Aerodynamic Issues of Unmanned Air Vehicles Workshop

Aero-Structural Coupling and Sensitivity of a JoinedWing SensorCraft

Lt Jennifer Schwartz (AFRL/AFIT) Lt Col Robert Canfield (AFIT) Dr Maxwell Blair (AFRL) 5 Nov 2002

Air Force Institute of Technology

Report Documentation Page

Form Approved OMB No. 0704-0188

Public reporting burden for the collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington VA 22202-4302. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to a penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number.

1. REPORT DATE

2. REPORT TYPE

3. DATES COVERED

26 JUL 2004
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE

N/A

5a. CONTRACT NUMBER 5b. GRANT NUMBER 5c. PROGRAM ELEMENT NUMBER

Aero-Structural Coupling and Sensitivity of a Joined- Wing SensorCraft

6. AUTHOR(S)

5d. PROJECT NUMBER 5e. TASK NUMBER 5f. WORK UNIT NUMBER

7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES)

AFRL/AFIT
9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES)

8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBER 10. SPONSOR/MONITORS ACRONYM(S) 11. SPONSOR/MONITORS REPORT NUMBER(S)

12. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENT

Approved for public release, distribution unlimited

13. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

See also ADM001685, EOARD-CSP-02-5078, Proceedings for Aerodynamic Issues of Unmanned Air vehicles (UAV)., The original document contains color images.
14. ABSTRACT 15. SUBJECT TERMS 16. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF:
a. REPORT b. ABSTRACT c. THIS PAGE

17. LIMITATION OF ABSTRACT

18. NUMBER OF PAGES

19a. NAME OF RESPONSIBLE PERSON

unclassified

unclassified

unclassified

UU

26

Standard Form 298 (Rev. 8-98)

Prescribed by ANSI Std Z39-18

Overview
Background on Joined-Wing SensorCraft
History of the Joined-Wing SensorCraft Background Configuration Issues

Modeling
Parametric Modeling & Design Method Aerodynamic Panel Model
PanAir FlightLoads

Structural Finite Element Model

Related Studies Conclusion

History of Joined Wings

Advantages Claimed
Reduce induced drag Improve Stability Strengthen Wing Prevent Flutter
U.S.Patent

Staggered Wing, Ratony, Ratony, 1977

Oct. 11,1977 sheet 1 of 4 4,053,125

Lockheed Martin New Strategic Aircraft Concept

fig. 4.

Joined / Box Wing Studies

Wolkovitch (1986)
Highly Integrated Structures & Aerodynamics Concept
NASA : Box Wing Airliner (325 Passenger)

Gallman & Kroo (1996)

Buckling Critical

Livne (2001)
Survey Complex Aeroelastic Behavior

Lockheed Martin Concept to Replace C-141 & KC-135

SensorCraft Background
Air Force Requirement
A UAV for continuous, long term intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) missions Joined wing magnifies sensor footprint by providing 360 degree coverage of the area of interest

Notional UAV Joined Wing SensorCraft Concept (Boeing)

Notional Mission Profile

Breguet Range Equation:
Climb 200 nm

Wi 1 # & V #& L # & ! R = $ !$ ! ln$ $ % C "% D " % Wi ! "

55,000 ft 50,000 ft

Egress M=0.6 Ingress M=0.6

3,000 nm

65,000 ft

Loiter
M=0.5 65,000 ft

3,000 nm

Descend 200 nm Max

L/D L/D= =24 24 C 0.04 D = C D = 0.04 TOGW TOGW= =63,000 63,000lbs lbs Fuel Weight = 41,000 Fuel Weight = 41,000lbs lbs

SensorCraft Concept

Developed by a team of AFRL in-house engineers Designed with the concept of designing an aircraft around the desired sensor package, rather than trying to pack sensors into an already existing platform Provides the required 360 deg coverage in a joined-wing configuration Further analysis is now being performed by students at the Air Force Institute of Technology

SensorCraft Complexity
Many current tools are unable to process unusual configurations Need to examine several points in the mission profile Complex aerodynamics at the joints Conformal, load bearing antenna integration Non-linear structural analysis
Wing buckling and bending

SensorCraft Issues

Interaction of structural and aero loads

Solution requires simultaneous, interactive examination of:

Sensors, including the structural characteristics Structural analysis Flexible aerodynamic loads

Overview Modeling
Background on Joined-Wing SensorCraft
History of the Joined-Wing SensorCraft Background Configuration Issues

Modeling
Parametric Modeling & Design Method Aerodynamic Panel Model
PanAir FlightLoads

Structural Finite Element Model

Related Studies Conclusion

Design Tools
AML Design Environment:
Object-oriented With Native Geometric Modeling Dependency-tracking & Demand Driven Process Run-time Object Creation

PanAir Aerodynamic Solver:

Linear panel geometry for complex configurations High order continuous singularity distribution Wake shaping capability

MSC.FlightLoads Solver:
Combined structural-aerodynamic model

ASTROS:
Structural Optimization Linear Fully-Stressed Design (FSD)

MSC.Nastran:
Non-Linear Analysis Gradient-Based Buckling Design

Joined-Wing Design Flowchart

Generate Geometric Model Generate Aero Model Antenna Structure AeroStructural Interface Generate FEM

Flexible Air Loads

FEA FSD

Weights

Trim , Drag & Fuel

Buckling & Nonlinear Analysis

Object-Oriented Wing Building

~ AML Design Environment ~
Start with Basic Building Blocks: 1) curve 2) contour 3) surface

6) Web Geometry

4) Airfoil

5) Wing Panel

7) Surface Geometry

Fully Associative Parametric Variations

~ AML Design Environment ~

Inboard Span (Sib) Outboard Span (Sob) Chord (crf, cra, cm, ct) Wing Separation (xfa) Wing Offset (zfa) Sweep (ib, ob) Airfoil Planform Area Wing Volume

26.0 m 6.3 m 2.5 m 22.0 m 7.0 m 30 deg FX-60-126-1 145.0 m2 52.2 m3

Joined-Wing Aero Model

~ PanAir Aerodynamic Solver ~

Rigid Trimmed PanAir Pressure Vectors on the Top Skin

PanAir Panel Model

MSC.FlightLoads Architecture
~ FlightLoads ~
Structural Modeling Aero Modeling Loads Browser Aerodynamics Aerodynamics DB Aeroelasticity Aeroelastic DB

Geometry

Externa Structura Loads & Dynamic Respons

Begin with geometry from user-preferred sources (i.e. IGES, CAD, etc) Define the aerodynamic and structural models Perform aerodynamic calculations Analyze the combined structural-aerodynamic model to provide both component and total vehicle aeroelastic responses View the results and produce external loads that can be passed to the stress group for detailed design and verification

Analysis Process
~ FlightLoads ~

Input a simple structural geometry

Include degrees of freedom

Build a flat-plate aero model, including control surfaces Spline the aero model to the structure
Identify aero and structural monitoring points

Examine the model at various points in the mission profile

Takeoff, ingress, mid-loiter, 2-g turn, egress, and landing

Export to NASTRAN for structural analysis Use NASTRAN results to complete the aerodynamic analysis

Aero-Structural Model
~ FlightLoads ~

Joined-Wing FEM
Rigid Trimmed Forces at the Structural Grid Points

Overview Related Studies

Background on Joined-Wing SensorCraft
History of the Joined-Wing SensorCraft Background Configuration Issues

Modeling
Parametric Modeling & Design Method Aerodynamic Panel Model
PanAir FlightLoads

Structural Finite Element Model

Related Studies Conclusion

Related Research
Previous Work
Joined-Wing Structural Weight Modeling Study (Blair/Canfield)

Concurrent Work
Stochastic Finite Element Analysis (Pettit/Ghanem) Reliability Based Structural Design (Roberts) Structurally Integrated Conformal Antennas (Smallwood)

Joined-Wing FEM
~ Joined-Wing Structural Weight Modeling Study ~

FEM Resized (Fully-Stressed): Linear FEA Aeroelastic Load was Applied in Geometrically Nonlinear FEA

Linear Results

Non-Linear Results

Conclusion: Non-linear Analysis Critical in Designing Joined-Wing

Linear FSD Flexible Loads Iter. 1

~ Joined-Wing Structural Weight Modeling Study ~
V2 L 200 C1

281702400. 264096297. 246490194. 228884092. 211277989. 193671886. 176065783. 158459680. 140853578. 123247475. 105641372. 88035269. 70429166. Z Y 52823064. 35216961. 17610858. 4755.

Linear FSD Static Deformation

X Output Set: M SC/NASTRAN Case 1 Deformed(3.151): Total Translation Contour: Plate Top VonM ises Stress

V1 L200 C1

1.764E

1.654E

1.544E

1.434E

1.323E

1.213E

1.103E

9.925

8.822

7.719

6.616

5.514

4.411

Buckling Deformation of Linear FSD

3.308 Y Z

2.205

X Output Set: Eigenvalue 2 1.208545 Deformed(1.001): Total Translation Contour: Plate Top VonM ises Stress

1.103

Conclusions
The joined-wing SensorCraft presents designers with unique technical issues Accomplishments
Design Environment for Nonlinear Flexible Trim Interactive Aero-Structural Model

Next Steps
Un-Sweep Outboard or Aft Wing Design for Buckling and Non-Linear FSD Tailor Aft Wing Buckling to Alleviate Flexible Load Verify aerodynamic results with CFD

Joined-Wing Analysis Flowchart

Generate Parametric Geometry

Rigid Air Loads

FEA

Weights

Trim ,

Drag & Range Flexible Air Loads

Un-Sweep Outboard Wing

Negative Aft Wing Lift

Positive Lift