SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “TRANSONIC FLUTTER”

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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

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

At least 127 records · Page 7

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Multiscale Mesh Adaptation for Transonic Aeroelastic Flutter Problems

This work applies multiscale mesh adaptation with refine to reduce spatial discretization error of aeroelastic computational fluid dynamics (CFD) simulations. Benchmark flutter models, such as the pitch and plunge NACA64A-010 airfoil and the benchmark supercritical wing, are studied with both a linearized frequency-domain solver and time-marching CFD coupled to a modal structural solver in FUN3D. The undeformed NASA Common Research Model (CRM), an aeroelastic jig shape variant of the CRM, is also studied with the linearized frequency-domain approach. For these cases, the adaptation process converges to comparable flutter predictions to hand-generated meshes but with smaller node counts. However the additional disciplines of the linearized frequency-domain analysis, the mesh deformation, and the unsteady finite-volume solver create robustness challenges that need to be addressed before it can be applied as a fully automated process for complex transonic aeroelastic problems. In particular, negative volumes are observed to be an issue for FUN3D’s linear elasticity mesh deformation solver when moving the adapted meshes.

Aeroelasticity↗

NASA NTRS1954

Free-Flight Tests of 0.11-Scale North American F-100 Airplane Wings to Investigate the Possibility of Flutter in Transonic Speed Range at Varying Angles of Attack

Free-flight tests in the transonic speed range utilizing rocketpropelled models have been made on three pairs of 0.11-scale North American F-100 airplane wings having an aspect ratio of 3.47, a taper ratio of 0.308, 45 degree sweepback at the quarter-chord line, and thickness ratios of 31 and 5 percent to investigate the possibility of flutte r. Data from tests of two other rocket-propelled models which accidentally fluttered during a drag investigation of the North American F-100 airplane are also presented. The first set of wings (5 percent thick) was tested on a model which was disturbed in pitch by a moving tail and reached a maximum Mach number of 0.85. The wings encountered mild oscillations near the first - bending frequency at high lift coefficients. The second set of wings 9 percent thick was tested up to a maximum Mach number of 0.95 at (2) angles of attack provided by small rocket motors installed in the nose of the model. No oscillations resembling flutter were encountered during the coasting flight between separation from the booster and sustainer firing (Mach numbers from 0.86 to 0.82) or during the sustainer firing at accelerations of about 8g up to the maximum Mach number of the test (0.95). The third set of wings was similar to the first set and was tested up to a maximum Mach number of 1.24. A mild flutter at frequencies near the first-bending frequency of the wings was encountered between a Mach number of 1.15 and a Mach number of 1.06 during both accelerating and coasting flight. The two drag models, which were 0.ll-scale models of the North American F-100 airplane configuration, reached a maximum Mach number of 1.77. The wings of these models had bending and torsional frequencies which were 40 and 89 percent, respectively, of the calculated scaled frequencies of the full-scale 7-percent-thick wing. Both models experienced flutter of the same type as that experienced-by the third set of wings.

O'Kelly, Burke R.↗

NASA NTRS2019

Extending A Correction Method for Unsteady Transonic Aerodynamics to Variable Camber Continuous Trailing Edge Flap

In this study, we have extended our correction method for transonic aerodynamics to baseline and variable camber continuous trailing edge (VCCTEF) geometries of super-critical airfoils at cruise conditions. This correction method modifies Theodorsen theory, which is based on incompressible potential flow over a flat plate. The method is partly based on CFD RANS simulations of oscillating NASA generic transport model (GTM) baseline cruise and VCCTEF airfoil geometries in pitch and shows promise for addressing transonic flutter problems of aeroelasticity. In the earlier study1, the Theodorsen functions were modulated with non-linear functions of Mach number, M, and reduced frequency, k, and thus the correction was demonstrated for the symmetrical NACA0012 airfoil. In the present study, the modulation functions are also allowed to account for the effects of camber and thickness of the airfoil. This is demonstrated by applying the correction method to various symmetric NACA00xx airfoil geometries (NACA001, NACA0002, NACA0012, NACA0015 and NACA0018), the NASA GTM super-critical baseline and VCCTEF airfoil geometries, e.g., the circular airfoil, VCCTEF222. First results indicate that the correction method accounts for a large variation of thickness of airfoils and camber. The present correction method will guide the development of a new state space model for the VCCTEF system and eventually a new transfer function that will be incorporated in a new aeroelastic framework leading to an appropriate transonic flutter model for use in the future aircraft systems in development under the NASA Advanced Air Transportation Technologies (AATT) project.

Kaul, Upender K.↗

NASA NTRS1979

Subsonic-transonic stall flutter study

The objective of the Subsonic/Transonic Stall Flutter Program was to obtain detailed measurements of both the steady and unsteady flow field surrounding a rotor and the mechanical state of the rotor while it was operating in both steady and flutter modes to provide a basis for future analysis and for development of theories describing the flutter phenomenon. The program revealed that while all blades flutter at the same frequency, they do not flutter at the same amplitude, and their interblade phase angles are not equal. Such a pattern represents the superposition of a number of rotating nodal diameter patterns, each characterized by a different amplitude and different phase indexing, but each rotating at a speed that results in the same flutter frequency as seen in the rotor system. Review of the steady pressure contours indicated that flutter may alter the blade passage pressure distribution. The unsteady pressure amplitude contour maps reveal regions of high unsteady pressure amplitudes near the leading edge, lower amplitudes near the trailing.

Stardter, H.↗

NASA NTRS1993

Transonic panel flutter

FEM is here used to ascertain the stability and aeroelastic response of thin, 2D panels subjected to Mach 0.8-2.5 flows. In the absence of shocks, it is found that the Euler equations used to represent the unsteady flowfield dynamics predict response behaviors resembling those obtained via potential flow methods. Where shocks do play a significant role in the overall motion of the panel, divergence and limit cycle flutter are observed. In the Mach 1.4-1.5 range, flutter involved the higher modes of the panel, tending toward possible chaotic motion.

Davis, Gary A.↗

NASA NTRS1948