Flutter as a self-excited oscillation can cause catastrophic damage to the aircraft structure. Tuned mass damper (TMD) is one of the vibration suppression methods widely used in engineering. However, traditional linear aerodynamic methods are not accurate in transonic flow. In this study, we first establish an unsteady aerodynamic model of the NACA0012 airfoil using the system identification method based on the Auto-Regressive with eXogenous input (ARX) model. Then, a flutter suppression model is constructed by coupling the TMD with the aeroelastic system. The parameters of the TMD are investigated using the model-based aeroelastic stability analysis. It is found that the flutter instability mode of the original system has changed due to the participation of the TMD in the system modal coupling. The proposed reduced-order model (ROM) provides a fast stability analysis method for flutter suppression with TMD as well as significant guidance for TMD design and optimization.
KarpelM. Design for active and passive flutter suppression and gust alleviation. NASA, 1981.
3.
TsushimaNSuW. Flutter suppression for highly flexible wings using passive and active piezoelectric effects. Aerospace Sci Tech2017; 65: 78–89.
4.
SunYSongZMaW, et al.Influence mechanism of lumped masses on the flutter behavior of structures. Aerospace Sci Tech2021; 111: 106524.
5.
KomatsuzakiTInoueTTerashimaO. Broadband vibration control of a structure by using a magnetorheological elastomer-based tuned dynamic absorber. Mechatronics2016; 40: 128–136.
6.
FrahmH. Device for damping vibrations of bodies. U.S Patent1911; 989,958: 4–18.
7.
OrmondroydJ. The theory of the dynamic vibration absorber. J Trans Asme, Appl Mech1928; 50: 9–22.
8.
AnhNDNguyenNXQuanNH. Global-local approach to the design of dynamic vibration absorber for damped structures. J Vibration Control2016; 22(14): 3182–3201.
9.
VerstraelenEHabibGKerschenG, et al.Experimental passive flutter suppression using a linear tuned vibration absorber. AIAA J2017; 55: 1707–1722.
10.
MalherATouzéCDoaréO, et al.Flutter control of a two-degrees-of-freedom airfoil using a nonlinear tuned vibration absorber[J]. J Comput Nonlinear Dyn2017; 12(5).
11.
PachecoDRQMarquesFDFerreiraAJM. Panel flutter suppression with nonlinear energy sinks: numerical modeling and analysis. Int J Non-linear Mech2018; 106: 108–114.
12.
LeeYSVakakisAFBergmanLA, et al.Enhancing the robustness of aeroelastic instability suppression using multi-degree-of-freedom nonlinear energy sinks. AIAA Journal2008; 46(6): 1371–1394.
13.
KassemMYangZGuY, et al.Active dynamic vibration absorber for flutter suppression. J Sound Vibration2020; 469: 115110.
14.
HubbardSAMcFarlandDMBergmanLA, et al.Targeted energy transfer between a model flexible wing and nonlinear energy sink. J Aircraft2010; 47(6): 1918–1931.
15.
HubbardSAMcFarlandDMBergmanLA, et al.Targeted energy transfer between a swept wing and winglet-housed nonlinear energy sink. AIAA Journal2014; 52(12): 2633–2651.
AlizadehHHosseni LavassaniSH. Flutter control of long span suspension bridges in time domain using optimized TMD. Int J Steel Struct2021; 21(2): 731–742.
18.
BakisKNMassaroMWilliamsMS, et al.Passive control of bridge wind-induced instabilities by tuned mass dampers and movable flaps. J Eng Mech2017; 143(9): 04017078.
19.
BrennanMJ. Some recent developments in adaptive tuned vibration absorbers/neutralisers. J Shock and Vibration2006; 13(45): 531–543.
20.
LuciaDJBeranPSSilvaWA. Reduced-order modeling: new approaches for computational physics. J Prog Aerospace Sciences2004; 40(1–2): 51–117.
21.
RiveraJJRDansberryBBennettR, et al.NACA 0012 benchmark model experimental flutter results with unsteady pressure distributions[C]. 33rd Structures, Structural Dynamics and Materials Conference, 1992, p. 2396.
22.
CowanTJArenaASGuptaKK, et al.Accelerating computational fluid dynamics based aeroelastic predictions using system identification. J Aircraft2001; 38(1): 81–87.
23.
DowellEHallKThomasJ, et al.Reduced order models in unsteady aerodynamics[C]. 40th Structures, Structural Dynamics, and Materials Conference and Exhibit, 1999, p. 1261.
24.
ZhangWYeZ. Reduced-order-model-based flutter analysis at high angle of attack. J Aircraft2007; 44(6): 2086–2089.
25.
GaoCZhangWLiX. Passive feedback control of transonic buffet flow. J Phys Fluids2019; 31(4): 046103.
26.
GaoCZhangW. Transonic aeroelasticity: a new perspective from the fluid mode. Prog Aerospace Sci2020; 113: 100596.
27.
ZhangWLvZDiwuQ, et al.A flutter prediction method with low cost and low risk from test data. J Aerospace Sci Tech2019; 86: 542–557.
28.
JiangY. Numerical Solution of Navier-Stokes Equations on Generalized Mesh and Its Applications[D]. Xi’an, Shaanxi: PhD Dissertation, Northwestern Polytechnical Univ.PRC, 2013.
29.
De BoerAVandSMSBijlH. Mesh deformation based on radial basis function interpolation. J Comput Structures2007; 85(11): 785–795.
30.
ZhangWGaoCLiuY, et al.The interaction between flutter and buffet in transonic flow. Nonlinear Dyn2015; 82(4): 1851–1865.
31.
GaoCZhangWLiuY, et al.Numerical study on the correlation of transonic single-degree-of-freedom flutter and buffet. J Sci China Phys Mech Astron2015; 58(8): 084701.
