Professional Documents
Culture Documents
aircraft loads77233615
aircraft loads77233615
Summary
The estimation of loads acting on an aircraft structure is an indispensable task ranging from conceptual,
preliminary, and detail design to loads flight testing when an aircraft is already in service. Work package 4 of
the DLR project iLOADS covers the range broadly. Physics-based loads and aerodynamic performance
analysis methods in pre-design are presented using a parameterized and automatized process nested in an
overall aircraft design loop. Such process can be used for conventional an unconventional configurations.
Covering the complete design process, a parametric set-up for structural modeling, estimation of loads and
loads flight testing for the DLR HALO, a modified Gulfstream G550, is also shown. Finally the in-flight system
identification activities including flight tests for the DLR Discus-2c are described.
Mx /Mx,max
modeling is done also with ModGen, where the individual 0.6
filling levels and deck angles of the aircraft can be
considered for each fuel tank. 0.4
0.2
3.4. DLR-HALO Finite Element Model
0
The resulting finite element model is shown in FIGURE 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
8a. For the loads analysis the structural model is
y/0.5b [ ]
condensed to selected nodes on the load reference axis
(LRA) of each component (see FIGURE 8d). The
condensation is based on the interpolation of the 6 FIGURE 9. Normalized bending moment Mx for the wing
degrees of freedom (DOFs) of the LRA grids by 6 for a 2.5 g symmetric maneuver load case
selected DOFs of the fe grids of the full structural model
shown in FIGURE 8a. Therefore the MSC Nastran The maximum deviation of the estimated loads compared
element RBE3 with UM option is used. All distributes to the GAC loads for the specific load case is about 8%
mass items (see FIGURE 8c) are also connected to the the average deviation about 3%. It is assumed that the
LRA grids. For the aerodynamics, a panel model for the differences are mainly caused by the aerodynamic model.
Doublet Lattice Method (DLM) of MSC Nastran is set up A correction of the DLM model with spanwise available
by the MONA process where only the lifting surfaces are aerodynamic coefficients based on wind tunnel
considered (see FIGURE 8b). In order to take wing twist measurement were not yet taken into account.
and camber into account, corresponding correction Furthermore the aerodynamic characteristics of the
factors are estimated by ModGen (MSC Nastran matrix fuselage were not considered.
W2GJ).
1
GAC
0.8 DLR
My /My,max [ ]
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
x/l [ ]
−50
975 980 985 990 995 1000 1005
time [s]
FIGURE 15. Strain gage calibration for one PMS carrier
FIGURE 17. Normed strain signal response during a roll
4.3. Flight tests maneuver
Beside strain responses, atmospheric turbulence data
The second flight was conducted for loads measurement, was also collected during the flights. Its first analyses in
where several maneuvers were flown for different the frequency domain show that the power spectral
conditions. In total there are 21 flight conditions consisting density of the measured turbulence is similar to a von-
of seven altitudes ranging from 12000 ft to 35000 ft Kármán spectrum [7], however with a smaller scale of
(3658 m to 10668 m) and three speeds each. The turbulence than 2500 ft (762 m) which is defined in CS25
maneuvers for each flight condition consist of impulsive [14] A smaller scale of turbulence means that more
inputs on the yoke and rudder pedals, a roll up to ± 45° energy of the turbulence is contained in oscillations with
and a pull-up up to 2 g. higher frequencies. An example of the power spectral
density of the measured turbulence and reference von-
The initial aim was to simulate gust loads using Kármán spectra are depicted in FIGURE 18, where L
maneuvers since gust loads are design loads for the stands for the scale of turbulence. With this finding, loads
hardpoints where the hanger beam is mounted. However, analysis methods regarding atmospheric turbulence can
to do so stick raps with a frequency of up to 14 Hz would be improved for the future.
be necessary. Such procedure is difficult to perform with
high precision. Furthermore, the control surface actuation
system filters the high frequency input to some degree.
Instead, impulsive inputs on the steering system and low
PSD [m 2/s2/Hz]
2 −10
10
−2 0
10 10
load factor [−]
1 measured
von Karman, L=76.2 m
0.5 von Karman, L=254 m
von Karman, L=762 m (CS25)
0
0 5 10 15 20 FIGURE 18. Power spectral density of measured
time [s] turbulence in comparison with reference von-
Kármán spectra
FIGURE 16. Load factor during a pull-up maneuver
A normed strain signal response of the left hand side PMS
carrier with all eight channels during a roll maneuver is
depicted in FIGURE 17. It is evident that the strain
response is already detectable before the bank angle
5. SYSTEM IDENTIFACTION FOR DLR DISCUS
2C
FIGURE 19. DLR Discus-2c flight test sailplane [17] FIGURE 21. System-Identification scheme of 7-point
loads model
5.2. Results
5.1. System-Identification Approach
The following FIGURE 22 and FIGURE 23 show some
The conventional System-Identification uses flight data as
exemplary System-Identification results for typical
input in order to model the aircraft aerodynamic loads.
longitudinal and lateral flight test maneuvers. Therefore
However, due to the limited information provided by the
the time histories show model outputs (red lines) in
standard flight test instrumentation only the global
comparison to the flight test data (blue lines). The first 8
aerodynamic contributions of wing/fuselage and horizontal
plots show control surface deflections and main aircraft
tail can be modeled. The objective of this work was to
motion parameters like speed, angles of attack and
extend the model for providing the capability to simulate
sideslip and rotation rates p, q, r. The next 7 plots show
local loads at certain positions of wing, horizontal tail and
the local aerodynamic lift coefficients for 6 wing segments
fuselage. However, this multipoint loads modeling
and horizontal tail.
requires the availability of local loads measurements as
additional observation variables to provide sufficient
information for the identification of a significant number of FIGURE 22 depicts a stall approach maneuver combined
model parameters. FIGURE 20 shows the wing and with a sequence of elevator doublets. This provides flight
horizontal tail cutting loads available at 7 stations after data that cover a large angle of attack, pitch rate and
calibrating the overall 46 strain sensors. The notation S, B elevator deflection range. It can be observed that the
and T means shear force, bending moment and torque identified 7-point loads model presents a good agreement
respectively. By subtracting the structural inertia masses with the measured local aerodynamic loads along the
from the loads measurements local aerodynamic lift (CL), entire angle of attack range. Additionally, these results
pitching (Cm) and rolling moment (Cl) coefficients for each show the efficacy of the implemented stall model used to
wing segment and horizontal tail were calculated. CLWR6 account for the wing lift-curve slope reduction at high
for example is the lift coefficient for the right wing segment angles of attack. For analyzing the longitudinal-lateral-
from the WR6 load station to the wing tip. For the degrees-of-freedom coupling effects and its influence on
development of a 7-point flight mechanical model these the local loads, several types of flight maneuvers were
measured local aerodynamic coefficients were used like applied to the System-Identification process. One
shown in the System-Identification scheme in FIGURE 21 example is the 3-2-1-1 aileron multistep input shown in
for finding the best match between measurement and FIGURE 23. It can be observed that the peaks of the local
model the DLR software FITLAB [5] was used to estimate spanwise lift coefficient along the wing relate directly to
the model parameter values. More detailed descriptions of the aileron excitations. Overall a very good matching
the model structure and the identified parameter values between flight test and simulation model is achieved.
can be found in [25] and [24].
FIGURE 22. Comparison Measurement – Model: Stall FIGURE 23. Comparison Measurement – Model: 3-2-1-1
approach combined with elevator doublets aileron multistep inputs
Transportflugzeugflügeln. Dissertation, TU-Braunschweig,
6. SUMMARY August 2016. DLR-FB 2016-34.
The use case work package of the DLR project iLOADS [10] W. Krüger and T. Klimmek. Definition eines
showed the wide range of loads analysis from conceptual übergreifenden Lastenprozesses im DLR-Projekt iLOADS.
design to loads flight testing. In Deutscher Luft- und Raumfahrtkongress, 13-15 Sept
2016, Braunschweig (Germany), 2016.
For conceptual design a physics base loads and sizing [11] T. L. Lomax. Structural Loads Analysis for
process is presented as part of a typical overall aircraft Commercial Transport Aircraft: Theory and Praxis.
design process, where normally statistics based or Number ISBN 1-56347-114-0. AIAA Education Series,
analytical methods are applied. Furthermore the flexibility 1996.
of the structure was not only considered for the structural [12] B. Nagel, T. Zill, E. Moerland, and D. Böhnke. Virtual
sizing, but also for the aerodynamic performance analysis. Aircraft Multidisciplinary Analysis and Design Processes –
Lessons Learned from the Collaborative Design Project
Regarding the loads analysis for a complete aircraft, a
VAMP. In in Proceedings of 4th CEAS Air & Space
parametric loads and design process is outlined and
Conference, 16-19 Sep., Linköping, Sweden, 2013.
applied to the DLR HALO. The set-up of a proper
structural model with the MONA process is shown as well [13] M. Niu. Airframe Stress Analysis and Sizing. Number
as the analysis of selected load cases to be compared to ISBN-13: 978-9627128120. Hong Kong Conmilit Press
results from GAC. In order to measure the interface loads LTD, Hong Kong, 1999.
between the store and the wing of the HALO with [14] N.N. CS25 - Certification Specifications and
mounted PMS carrier, the structural model is also used to Acceptable Means of Compliance for Large Aeroplanes.
simulate gust analysis. The results serve as input for pre- http://easa.europa.eu/document-library/certification-
tests on the vibration table MAVIS. Eventually first results specifications/cs-25-amendment-14, last checked 2014-
of the measured flight loads are shown. 05-20 2013. Amendment 14.
[15] D.P. Raymer. Aircraft Design: A Conceptual
Finally first results for a loads model for the DLR Discus- Approach. AIAA Education Series, Washington, DC,
2c based on flight test is shown. Two test campaigns of 1989. ISBN 0-930403-51-7.
the considerably equipped sailplane with various sensors [16] J. R.Wright and J. E. Cooper. Introduction to Aircraft
are a basis not only for a loads model, but for an overall Aeroelasticity and Loads. Number ISBN 978-0470-85840-
system identification of the aircraft. 0. Wiley, 2007.
[17] Schempp-Hirth Flugzeugbau GmbH, Kirchheim unter
SCHRIFTTUM Teck, Germany. Flughandbuch für das Segelflugzeug
Discus-2c, 2005. (in German).
[1] M. D. Ardema, M. C. Chambers, A. P. Patron, A. S. [18] D. Seider, P. M. Fischer, M. Litz, A. Schreiber, and
Hahn, H. Miura, and Mark D. Moore. Analytical fuselage A. Gerndt. Open source software framework for
and wing weight estimation of transport aircraft. Technical applications in aeronautics and space. In in Proceedings
Report Technical Memorandum 110392, NASA, May of IEEE Aerospace Conference, 3-10 March 2012, Big
1996. Sky, Montana, USA, 2012.
[2] P. D. Ciampa, T. Zill, and B. Nagel. A hierarchical [19] J. Sinske, Y Govers, V. Handojo, and W.-K. Krüger.
aeroelastic engine for the preliminary design and HALO Flugtest mit instrumentierten Außenlasten für
optimization of the flexible aircraft. In In Proceedings of Aeroelastik- und Lastmessungen im DLR-Projekt iLOADS.
54th AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural In Deutscher Luft- und Raumfahrtkongress 2016, 13-16
Dynamics, and Materials Conference, April 8-11, 2013, Sept. 2016, Braunschweig. DGLR, 2016. (to be
Boston, Massachusetts, number AIAA 2013-1820, 2013. published).
[3] F. Van Dalen. MDO load analysis and preliminary [20] T.H. Skopinski, Aiken Jr., W.S., and W.B. Huston.
sizing. Technical report, Delft University of Technology, Calibration of strain-gage installations in aircraft structures
December 1996. for the measurement of flight loads. Technical Report
[4] M. J. de C. Henshaw, K.J. Badcock, G.A., Vio, C.B. NACA Report No. 1178, NACA, 1954.
Allen, J. Chamberlain, I. Kaynes, G. Dimitriadis, J.E. [21] E. Torenbeek. Synthesis of Subsonic Airplane
Cooper, M.A. Woodgate, A.M. Rampurawala, D. Jones, Design. Delft University Press, Delft, 1988. ISBN 90-247-
C. Fenwick, A.L. Gaitonde, N.V. Taylor, D.S. Amor, T.A. 2724-3.
Eccles, and C.J. Denley. Non-linear aeroelastic prediction [22] F. van Dalen and A. Rothwell. Adas structures
for aircraft applications. Progress in Aerospace Sciences, module: User’s manual. Memorandum M-709, TU-Delft,
43:65–137, May-Aug 2007. 1995.
[5] DLR - German Aerospace Center. CPACS - Common [23] M. V. Preisighe Viana. Sensor calibration for
Parametric Aircraft Configuration Schema, Sept. 2016. calculation of loads on a flexible aircraft. In 16th
www.cpacs.de (last checked 2016-09-12). International Forum on Aeroelasticity and Structural
[6] DLR - German Aerospace Center. RCE - Remote Dynamics - IFASD 2015, 28 June - 2 July 2015, Saint
Component Environment, Sept. 2016. Petersburg, Russia, 2015.
www.rcenvironment.de (last checked 2016-09-12). [24] M. V. Preisighe Viana. Multipoint Loads Model for
[7] F. M. Hoblit. Gust Loads on Aircraft: Concepts and Flexible Aircraft Health Monitoring in Real Time.
Applications, volume ISBN 0-930402-45-2 of AIAA Dissertation, Institut für Flugsystemtechnik, 2016. (to be
Education Series. AIAA, 1988. published).
[8] R. V. Jategaonkar. Flight Vehicle System Identifica- [25] M. V. Preisighe Viana. Time-domain system identi-
tion: A Time Domain Methodology. Progress in fication of rigid-body multipoint loads model. In American
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 216, 2006. Reston, VA, Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA),
USA. Atmospheric Flight Mechanics Conference, June 2016,
[9] T. Klimmek. Statische aeroelastische Anforderungen Washington D.C., USA, 2016.
beim multidisziplinären Strukturentwurf von