Journal of Aircraft · 2013 · 78 citations · 23 references
EngineeringAerospace EngineeringMechanical EngineeringAerodynamicsAeroelasticityAircraft DesignAeroelastic ModelingAeroelastic StabilityAircraft StabilityAircraft TrimDynamic AeroelasticityNonlinear AeroelasticityFlutterNonlinear Aeroelastic AnalysisNonlinear Aeroelastic ResponseNonlinear FlutterNonlinear TrimTrimTrim DynamicsTrim Stability
The flying wing exhibits a nonoscillatory yawing instability typical of aircraft without a vertical tail or yaw control. The study investigates how engine placement and sweep influence flutter in an aft‑swept flying wing and explores a link between favorable flutter at 60 % span and the region of minimum kinetic energy. A nonlinear aeroelastic trim and stability model with a fixed center of gravity was used to evaluate flutter across engine positions and to analyze the kinetic energy distribution of the first bending mode. Validated against published data, the analysis shows maximum flutter speed when engines are just beyond 60 % span with forward CG, while the low‑frequency body‑freedom flutter mode is largely unaffected by engine placement except near the tip or elastic axis.
The effects of engine placement and sweep on the flutter characteristics of an aft-swept flying wing resembling the Horten IV are investigated using the Nonlinear Aeroelastic Trim and Stability of HALE Aircraft. The analysis was validated against the published results for divergence and flutter of swept wings and found to be in excellent agreement. Moreover, the modal frequencies and damping obtained for the Goland wing were found in excellent agreement with published results based on a new continuum-based unsteady aerodynamic formulation. This aircraft exhibits a nonoscillatory yawing instability, expected in aircraft with neither a vertical tail nor yaw control. More important, however, is the presence of a low-frequency "body-freedom flutter" mode. The aircraft center of gravity was held fixed during the study, which allowed the aircraft controls to trim similarly for each engine location and minimized flutter speed variations along the inboard span. The maximum flutter speed occurred for engine placement just outboard of 60% span with engine center of gravity forward of the elastic axis. The body-freedom flutter mode was largely unaffected by the engine placement except for cases in which the engine is placed at the wing tip and near the elastic axis. In the absence of engines, aerodynamics, and gravity, a region of minimum kinetic energy density for the first symmetric free-free bending mode is also near the 60% span. A possible relationship between the favorable flutter characteristics obtained by placing the engines at that point, and the region of minimum kinetic energy is briefly explored.
23