A lot of composite materials are used for the modern aircraft to reduce its weight. Aircraft aeroservoelastic models are typically characterized by significant levels of model parameter uncertainty due to composite manufacturing process. Small modeling errors in the finite element model will eventually induce errors in the structural flexibility and mass, thus propagating into unpredictable errors in the unsteady aerodynamics and the control law design. One of the primary objectives of X-56A aircraft is the flight demonstration of active flutter suppression, and therefore in this study, the identification of the primary and secondary modes is based on the flutter analysis of X-56A aircraft. It should be noted that for all three Mach number cases rigid body modes and mode numbers seven and nine are participated 89.1 92.4 % of the first flutter mode. Modal participation of the rigid body mode and mode numbers seven and nine for the second flutter mode are 94.6 96.4%. Rigid body mode and the first two anti-symmetric modes, eighth and tenth modes, are participated 93.2 94.6% of the third flutter mode. Therefore, rigid body modes and the first four flexible modes of X-56A aircraft are the primary modes during the model tuning procedure. The ground vibration test-validated structural dynamic finite element model of the X-56A aircraft is to obtain in this study. The structural dynamics finite element model of X-56A aircraft is improved using the parallelized big-bang big-crunch algorithm together with a hybrid optimization technique.
Follow on Researches for X-56A Aircraft at NASA Dryden Flight Research Center (Progress Report)
Aerospace Flutter and Dynamics Council Meeting, Spring 2012 ; 2012 ; Santa Ana, CA, United States
18.05.2012
Sonstige
Keine Angabe
Englisch