AAE 556

Aeroelasticity

Lectures 22, 23
Typical dynamic instability
problems and test review

Purdue Aeroelasticity 22-1

 How to recognize a flutter problem in the making
Given: a 2 DOF system with a parameter Q that
creates loads on the system that are linear functions of
the displacements

x1 
 
x1 

�M 1 0 ��&
x&
1� �K1 0 ��x1 � �0 p12 ��x1 �  =  ei t
�0 M ��& +
�� ��x �= Q �p � �
���������
2 x&
2 0 K 2 2 21 0 � x2 
x 2 
 
x 2 


Q is a real number  
 4   2  12 +  22 + 12 22 = 0
If p12 and p21 have K K2 Q=0
12 = 1 22 =
the same sign (both M1
M2
positive or both  
 
negative) can 




2
+2 Q 

1 
M
p
12
1 






x1




0 Q not zero
 
 
=

flutter occur?  




Q
M21

p

 2 


2
+ 

2
x

2

2
0




 =  + 2 2
1   + 
2 Q2
2
2
M 1M 2

p12 p21 = 0
23-2
Purdue Aeroelasticity
 The modified determinant
M1 0 ��x1 � �
� K1 0 ��x1 � �0 p12 ��x1 � ��
0
 �
2
�� �+ � �� � Q � ��r �= ��
0 M 2 x2
��������� 0 K 2 x2 p21 0 x2 0
�

  
2
Q
 =   2 + 12   2 + 22  p12 p21 = 0
M 1M 2
12 =
K1 2 K2
M
2 =
1 M2

 + 
 
2 2
1 2 2 Q2
n =
2 1 2
 2
1  2 +4 p12 p21
2 2 M 1M 2

23-3
Purdue Aeroelasticity
 If flutter occurs two frequencies must merge

 + 
 
2 2
1 2 2 Q2
n =
2 1 2
 2
1  2 +4 p12 p21
2 2 M 1M 2

FLUTTER – Increasing Q must cause the term under the radical

2 K1 sign to become zero.
1 =
Q2
M
 
???
1 2 2
2
1  2 = 4 p12 p21
K2
M 1M 2
22 =
M2

   
2 2
M 1 M 2  12   22 M 1 M 2  12   22
2
Q = p12 p21 = 
4 p12 p21 4Q 2

For frequency merging flutter to occur, p12 and p21 must have opposite signs.

23-4
Purdue Aeroelasticity
 If one of the frequencies can be driven
to zero then we have divergence

 =  + 2 2
1   + 
2 2
2
Q2

M 1M 2
p12 p21 = 0

n = 0  = 0 = 1 2   
2 2

Q2
M 1M 2
p12 p21

  
 12  22 =
Q2
M 1M 2
p12 p21
2M 1 M 2 12 22
Q =
p12 p21
2 KK M 1 M 212 22
Q = 1 2 p12 p21 =
Q2
p12 p21

Divergence requires that the cross-coupling terms have the same sign

23-5
Purdue Aeroelasticity
 Aero/structural interaction model
TYPICAL SECTION
What did we learn?

L = qSC L   o +  
lift
V
e torsion spring
 KT
 qScCMAC 
 o + K 
L = qSCL  T 
 1  qSeCL 
GJ  
KT   KT 
span

23-6
Purdue Aeroelasticity
 Divergence-examination vs.
perturbation
qSC L qSC L qScC 
L= o + 
 K
MAC 

qSeC L qSeC L  
1 KT 1 KT
T

Kh 0 h    L 
   =  
 0 KT   M
 SC 


1
= 1 + q + q 2 + q 3 +...= 1 +  q n
1 q n=1

23-7
Purdue Aeroelasticity
 Perturbations & Euler’s Test
lift
V
e torsion spring

K T       L e
 KT

...result - stable - returns -no static equilibrium in perturbed state

KT      L e
...result - unstable -no static equilibrium -
motion away from equilibrium state

KT   =  Le
sult - neutrally stable - system stays - new static equilibrium point
23-8
Purdue Aeroelasticity
 Stability equation is original
equilibrium equation with R.H.S.=0.
lift

  0
V
e torsion spring
 KT

KT  qSeCL = KT = 0
The stability equation is an equilibrium equation that represents an
equilibrium state with no "external loads" –

Only loads that are deformation dependent are included

The neutrally stable state is called self-equilibrating

23-9
Purdue Aeroelasticity
 Multi-degree of freedom systems
A
From linear algebra,
3KT 2KT
shear
we know that there is
panel 1 panel 2 centers
a solution to the
e
A homogeneous
aero

b/2 b/2
centers equation only if the
determinant of the
 + 2 aeroelastic stiffness
V
matrix is zero
 + 1
view A-A

5 2 1  1 0 1  1

KT   + qSeC L   = qSeC L  o  
2 2  
 2   0 1 
 2  1

23-10
Purdue Aeroelasticity
 MDOF stability
Mode shapes? Eigenvectors and eigenvalues.

KT  i = 0

KT = 0 Kij  qAij = 0

System is stable if the aeroelastic stiffness matrix

determinant is positive. Then the system can absorb
energy in a static deformation mode. If the stability
determinant is negative then the static system, when
perturbed, cannot absorb all of the energy due to work
done by aeroelastic forces and must become dynamic.
23-11
Purdue Aeroelasticity
 Three different definitions of roll
effectiveness

• Generation of lift – unusual but the only game in town

for the typical section
• Generation of rolling moment –
• contrived for the typical section – reduces to lift
generation
• Multi-dof systems – this is the way to do it
• Generation of steady-state rolling rate or velocity-this
is the information we really want for airplane
performance
• Reversal speed is the same no materr which way you
do it.
23-12
Purdue Aeroelasticity
 Control effectiveness
 q c CM 
1+ 
 
 qD e CL  q c CM 
L = qSCL   o =0 1+ =0
1
q  
qD e CL
qD
KT CL 
qR =    
ScCL CM 
Lift
reversal is not an
MAC torsion spring KT instability - large
0+ shear center input produces
small output
V opposite to
e 0
divergence
phenomenon
23-13
Purdue Aeroelasticity
 Steady-state rolling motion

qScCM v 
L = 0 = qSCL   o   + qSC L  o
 K T V 

Lift

MAC torsion spring KT

0+ shear center

V
e 0

23-14
Purdue Aeroelasticity
 Swept wings

 structural =    tan 

2
qn = qcos  K1

f o
K2
C
V
V cos
C

K 0  tb b   b

  Q o  
 0  Q  2 2  = cos 2 
K 
  te e   e 

23-15
Purdue Aeroelasticity
 Divergence

 bt 
 = K K + QK  Ke 
2
K nondimensional divergence dynamic
pressure vs. wing sweep angle
Seao 2.0
qD =

nondimensional divergence
 b K tan   1.5
sweep back

cos  1   

sweep forward
2
   1.0

dynamic pressure
5.72 degrees
 e K
   2  0.5

0.0
b/c=6
-0.5 e/c=0.10

e c  K 

Kb/Kt=3
-1.0

tan  crit = 2     -1.5

c b K  -2.0
-90 -75 -60 -45 -30 -15 0 15 30 45 60 75 90
sweep angle
(degrees)

23-16
Purdue Aeroelasticity
 Lift effectiveness
lift effectiveness
vs.
2.0
dynamic pressure

unswept
wing
1.5
lift effectiveness

unswept wing
divergence

1.0
15 degrees
sweep

0.5

30 degrees
sweep
0.0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
dynamic pressure (psf)

23-17
Purdue Aeroelasticity
 Flexural axis


  E =    tan
x
y

Flexural axis - locus of points where a concentrated force creates no

stream-wise twist (or chordwise aeroelastic angle of attack)

E = 0 The closer we align the

airloads with the flexural
axis, the smaller will be
aeroelastic effects.
23-18
Purdue Aeroelasticity
 How to recognize a flutter problem in the making
Given: a 2 DOF system with a parameter Q that
creates loads on the system that are linear functions of
the displacements

x1 
 
x1 

�M 1 0 ��&
x&
1� �K1 0 ��x1 � �0 p12 ��x1 �  =  ei t
�0 M ��& +
�� ��x �= Q �p � �
���������
2 x&
2 0 K 2 2 21 0 � x2 
x 2 
 
x 2 


Q is a real number  
 4   2  12 +  22 + 12 22 = 0
If p12 and p21 have K K2 Q=0
12 = 1 22 =
the same sign (both M1
M2
positive or both  
 
negative) can 




2
+2 Q 

1 
M
p
12
1 






x1




0 Q not zero
 
 
=

flutter occur?  




Q
M21

p

 2 


2
+ 

2
x

2

2
0




 =  + 2 2
1   + 
2 Q2
2
2
M 1M 2

p12 p21 = 0
23-19
Purdue Aeroelasticity
 If flutter occurs two frequencies must merge

 + 
 
2 2
1 2 2 Q2
n =
2 1 2
 2
1  2 +4 p12 p21
2 2 M 1M 2

FLUTTER – Increasing Q causes the term under the radical sign to

2 K1 be zero.
1 =
M
  Q2
1 2
 12   22 = 4 p12 p 21
K2 M1 M 2
22 =
M2

   
2 2
M 1 M 2  12   22 M 1 M 2  12   22
2
Q = p12 p21 = 
4 p12 p21 4Q 2

For frequency merging flutter to occur, p12 and p21 must have opposite signs.

23-20
Purdue Aeroelasticity
 If one of the frequencies is driven to
zero then we have divergence
�M1 0 ��&
x&
1� �K1 0 ��x1 � �0 p12 ��x1 �
�0 M ��& +
�� �� �= Q � ��
x& 0 �x
n = 0 ���������
2 2 0 K 2 x2 p21 2

  
 = 0 = 1 2
2 2

Q2
M 1M 2
p12 p21

  
 12  22 =
Q2
M 1M 2
p12 p21
2M 1 M 2 12 22
Q =
p12 p21
2 KK M 1 M 212 22
Q = 1 2 p12 p21 =
Q2
p12 p21

Divergence requires that the cross-coupling terms are of the same sign

23-21
Purdue Aeroelasticity
 Fuel line flutter

A hollow, uniform-thickness, flexible tube has a mass per unit length of m

slugs/ft. and carries liquid fuel with density r to a rocket engine. The fuel flow
rate is U ft/sec. through a pipe cross-section of A. The tube is straight and has
supports a distance L apart, the tube bending displacement is approximated to
be
 y  2 y 
w y,t  = 1 sin  +  2 sin 
L L 
1
Unknown amplitudes of vibrational motion
2 2
4
  EI
 =  
1
L mo
The free vibration frequencies when the mo = m + A
4
2 EI
fluid is not flowing are:  22 =  
L  m o
23-22
Purdue Aeroelasticity
 Fluid flow creates system coupling, but through
the velocity, not the displacement

�& � 2  AU 2 � ��
2
&& 8 � AU
1  � �2 + �
1  � �� 1 = 0
3 �mo L � � � mo �L ���

�& � 2  AU 2 �2 ��
2
&& 8 � AU
2  � �1 + �
2  � � 2 = 0
�
3 �mo L � � � mo �L �� �

1. Find the divergence speed

2. Estimate the flow speed that flutter occurs, if it occurs

23-23
Purdue Aeroelasticity
 Divergence is found by computing the
determinant of the aeroelastic stiffness matrix

�& � 2  AU 2 � ��
2
& 8 � AU
& � �2 + �
1  � �� 1 = 0
1
3 �mo L � � � mo L
� �� �

�& � 2  AU 2 �2 ��
2
& 8 � AU
& � �1 + �
2  � �� 2 = 0
2
3 �mo L � � � mo L
� �� �

 2 AU 2    2  2 AU 2  2  2 
 aesm =  1     2    =0
 m  L   m  L  
 o  o 

 2
 2
   EI
mo 12
L mo  22
L = 
2
U1 =   2
U2 =   U div  

 A  

  A 2 

  L A

23-24
Purdue Aeroelasticity
 Assume that coupling leads to flutter and
find an estimate of the merging point

� 2  AU 2 � �
2
�
&&
1 + �
  1 = 0
�1 � �� �
� mo �L ��
� 2  AU 2 �2 �
2
�
&
&+ �
  � �� 2 = 0
2
�2 mo �L �� �
�

Harmonic motion?

 2  2  2  2 

 2 2 AU   2 2 AU 2 

  +       +   
 L  =0
 1
mo   

  
L 
 2
m  
o    


23-25
Purdue Aeroelasticity
 The frequencies are approximated
 2  2  2  2 
 2 2 AU   2 2 AU 2 

  +  1  
 
  
  +  2  
 
  =0
 mo L  mo  L  
  

2  2
2 
2  AU  
2  2 2
 = 2 
 AU 2
 
 =  12    m o  L 

m o L 

 
2 2
AU    2
AU  2  2
 
2
1    2 
2F
  F
mo  L  mo  L 
2
   EI
 
2
1 2 2 mo L
U  2  1
2
F = 5 
3 A  2
 L  A
23-26
Purdue Aeroelasticity