You are here

Physics-Based Identification and Management of Aeroelastic Limit-Cycle Oscillations (LCO)

Award Information
Agency: Department of Defense
Branch: Air Force
Contract: FA9550-09-C-0057
Agency Tracking Number: F074-006-0095
Amount: $749,918.00
Phase: Phase II
Program: STTR
Solicitation Topic Code: AF07-T006
Solicitation Number: N/A
Timeline
Solicitation Year: 2007
Award Year: 2009
Award Start Date (Proposal Award Date): 2008-10-24
Award End Date (Contract End Date): 2010-10-24
Small Business Information
2780 Skypark Drive Suite 400
Torrance, CA 90505
United States
DUNS: 106823607
HUBZone Owned: No
Woman Owned: No
Socially and Economically Disadvantaged: Yes
Principal Investigator
 Gerald Andersen
 Principal Investigator
 (310) 626-8373
 gandersen@nextgenaero.com
Business Contact
 Zoltan Feher
Title: Manager, Contracts
Phone: (310) 626-8384
Email: zfeher@nextgenaero.com
Research Institution
 University of Illinois, Champaign I
 Lori B Pankau
 
104 S. Wright Street, 306G, Talbot Lab MC 236
Urbana, IL 61801
United States

 (217) 244-7139
 Nonprofit College or University
Abstract

The Phase II effort presented in this proposal is intended to passively eliminate LCO by suppressing the triggering mechanism of the LCO through the concept of Targeted Energy Transfer (TET) between the aeroelastic modes of the system. The TET is physically realized through the utilization of a device known as a Nonlinear Energy Sink (NES), which provides nonlinear stiffness and inertial loading response to LCO excitations. During Phase II, initial analyses with tools developed during Phase I will be used to assess the Phase II test bed systems response and robustness to the addition of the NES. This will be done with a number of analytical methods including reduced order slow flow modeling to identify the triggering mechanisms, and various levels of CFD/structural solver couplings. The test bed itself is an existing transport wing model which has already been tested in NASA Langley Research Centers Transonic Dynamics Tunnel (TDT). Previous tests with this model have characterized the LCO behavior of the system; therefore there exist known flight conditions at which LCO occurs and will be directly mitigated by the passive application of the NES system to the existing aeroelastic model. BENEFIT: Because of a lack of established analytical methods and verification procedures for dealing with LCO phenomena, the aircraft design team is forced to work with design guidelines based upon historical or empirical findings.  These may be extremely onerous to conform to, and, at the same time, may not preclude LCOs for a particular structure in question. For example, MIL-A-87220, which is often very difficult to meet, establishes maximum allowable freeplay for various types of control surfaces.  These will dictate the use of expensive, close-tolerance bearings and thorough and frequent inspections and servicing during the aircrafts lifetime. Adherence to indirect military specifications of this nature would be rendered unnecessary by a combination of developments in the state-of-the-art of aircraft analysis tools and implementation of the NES. With analysis and design tools, analogous to those currently available for flutter calculations available to the engineer, better designs for both commercial and military aircraft in consideration of LCO behavior will be achieved, leading to vehicles requiring less inspection and maintenance and with expanded operating envelops free of LCO.

* Information listed above is at the time of submission. *

US Flag An Official Website of the United States Government