Receptance-Based Active Aeroelastic Control Using Multiple Control Surfaces

Design of next generation aircraft/sensorcraft for improved performance, such as gust load alleviation towards aircraft stability and flutter suppression during its flight operation, may necessitate wing technology that can be controlled and manipulated by active means. Moreover, in recent years the efforts are underway to realize “Fly by Feel” concepts, which are aimed in utilizing on-board sensors (embedded) and actuators (control surfaces) of the aircraft towards the design of active control system for desired performance. This paper presents active control strategies for wings having multiple control surfaces, which are purely based upon in-flight receptance (measured) data. The proposed receptance based control approach has several advantages over the traditional state-space based control because it circumvents approximation errors in reduced order modeling; it captures the true interaction between structure and aerodynamic loads; and it requires modest size of matrices (depending upon the available number of sensors and actuators) for control gain computations. In this study, multi-input state and output feedback control strategies for active aeroelastic control using the method of receptances is developed. The control gains are computed for the extension of flutter boundaries via pole placement. At first, by using numerical receptances obtained from the aeroelastic model of a flexible wing having multiple control surfaces, the proposed methodology is demonstrated. In order to test and demonstrate the receptance method for more complex aircraft geometries, configurations and aerodynamic loading conditions, numerical receptances from Finite Element models of aircraft wings with multiple control surfaces were extracted for the proposed control design. Presented studies and control approach may become the basis for optimal placement and sizing of control surfaces in a given wing section for active aeroelactic control and enhanced flight performance.

[1]  Raymond M. Kolonay,et al.  Multiple control surface utilization in active aeroelastic wing technology , 1997 .

[2]  John E. Mottershead,et al.  Robust pole placement in structures by the method of receptances , 2011 .

[3]  Boyd Perry,et al.  Summary of an Active Flexible Wing program , 1992 .

[4]  Jonathan E. Cooper,et al.  Active Aeroelastic Control Using the Receptance Method , 2010 .

[5]  Jonathan E. Cooper,et al.  Introduction to Aircraft Aeroelasticity and Loads , 2007 .

[6]  E. Dowell,et al.  Aeroelastic Wing with Leading- and Trailing-Edge Control Surfaces , 2003 .

[7]  Alfred G. Striz,et al.  Influence of Structural and Aerodynamic Modeling on Flutter Analysis and Structural Optimization , 1990 .

[8]  Sergio Ricci,et al.  Active Aeroelastic Control Over a Multisurface Wing: Modeling and Wind-Tunnel Testing , 2007 .

[9]  M. Karpel Procedures and Models for Aeroservoelastic Analysis and Design , 2001 .

[10]  John E. Mottershead,et al.  Assignment of eigenvalue sensitivities from receptance measurements , 2009 .

[11]  E Stanewsky,et al.  Adaptive wing and flow control technology , 2001 .

[12]  Sebastian Heinze,et al.  An Approach to Induced Drag Reduction and its Experimental Evaluation , 2004 .

[13]  Jonathan E. Cooper,et al.  Receptance Based Active Aeroelastic Control Using Multiple Control Surfaces , 2012 .

[14]  S Buttrill Carey,et al.  Aeroservoelastic Simulation of an Active Flexible Wing Wind Tunnel Model , 1996 .

[15]  Alfred G. Striz,et al.  Influence of structural and aerodynamic modeling on optimization with flutter constraint , 1990 .

[16]  John E. Mottershead,et al.  Receptance Method in Active Vibration Control , 2006 .

[17]  Edmund Pendleton,et al.  Active Aeroelastic Wing Flight Research Program: Technical Program and Model Analytical Development , 2000 .

[18]  Günter H. Schnerr,et al.  Numerical Investigation of Performance Losses in a Centrifugal Pump due to Cavitation , 2001 .

[19]  Yonghui Zhao,et al.  Flutter suppression of a high aspect-ratio wing with multiple control surfaces , 2009 .

[20]  Mordechay Karpel Design for Active Flutter Suppression and Gust Alleviation Using State-Space Aeroelastic Modeling , 1982 .

[21]  Robert C. Scott,et al.  Development of Aeroservoelastic Analytical Models and Gust Load Alleviation Control Laws of a SensorCraft Wind-Tunnel Model Using Measured Data , 2006 .

[22]  S. V. Thornton,et al.  Reduction of structural loads using maneuver load control on the Advanced Fighter Technology Integration (AFTI)/F-111 mission adaptive wing , 1993 .

[23]  Aman Behal,et al.  Model-Free Control Design for Multi-Input Multi-Output Aeroelastic System Subject to External Disturbance , 2011 .

[24]  Jessica A. Woods-Vedeler,et al.  Rolling Maneuver Load Alleviation using active controls , 1992 .

[25]  David Lucia,et al.  The SensorCraft Configurations: A Non-Linear AeroServoElastic Challenge for Aviation , 2005 .

[26]  Vivek Mukhopadhyay,et al.  Flutter suppression control law design and testing for the active flexible wing , 1995 .

[27]  R. H. Liebeck,et al.  Design of the Blended Wing Body Subsonic Transport , 2002 .

[28]  D. J. Neill,et al.  ASTROS - A multidisciplinary automated structural design tool , 1987 .