The main concern related to the flutter phenomenon is predicting and avoiding it. This paper describes the application of a flexural-torsional flutter testbed for acceleration reduction by applying active and passive model-based control. The model consists of the 2D typical section, with aerodynamic loads estimated by an unsteady time-domain formulation based on Wagner’s function. The active control architecture consists of a stability augmentation system with output feedback and gain scheduling via the linear-quadratic regulator theory and actuation by servomechanism. The passive control employs a shape-memory alloy to provide additional torsional stiffness. Experimental results show considerable reduction of oscillations at a relative low cost for both active and passive control strategies, and that the use of shape memory alloys in aeroelastic stability problems is promising.
BisplinghoffRLAshleyH (2013) Principles of Aeroelasticity, Courier Corporation.
3.
BuehlerWJGilfrichJWileyR (1963) Effect of low temperature phase changes on the mechanical properties of alloys near composition TiNi. Journal of Applied Physics34(5): 1475–1477.
4.
Bueno DD (2014) A Contribution to Aeroelasticity Using Lyapunov Theory. PhD thesis, Instituto Tecnológico de Aeronáutica.
5.
CassaroMBattipedeMMarzoccaPBehalA (2015) Comparison of adaptive control architectures for flutter suppression. Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics38(2): 346–355.
6.
De Marqui Jr C (2004) Estudo Teórico e Experimental de um Controlador para Supressão de Flutter. PhD thesis, Universidade de São Paulo (USP), Escola de Engenharia de São Carlos.
7.
De Marqui Jr C, Belo EM and Marques F (2004) Wind-tunnel model and a controller for flutter suppression. In 45th AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics & Materials Conference, pages 19–22.
8.
Donald JL (2007) Engineering Analysis of Smart Material Systems. John Wiley & Sons.
9.
DuanBAbdel-MotagalyKGuoXMeiC (2003) Suppression of supersonic panel flutter and thermal deflection using shape memory alloy. AIAA paper1513–2003: 10.
10.
Dykman J, Truong H and Urnes J (2013). Active control for elastic wing structure dynamic modes. In: 56th AIAA/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics, and Materials Conference, AIAA SciTech Forum.
11.
Farmer MG (1982) A two degree of freedom flutter mount system with low damping for testing rigid wings at different angles of attack. In: Virginia Academy of Science Meeting, Blacksburg, VA, 20–23 April 1982.
12.
Farmer MG (1984) Model mount system for testing flutter. US Patent 4,475,385.
13.
FramptonKDClarkRL (2000) Experiments on control of limit cycle oscillations in a typical section. Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics23(5): 956–960.
14.
GreningerABMooradianVG (1938) Strain transformation in metastable beta copper-zinc and beta copper-Ti alloys. AIME Transactions128: 337–369.
15.
Grigorie T, Botez R, Popov A, Mamou M and Mebarki Y (2011) An intelligent controller based fuzzy logic technique for a morphing wing actuation system using shape memory alloy. In: 52nd AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics and Materials Conference, Structures, Structural Dynamics, and Materials and Co-located Conferences, Denver, CO, 4–7 April 2011, p. 2133.
16.
GuoXLeeY-YMeiC (2007) Supersonic nonlinear panel flutter suppression using shape memory alloys. Journal of Aircraft44(4): 1139–1149.
17.
HagaYMizushimaMMatsunagaTEsashiM (2005) Medical and welfare applications of shape memory alloy microcoil actuators. Smart Materials and Structures14(5): S266.
18.
HwangCPiW (1984) Optimal control applied to aircraft flutter suppression. Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics7(3): 347–354.
19.
JaniJMLearyMSubicAGibsonMA (2014) A review of shape memory alloy research, applications and opportunities. Materials and Design56: 1078–1113.
20.
JanochaHet al.(1999) Adaptronics and Smart Structures, Springer.
21.
JayasankarSKumarPSVarugheseBRamanaiahBVishwanathSRamachandraHDayanandaG (2011) Smart aerodynamic surface for a typical military aircraft using shape memory elements. Journal of Aircraft48(6): 1968–1977.
22.
KarpelMMoulinBAnguitaLMaderueloCClimentH (2004) Flutter analysis of aircraft with external stores using modal coupling. Journal of Aircraft41(4): 892–902.
23.
KoJStrganacTWKurdilaAJ (1999) Adaptive feedback linearization for the control of a typical wing section with structural nonlinearity. Nonlinear Dynamics18(3): 289–301.
24.
Leal PB, Savi MA, Bertagne CL and Hartl DJ (2015) Aerostructural optimization of shape memory alloy based wing morphing via a class/shape transformation approach. In: 23rd AIAA/AHS Adaptive Structures Conference, Kissimmee, FL.
25.
MachadoLSaviM (2002) Odontological applications of shape memory alloys. Revista Brasileira de Odontologia59(5): 302–306.
26.
McEverMArdeleanEVColeDGClarkR (2007) Active control and closed loop identification of flutter instability in typical section airfoil. Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics30(3): 733–740.
27.
MukhopadhyayV (1995) Flutter suppression control law design and testing for the active flexible wing. Journal of Aircraft32(1): 45–51.
28.
NissimE (1976) Active flutter suppression using trailing edge and tab control surfaces. AIAA Journal14(6): 757–762.
29.
ÖlanderA (1932) The crystal structure of AuCd. Zeitschrift für Kristallographie-Crystalline Materials83(1–6): 145–148.
30.
OtsukaKWaymanCM (1999) Shape Memory Materials, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
31.
PeppingR (1954) A theoretical investigation of the oscillating control surface frequency response technique of flight flutter testing. Journal of the Aeronautical Sciences21(8): 533–542.
32.
RogerKLHodgesGEFeltL (1975) Active flutter suppression - a flight test demonstration. Journal of Aircraft12(6): 551–556.
33.
SandfordMAbelIGrayD (1975) Development and demonstration of a flutter suppression system using active controls wind tunnel tests. Report, NASA.
34.
SilvestreFJLucknerR (2015) Experimental validation of a flight simulation model for slightly flexible aircraft. AIAA Journal53(12): 3620–3636.
35.
ThompsonGSevartF (1975) Wind tunnel investigation of control configured vehicle systems. AGARD Flutter Suppression and Structural Load Alleviation 8 p(SEE N 75-32096 23-05).
36.
VasistaSTongLWongK (2012) Realization of morphing wings: a multidisciplinary challenge. Journal of Aircraft49(1): 11–28.
37.
VippermanJSClarkRLConnerMDowellEH (1998) Experimental active control of a typical section using a trailing edge flap. Journal of Aircraft35(2): 224–229.
38.
WaszakMR (2001) Robust multivariable flutter suppression for benchmark active control technology wind tunnel model. Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics24(1): 147–153.
