Reducing the Risk of

Its causes and potentially catastrophic effects

NEAL WILLFORD, EAA 169108

58 DECEMBER 2003
FLUTTER PHOTO ILLUSTRATION BY JIM KOEPNICK

FLUTTER
L
FLUTTER
egend has it that the famed Wisconsin air racer Steve Wittman
used to check his racing airplanes for flutter by making high-
speed passes just above frozen Lake Winnebago. His reasoning was
that if he experienced flutter, he could quickly land and slide to a
stop on the lake.
You won’t find any flight-test manual recommending this proce-
dure, but in the 1930s, as racers pushed the performance envelope,
Sport Aviation 59
 Whether you’re building your own design or someone
else’s, you need to do what you can to ensure that
your airplane will never experience this destructive
phenomenon.
designers knew that flutter was a
dangerous thing, even though they
may not have completely under-
stood it. Flight-testing was the main
way they had to show that their
designs were free from flutter.
Fortunately, a lot of research has
been done since then, enabling
designers and builders to reduce the
risk of potentially catastrophic flut-
ter.
Let’s take a look at some of the
causes of flutter and how to reduce
the risk of it. A new spreadsheet to
help estimate the amount of control
surface balance needed is available
for download from the EAA website
at www.eaa.org. Just click on the EAA
Sport Aviation cover and scroll down
to the December links.
What Causes Flutter
The FAA defines flutter as: “The
unstable, self-excited oscillation of
an airfoil and its associated struc-
ture, caused by a combination of
aerodynamic, inertia, and elastic
effects in such a manner as to
extract energy from the airstream.
60 DECEMBER 2003
The amplitude of oscillation (at the
critical flutter speed) following an
initial disturbance will be main-
tained. At a higher speed these
amplitudes will increase.”
You’ll probably not want to use
this definition when explaining to
your spouse why a flag flutters in a
stiff breeze! However, this long defi-
nition describes the causes of flutter,
so let’s dig them out to see what
roles they play and how to mini-
mize the risk. The three factors that
can combine together and cause
flutter are:
■ Elastic properties of the struc-
ture
■ Inertia effects
■ Aerodynamic effects
Elastic Properties: Most objects
are flexible and will oscillate, or
vibrate, at their natural frequency if
acted on by a force. This natural fre-
quency is a function of the object’s
geometry, weight, and material
properties. You can demonstrate
this with the following experiment.
Put a yardstick on a table and let 6
GLASTAR SPORTSMAN 2+2—PHOTO BY MIKE STEINEKE
inches hang over the edge. While
holding it down, pull up and release
the overhanging end. You will see
and hear the yardstick oscillate.
Repeat the experiment with a 12-
inch overhang and you’ll see and
hear that it oscillates at a lower fre-
quency.
Each type of motion that an
object experiences is called a mode,
and it usually takes two or more
modes acting together to have flut-
ter. The yardstick experiment is an
example of a bending mode. We
could have also twisted and released
the yardstick and it would have
oscillated at some torsional frequen-
cy—an example of a torsion mode.
An airplane’s fuselage, wing, and
tail surfaces can all oscillate in these
two modes. An airplane’s critical
flutter speed is a function of the nat-
ural frequency of its various parts,
and all things being equal, a higher
natural frequency leads to a higher
critical flutter speed. It is the design-
er’s goal to ensure that critical flut-
ter speed for each of the possible
flutter modes is higher than the
maximum dive speed of the air-
plane.
Conventional fuselages with tail
surfaces attached directly to the
tailcone are usually pretty stiff in
bending and torsion. This is good,
because higher stiffness leads to a
higher natural frequency. A pod
and boom fuselage, on the other
hand, tends to be more flexible
because the boom has a smaller
smaller cross section. Designers
who use a pod and boom arrange-
ment should keep this in mind and
try to use as stiff a boom as possible.
Moveable control surfaces and
SAFETY ON DISPLAY.
trim tabs increase the number of
The New KMD 250 Multi-Function Display. Sharp 3.8-inch
modes, and the list of possible
mode combinations that could active matrix LCD. Positioning, data link weather, traffic and
cause flutter gets long quickly. terrain, all on an affordable high-resolution and user-friendly
Fortunately, the interaction of display. Optional VFR GPS. Give us a call at 1-877-712-2386
these different modes is pretty well
understood, and following good or 1-913-712-2613 or visit our website
design and building practices can at www.bendixking.com/KMD250
minimize the risk of flutter. for more information.
An airplane’s structural material
also helps determine the airframe’s
elastic properties. Researchers have
pulled, bent, and twisted the differ-
ent materials we use to build air-
planes in order to determine their
limits. Two of these material prop-
erties are the modulus of elasticity
and the shear modulus. Each is a
measure of a material’s “springi-
ness,” with the first indicating how
much the material will bend and
the second how much it will twist
when a load is applied. A higher
modulus means higher stiffness,
which is desirable for reducing the
risk of flutter.
Some materials have modulus
values much higher than others.
For example, fiberglass is a strong
material, but its modulus values are
less than 50 percent than the values
of aluminum. This means that a
fiberglass wing designed to the
same strength levels as an alu-
minum wing would be roughly
twice as flexible.
One reason why composite air-
craft have the plies of glass on the
skins and spar webs oriented at
roughly 45 degrees is to help
For more information, visit SPORT AVIATION on the Web at www.eaa.org
Sport Aviation 61
improve their torsional stiffness.
Carbon fiber has much higher mod-
ulus values than fiberglass, which is
one reason why it’s often used on
the control surfaces and wing skins
of high-performance composite air-
craft.
The torsional stiffness of control
Figure 1
Wing Accelerating Up
Steady Flight
Wing Accelerating Down
Figure 2
Hinge Line
CG of Part
Axis Line
62 DECEMBER 2003
surfaces is important for reducing
the risk of flutter, so it is desirable to
skin them with something that is
light and stiff. From a cost and
weight standpoint, aluminum and
plywood are hard to beat. The next
time you see the largely composite
Cirrus SR-22, take a look at its con-
X ration must ensure that both
Y torsion and the vertical fin in
+ X Direction of the vertical fin to put it
trol surfaces—they’re aluminum!
Inertia Effects: Inertia is the
resistance of an object to change
direction and the heavier the object,
the higher the inertia. Inertia effects
depend on the weight and location
of the airplane’s individual pieces.
These effects are actually
closely tied to the airplane’s
elastic characteristics. You
can see this by repeating the
yardstick experiment and
attaching a pair of vise grips
to the overhanging end.
With the added mass the
yardstick will now vibrate at
a much lower frequency
than before. Without the
vise grips, when the yard-
stick reaches its maximum
deflection, it immediately
wants to spring back in the
opposite direction. With the
vise grips, the yardstick is
not as anxious to change
directions and consequently
results in a lower oscillating
frequency. This is not good;
we want the natural frequen-
cy to be higher, not lower.
An aviation example
would be installing outboard
fuel tanks (either internally
or as tip tanks). Like the vise
grips, the tanks would alter
the wing’s natural frequency
and could reduce the critical
flutter speed. A T-tail is
another “vise grip” example.
Designers using this configu-
the vertical fin and tailcone
(or boom) are as stiff as pos-
sible to reduce the possibility
of the fuselage fluttering in
bending. T-tail sailplanes
often have the horizontal tail
mounted to the forward part
ahead of the fin’s elastic axis
and thereby reduce the ten-
dency of flutter.
So far our discussion
about inertia effects has been
limited to the airplane’s fixed struc-
ture, but we can’t forget the rudder,
elevator, and ailerons. Their inertia
effects play a critical role in whether
the airplane will have flutter prob-
lems. To see why, look at Figure 1.
The middle airfoil represents the
outboard portion of a wing in
steady flight. The circle on the
aileron represents its center of grav-
ity, which on unbalanced control
surfaces is usually aft of the hinge
line. Let’s assume the airplane
encounters a strong upward ther-
mal that suddenly deflects the wing
upward. Recalling that inertia is the
SOLVE YOUR TRAFFIC PROBLEMS.
resistance of an object to change
The new solid-state KT 73 Mode S Data Link Transponder
direction, and that inertia forces act
at the center of gravity of an object, enhances pilot “see and avoid” safety and efficiency in flight
the aileron would tend to lag using FAA TIS technology — the new, free Traffic Information
behind the upward moving wing, as Service. Call 1-877-712-2386 or 1-913-712-2613 or visit our
shown in the top of Figure 1.
website at www.bendixking.com/kt73
To the oncoming air, the lagging
aileron looks like a deflected flap, for more information.
which increases its lift and a ten-
dency to twist the wing’s outboard
section. At some point the wing’s
stiffness will stop this deflection
and the wingtip will rebound in a
downward motion. The aileron
again lags behind the wing, as
shown in the bottom of the figure,
and the upward deflected aileron Quieter • Safer • Painless
will decrease the lift and increase
the tendency to twist the leading “To fly over 19,000 miles in 81 hours
edge up. This downward deflection without squirming in the seat is
will continue until the wing stiff- priceless! I can honestly say I have
ness again prevails and sends the never experienced such seat comfort.”
wing springing back upward.
“The difference in comfort and sound
This combined bending and tor-
sion motion will eventually damp-
levels since Oregon Aero worked their
en out if the airplane is flying magic on my helmet and headset is
below the critical flutter speed for nothing short of fantastic!”
this type of interaction. If the air- photo courtesy B. Bohannon Bruce Bohannon
plane is flying above this speed, the
Bruce Bohannon, Pilot, The Exxon Flyin’ Tiger, Has Set or
oscillation will feed on the energy
Broken 19 Altitude and Time to Climb World Records.
from the airstream and the magni-
tude of the deflections will rapidly • Custom & Portable Seat Cushion Systems
increase until the pilot slows the • Headset & Helmet Upgrades
airplane—or worse, something • Aircraft Interior Upgrades
breaks. Fortunately there are ways • Shoe Inserts
to reduce the risk of this kind of New Ways Of Thinking To Solve Old Problems.
flutter that we will discuss shortly.
34020 Skyway Drive, Scappoose, OR 97056-2516
Aerodynamic Effects: Aero- 800-888-6910 • 503-543-7399 • www.oregonaero.com • email@oregonaero.com

dynamic effects are the final ingre- Money back guarantee. Visa, MasterCard and US Government IMPAC cards accepted.

For more information, visit SPORT AVIATION on the Web at www.eaa.org

Sport Aviation 63
 When it comes to preventing control surface flutter,
there are two types of control surface balance to consider:
static and dynamic.
dients of the flutter recipe. The air
rushing past an airplane in flight
provides a large source of energy,
which an oscillating wing or con-
trol surface can tap into. This ener-
gy source is proportional to the air-
speed squared, so a slow airplane
will have a reduced tendency to
flutter. (Notice I didn’t say zero ten-
dency.)
Wind gusts and buffeting due to
separated flow can also provide a
pulsing force to initiate flutter. As
long as these disturbances happen
below the critical flutter speed,
aerodynamic forces and structural
stiffness should dampen any result-
ing oscillations out. At higher alti-
tudes the air is less dense and con-
sequently the aerodynamic damp-
ening is also reduced. Also, an air-
plane flying at high altitude and
high airspeed can start experienc-
ing compressibility over portions
of the wing or tail due to the local
flow reaching a high Mach num-
ber. This can result in aerodynamic
buffeting that can cause control
surfaces downstream to start
vibrating.
64 DECEMBER 2003
Reducing the Risk of Flutter
Whether you’re building your own
design or someone else’s, you need
to do what you can to ensure that
your airplane will never experience
this destructive phenomenon. Years
of research and cumulative flight
experience have provided us with
good recommendations for reduc-
ing the risk of flutter.
Aerodynamic: The aerodynamic
shape of the control surface can
influence an airplane’s tendency to
flutter. Control surfaces with flat or
concave sides are more flutter resist-
ant than those with convex (slight-
ly bulging) contours. Another trick
some designers use to reduce the
risk of control surface flutter is to
bevel the trailing edge slightly.
Control System Rigidity: Free
play in the control system should be
reduced to a minimum. Hinges and
control connections should not
have excess slop, and control cables
should be at their proper tension.
From a potential flutter standpoint,
a control system that uses large
VAN’S RV-10A—PHOTO BY LEEANN ABRAMS
diameter push/pull tubes has an
advantage over a cable system.
Reference 1 recommends that
with one aileron clamped to the
wing, the total free play at the trail-
ing edge of the other aileron should
not exceed a distance equal to 2.5
percent times the average aileron
chord (measured aft of the hinge
line). Excessive slop in the aileron
control system can aggravate the
condition shown in Figure 1.
Similarly, the total free play in
trim tabs should also not exceed 2.5
percent times the average trim tab
chord. The trim tabs should also be
irreversible, meaning that they
should only move by using the trim
wheel or switch, not by applying a
load to the tab itself. Finally, the
interconnection between elevator
surfaces should be as torsionally stiff
as possible. Using a large diameter
elevator interconnect tube is a way
to help achieve this.
Control Surface Balance: The
most effective way to reduce the risk
of control surface flutter is to use an
appropriate amount of control sur-
face balance. Flaps are normally not essary balancing weight in the sur- of vibration, and you may recall
balanced because of their inboard face’s leading edge or on an extend- that it usually takes two modes
location, but the ailerons, elevator, ed arm. Designers, however, like interacting to start flutter.
and rudder often have some adding weight to their airplanes as Another way to reduce the
amount of leading edge balance much as pilots like paying user’s amount of balance weight is to
weights. fees, so they often try to make the design the control surface to be stat-
It’s true that some airplanes control surfaces as light as possible. ically underbalanced and ensure
don’t have any leading edge bal- This is one reason why so many that it has a proper amount of
ance weights on their control sur- World War II fighters, like the F4U dynamic balance. Reference 3 states
faces, and they don’t have flutter Corsair, had fabric covered control that this is okay as long as the max-
problems. Often they are slower air- surfaces. imum dive speed is less than 300
planes with fabric-covered control A control surface is dynamically mph. Above this speed, it recom-
surfaces whose center of gravity balanced about an axis (like the cen- mends that all control surfaces be
tends to be close to the hinge line. terline through an airplane) if an both statically and dynamically bal-
But, just because some “slow” air- angular acceleration about this axis anced.
planes haven’t had flutter problems does not tend to cause the control Dynamic balance depends on the
doesn’t mean that others won’t, so surface to rotate about its hinge weight of each control surface part,
designers of slow airplanes can’t line. For example, if a wing is oscil- as well as their center of gravity’s
just assume their designs will be lating up and down in bending, the location with respect to the hinge
flutter free. outer portion of the wing is experi- line and axis of rotation. The
The FAA’s predecessor, the CAA, encing a larger angular acceleration amount of dynamic balance can be
provided information (References 1- than the inner portion. If the determined experimentally (as
3) that is still useful to help design- aileron is not dynamically balanced, shown in Reference 1) or calculated
ers estimate the amount of control this wing flapping can cause the if you know the weight and CG
surface balance needed to reduce aileron to start rotating about its locations of each of the parts. Figure
the risk of flutter. The FAA still hinge line. Now there’s two modes 2 shows the dimensions needed to
allows Reference 1 to be used for
certified airplanes, provided that it
meets a whole slew of criteria (see
FAR 23.629 for more details).
When it comes to preventing
control surface flutter, there are two
types of control surface balance to
consider: static and dynamic. Static
balance deals with whether a con-
trol surface balances about its hinge
line. A surface is completely bal-
anced if it’s balanced about its hinge
line. It’s underbalanced if its trailing
edge is heavy and overbalanced if its
leading edge is heavy. This is the
type of balancing that most builders
or restorers are familiar with, and
the plans or manual for their air-
plane should provide information
on how the control surfaces are to
be balanced. Don’t forget that
repainting your airplane can change
the balance on its control surfaces
due to the added weight of the
paint, so be sure that they are prop-
erly balanced before flying.
Because a control surface’s struc-
ture is mostly aft of its hinge line,
airplanes that require static bal-
anced surfaces often locate the nec-
For more information, visit SPORT AVIATION on the Web at www.eaa.org
Sport Aviation 65
estimate the dynamic balance of a
control surface, which can then be
calculated using the following equa-
tion:
Dynamic Balance Coefficient =
Σ Part Weight x X x Y
Σ Part Weight x X x X
The top half of the equation is
called the product of inertia and the
bottom half the mass moment of
inertia. The Σ symbol represents the
total sum for each part in the con-
trol surface. X values are positive for
distances aft of the hinge line, and Y
values are positive when they are
above (or outboard) the axis line. A
control surface is dynamically bal-
anced when the sum in the top of
the equation is equal to zero. A neg-
ative coefficient means the surface
is overbalanced and a positive coef-
ficient when it is underbalanced.
According to the equation, when
a balance weight is located out at
the tip, the value of X times Y is
very negative, and consequently is a
very effective way to make the top
part of the equation equal to zero.
When the balance weights are out-
board, the result can be a control
surface that is dynamically balanced
yet statically underbalanced.
However, there is a limit to the
amount of static underbalance that
a control surface should have, even
with the correct amount of dynam-
ic balance, and Reference 3 recom-
mends that the center of gravity
should never be aft of 15 percent of
the control surface chord.
Through flight experience and
testing in the 1930s through the
1950s, researchers determined the
acceptable amount of dynamic bal-
ance for the various control sur-
faces, which are presented in
References 1–3. Note that these cri-
teria are based on airplanes using
construction methods popular in
that era and having “convention-
al” tail surfaces and fuselages.
Those interested in designing an
all-composite airplane—one with
pod and boom fuselage or a T tail—
66 DECEMBER 2003
should, for preliminary design pur-
poses, make sure the control sur-
faces are both statically and
dynamically balanced. Then it
would still be advisable to seek out
an experienced flutter expert to
run a ground vibration test on your
design. Modern structural analysis
programs can also be useful to do
preliminary flutter estimates for
unconventional designs.
We saw that locating the balance
weight at the tip will usually result
in the least amount of weight
needed, but such an installation
does require that the control sur-
face be very stiff in torsion. Some
designers instead prefer to locate
the balance weight in the outboard
portion of the leading edge.
Wherever the location, it is
extremely important to make sure
that the balance weight attach
structure is both strong and stiff. A
balance weight attached to a flimsy
arm can end up causing more
problems than it solves. The FAA
requires that the attach structure
for balance weights be able to sup-
port that weight times the follow-
ing LIMIT load factors:
■ 24 g normal to the plane of
the control surface
■ 12 g fore and aft
■ 12 g parallel to the hinge line
These should be the minimum
limits for homebuilt airplanes also.
Finally, if you’re building a
proven design and can verify that
the designer or manufacturer has
demonstrated that the airplane is
free from flutter at least 11 percent
above redline speed (VNE), don’t
change the control surface balance
weight or their locations. If you do,
you might inadvertently increase
the risk of flutter in an otherwise
safe design. Don’t second-guess the
designer unless you know what
you are doing!
Flutter Testing
There are two types of testing
used to check if an airplane will
have flutter problems. The first is a
ground vibration test, where special
equipment vibrates various parts of
an airplane at different frequencies.
The results can be used to identify
the possible flutter modes and fre-
quencies and also to correlate
dynamic computer models.
The second involves diving the
airplane to a speed 11 percent faster
than the redline speed while,
according to FAR 23.629, “proper
and adequate attempts” to induce
flutter have been made. See
References 5 and 6 for more infor-
mation on both of these types of
tests.
Flutter is serious business, but
your chances of ever experiencing
it can be reduced by using good
design practices, or by following
the designer’s or manufacturer’s
balance requirements for your air-
plane, and finally by flying at or
below redline speed. Design, build,
and fly safely!
More at www.eaa.org
Click on the EAA Sport Aviation
cover and scroll down to the
December links.
References
Airframe and Equipment
Engineering Report #45,
“Simplified Flutter Prevention
Criteria for Personal Type
Aircraft.”
Civil Aeronautics Manual
(CAM) 04, “Airplane
Airworthiness,” 1944,
http://dotlibrary.specialcollec-
tion.net/
ANC-12, Vibration and Flutter
Prevention Handbook, 1948.
Aircraft Vibration and Flutter,
Freberg, C. and Kemler, E., John
Wiley and Sons, 1944.
“The New Look on the Turner
T-40 and Thorp T-18”, Thorp,
John and Turner, Eugene, EAA
Sport Aviation, August 1969.
Understanding Flutter, Thorp,
John and Sunderland, Lu, EAA
Sport Aviation, September 1976.