Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “aerostructures”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

87 records · Page 5
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2003

Flight-Test Evaluation of Flutter-Prediction Methods

The flight-test community routinely spends considerable time and money to determine a range of flight conditions, called a flight envelope, within which an aircraft is safe to fly. The cost of determining a flight envelope could be greatly reduced if there were a method of safely and accurately predicting the speed associated with the onset of an instability called flutter. Several methods have been developed with the goal of predicting flutter speeds to improve the efficiency of flight testing. These methods include (1) data-based methods, in which one relies entirely on information obtained from the flight tests and (2) model-based approaches, in which one relies on a combination of flight data and theoretical models. The data-driven methods include one based on extrapolation of damping trends, one that involves an envelope function, one that involves the Zimmerman-Weissenburger flutter margin, and one that involves a discrete-time auto-regressive model. An example of a model-based approach is that of the flutterometer. These methods have all been shown to be theoretically valid and have been demonstrated on simple test cases; however, until now, they have not been thoroughly evaluated in flight tests. An experimental apparatus called the Aerostructures Test Wing (ATW) was developed to test these prediction methods.

Lind, RIck↗
NASA NTRS2011

Basis Function Approximation of Transonic Aerodynamic Influence Coefficient Matrix

A technique for approximating the modal aerodynamic influence coefficients matrices by using basis functions has been developed and validated. An application of the resulting approximated modal aerodynamic influence coefficients matrix for a flutter analysis in transonic speed regime has been demonstrated. This methodology can be applied to the unsteady subsonic, transonic, and supersonic aerodynamics. The method requires the unsteady aerodynamics in frequency-domain. The flutter solution can be found by the classic methods, such as rational function approximation, k, p-k, p, root-locus et cetera. The unsteady aeroelastic analysis for design optimization using unsteady transonic aerodynamic approximation is being demonstrated using the ZAERO flutter solver (ZONA Technology Incorporated, Scottsdale, Arizona). The technique presented has been shown to offer consistent flutter speed prediction on an aerostructures test wing 2 configuration with negligible loss in precision in transonic speed regime. These results may have practical significance in the analysis of aircraft aeroelastic calculation and could lead to a more efficient design optimization cycle.

Li, Wesley W.↗
NASA NTRS2013

FUN3D Analyses in Support of the First Aeroelastic Prediction Workshop

This paper presents the computational aeroelastic results generated in support of the first Aeroelastic Prediction Workshop for the Benchmark Supercritical Wing (BSCW) and the HIgh REynolds Number AeroStructural Dynamics (HIRENASD) configurations and compares them to the experimental data. The computational results are obtained using FUN3D, an unstructured grid Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes solver developed at NASA Langley Research Center. The analysis results for both configurations include aerodynamic coefficients and surface pressures obtained for steady-state or static aeroelastic equilibrium (BSCW and HIRENASD, respectively) and for unsteady flow due to a pitching wing (BSCW) or modally-excited wing (HIRENASD). Frequency response functions of the pressure coefficients with respect to displacement are computed and compared with the experimental data. For the BSCW, the shock location is computed aft of the experimentally-located shock position. The pressure distribution upstream of this shock is in excellent agreement with the experimental data, but the pressure downstream of the shock in the separated flow region does not match as well. For HIRENASD, very good agreement between the numerical results and the experimental data is observed at the mid-span wing locations.

Chwalowski, Pawel↗
NASA NTRS2014

A Comparison of Metallic, Composite and Nanocomposite Optimal Transonic Transport Wings

Current and future composite material technologies have the potential to greatly improve the performance of large transport aircraft. However, the coupling between aerodynamics and structures makes it challenging to design optimal flexible wings, and the transonic flight regime requires high fidelity computational models. We address these challenges by solving a series of high-fidelity aerostructural optimization problems that explore the design space for the wing of a large transport aircraft. We consider three different materials: aluminum, carbon-fiber reinforced composites and an hypothetical composite based on carbon nanotubes. The design variables consist of both aerodynamic shape (including span), structural sizing, and ply angle fractions in the case of composites. Pareto fronts with respect to structural weight and fuel burn are generated. The wing performance in each case is optimized subject to stress and buckling constraints. We found that composite wings consistently resulted in lower fuel burn and lower structural weight, and that the carbon nanotube composite did not yield the increase in performance one would expect from a material with such outstanding properties. This indicates that there might be diminishing returns when it comes to the application of advanced materials to wing design, requiring further investigation.

Kennedy, Graeme J.↗
NASA NTRS2014

Static Aeroelastic Analysis with an Inviscid Cartesian Method

An embedded-boundary, Cartesian-mesh flow solver is coupled with a three degree-of-freedom structural model to perform static, aeroelastic analysis of complex aircraft geometries. The approach solves a nonlinear, aerostructural system of equations using a loosely-coupled strategy. An open-source, 3-D discrete-geometry engine is utilized to deform a triangulated surface geometry according to the shape predicted by the structural model under the computed aerodynamic loads. The deformation scheme is capable of modeling large deflections and is applicable to the design of modern, very-flexible transport wings. The coupling interface is modular so that aerodynamic or structural analysis methods can be easily swapped or enhanced. After verifying the structural model with comparisons to Euler beam theory, two applications of the analysis method are presented as validation. The first is a relatively stiff, transport wing model which was a subject of a recent workshop on aeroelasticity. The second is a very flexible model recently tested in a low speed wind tunnel. Both cases show that the aeroelastic analysis method produces results in excellent agreement with experimental data.

Aeroelastic↗
NASA NTRS2014

Co-Optimization of Blunt Body Shapes for Moving Vehicles

A method and associated system for multi-disciplinary optimization of various parameters associated with a space vehicle that experiences aerocapture and atmospheric entry in a specified atmosphere. In one embodiment, simultaneous maximization of a ratio of landed payload to vehicle atmospheric entry mass, maximization of fluid flow distance before flow separation from vehicle, and minimization of heat transfer to the vehicle are performed with respect to vehicle surface geometric parameters, and aerostructure and aerothermal vehicle response for the vehicle moving along a specified trajectory. A Pareto Optimal set of superior performance parameters is identified.

Brown, James L.↗
NASA NTRS2017

Summary of Data from the Sixth AIAA CFD Drag Prediction Workshop: CRM Cases 2 to 5

Results from the Sixth AIAA CFD Drag Prediction Workshop Common Research Model Cases 2 to 5 are presented. As with past workshops, numerical calculations are performed using industry-relevant geometry, methodology, and test cases. Cases 2 to 5 focused on force/moment and pressure predictions for the NASA Common Research Model wing-body and wing-body-nacelle-pylon configurations, including Case 2 - a grid refinement study and nacelle-pylon drag increment prediction study; Case 3 - an angle-of-attack buffet study; Case 4 - an optional wing-body grid adaption study; and Case 5 - an optional wing-body coupled aero-structural simulation. The Common Research Model geometry differed from previous workshops in that it was deformed to the appropriate static aeroelastic twist and deflection at each specified angle-of-attack. The grid refinement study used a common set of overset and unstructured grids, as well as user created Multiblock structured, unstructured, and Cartesian based grids. For the supplied common grids, six levels of refinement were created resulting in grids ranging from 7x10(exp 6) to 208x10(exp 6) cells. This study (Case 2) showed further reduced scatter from previous workshops, and very good prediction of the nacelle-pylon drag increment. Case 3 studied buffet onset at M=0.85 using the Medium grid (20 to 40x10(exp 6) nodes) from the above described sequence. The prescribed alpha sweep used finely spaced intervals through the zone where wing separation was expected to begin. Although the use of the prescribed aeroelastic twist and deflection at each angle-of-attack greatly improved the wing pressure distribution agreement with test data, many solutions still exhibited premature flow separation. The remaining solutions exhibited a significant spread of lift and pitching moment at each angle-of-attack, much of which can be attributed to excessive aft pressure loading and shock location variation. Four Case 4 grid adaption solutions were submitted. Starting with grids less than 2x10(exp 6) grid points, two solutions showed a rapid convergence to an acceptable solution. Four Case 5 coupled aerostructural solutions were submitted. Both showed good agreement with experimental data. Results from this workshop highlight the continuing need for CFD improvement, particularly for conditions with significant flow separation. These comparisons also suggest the need for improved experimental diagnostics to guide future CFD development.

Tinoco, Edward N.↗
NASA NTRS2018

Best Practices for Training the Structures Flight Test Engineer

The Structures Flight from 412th Test Wing and the Aerostructures Branch at NASA Armstrong Flight Research Center at Edwards Air Force Base have developed a set of best practices for training a structures flight test engineer. These practices represent the hard-won lessons learned and best practices from training generations of engineers to perform high risk envelope expansion and developmental flight test. Collectively, these organizations have tested many of the world's most advanced and innovative aircraft, including the B-2, C-17, F-22, F-35, RQ-4, X-29, F-18 High Angle of Attack Research Vehicle, X-53, G-III Adaptive Compliant Trailing Edge, and X-56.

flight tests↗
NASA NTRS2018

Best Practices for Training the Structures Flight Test Engineer

The Structures Flight from 412 Test Wing and the Aerostructures Branch at NASA Armstrong Flight Research Center at Edwards Air Force Base have developed a set of best practices for training a structures flight test engineer. These practices represent the hard-won lessons learned and best practices from training generations of engineers to perform high risk envelope expansion and developmental flight test.

structures testing↗
NASA NTRS2018

Progress Towards the CFD Vision 2030

Outline: NASA Motivation; CFD Vision 2030 Study Summary - The Vision - Roadmap - Validation Experiments - CFD 2030 Activities Since Report Release; T3 Technical Challenges Supporting CFD Vision 2030 - Revolutionary Computational Aerosciences (RCA) [Aerodynamics - Aerothermodynamics - Aerostructures - Aeroacoustics - Propulsion Integration] - Multidisciplinary Design, Analysis, and Optimization (MDAO) - Combustion Modeling - Innovative Measurements (Proposed); Implementation Plan, Going Forward; Summary.

Vision 2030↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Distributed Pressure Sensing for Enabling Self-Aware Autonomous Aerial Vehicles

Autonomous aerial transportation will be a fixture of future robotic societies, simultaneously requiring more stringent safety requirements and fewer resources for characterization than current commercial air transportation. More robust, adaptable, self-state estimation will be necessary to create such autonomous systems. We present a modular, scalable, distributed pressure sensing skin for aerodynamic state estimation of a large, flexible aerostructure. This skin used a network of 22 nodes that performed in-situ computation and communication of data collected from 74 pressure sensors, which were embedded into the skin panels of an ultra-lightweight 14-foot wingspan made from commutable, lattice-based subcomponents, and tested at NASA Langley Research Center's 14X22 wind tunnel. The density of the pressure sensors allowed for the use of a novel distributed algorithm to generate estimates of the wing lift contribution that were more accurate than the direct integration of the pressure distribution over the wing surface.

Daniel Cellucci↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Methods for System-Level Multidisciplinary Uncertainty Analysis of Low-Boom Flight Vehicles

Current research supporting NASA’s Commercial Supersonic Technology project is focused on the efficient prediction of uncertainty in sonic boom loudness generated by low-boom aircraft concepts. This paper focuses on research incorporating aircraft trim and aerostructural analysis into a multidisciplinary system-level uncertainty analysis. This enables the modeling of a steady-state representation of a point in the uncertainty space, simulating the vehicle as it would be flown. This approach also enables multiple uncertain parameters defining the configuration of the vehicle to be reduced to three: Mach number, altitude, and aircraft weight. To demonstrate this methodology, a case study exploring a conceptual low-boom supersonic aircraft is performed. Two different approaches are used to model the interactions between nearfield pressure signature analysis and sonic boom propagation, and their performance is evaluated in terms of accuracy and computational expense. One method uses a set of local surrogate models to generate a large number of nearfield signatures and perform Monte Carlo analysis. This method is found to produce, at a lower expense, uncertainty metrics that are comparable to the second method, in which uncertainty metrics are computed based on loudness metric values obtained directly from simulated nearfield signatures.

UQ↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Method for System-Level Multidisciplinary Uncertainty Analysis of Low-Boom Flight Vehicles

Current research supporting NASA’s Commercial Supersonic Technology project is focused on the efficient prediction of uncertainty in sonic boom loudness generated by low-boom aircraft concepts. This paper focuses on research incorporating aircraft trim and aerostructural analysis into a multidisciplinary system-level uncertainty analysis. This enables the modeling of a steady-state representation of a point in the uncertainty space, simulating the vehicle as it would be flown. This approach also enables multiple uncertain parameters defining the configuration of the vehicle to be reduced to three: Mach number, altitude, and aircraft weight. To demonstrate this methodology, a case study exploring a conceptual low-boom supersonic aircraft is performed. Two different approaches are used to model the interactions between nearfield pressure signature analysis and sonic boom propagation, and their performance is evaluated in terms of accuracy and computational expense. One method uses a set of local surrogate models to generate a large number of nearfield signatures and perform Monte Carlo analysis. This method is found to produce, at a lower expense, uncertainty metrics that are comparable to the second method, in which uncertainty metrics are computed based on loudness metric values obtained directly from simulated nearfield signatures.

Supersonics↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

X-57 Static Structural Requirements and Airworthiness Approach

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Armstrong Flight Research Center (AFRC) (Edwards, California, U.S.A.) has been flying various types of aircraft, including experimental ones requiring structural modifications. Many of these aircraft aren’t typically certified by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) or the Department of Defense (DoD), but NASA can provide its own airworthiness certification utilizing a riskbased approach. The AFRC has established review processes and procedures to identify hazards, manage risks associated with flight programs, ensure safe flight operations, and satisfy programmatic requirements. The Aerostructures Branch at AFRC developed guidelines for the structural safety of flight, covering experimental aircraft, new components, payloads, and modifications. These guidelines detail structural design, analysis, instrumentation, ground testing, and flight-test operational aspects. The guidelines are followed for defining the airworthiness plan throughout the life cycle of a project. The guidelines can be tailored to the risk posture of each individual project. This paper documents the details of the structural airworthiness plan for the X-57 aircraft, including existing, modified, and newly developed structures. Additionally, it covers the design requirements and load cases specific to the X-57 aircraft.

Wesley W. Li↗