SIMULATION OF MANEUVERING FLEXIBLE AIRCRAFT BY COUPLED MULTIBODY/CFD

This paper illustrates the application of Multibody SystemDynamics (MSD) cou- pled to Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) for the aeroelas tic analysis of detailed aircraft models undergoing arbitrary free flight motion. Computatio nal AeroServoElasticity (CASE) requires the concurrent modeling of rather different aspec ts of aeromechanics, including rigid body dynamics, structural flexibility, fluid flow, servo-mechanisms for actuators. Considering all these issues within a single monolithic solver is partic ularly difficult, and possibly not worth the effort. An efficient alternative consists in building CASE modeling capability using inde- pendently developed software for each single domain: struc ture, fluid and mechanism analysis. The partitioned approach relies on dedicated software base d on the most appropriate techniques to address the dynamics of each specific field. Efficiency is guaranteed since each subsystem can be modeled independently and only the time and spatial sc ales of interest are considered. Another advantage is the great flexibility in setting up the m odel: the designer can indeed choose the most appropriate tools, trading accuracy for com putational costs, demanding for higher-order fidelity methods only when simplified ones cannot be applied, or their validation is required. The outcome of the combination of Multibody Sys tem Dynamics (MSD) and Com- putational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) is a prediction tool with a h level of accuracy, that can be crucial in the preliminary and intermediate design steps ofunconventional configurations, for the investigation of loads, performance, stability and vib ratory response of the vehicle at the boundaries of the flight envelope.

[1]  Daniella E. Raveh,et al.  Nonlinear Design Loads for Maneuvering Elastic Aircraft , 2000 .

[2]  Paolo Mantegazza,et al.  A Multi-Body Implementation of Finite Volumes C Beams , 1999 .

[3]  Armin Beckert Coupling fluid (CFD) and structural (FE) models using finite interpolation elements , 2000 .

[4]  Shia Hui Peng HYBRID RANS-LES MODELING BASED ON ZERO- AND ONE-EQUATION MODELS FOR TURBULENT FLOW SIMULATION , 2005 .

[5]  Ahmed A. Shabana,et al.  Application of deformable-body mean axis to flexible multibody system dynamics , 1986 .

[6]  Holger Wendland,et al.  Piecewise polynomial, positive definite and compactly supported radial functions of minimal degree , 1995, Adv. Comput. Math..

[7]  Simon Wiedemann,et al.  Simulation of Deployment of a Flexible Solar Array , 2002 .

[8]  Paolo Mantegazza,et al.  State Space Reduced Order Models for Static Aeroelasticity and Flight Mechanics of Flexible Aircrafts , 2003 .

[9]  Oskar Wallrapp,et al.  Standardization of flexible body modeling in multibody system codes , 1994 .

[10]  C. R. Ethier,et al.  A semi-torsional spring analogy model for updating unstructured meshes in 3D moving domains , 2005 .

[11]  Paolo Mantegazza,et al.  REAL-TIME MULTIBODY ANALYSIS OF WIND-TUNNEL ROTORCRAFT MODELS FOR VIRTUAL EXPERIMENT PURPOSES , 2003 .

[12]  Gian Luca Ghiringhelli,et al.  A Multibody Approach to the Analysis of Helicopter-Terrain Interaction , 2002 .

[13]  David K. Schmidt,et al.  Flight dynamics of aeroelastic vehicles , 1988 .

[14]  Dewey H. Hodges,et al.  Flight Dynamics of Highly Flexible Flying Wings , 2006 .

[15]  Thomas A. Zeiler,et al.  Nonlinear simulation of a flexible aircraft in maneuvering flight , 1987 .

[16]  Jan Nordström,et al.  Investigations of Acceleration Effects on Misssile Aerodynamics Using CFD , 2003 .

[17]  Ahmed A. Shabana,et al.  Flexible Multibody Simulation and Choice of Shape Functions , 1999 .

[18]  Michael T. Heath,et al.  Common‐refinement‐based data transfer between non‐matching meshes in multiphysics simulations , 2004 .

[19]  A. Huerta,et al.  Finite Element Methods for Flow Problems , 2003 .

[20]  David J. Ewins,et al.  Modal Testing: Theory, Practice, And Application , 2000 .

[21]  Jens Neumann,et al.  Numerical Simulation of Maneuvering Aircraft by Aerodynamic, Flight Mechanics and Structural Mechanics Coupling , 2007 .

[22]  D. Henningson,et al.  Shape Optimization for Delay of Laminar-Turbulent Transition , 2006 .

[23]  Martin Spieck,et al.  Multibody Simulation of the Free-Flying Elastic Aircraft , 2005 .

[25]  Paolo Mantegazza,et al.  Multi-Body Analysis of a Tiltrotor Configuration , 1998 .

[26]  O. Wallrapp Flexible Bodies in Multibody System Codes , 1998 .

[27]  Dario H. Baldelli,et al.  Unified Aeroelastic and Flight Dynamic Formulation via Rational Function Approximations , 2006 .

[28]  Lars Tysell Adaptive grid generation for 3D unstructured grids , 2010 .

[29]  Charbel Farhat,et al.  Matching fluid and structure meshes for aeroelastic computations : a parallel approach , 1995 .

[30]  H. Bijl,et al.  Mesh deformation based on radial basis function interpolation , 2007 .

[31]  P. Likins,et al.  Floating reference frames for flexible spacecraft , 1977 .

[32]  R. D. Milne,et al.  Some remarks on the dynamics of deformable bodies. , 1968 .

[33]  A. Arena,et al.  On the transpiration method for efficient aeroelastic analysis using an Euler solver , 1996 .

[34]  H. Saunders,et al.  Finite element procedures in engineering analysis , 1982 .

[35]  Rainald Löhner,et al.  Conservative load projection and tracking for fluid-structure problems , 1996 .

[36]  Michael Henshaw,et al.  Comparison of static and dynamic fluid-structure interaction solutions in the case of a highly flexible modern transport aircraft wing , 2003 .

[37]  Ahmed A. Shabana,et al.  Flexible Multibody Dynamics: Review of Past and Recent Developments , 1997 .

[38]  W. P. Rodden,et al.  Equations of motion of a quasisteady flight vehicle utilizing restrained static aeroelastic characteristics , 1985 .

[39]  Simon Wiedemann,et al.  Comparison of Results in Flexible Multibody Dynamics Using Various Approaches , 2003 .

[40]  P. Lancaster,et al.  Surfaces generated by moving least squares methods , 1981 .

[41]  E C Yates,et al.  AGARD Standard Aeroelastic Configurations for Dynamic Response I - Wing 445.6 , 1988 .

[42]  R. D. Milne Dynamics of the deformable aeroplane , 1964 .

[43]  E. van der Weide,et al.  Time-dependent aeroelastic simulation of rapid manoeuvring aircraft , 2002 .

[44]  P. Mantegazza,et al.  Application of Navier-Stokes simulations for aeroelastic stability assessment in transonic regime , 2007 .

[45]  Andrew Arena,et al.  Application of the transpiration method for aeroservoelastic prediction using CFD , 1998 .

[46]  Robert Schaback,et al.  Remarks on Meshless Local Construction of Surfaces , 2000, IMA Conference on the Mathematics of Surfaces.

[47]  Martin Spieck,et al.  Aeroelastic Effects in Multibody Dynamics , 2004 .

[48]  P. Mantegazza,et al.  Multibody Implementation of Finite Volume C-0 Beams , 2000 .

[49]  Andrew Arena,et al.  CFD-based aeroservoelastic predictions with comparisons to benchmark experimental data , 1999 .

[50]  P. Thomas,et al.  Geometric Conservation Law and Its Application to Flow Computations on Moving Grids , 1979 .

[51]  E. Carson Yates,et al.  AGARD standard aeroelastic configurations for dynamic response. Candidate configuration I.-wing 445.6 , 1987 .

[52]  Leonard Meirovitch,et al.  Hybrid state equations of motion for flexible bodies in terms of quasi-coordinates , 1991 .

[53]  Sergio Ricci,et al.  Active Aeroelastic Control over a Four Control Surface Wind Tunnel Wing Model , 2007 .

[54]  H. Ashley Observations on the dynamic behavior of large flexible bodies in orbit. , 1967 .

[55]  P. W. Likins,et al.  Floating reference frames for flexible spacecraft , 1977 .