K
e can then be
calculated explicitly from the form of w
est given in eq. (82), this can be shown to be:
 L   
2 R + 2λ1 η 2 + 6sξ + 2tη − 12sξ 2 − 4tξη + 6sξ 3 + 2tξ 2 η L
2R + 2λ1 η 2
K
e = 2λ22 λ1 ξ 2  and e 0 =  2λ2 λ1 ξ 2 
K 2 (86)
2λ2 2tξ + 4λ1 ξη − 2tξ 2 + 32 tξ 3

8λ2 λ1 ξη
Where the additional dimensionless ratio λ2 = L/b has been used. And so if the non-dimesnionalisations proposed for
the variables x, y, K and Ub are used, it can be seen that eq. (83) now has the form:
1 ν 0
1
!
1
λ23
Z Z 2
Ueb = ν 1 0 e −K
K e0 · Ke −K
e 0 dηdξ (87)
6(1 − ν 2 ) 0 − 21 0 0 1−ν
where a third dimensionless ratio, λ3 = h/L has been introduced. And so substituting eq. (84) and eq. (86) into eq.
(83) and using the energy rescaling from eq. (76) the bending energy for the deformed configuration can be expressed
in terms of the integral:
1 2 2
1
λ23
Z Z
2 4
Ueb = 6sξ +2tη −12sξ 2 −4tξη +6sξ 3 +2tξ 2 η +λ22 (1−ν) 4tξ −4tξ 2 + tξ 3 dηdξ (88)
6(1 − ν 2 ) 0 − 12 3
The additional dimensionless ratio λ2 will now be introduced, which has been defined to be the ratio between the length
and width of our system, i.e. λ2 = b/L, and since the integrals here are dependent on the values of ξ and η but the
effect of the scalars s and t is of interest to this report the integrals can be rearranged in terms of our scalars to become:
1
1
λ23
Z Z 2 2
36ξ − 144ξ 3 + 72ξ 4 + 144ξ 4 − 144ξ 5 + 36ξ 6 s2

Ueb =
6(1 − ν 2 ) 0 − 12
+ 24ξη − 48ξ 2 η + 24ξ 3 η + 24ξ 3 η + 96ξ 3 η − 48ξ 4 η − 48ξ 4 η + 24ξ 5 η st

2
4η − 16ξη 2 + 8ξ 2 η + 16ξ 2 η 2 − 16ξ 3 η 2 + 4ξ 4 η 2

+

2 2 1
+ λ22 (1 − ν) ξ 2 − 2ξ 3 + ξ 4 + ξ 4 − ξ 5 + ξ 6 t2 dξdη (89)
3 3 9
It can be seen from the form of this equation that the cross term given by st will be equal to zero due to its linear
dependence on the the η coordinate. Our dimensionless bending energy can now be expressed as:
29
Research Project
Figure 25: Plot of the bending energy for L = 0.3, b = 0.1, R = 0.3, h = 0.012, and ν = 0.33.
( Z
2 1
λ 3
Ueb = 36 ξ 2 − 4ξ 3 + 6ξ 4 − 4ξ 5 + ξ 6 dξs2
6(1 − ν 2 ) 0
Z 1 Z 1
2
+ 4 1 − 4ξ + 6ξ 2 − 4ξ 3 + ξ 4 dξ η 2 dη (90)
0 − 12
Z 1 )
2 4 2 5 1 6
+ λ22 (1 − ν) ξ − 2ξ + ξ + ξ − ξ + ξ dξ t2
2 3 4
0 3 3 9
The integrals in s2 and t2 can then be computed explicitly in terms of the material parameters, this gives the final
representation of the bending energy in terms of the symmetric and non-symmetric scalars as:
" #
2 2

λ 3 12 2 1 λ2
Ueb (s, t) = s + + (1 − ν) t2 (91)
6(1 − ν 2 ) 35 15 14
this has given an equation relating the perturbation, described with s and t, to the dimensionless total bending energy
felt by the system in that perturbation. A contour plot of this energy can be seen in figure 25 . It can be seen, as one
would expect, that the origin, given by s = t = 0, is a minimum of the energy, since it has already been defined as a
stress free configuration. Note that the value of the parameters here has been chosen to roughly correspond to those in
model b in [30].
5.4 Stretching Energy
Now a similar description for the stretching energy, also known as membrane energy, for our system in the different
configurations described by scalar quantities s and t is needed. The stretching energy can be given by the integral,
see [71] or [72]:
b
Z L Z
1 2
Um = A−1 N · Ndydx (92)
2 0 − 2b
where N is the membranal stress field, which is defined as the vector containing the stress components in x and y, i.e. it
has the form N = (σx , σy , τxy ) where σ and τ are the components of the cauchy strain tensor given in [64], this can
then be defined in terms of the airys stress function, denoted here φ. The components of the membranal stress field are
given by:
∂2φ ∂2φ ∂2φ

Nxx = , Nyy = , and Nxy = − (93)
∂y 2 ∂x2 ∂x∂y
and A is the matrix given by:
30
Research Project
12
A= D (94)
h2
Which has an inverse given by:
1 −ν 0
!
−1 1
A = −ν 1 0 (95)
Eh 0 0 1+ν
Now the components of the airys stress function must be determined so that the stretching energy for different
configurations of the system can be found.
5.4.1 Airys Stress Function

The airys stress function, can be found by solving the Non-Homogeneous Biharmonic Equation, as in [71], with RHS
being defined in terms of the curvature fields of the perturbed and initial configurations, like so:
∆∆φ = Eh(det(K) − det(K0 )) (96)
with boundary conditions given by:
∂2φ
φ= =0 (97)
∂2n
on ξ = 0, 1 and η = ± 21 where n is the outward unit normal at the edges. The representation of the curvature fields as
given in eq. (86) can be used, to express the RHS of eq. (96) as:
1
det(K) − det(K0 ) = det( e − det(K
K) e 0)
L2
λ2
= 22 − 16t2 ξ 2 + (4 − 64λ1 )tξ 2 η + 12s + 32t2 ξ 3 + (−8 + 64λ1 ) tξ 3 η

L

80 64 32 16
+ −24s − t2 ξ 4 − 4 − λ1 tξ 4 η + 12s − t2 ξ 5 − t2 ξ 6 (98)
3 3 3 9
This equation can be rewritten in the form:
λ22
det(K) − det(K0 ) = Cij (s, t)ξ i η j (99)
L2
Where Einstein summation convention has been used, so the term in the above equation is a sum over eight separate
terms, the functions Cij (s, t) are given by:
C10 (s, t) = 0 C11 (s, t) = 0

2
C20 (s, t) = −16t C21 (s, t) = (4 − 64λ1 ) t
2
C30 (s, t) = 12s + 32t C31 (s, t) = (−8 + 64λ1 ) t (100)

80 64
C40 (s, t) = −24s − t2 C41 (s, t) = 4 − λ1 t
3 3
32 2
C50 (s, t) = 12s − t C51 (s, t) = 0
3
16 2
C60 (s, t) = − t C61 (s, t) = 0
9
31
Research Project
However now need care must be taken since the differential operator given in eq. (96) is defined for the dimensional
coordinates x and y, therefore the following substitution is required:
∂ 4φ ∂ 4φ ∂ 4φ 1 ∂ 4φ 2 ∂ 4φ 1 ∂ 4φ
∆∆φ = + 2 + = + + (101)
∂x4 ∂x2 ∂y 2 ∂y 4 L4 ∂ξ 4 L2 b2 ∂ξ 2 ∂η 2 b4 ∂η 4
also needed is a sufficient rescaling for the Airys stress function, since the Airys stress function is the second differential
of the stress [73] it can be seen that it must have dimension φ = M L2 T −2 and so the following non-dimensionalisation,
is proposed: φ = ELbhφ. e If this is then substituted into eq. (96) then it can be seen that:
1 ∂ 4φ 2 ∂ 4φ ∂ 4φ 1
Cij ξ i η j
e e e
+ + = (102)
λ42 ∂ξ 4 λ22 ∂ξ 2 ∂η 2 ∂η 4 λ2
Then the fact that the Biharmonic equation is a linear partial differential equation can be used, so that the problem
expressed in eq. (96) can be reduced to the 7 separate PDEs given by:
1 ∂ 4φ
eij 2 ∂ 4φ eij ∂ 4φ
eij 1 1
+ + = ξ i η j on 0 < ξ < 1, − < η < (103)
λ42 ∂ξ 4 λ22 ∂ξ 2 ∂η 2 ∂η 4 2 2
with the same boundary conditions as for the original problem. These separate solutions given by φij (ξ, η) can then be
superimposed to find the full solution φ(ξ, η), this will be given by:
1
φ(ξ,
e η) = Cij (s, t)φ
eij (ξ, η) (104)
λ2
In order to solve eq. (103) traditionally one would use a double Fourier expansion in ξ and η, expressing the solution in
terms of a trigonometric sum. However this method can converge slowly and due to the number of series needed to
express the solution of the integral given in eq. (92) a reasonable rate of convergence for the resultant series is required.
Therefore Levys method will be used in this report, by assuming a single series expansion of the solution function,
see [67]. This allows for a reduction of the problem from a PDE in both ξ and η to an ODE in just η, this is done by
assuming a solution to the problem in the form:
∞
X
eij (ξ, η) =
φ Ain ϕij
n (η) sin(nπξ) (105)
n=1
This can then be inserted into the LHS of eq. (103) to get:
∞ 4
n2 π 2 d2 ij n4 π 4 ij

X d ij
eij (ξ, η) =
∆∆φ ϕ (η) − 2 ϕ (η) + ϕ (η) sin(nπξ) (106)
n=1
dy 4 n λ22 dy 2 n λ42 n
Then a similar expression for the RHS of eq. (103) is needed, since it is desirable to express ξ i η j in a way which makes
the subsequent analysis easier a trigonometric series in ξ using a basis of orthogonal sin terms has been chosen to
represent the LHS of the problem. This necessitates using the Fourier series:
∞
X
i
ξ = Ain sin(nπξ) (107)
n=1
where the terms given by Ain are constants and are given by the integral:
Z 1
Ain = 2 ξ i sin(nπξ)dξ (108)
0
these can be computed in a closed form to give the values of Ai for each value of n as:
32
Research Project
1
(−1)n+1
Z
A1n = 2 ξ sin(nπξ)dξ = 2
0 nπ
1
(−1)n − 1 (−1)n+1
Z
A2n = 2 ξ 2 sin(nπξ)dξ = 4 3 3
+2
0 n π nπ
1
(−1)n (−1)n+1
Z
A3n =2 ξ 3 sin(nπξ)dξ = 12 3 3
+2 (109)
0 n π nπ
1
(−1)n+1 − 1 (−1)n (−1)n+1
Z
A4n =2 ξ 4 sin(nπξ)dξ = 48 + 24 + 2
0 n5 π 5 n3 π 3 nπ
1
(−1)n+1 (−1)n (−1)n+1
Z
A5n = 2 ξ 5 sin(nπξ)dξ = 240 + 40 + 2
0 n5 π 5 n3 π 3 nπ
1
(−1)n − 1 (−1)n+1 (−1)n (−1)n+1
Z
A6n = 2 ξ 6 sin(nπξ)dξ = 1440 + 720 + 60 + 2 (110)
0 n7 π 7 n5 π 5 n3 π 3 nπ
Note that the ease of finding these expressions for the Ain ’s is because the i values take on only positive integer values,
in general much of the analysis of eq. (103) presented in this section is only possible for positive integer values of i and
j . This then allows us to express the RHS of eq. (103) as the sum over the sin functions:
∞
X
ξi ηj = η j Ain sin(nπξ) (111)
n=1
Now if eq. (106) and eq. (111) are substituted into eq. (103), the problem has become:
∞ 4 ∞
n2 π 2 d2 ij n4 π 4 ij

X d ij X
ϕ
4 n
(η) − 2 ϕ
2 dη 2 n (η) + 4 ϕ n (η) sin(nπξ) = η j Ain sin nπξ (112)
n=1
dη λ 2 λ 2 n=1
To this the standard Fourier Technique of multiplying both sides by the basis function, given here by sin(mπξ), and then
integrating over the domain in ξ can be applied. This removes the dependence on ξ from the equations and therefore
reduces our system to an ODE in η, this ODE is given by:
d4 ij n2 π 2 d2 ij n4 π 4
ϕn (η) − 2 2 ϕn (η) + 4 ϕij (η) = Ain η j (113)
dη 4 λ2 dη 2 λ2 n
this is a fourth order non-homogeneous ordinary differential equation with boundary conditions given by ϕij
n (±1/2) =
′′
ϕij
n (±1/2) = 0. In order to solve this the problem will be broken down into the Homogeneous and Non-homogeneous
problems, taking the homogeneous problem first it becomes necessary to find the solution to the ODE given by:
d4 ij n2 π 2 d2 ij n4 π 4
ϕn (η) − 2 2 ϕn (η) + 4 ϕij (η) = 0 (114)
dη 4 λ2 dη 2 λ2 n
This has characteristic equation given by:
n2 π 2 2 n4 π 4
r4 − 2 r + 4 =0 (115)
λ22 λ2
which therefore has solutions given by r = ± inπ

λ2 each root of which is of order two, this gives the complementary
solution for eq. (113) given by:

nπ nπ
ϕij
CSn (η) = (K1 + K2 η) sinh η + (K3 + K4 η) cosh η (116)
λ2 λ2
33
Research Project
where K1,2,3,4 are constants which must be determined after forming the general solution to the problem, though it
should be noted now that it is to be expected that these constants will depend on i, j, and n. For the particular solution
to this problem a function is needed which can be inserted into the RHS of eq. (113) to get the non-homogeneous LHS
function. This is found to be for the particular case:
λ42 Ain j
ϕij
P Sn (η) = η (117)
n4 π 4
Where it should again be noted that this solution only applies because the value of j given in eq. (113) is only equal to
one or zero, if higher powers of η were admissible it would change the form of this particular solution. The general
solution to the ODE can now be found by combining eq. (116) and eq. (117) to find the full solution to the ODE, this is
found to be:
λ4 Ai

nπ nπ
ϕij
GSn (η) = (K1 + K2 η) sinh η + (K3 + K4 η) cosh η + 24 4n η j (118)
λ2 λ2 n π
Now the boundary conditions for the problem must be determined in order to solve for the constants K1,2,3,4 , first recall
that for the original problem given in eq. (96), there were conditions on φ and φ′′ at the boundaries. This means that
the boundary conditions for this problem are given by:
d2 ij

1 1
ϕij
n ± = 2 ϕn ± =0 (119)
2 dη 2
Solving eq. (118) according to the boundary conditions given in eq. (119) gives the following expressions for the
constants:

nπ nπ
n2 π 2 cosh + 4λ22 sinh
2λ2 2λ2
j
1 1
j 4 i
λ 2 An
K1ij (n) = − − − (120)
8n2 π 2 sinh2 2λnπ 2 2 n4 π 4
2
j j 4 i
n2 π 2 1 1 λ2 An
K2ij (n) = + − (121)
4λ22 cosh 2λ nπ 2 2 n4 π 4
2

nπ nπ
n2 π 2 sinh + 4λ22 cosh
2λ2 2λ2
j
1 1
j 4 i
λ 2 An
K3ij (n) =− + − (122)
8λ22 cosh2 2λ
nπ 2 2 n4 π 4
2
(123)
It can be seen from the exact form of these constants that when j = 0, K1,4 = 0, and when j = 1, K2,3 = 0. Now the
expressions derived throughout this section can be used to describe the full solution to eq. (96), this solution is given as
the triple sum:
∞
1 X
φ(ξ, η) = Cij (s, t)ϕij
n (η) sin(nπξ) (124)
λ22 n=1
This therefore describes the value of the Airys stress function at each point in ξ and η space for each different
configuration given by the scalars s and t.
34
Research Project
5.4.2 Explicit Calculation Of Membrane Energy
In order to use the solution found in the previous section it is first necessary to manipulate the form of the integral
given in eq. (92). Here it would be desirable to do something similar to the section on the bending energy where terms
describing the perturbation s and t were taken out of the integral to get integrals solely in terms of ξ and η which can
then be explicitly calculated. Here however these integrals must be expressed in terms of an infinite sum over n.
In order to find the form of these integrals it is necessary to first break down the expression given in eq. (92) into its
separate parts as given in eq. (93), this gives the following form of the membrane energy:
Z LZ b
Nxx Nxx
2
! !
1 −1
Um = A Nyy · Nyy dydx (125)
2 Nxy Nxy
0 − 2b
Now it is necessary to convert this to the form required for our non-dimensionalised variables, to do this eq. (93) will
be used, and from this it can be seen that:
∂ 2φ ∂ 2φ
L
   e

∂y 2 ∂η 2
b
 ∂ 2φ   ∂ 2 φe 
b
N=  ∂x2  = Eh  ∂ξ2 
L
(126)
∂ 2φ ∂ 2φ
− ∂x ∂y − ∂ξ e
∂η
Therefore the integral in eq. (125) can now be expressed in terms of the rescaled variables and Airys stress function as:
1 ∂ 2φ ∂ 2φ
Z 1Z 2
 L e
  L

e
1 −ν 0
!
∂η 2
b b ∂η 2
EhLb  ∂ 2 φe 
b  ∂ 2 φe 
b
Um = −ν 1 0  ∂ξ2 
L
·  ∂ξ2  dηdξ
L
(127)
2 0 0 1+ν ∂ 2φ ∂ 2φ
0 − 12 − ∂ξ e
∂η − ∂ξ e
∂η
This integral can then be expanded, to give the dimensionless membrane energy as:
Z 1Z 1
2 2 2 2
∂ 2φ ∂ 2φ ∂ 2φ ∂ 2φ

1 1 ∂φ
Uem = λ22 − 2ν
e e e e e
+ 2 + (1 + ν) dηdξ (128)
2 ∂η 2 ∂η 2 ∂ξ 2 λ2 ∂ξ 2 ∂ξη
0 − 12
The expression for φ from eq. (124) can now be used, if this is substituted into the previous equation it can be found
that:
Z 1Z 1 (
2 2
d2 ϕij d2 ϕij

1 n
Uem = 2 λ22 Cij (η) sin(nπξ) + 2ν n 2 2
π C ϕ
ij n
ij
(η) sin(nπξ) C ij (η) sin(nπξ)
4λ1 dη 2 dη 2
0 − 21
2 )
dϕij

1 2 2 ij
2 n
+ 2 n π Cij ϕn (η) sin(nπξ) + (1 + ν) nπCij (η) cos(nπξ) dηdξ (129)
λ2 dη
Since different sums are being cross multiplied together here, additional sums must be introduced into the expression,
this gives:
35
Research Project
Z 1Z 1 (
2
1 d2 ϕij 2 ak
n d ϕm
Uem = 2 Cij (s, t)Cak (s, t) λ22 sin(nπξ) sin(mπξ)
4λ2 dη 2 dη 2
0 − 12
d2 ϕak
m
+ 2νnmπϕij
n sin(nπξ) sin(mπξ)
dη 2
1 2 2 4 ij ak
+ n m π ϕn ϕm sin(nπξ) sin(mπξ)
λ22
)
2 dϕij ak
n dϕm
+ nmπ (1 + ν) cos(nπξ) cos(mπξ) dηdξ (130)
dη dη
This expression represents a superposition of six sums, in i, j, a, k, n, and m, respectively. The orthogonality of the
sine and cosine terms can be used to eliminate the terms of the sum where n ̸= m which reduces the above expression
down to five sums. This gives the following expression for the membrane energy in the system:
Z 1
∞ 2
d2 ϕij 2 ak 2 ak
dϕij ak

1 X
n d ϕn 2 2 ij d ϕn 1 4 4 ij ak n dϕn
Uem = 2 Cij (s, t)Cak (s, t) λ22 + 2νn π ϕ n + n π ϕ ϕ
n n + n 2 2
π (1 + ν) dη
4λ2 dη 2 dη 2 dη 2 λ22 dη dη
n=1 − 12
(131)
In order to simplify the notation the following variables are introduced for the integrals:
Z 1
2
(1)
Iijak (n) = ϕij ak
n ϕn dη (132)
− 12
1
d2 ϕak
Z 2
(2) n
Iijak (n) = ϕij
n dη (133)
− 12 dη 2
1
dϕij ak
Z
n dϕn
2
(3)
Iijak (n) = dη (134)
− 12 dη dη
1
d2 ϕij 2 ak
Z
n d ϕn
2
(4)
Iijak (n) = dη (135)
− 12 dη 2 dη 2
This then means that the membrane energy of our system can now be expressed as:
∞ 4 4
1 X n π (1) 2 2 (2) 2 2 (3) 2 (4)
Um = 2 Cij (s, t)Cak (s, t)
e I (n) + 2νn π I (n) + (1 + ν)n π Iijak (n) + λ2 I (n) (136)
4λ2 n=1
λ22 ijak
These four separate integrals can be solved now in a closed form with these forms given in Appendix C, if the infinite
sums from eq. (136) are now denoted as:
∞ ∞ ∞ ∞
(1) (1) (2) (2) (3) (3) (4) (4)
X X X X
Iijak = n4 π 4 Iijak (n), Iijak = n2 π 2 Iijak (n), Iijak = n2 π 2 Iijak (n), and Iijak = Iijak (n)
n=1 n=1 n=1 n=1
(137)
Then these are just 128 different real valued constants which depend on the material parameter ν and the geometric
ratio λ2 = L/b. Due to the form of the constants in eq. (120) it can be shown that whenever i ̸= k the constant given
36
Research Project
Figure 26: Membrane energy of our system for L = 0.3, b = 0.1, R = 0.3, h = 0.012, and ν = 0.33
in eq. (137) are equal to zero. Using these values the full membrane energy for our different configurations can be
expressed as:
1
Uem (s, t) = 2 Cij (s, t)Cak (s, t)Sijak (138)
4λ2
where the following notation has been introduced:
1 (1) (2) (3) (4)

Sijak = I + 2νIijak + (1 + ν)Iijak + λ22 Iijak (139)
λ22 ijak
Note here that Sijak represents 36 different constants (half of which are zero since when j ̸= k, Sijak = 0) that depend
only on the ratio λ2 and the Poissons ratio ν. The cross terms from multiplying together the Cij ’s can be expanded and
our membrane energy can be expressed as:
e1 s2 + B
Uem (s, t) = B e2 t2 + B3 st2 + B4 t4 (140)
where the coefficients are given by:
e1 = 144 [S3030 − 4S3040 + 2S3050 + 4S4040 − 4S4050 + S5050 ]

B (141)

2 64
B2 = 4 (1 − 16λ1 ) S2121 − 2 (1 − 16λ1 ) (8 − 64λ1 ) S2131 + 2 (1 − 16λ1 ) 4 − λ1 S2141
e
3
2
2 64 64
+ (2 − 16λ1 ) S3131 − 2 (2 − 16λ1 ) 4 − λ1 S3141 + 4 − λ1 S3131 (142)
3 3

8
B3 = 64 − 6S2030 + 12S2040 − 6S2050 + S2060 = 12S3030
9

1 4 2 4
+ 33S3040 + 8S3050 − S3060 + 20S4040 − 2S4050 + S4060 − 4S5050 − S5060 + S6060 (143)
3 3 3 81

10 2 2 20
B4 = 256 S2020 − 4S2030 + S2040 − S2050 + S2060 + 4S3030 + S3040
3 3 9 3

10 4 25 20 10 4 4 1
− S3050 − S3060 + S4040 + S4050 + S4060 + S5050 + S5060 + S6060 (144)
3 9 9 9 27 9 27 81
Where the fact that Sijak = Sakij has been used. eq. (140) is an equivalent expression to that in eq. (91) as it relates
the configuration parameters, given by s and t, and the material parameters, given here by ν and λ1,2,3 , to the total
membrane energy at the given configuration. A contour plot of this energy can be seen in figure 26
37
Research Project
5.5 Results
An expression for the total elastic energy within our system can now be formed, this is done by adding together eq. (91)
and eq. (140), and so the final form of the total elastic energy is given by:
Uee (s, t) = Ueb (s, t) + Uem (s, t) = B1 s2 + B2 t2 + B3 st2 + B4 t4 (145)
where B3,4 are the same as in the preceeding section but the form of B1,2 has been changed slightly via:
2λ23
B1 = B
e1 + (146)
35(1 − ν 2 )
λ23 λ22

1
B2 = B2 +
e + (1 − ν) (147)
6(1 − ν 2 ) 15 14
This means that the relationship between the symmetric and anti-symmetric perturbation scalars, s and t, and the total
elastic energy has the form of a fourth order coupled polynomial, with coefficients defined via the poissons ratio and the
geometric properties λ1,2,3 .
Now it remains to investigate the presence of an alternate stable configurations within this model, these are represented
by minimas of the total elastic energy of the system, in order to find these minimas the partial derivatives with respect
to s and t must be taken, this is given by:
∂ Uee
= 2B1 s + B3 t2 (148)
∂s
∂ Uee
= 2B2 t + 2B3 st + 4B4 t3 (149)
∂t
if these are now equated to zero it can be seen that the s and t values of the stationary points of the potential energy are
given by:
s
B2 B3 2B1 B2
s̄ = − 2 , and t̄ = ± (150)
B3 − 4B1 B4 B32 − 4B1 B4
this is in addition to the obvious stationary point at s̄ = t̄ = 0 which is clearly a minima of the potential energy since it
was defined earlier to be the stress free configuration. And since of interest to us is obtaining minimas of the potential
energy the additional constraints are required:
2
∂ 2U ∂ 2U ∂ 2U ∂ 2U ∂ 2U

> 0, > 0, and > (151)
∂s2 ∂t2 ∂s2 ∂t2 ∂s ∂t
or expressed in terms of our coefficients three conditions can be obtained:
∂ 2U
> 0 =⇒ 2B1 > 0 (152)
∂s2
∂ 2U 16B1 B2 B4
> 0 =⇒ 2 >0 (153)
∂t2 B3 − 4B1 B4
2 2 2 2
∂ U ∂ U ∂ U 8B1 B2 4B1 B4 − B32
− > 0 =⇒ = −8B1 B2 > 0 (154)
∂t2 ∂s2 ∂s ∂t B32 − 4B1 B4
38
Research Project
Figure 27: potential energy landscape for L = 0.3, b = 0.1, R = 0.3, h = 0.012, and ν = 0.33
Through numerical investigation it was found that for physically permissible parameter values the coefficients B1,2,4
were always positive, and B3 was always negative, and in particular for all three configurations given in [30]. Therefore,
it can be seen from the form of eq. (150) that in order to have any more stationary points other than the original
configuration, that B32 − 4B1 B4 > 0. And so if this requirement is satisfied, it can be seen that the first two conditions
from eq. (152) are always satisfied, however the third one is not. This implies that instead of being minimas, the
stationary points found here are in fact saddle points of the total potential energy, and therefore do not represents truly
bi-stable configurations of the potential energy. A plot of an example potential energy landscape can be seen in figure
27.
5.6 Model Limitations
There are several reasons why the model presented above may be insufficient to model the system proposed and
manufactured in [30], some to do with the geometry of the proposed model and some to do with its manufacturing and
material. Taking the first point to begin with the shape proposed in the paper was not pre-selected as it has been in
the above analysis. Instead as discussed in section 2.2 the shape was found by applying thermal stresses to a laminate
layup and then assessing the resultant shape to see which best fit the operational requirements. In order to simplify the
analysis in this section an assumed stress free configuration was instead selected, though the mathematical tools to
analyse how thermal stresses effect elastic systems do exist [74], they were not considered here and could represent an
intriguing avenue for future analytic work.
Another geometric consideration not made here was the non-rectangular shape of the propose winglet, due to the
importance of the boundary conditions in the analysis used here, a rectangular shape was assumed for the system.
However most real life wings are not perfectly rectangular and neither is the winglet proposed in [30]. This could have
been considered by altering the form of S given in section 5.1 and the boundary conditions presented in section 5.2, so
that instead of considering y = ±b/2, one boundary on y = −b/2 and another given by some line y = f (x) could
have been considered. along with changing the other boundaries of our system accordingly. Though this may have
made the analysis more accurate it was deemed unnecessary for the scope of this report, since it would have made
the computation of the integrals in eq. (83) and (92) more difficult and most likely would have made solving eq. (96)
impossible in a closed form.
Another consideration of importance in [30] but not considered here is the effect of the use of composite materials,
specifically here multiple layers of T300 carbon fiber with 914 Hexdite matrix prepeg. Though there has also been
much work done on composite materials and the maths behind them [75], this was also deemed beyond the scope of
this work. The other main material consideration which was found by the authors to have an effect was the orientation
of the fibers within the laminas, this was found in their work to have a considerable effect on the resultant stable shapes
for the system. This is another field where work has been carried out [76], but was not considered feasible to consider
within this report.
The consideration of these additional effects, though likely to create a more accurate model, would likely have made an
analytic solution impossible to obtain for our system. Under such circumstances a numerical approach would have
been more effective, using a finite element software such as ABAQUS, as used in [30], would likely have been a more
effective route of analysis.
Finally the inability of our model to find alternate stable configurations for the proposed system must be addressed. It
is possible that this was caused by the form of the polynomial perturbed configuration given in eq. (82), for example
in [71], where a similar perturbation method was used a sixth order polynomial was used for the symmetric variable, in
39
Research Project
this case the radius ρ. In addition to this the cylindrical form of the chosen coordinate system allowed for an easier
solution to be found to the bi-harmonic problem discussed in section 5.4.1 here.
6 Conclusion
In this report, an analytic investigation into the bi-stability of a morphable winglet has been carried out. It began by
overviewing the applicability of morphable and bi-stable parts to aircraft, with particular emphasis on how these parts
could expand the range of flight regimes for a specific aircraft. The most important part of this section was the proposed
design of a bi-stable winglet for a typical aircraft wing. Such a system, if fully developed, was found to offer advantages
over a typical fixed winglet. Specifically, the idea emerged that the winglet’s shape could be optimised for separate
flight objectives, especially when concerned with take off and loiter regimes.
After this, the basics of elastic theory were discussed in order to emphasise how expressing the potential energy of a
system can beneficially determine its dynamics. And additionally, how separate forces acting on the system can be
modelled. These ideas were used in the following section, in which a simplified model for the winglet of an aircraft
is proposed. In this proposal, the winglet was modelled as an elastic arch with one free end. After the bending and
stretching energies were derived, the equations governing the motion of the arch were finally calculated.
In the next section, a more accurate model of the winglet was presented, which modelled the initial configuration of the
winglet as the stress free configuration of an elastic plate. The bending and stretching energies of the winglet were
then derived and a description of the total dimensionless elastic energy was presented. Finally, this data was used to
investigate the presence of bi-stability for such a system.
It was found that both models used in this report were unable to prove the existence of alternate stable configurations
for the elastic systems considered. Some of the possible reasons for this were discussed in section 5.6. This serves
as an example of the complexities inherent in the field of solid mechanics. As discussed in the mentioned section,
even a single layer of carbon fibre, like the ones used in [30], presents several challenges to be modelled, since it is an
an-isotropic material. In addition to this, the effects of multiple layers in a single layup could be considered, along with
an investiagtion into the thermal effects induced by the authors.
All of this goes to show the difficulties in modelling a physical system, where small differences in initial characteristics
can have enormous impacts on the dynamics of the system. However, it is the hope of this report’s author that the
analysis presented illustrates significant techniques and approaches available to those who wish to model such systems.
Some possible areas of future work are as follows:
1. To more fully model the elastic characteristics of the system, such as fibre orientation or layup effects, as
discussed in more detail in section 5.6.
2. To use more accurate descriptions of the geometry of such a system and also more complex relationships
between perturbations of the system and internal strains caused.
3. To analyse in more detail the effects of aerodynamic forces and there effects on different wing configurations.
4. To analyse and develop the use of numerical methods, for example finite element models, to describe the
stability of such systems.
5. To carry out practical investigations of such systems, such as building experimental rigs to carry out experiments
on.
40
Research Project
A 2D Problem
(2)
The values of µ1,2,3 given in eq. (70) can be expressed as:
(2) 1 p
µ1 = sin 2 Feλ2 Θ − Θ (155)
Feλ2
1 p Θ2
(2) (2)
µ2 = cos 2 Feλ2 Θ + + µ1 Θ (156)
Feλ2 2
(2) 1 p Θ Θ3
µ3 = 3/2 sin 4 Feλ2 Θ − e 2 − 3
8 Feλ2 2F λ
 2 
(2) (2)
µ1 + Θ p µ1
(2) (2)
− cos 2 Feλ2 Θ − µ1 Θ2 + − + µ2 − Fe Θ (157)
 
Fλ
e 2 2
(3)
In order to represent the value of µ1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10 the following constants will be used:
1 p p
A= p sin 2 Feλ2 cos αΘ + tan α cos 2 Feλ2 cos αΘ − Θ (158)
Feλ2 cos α
1 p p Θ2
B= cos 2 Feλ2 cos αΘ − tan α sin 2 Feλ2 cos αΘ + + AΘ (159)
Feλ2 cos α 2
And so now the values of µ(3) can be given by:
(3)
p
(3) 1 − λ4 Fe2 sin2 α
µ1 = Feλ2 cos α, µ2 = 3 (160)
(3)
8 µ1
(3) tan α (3) 1
µ3 = − (3)
, µ4 = − 2 (161)
4µ1 (3)
µ1
(3) λ2 Fe sin α (3) λ2 Fe

µ5 = − 2 , µ6 = 2 sin(α)A (162)
(3) (3)
µ1 µ1
(3) A tan α λ2 Fe sin α (3)

µ7 = 2 + (3)
− 3 , µ8 = A (163)
(3) µ1 (3)
µ1 µ1
(3) A2 λ4 Fe2 sin2 α 1

µ9 = B − − 2 − 2 + Fe cos α (164)
2 (3) (3)
µ1 4 µ1

(3) (3) (3) (3) (3) (3) (3) (3) (3)
µ10 = µ2 sin 4µ1 Θ − µ3 cos 4µ1 Θ + µ4 Θ cos 2µ1 Θ − µ5 Θ sin 2µ1 Θ
Θ3
(3) (3) (3) (3) (3) (3)
+ µ6 sin 2µ1 Θ − µ7 cos 2µ1 Θ − − µ8 Θ2 + µ9 Θ (165)
3
B 3D Problem: Initial Configuration
A circular representation of the initial configuration of the winglet was at first attempted, in which the shape in the
y = 0 plane was given by:
41
Research Project
p
w(x, 0) = R − R 2 − x2 where x ∈ [0, R] (166)
which models a quarter circle of radius R starting at the origin. This shape fits more properly with the one used in
the previous section, however was found to be computationally infeasible for the analytic approach adopted in this
work, such a system configuration would likely need to be investigated using numerical methods. Instead a polynomial
approximation to this shape was used to simplify notation, to do this a taylor expansion is taken for the square root of
the above expression, this gives the form:
x2
w(x, 0) = (167)
2R
added to this was an additional term describing curvature in the y plane. To obtain this recall that at the point where the
winglet attached to the wing a flat configuration is required in the y-plane. Therefore we model the configuration in y as
3 x2
a circle of radius Rx20
for each fixed x0 , but which is equal to R0 at y = 0. Again using a taylor expansion and taking
only the first term it can again be seen that the simplest expression which approximates these requirements is given by:
1 2 1 2 2
w(x, y) = x + x y (168)
2R 2R3
C 3D Problem: Integrals
(1,2,3,4)
In this appendix we state the closed form solution to the four integrals given by Iijak (n), these can be given in
closed form as: , for integral one:
" # " #
(1) λ2 sinh( nπ
λ2 ) 1 (λ2 n2 π 2 + 2λ32 ) sinh( nπ λ2 ) λ22 cosh( nπ
λ2 ) 1
Iijak (n) =K1ij K1ak − + K2 K2ij ak
− −
2nπ 2 8n3 π 3 4n2 π 2 24
" nπ
# " nπ nπ
#
2 2 3 2
ij ak
λ2 sinh( λ2 ) 1 ij ak
(λ2 n π + 2λ2 ) sinh( λ2 ) λ2 cosh( λ2 ) 1
+ K3 K3 + + K4 K4 − +
2nπ 2 8n3 π 3 4n2 π 2 24
" #
cosh( nπ λ2 ) λ22 sinh( nπλ2 )
+ (K1ij K4ak + K2ij K3ak + K4ij K1ak + K3ij K2ak ) λ2 − 2 2
4nπ 4n π
 nπ 2 nπ
nπ
λ4 Ai λ2 cosh( 2λ ) 2λ2 sinh( 2λ ) λ4 Ai 2λ2 sinh( 2λ )
h i
K2ak n24 πn4 2
+ 2
+ K3ak n24 πn4 2
if j = 0


nπ n2 π 2 nπ
+ nπ
2λ22 sinh( 2λnπ
2 2 3 nπ
2λ22 cosh( 2λnπ

ak λ2 An λ2 cosh( 2λ2 ) ) ak λ2 An (λ2 n π +8λ2 ) sinh( 2λ2 ) )
4 i 4 i
K1 n4 π4 + 2
+ K4 n4 π4 − 2
if j = 1


nπ n2 π 2 2n3 π 3 n2 π 2

nπ
ij λ4 Aa λ2 cosh( 2λ2 ) 2λ22 sinh( 2λnπ
) nπ i
λ4 Aa 2λ2 sinh( 2λ2 )
h
K2 n24 πn4 − 2
+ K3ij n24 πn4 if k=0


nπ n2 π 2 nπ
+ 4 a
nπ
λ2 cosh( 2λ ) 2 nπ
2λ2 sinh( 2λ )

4 a
2 2 3 nπ
(λ2 n π +8λ2 ) sinh( 2λ ) nπ

ij λ A λ A 2 cosh( )
K1 n24 πn4 2
− 2
+ K4ij n24 πn4 2
− n2 π 2 2 ij k=1


nπ n2 π 2 2n3 π 3
" j+k+1 #
j+k+1
λ82 Ain Aan

1 1
+ 8 8 − −
n π (j + k + 1) 2 2
42
Research Project
Integral two:
" # " #
λ2 sinh( nπ λ2 ) λ2 sinh( nπ
λ2 )

(2) nπ nπ ij ak ij ak 1 nπ nπ ij ak ij ak 1
Iijak (n) = K K + 2K1 K4 − + K K + 2K3 K2 +
λ2 λ2 1 1 2nπ 2 λ2 λ2 3 3 2nπ 2
" #
n2 π 2 (λ2 n2 π 2 + 2λ32 ) sinh( nπ λ2 ) λ22 cosh(nπ) 1
+ 2 K2ij K2ak − −
λ2 8n3 π 3 4n2 π 2 24
" nπ nπ
#
2 2 3 2
n2 π 2 ij ak (λ2 n π + 2λ2 ) sinh( λ2 ) λ2 cosh( λ2 ) 1
+ 2 K4 K4 − +
λ2 8n3 π 3 4n2 π 2 24

nπ nπ ij ak nπ ij ak nπ ij ak nπ ij ak
+ K K + K K + K K + K K
λ2 λ2 1 4 λ2 2 3 λ2 3 2 λ2 4 1
" #
λ2 cosh( nπ λ2 ) λ22 sinh( nπ
λ2 )

ij ak ij ak
+ 2K2 K2 + 2K4 K4 −
4nπ 4n2 π 2

λ2 Ai
nπ
λ2 cosh( 2λ ) 2λ22 sinh( 2λnπ
) ak λ2 An 2λ2 sinh( 2λ2 )
3 i nπ i
h
nπ
K2ak n22 πn2 2
− 2
+ (2K ak
+ K ) if j = 0


4nπ n2 π 2 2 λ2 3 n3 π 3 nπ
+ nπ
2λ22 sinh( 2λ
nπ

(λ2 n2 π 2 +8λ32 ) sinh( 2λ
nπ
2λ22 cosh( 2λ
nπ

ak λ2 An λ2 cosh( 2λ2 ) ) )
3 i
λ2 Ai
(2K4ak + nπ λ2 K1 ) n3 π 3 − 2
+ K4ak n22 πn2 2
− 2
if j = 1


4nπ n2 π 2 2n3 π 3 n2 π 2
Integral three:
" nπ nπ
#
2 2 3
(3) n2 π 2 ij ak (λ2 n π + 2λ2 ) sinh( λ2 ) cosh( λ2 ) 1
Iijak (n) = K2 K2 − +
λ22 8n3 π 3 4n2 π 2 24
" nπ nπ
#
2 2 3 2
+ 2 K4 K4 − −
λ2 8n3 π 3 4n2 π 2 24
" #
λ2 sinh( nπ λ2 )
2 2
n π ij ak nπ ij ak nπ ij ak ij ak 1
+ K1 K1 + K K + K K + K4 K4 +
λ22 λ2 1 4 λ2 4 1 2nπ 2
" #
sinh( nπλ2 )
2 2
n π ij ak nπ ij ak nπ ij ak ij ak 1
+ K3 K3 + K K + K K + K2 K2 λ2 −
λ22 λ2 3 2 λ2 2 3 2nπ 2
2 2 2 2
n π n π nπ ij ak nπ ij ak
+ K2ij K3ak + 2 K1ij K4ak + K K + K K
λ2 λ2 λ2 2 2 λ2 4 4
" nπ 2 nπ
#
ij ij nπ ij nπ ij
λ2 cosh( λ ) 2λ 2 sinh( λ )
+ n2 π 2 K4 K1ak + n2 π 2 K3 K2ak + K K ak + K K ak 2
− 2
λ2 4 4 λ2 2 2 4nπ 4n2 π 2
" nπ
# " nπ 2 nπ
#
λ42 Ain nπ ak 2λ2 sinh( 2λ ) λ32 Ain ak λ2 cosh( 2λ2 ) 2λ2 sinh( 2λ2 )

ak
+ 4 4 K + K4 2
+ 3 3 K4 − if j = 1
n π λ2 1 nπ n π nπ n2 π 2
" nπ
# " nπ 2 nπ
#
λ42 Aan nπ ij 2λ2 sinh( 2λ ) 3 a λ cosh( ) 2λ sinh( )

ij λ 2 A n ij 2 2λ 2 2λ
+ 4 4 K + K4 2
+ 3 3 K4 2
− 2
if k = 1
n π λ2 1 nπ n π nπ n2 π 2
λ82 Ain Aan
+ if j = k = 1 (169)
n8 π 8
43
Research Project
and integral four:

" nπ nπ
#
2 2 3 2
(4) n4 π 4 ij ak (λ2 n π + 2λ2 ) sinh( λ2 ) λ2 cosh( λ2 ) 1
Iijak (n) = 4 K2 K2 − −
λ2 8n3 π 3 4n2 π 2 24
" nπ nπ
#
2 2 3 2
+ 4 K4 K4 − +
λ2 8n3 π 3 4n2 π 2 24
" #
n2 π 2 n2 π 2 ij ak λ2 sinh( nπ
λ2 )

nπ ij ak nπ ij ak ij ak 1
+ 2 K1 K1 + 2 K1 K4 + 2 K4 K1 + 4K4 K4 −
λ2 λ22 λ2 λ2 2nπ 2
" nπ
#
n2 π 2 n2 π 2 ij ak λ2 sinh( λ2 ) 1

nπ ij ak nπ ij ak ij ak
+ 2 K3 K3 + 2 K3 K2 + 2 K2 K3 + 4K2 K2 +
λ2 λ22 λ2 λ2 2nπ 2
n2 π 2 n2 π 2 ij ak n2 π 2 ij ak n2 π 2 ij ak n2 π 2 ij ak

+ 2 K2 K3 + 2 K1 K4 + 2 K4 K1 + 2 K3 K2
λ2 λ22 λ2 λ2 λ2
" #
nπ ij ak nπ ij ak λ2 cosh( λ2 ) λ2 sinh( nπ
nπ 2
λ2 )
+ 4 K4 K4 + 4 K2 K2 − (170)
λ2 λ2 4nπ 4n2 π 2
References
[1] I. Todhunter, A History of the Theory of Elasticity and of the Strength of Materials: From Galilei to the Present
Time, vol. 1 of Cambridge Library Collection - Mathematics. Cambridge University Press, 2014.
[2] E. of Encyclopedia, “elasticity,” Encyclopedia Britannica, 2021.
[3] O. T. Bruhns, History of Plasticity, pp. 1–61. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2018.
[4] . E. L. Truesdell, C. A., The Rational Mechanics of Flexible or Elastic Bodies: 1638-1788 : Introduction to
Leonhardi Euleri Opera Omnia Vol. X Et XI Seriei Secundae. Turici : Venditioni exponunt Orell Fussli(IS), Zurich
: Fussli. 1960, 1960.
[5] E. E. Zajac, “Stability of Two Planar Loop Elasticas,” Journal of Applied Mechanics, vol. 29, pp. 136–142, 03
1962.
[6] T. McMillen and A. Goriely, “Tendril perversion in intrinsically curved rods,” Journal of Nonlinear Science,
vol. 12, pp. 241–281, 07 2002.
[7] I. Klapper, “Biological applications of the dynamics of twisted elastic rods,” Journal of Computational Physics,
vol. 125, no. 2, pp. 325–337, 1996.
[8] R. E. Goldstein and S. A. Langer, “Nonlinear dynamics of stiff polymers,” Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 75, pp. 1094–1097,
Aug 1995.
[9] J. V. Selinger, F. C. MacKintosh, and J. M. Schnur, “Theory of cylindrical tubules and helical ribbons of chiral
lipid membranes,” Phys. Rev. E, vol. 53, pp. 3804–3818, Apr 1996.
[10] W. R. Bauer, R. A. Lund, and J. H. White, “Twist and writhe of a dna loop containing intrinsic bends.,” Proceedings
of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 90, no. 3, pp. 833–837, 1993.
[11] D. Bensimon, A. Simon, V. Croquette, and A. Bensimon, “Stretching dna with a receding meniscus: Experiments
and models,” Physical review letters, vol. 74, pp. 4754–4757, 07 1995.
[12] S. B. Smith, Y. Cui, and C. Bustamante, “Overstretching b-dna: The elastic response of individual double-stranded
and single-stranded dna molecules,” Science, vol. 271, no. 5250, pp. 795–799, 1996.
[13] T. R. Strick, J.-F. Allemand, D. Bensimon, A. Bensimon, and V. Croquette, “The elasticity of a single supercoiled
dna molecule,” Science, vol. 271, no. 5257, pp. 1835–1837, 1996.
[14] B. Coleman and D. Swigon, “Theory of self–contact in kirchhoff rods with applications to supercoiling of knotted
and unknotted dna plasmids,” Philosophical transactions. Series A, Mathematical, physical, and engineering
sciences, vol. 362, pp. 1281–99, 08 2004.
[15] N. Clauvelin, B. Audoly, and S. Neukirch, “Mechanical response of plectonemic dna: An analytical solution,”
Macromolecules, vol. 41, pp. 4479–4483, 06 2008.
44
Research Project
[16] H. Lee, J.-G. Lee, J. Ryu, and M. Cho, “Twisted shape bi-stable structure of asymmetrically laminated cfrp
composites,” Composites Part B: Engineering, vol. 108, pp. 345–353, 2017.
[17] B. Davidovitch, R. Schroll, and E. Cerda, “Nonperturbative model for wrinkling in highly bendable sheets,” Phys.
Rev. E, vol. 85, 06 2012.
[18] J. S. HUMPHREYS, “On dynamic snap buckling of shallow arches.,” AIAA Journal, vol. 4, no. 5, pp. 878–886,
1966.
[19] G. Librandi, E. Tubaldi, and K. Bertoldi, “Snapping of hinged arches under displacement control: Strength loss
and nonreciprocity,” Physical Review E, vol. 101, p. 053004, 2020.
[20] N. Hu and R. Burgueño, “Buckling-induced smart applications: recent advances and trends,” Smart Materials and
Structures, vol. 24, p. 063001, may 2015.
[21] P. Harvey and L. Virgin, “Coexisting equilibria and stability of a shallow arch: Unilateral displacement-control
experiments and theory,” International Journal of Solids and Structures, vol. 54, pp. 1–11, 2015.
[22] M. Gomez, D. Moulton, and D. Vella, “Critical slowing down in purely elastic ‘snap-through’ instabilities,” Nature
Physics, vol. 13, 09 2016.
[23] R. M. Neville, R. M. J. Groh, A. Pirrera, and M. Schenk, “Shape control for experimental continuation,” Phys.
Rev. Lett., vol. 120, p. 254101, Jun 2018.
[24] J. M. T. Thompson, “Instabilities of elastic and spinning systems: Concepts and phenomena,” International
Journal of Bifurcation and Chaos, vol. 27, no. 09, p. 1730029, 2017.
[25] A. B. Pippard, “The elastic arch and its modes of instability,” European Journal of Physics, vol. 11, pp. 359–365,
nov 1990.
[26] S. Poppinga and M. Joyeux, “Different mechanics of snap-trapping in the two closely related carnivorous plants
dionaea muscipula and aldrovanda vesiculosa,” Phys. Rev. E, vol. 84, p. 041928, Oct 2011.
[27] A. Pandey, D. E. Moulton, D. Vella, and D. P. Holmes, “Dynamics of snapping beams and jumping poppers,” EPL
(Europhysics Letters), vol. 105, p. 24001, jan 2014.
[28] S. Hussain, Review of Morphing Wing. PhD thesis, 05 2017.
[29] A. K. Jha and J. N. Kudva, “Morphing aircraft concepts, classifications, and challenges,” in Smart Structures and
Materials 2004: Industrial and Commercial Applications of Smart Structures Technologies (E. H. Anderson, ed.),
vol. 5388, pp. 213 – 224, International Society for Optics and Photonics, SPIE, 2004.
[30] A. Gatto, F. Mattioni, and M. I. Friswell, “Experimental investigation of bistable winglets to enhance aircraft wing
lift takeoff capability,” Journal of Aircraft, vol. 46, no. 2, pp. 647–655, 2009.
[31] W. A. Chapkin, P. Walgren, G. J. Frank, D. R. Seifert, D. J. Hartl, and J. W. Baur, “Design and optimization of
high-strain, cylindrical composite skins for morphing fuselages,” Materials Design, vol. 187, p. 108395, 2020.
[32] C. Bolkcom, “V-22 osprey tilt-rotor aircraft,” p. 24, 04 2004.
[33] D. Li, S. Zhao, A. Da Ronch, J. Xiang, J. Drofelnik, Y. Li, L. Zhang, Y. Wu, M. Kintscher, H. P. Monner,
A. Rudenko, S. Guo, W. Yin, J. Kirn, S. Storm, and R. D. Breuker, “A review of modelling and analysis of
morphing wings,” Progress in Aerospace Sciences, vol. 100, pp. 46–62, 2018.
[34] Z. Min, V. K. Kien, and L. J. Richard, “Aircraft morphing wing concepts with radical geometry change,” The IES
Journal Part A: Civil & Structural Engineering, vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 188–195, 2010.
[35] H. F. Parker, “The parker variable cambre wing,” 1920.
[36] S. V.B., The History of Aircraft Construction in the USSR. 1994.
[37] R. KRESS, Variable sweep wing design.
[38] S. Siouris and N. Qin, “Study of the effects of wing sweep on the aerodynamic performance of a blended wing
body aircraft,” Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part G: Journal of Aerospace Engineering,
vol. 221, no. 1, pp. 47–55, 2007.
[39] J. Miller, The X-planes: X-1 to X-29. Specialty Press, 1983.
[40] J. Sun, Q. Guan, Y. Liu, and J. Leng, “Morphing aircraft based on smart materials and structures: A state-of-the-art
review,” Journal of Intelligent Material Systems and Structures, vol. 27, no. 17, pp. 2289–2312, 2016.
[41] B. Camescasse, A. Fernandes, and J. Pouget, “Bistable buckled beam: Elastica modeling and analysis of static
actuation,” International Journal of Solids and Structures, vol. 50, no. 19, pp. 2881–2893, 2013.
45
Research Project
[42] M. E. Pontecorvo, S. Barbarino, G. J. Murray, and F. S. Gandhi, “Bistable arches for morphing applications,”
Journal of Intelligent Material Systems and Structures, vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 274–286, 2013.
[43] J. L. do Vale, F. Afonso, F. Lau, and A. Suleman, “Chapter 4 - span morphing concept: An overview,” in Morphing
Wing Technologies (A. Concilio, I. Dimino, L. Lecce, and R. Pecora, eds.), pp. 125–144, Butterworth-Heinemann,
2018.
[44] M. R. Schultz, “A concept for airfoil-like active bistable twisting structures,” Journal of Intelligent Material
Systems and Structures, vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 157–169, 2008.
[45] R. KARIMI KELAYEH and M. H. DJAVARESHKIAN, “Aerodynamic investigation of twist angle variation based
on wing smarting for a flying wing,” Chinese Journal of Aeronautics, vol. 34, no. 2, pp. 201–216, 2021.
[46] S. Daynes, S. Nall, P. Weaver, K. Potter, P. Margaris, and P. Mellor, “On a bistable flap for an airfoil,” in 50th
AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics, and Materials Conference 17th AIAA/ASME/AHS
Adaptive Structures Conference 11th AIAA No, p. 2103, 2009.
[47] A. S. Panesar and P. M. Weaver, “Optimisation of blended bistable laminates for a morphing flap,” Composite
Structures, vol. 94, no. 10, pp. 3092–3105, 2012.
[48] S. Daynes, P. Weaver, and J. Trevarthen, “A morphing composite air inlet with multiple stable shapes,” Journal of
intelligent material systems and structures, vol. 22, no. 9, pp. 961–973, 2011.
[49] N. J. Pignier, C. J. O’Reilly, and S. Boij, “Aerodynamic and aeroacoustic analyses of a submerged air inlet in a
low-mach-number flow,” Computers Fluids, vol. 133, pp. 15–31, 2016.
[50] J. Guerrero, M. Sanguineti, and K. Wittkowski, “Cfd study of the impact of variable cant angle winglets on total
drag reduction,” Aerospace, vol. 5, no. 4, 2018.
[51] T. D. Crouch, “Wings: A history of aviation from kites to the space age,” 2003.
[52] R. Petz and W. Nitsche, “Active separation control on the flap of a two-dimensional generic high-lift configuration,”
Journal of Aircraft, vol. 44, no. 3, pp. 865–874, 2007.
[53] E. Torenbeek, Synthesis of Subsonic Airplane Design. Springer Dordrecht, 1982.
[54] Y. Gandhi, A. Pirondi, and L. Collini, “Analysis of bistable composite laminate with embedded sma actuators,”
Procedia Structural Integrity, vol. 12, pp. 429–437, 2018. AIAS 2018 international conference on stress analysis.
[55] M. Smith, ABAQUS/Standard User’s Manual, Version 6.9. United States: Dassault Systèmes Simulia Corp, 2009.
[56] X. WANG, J. LIU, X. SU, H. PENG, X. ZHAO, and C. LU, “A review on carrier aircraft dispatch path planning
and control on deck,” Chinese Journal of Aeronautics, vol. 33, no. 12, pp. 3039–3057, 2020.
[57] M. Voskuijl, “Performance analysis and design of loitering munitions: A comprehensive technical survey of recent
developments,” Defence Technology, vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 325–343, 2022.
[58] R. Hooke, Lectures de Potentia Restitutiva, Or of Spring Explaining the Power of Springing Bodies. [Cutlerian
lecture, John Martyn, 1678.
[59] A. E. Moyer, “Robert hooke’s ambiguous presentation of ”hooke’s law”,” Isis, vol. 68, no. 2, pp. 266–275, 1977.
[60] J. J. Zhang, “Chapter 2 - rock physical and mechanical properties,” in Applied Petroleum Geomechanics (J. J.
Zhang, ed.), pp. 29–83, Gulf Professional Publishing, 2019.
[61] J. Bergström, “5 - elasticity/hyperelasticity,” in Mechanics of Solid Polymers (J. Bergström, ed.), pp. 209–307,
William Andrew Publishing, 2015.
[62] C. WD., Materials Science and Engineering : An Introduction. New York: John Wiley Sons, 1997.
[63] E. Houghton, P. Carpenter, S. H. Collicott, and D. T. Valentine, “Chapter 1 - basic concepts and definitions,” in
Aerodynamics for Engineering Students (Seventh Edition) (E. Houghton, P. Carpenter, S. H. Collicott, and D. T.
Valentine, eds.), pp. 1–86, Butterworth-Heinemann, seventh edition ed., 2017.
[64] B. Audoly and Y. Pomeau, Elasticity and Geometry: From Hair Curls to the Non-linear Response of Shells. OUP
Oxford, 2010.
[65] O. A. Bauchau and J. Craig, “Structural analysis: With applications to aerospace structures,” 2009.
[66] C. J. Bauchau OA, Craig JI, Structural Analysis : With Applications to Aerospace Structures. Dordrecht: Springer,
2009.
[67] J. R. Vinson, Plate and Panel Structures of Isotropic, Composite and Piezoelectric Materials, Including Sandwich
Construction. Solid Mechanics and Its Applications.
[68] S. IS., Mathematical Theory of Elasticity ... Second Edition. New York: McGraw-Hill Book, 1956.
46
Research Project
[69] J. Levitas, J. Singer, and T. Weller, “Global dynamic stability of a shallow arch by poincaré-like simple cell
mapping,” International Journal of Non-Linear Mechanics, vol. 32, no. 2, pp. 411–424, 1997.
[70] Y.-L. Pi and M. Bradford, “Nonlinear dynamic buckling of pinned–fixed shallow arches under a sudden central
concentrated load,” Nonlinear Dynamics, vol. 73, 08 2013.
[71] K. A. Seffen and S. Vidoli, “Eversion of bistable shells under magnetic actuation: a model of nonlinear shapes,”
vol. 25, p. 065010, may 2016.
[72] S. Vidoli, “Discrete approximations of the föppl–von kármán shell model: From coarse to more refined models,”
International Journal of Solids and Structures, vol. 50, no. 9, pp. 1241–1252, 2013.
[73] . K. T. Ventsel, E., Thin Plates and Shells: Theory, Analysis, and Applications (1st ed.). CRC Press., 2001.
[74] M. R. E. Richard B. Hetnarski, Thermal Stresses – Advanced Theory and Applications. Springer Dordrecht.
[75] O. S. Liviu Librescu, Thin-Walled Composite Beams. Springer Dordrecht.
[76] J. Millett, N. Bourne, Y. Meziere, R. Vignjevic, and A. Lukyanov, “The effect of orientation on the shock response
of a carbon fibre–epoxy composite,” Composites Science and Technology, vol. 67, no. 15, pp. 3253–3260, 2007.
47

Technical Project

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Technical Project

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

A NALYTIC I NVESTIGATION OF B I -S TABLE W INGLETS T O

E XPAND AVAILABLE F LIGHT R EGIMES

2.1.1 Historical Uses of Morphing Parts

2.1.2 Modern Examples of Morphing Systems: Bi-Stability

Figure 3: Public Domain artists rendition of the

Figure 9: Bi-Stable Air-inlet to improve aerodynamic

2.2 ”Experimental Investigation of Bi-Stable Winglets to Enhance Take-Off Capacity”

Figure 11: Theoretical Wing Shape Proposed in [30]

Figure 12: Different fibre orientaions proposed in ref. [30]

2.3 Impetus to Investors

3 Mathematical Theory: Beam Equations

3.1 Classical Beam Theory

3.1.1 Hookes Law

3.1.2 Dimensional Form

3.1.3 Euler Bernoulli Beam Theory

1. The cross-section is infinitely rigid in its own plane.

3.1.4 Beam Loading Example: Classical Approach

x ∈ [0, L], y ∈ [−b/2, b/2], and z ∈ [−h/2, h/2] (7)

or given in terms of the displacements as:

3.2 Energy Methods

3.2.1 Beam Loading Example: Energy Approach

In order for this to be true it must be that:

4 Two dimensional arch model

M L−1 T −2 , it will later be found that the non-dimensionalisation given by:

4.2 Model Formulation

4.3 Boundary Conditions

ṽ(−Θ) = ṽ ′ (−Θ) = w̃(−Θ) = 0 (49)

ṽ(−Θ) = ṽ ′ (−Θ) = w̃(−Θ) = 0

Figure 16: examples of different boundary conditions for our system

ṽ (1)′′ = λ2 Fe(θ − Θ) (51)

(a)F̃ = 0 (b)F̃ = 0.0001 (c)F̃ = 0.0005

(d)F̃ = 0.001 (e)F̃ = 0.002 (f)F̃ = 0.0025

(g)F̃ = 0.003 (h)F̃ = 0.004 (i)F̃ = 0.005

(a)F̃ = 0 (b)F̃ = 0.0001 (c)F̃ = 0.0005

(d)F̃ = 0.001 (e)F̃ = 0.002 (f)F̃ = 0.0025

(g)F̃ = 0.003 (h)F̃ = 0.004 (i)F̃ = 0.005

This can then be rearranged to get:

(a) Energy vs Force Plot with maxima and minima labelled

(a) Energy vs Force Plot with maxima and minima labelled

Figure 23: Initial Configuration for the proposed Wing-let

5 Three dimensional Polynomial Approach

5.1 Model Formulation

where the initial vertical displacement w0 (x, y) is given by:

5.2 Boundary Conditions and Non-Dimensionalisation

(a) s = −0.1 (a) s = 0 (a) s = 0.1

(a) t = −0.1 (a) t = 0 (a) t = 0.1

5.3 Bending Energy

+ 24ξη − 48ξ 2 η + 24ξ 3 η + 24ξ 3 η + 96ξ 3 η − 48ξ 4 η − 48ξ 4 η + 24ξ 5 η st

5.4 Stretching Energy

∂2φ ∂2φ ∂2φ

5.4.1 Airys Stress Function

∆∆φ = Eh(det(K) − det(K0 )) (96)

with boundary conditions given by:

This equation can be rewritten in the form:

C10 (s, t) = 0 C11 (s, t) = 0

This has characteristic equation given by:

which therefore has solutions given by r = ± inπ

5.4.2 Explicit Calculation Of Membrane Energy

where the following notation has been introduced:

1 (1) (2) (3) (4)

where the coefficients are given by:

e1 = 144 [S3030 − 4S3040 + 2S3050 + 4S4040 − 4S4050 + S5050 ]

Uee (s, t) = Ueb (s, t) + Uem (s, t) = B1 s2 + B2 t2 + B3 st2 + B4 t4 (145)

5.6 Model Limitations