Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Trusses”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 397 records · Page 22
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2015

Novel Control Effectors for Truss Braced Wing

At cruise flight conditions very high aspect ratio/low sweep truss braced wings (TBW) may be subject to design requirements that distinguish them from more highly swept cantilevered wings. High aspect ratio, short chord length and relative thinness of the airfoil sections all contribute to relatively low wing torsional stiffness. This may lead to aeroelastic issues such as aileron reversal and low flutter margins. In order to counteract these issues, high aspect ratio/low sweep wings may need to carry additional high speed control effectors to operate when outboard ailerons are in reversal and/or must carry additional structural weight to enhance torsional stiffness. The novel control effector evaluated in this study is a variable sweep raked wing tip with an aileron control surface. Forward sweep of the tip allows the aileron to align closely with the torsional axis of the wing and operate in a conventional fashion. Aft sweep of the tip creates a large moment arm from the aileron to the wing torsional axis greatly enhancing aileron reversal. The novelty comes from using this enhanced and controllable aileron reversal effect to provide roll control authority by acting as a servo tab and providing roll control through intentional twist of the wing. In this case the reduced torsional stiffness of the wing becomes an advantage to be exploited. The study results show that the novel control effector concept does provide roll control as described, but only for a restricted class of TBW aircraft configurations. For the configuration studied (long range, dual aisle, Mach 0.85 cruise) the novel control effector provides significant benefits including up to 12% reduction in fuel burn.

White, Edward V.↗
NASA NTRS2014

Computed and Experimental Flutter/LCO Onset for the Boeing Truss-Braced Wing Wind-Tunnel Model

This paper presents high fidelity Navier-Stokes simulations of the Boeing Subsonic Ultra Green Aircraft Research truss-braced wing wind-tunnel model and compares the results to linear MSC. Nastran flutter analysis and preliminary data from a recent wind-tunnel test of that model at the NASA Langley Research Center Transonic Dynamics Tunnel. The simulated conditions under consideration are zero angle of attack, so that structural nonlinearity can be neglected. It is found that, for Mach number greater than 0.78, the linear flutter analysis predicts flutter onset dynamic pressure below the wind-tunnel test and that predicted by the Navier-Stokes analysis. Furthermore, the wind-tunnel test revealed that the majority of the high structural dynamics cases were wing limit cycle oscillation (LCO) rather than flutter. Most Navier-Stokes simulated cases were also LCO rather than hard flutter. There is dip in the wind-tunnel test flutter/LCO onset in the Mach 0.76-0.80 range. Conditions tested above that Mach number exhibited no aeroelastic instability at the dynamic pressures reached in the tunnel. The linear flutter analyses do not show a flutter/LCO dip. The Navier-Stokes simulations also do not reveal a dip; however, the flutter/LCO onset is at a significantly higher dynamic pressure at Mach 0.90 than at lower Mach numbers. The Navier-Stokes simulations indicate a mild LCO onset at Mach 0.82, then a more rapidly growing instability at Mach 0.86 and 0.90. Finally, the modeling issues and their solution related to the use of a beam and pod finite element model to generate the Navier-Stokes structure mode shapes are discussed.

Bartels, Robert E.↗
NASA NTRS2019

Aero-Structural Modeling of the Truss-Braced Wing Aircraft Using Potential Method with Correction Methods for Transonic Viscous Flow and Wing-Strut Interference Aerodynamics

This paper describes an aero-structural modeling method for the Transonic Truss-Braced Wing (TTBW) aircraft using VSPAERO. A vortex-lattice model of the TTBW aircraft is developed, and a transonic and viscous flow correction method is implemented in the VSPAERO models to account for transonic and viscous flow effects. A correction method for the wing-strut interference aerodynamics is developed and applied to the VSPAERO solver. Also, a structural dynamic finite-element model of the TTBW aircraft is developed. This finite-element model includes the geometric nonlinear effect due to the tension in the struts which cause a deflection dependent nonlinear stiffness. The VSPAERO models are coupled to the finite-element model to provide a rapid capability for aero-structural modeling and flutter analysis. A flight-optimized jig twist model is being developed and will be applied for the purpose of generating a full flight dynamic model of the TTBW aircraft.

Fugate, Jason↗
NASA NTRS2019

Investigation of Transonic Truss-Braced Wing Aircraft Transonic Wing-Strut Interference Effects Using FUN3D

This paper presents a computational study of transonic wing-strut interference effects of Transonic Truss-Braced Wing (TTBW) aircraft using the high-fidelity CFD (Computational Fluid Dynamics) code FUN3D (Fully Unstructured Navier-Stokes Three Dimensional). The study is conducted for the wing-strut and the wing-alone configurations at different Mach numbers and Reynolds numbers. The interference effects are calculated by comparing the wing aerodynamics along the spanwise direction between the wing-strut and the wing-alone configurations. The presence of the strut underneath the wing induces a suction peak on the lower surface of the wing, which causes changes in aerodynamic forces and moments, as well as the aerodynamic center location. The interference effects become more pronounced as the Mach number increases. The Reynolds number has less impact on the interference effects. A transonic wing-strut interference aerodynamic correction method is developed for use in a lower-fidelity tool, VSPAERO [a vortex lattice flow solver], coupled to a finite-element model for rapid flutter analysis.

Xiong, Juntao↗
NASA NTRS2020

Jig Twist Optimization of Mach 0.745 Transonic Truss-Braced Wing Aircraft and High-Fidelity CFD Validation

This paper presents a jig twist optimization study of Mach 0.745 Transonic Truss-Braced Wing (TTBW) aircraft using an in-house developed aero-structural analysis solver VSPAERO coupled to BEAM3D. A vortex-lattice model of the TTBW model is developed, and a transonic and viscous flow correction method is implemented in the VSPAERO model to account for transonic and viscous flow effects. A correction method for the wing-strut interference aerodynamics is developed and applied to the VSPAERO solver. Also, a structural dynamic finite-element model of the TTBW aircraft is developed. This finite-element model includes the geometric nonlinear effect due to the tension in the struts which causes a deflection-dependent nonlinear stiffness. The VSPAERO model is coupled to the corresponding finite-element model to provide a rapid aero-structural analysis. A design flight condition corresponding to Mach 0.745 at 42000 ft is selected for the TTBW aircraft jig twist optimization to reduce the drag coefficient. After the design is implemented, the drag coefficient of the twist optimized TTBW aircraft is reduced about 8 counts. At the end, a high-fidelity CFD solver FUN3D is used to validate the design.

BEAM3D↗
NASA NTRS2020

Jig Twist Optimization of Mach 0.745 Transonic Truss-Braced Wing Aircraft and High-Fidelity CFD Validation

This paper presents a jig twist optimization study of Mach 0.745 Transonic Truss-Braced Wing (TTBW) aircraft using an in-house developed aero-structural analysis solver VSPAERO coupled to BEAM3D. A vortex-lattice model of the TTBW model is developed, and a transonic and viscous flow correction method is implemented in the VSPAERO model to account for transonic and viscous flow effects. A correction method for the wing-strut interference aerodynamics is developed and applied to the VSPAERO solver. Also, a structural dynamic finite-element model of the TTBW aircraft is developed. This finite-element model includes the geometric nonlinear effect due to the tension in the struts which causes a deflection-dependent nonlinear stiffness. The VSPAERO model is coupled to the corresponding finite-element model to provide a rapid aero-structural analysis. A flight condition corresponding to Mach 0.745 at 42000 ft is selected for the TTBW aircraft jig twist optimization to reduce the drag coefficient. After the design is implemented, the drag coefficient of the twist optimized TTBW aircraft is reduced about 8 counts. At the end, a high-fidelity CFD solver FUN3D is used to validate the design.

Xiong, Juntao↗
NASA NTRS2020

Computational Simulations of a Mach 0.745 Transonic Truss-Braced Wing Design

A joint effort between the NASA Ames and Langley Research Centers was undertaken to analyze the Mach 0.745 variant of the Boeing Transonic Truss-Braced Wing (TTBW) Design. Two different flow solvers, LAVA and USM3D, were used to predict the TTBW flight performance. Sensitivity studies related to mesh resolution and numerical schemes were conducted to define best practices for this type of geometry and flow regime. Validation efforts compared the numerical simulation results of various modeling methods against experimental data taken from the NASA Ames 11-foot Unitary Wind Tunnel experimental data. The fidelity of the computational representation of the wind tunnel experiment, such as utilizing a porous wall boundary condition to model the ventilated test section, was varied to examine how different tunnel effects influence CFD predictions. LAVA and USM3D results both show an approximate 0.5 angle of attack shift from experimental lift curve data. This drove an investigation that revealed that the trailing edge of the experimental model was rounded in comparison to the CAD model, due to manufacturing tolerances, which had not been accounted for in the initial simulations of the experiment. Simulating the TTBW with an approximation of this rounded trailing-edge reduces error by approximately 60%. An accurate representation of the tested TTBW geometry, ideally including any wing twists and deflections experienced during the test under various loading conditions, will be necessary for proper validation of the CFD.

Maldonado, Daniel↗
NASA NTRS2020

Computational Simulations of a Mach 0.745 Transonic Truss-Braced Wing Design

A joint effort between the NASA Ames and Langley Research Centers was undertaken to analyze the Mach 0.745 variant of the Boeing Transonic Truss-Braced Wing (TTBW) Design. Two different flow solvers, LAVA and USM3D, were used to predict the TTBW flight performance. Sensitivity studies related to mesh resolution and numerical schemes were conducted to define best practices for this type of geometry and flow regime. Validation efforts compared the numerical simulation results of various modeling methods against experimental data taken from the NASA Ames 11-foot Unitary Wind Tunnel experimental data. The fidelity of the computational representation of the wind tunnel experiment, such as utilizing a porous wall boundary condition to model the ventilated test section, was varied to examine how different tunnel effects influence CFD predictions. LAVA and USM3D results both show an approximate 0.5o angle of attack shift from experimental lift curve data. This drove an investigation that revealed that the trailing edge of the experimental model was rounded in comparison to the CAD model, due to manufacturing tolerances, which had not been accounted for in the initial simulations of the experiment. Simulating the TTBW with an approximation of this rounded trailing-edge reduces error by approximately 60%. An accurate representation of the tested TTBW geometry, ideally including any wing twists and deflections experienced during the test under various loading conditions, will be necessary for more thorough validation of the CFD.

Maldonado, Daniel↗
NASA NTRS2019

Performance Enhancement of the Flexible Transonic Truss-Braced Wing Aircraft Using Variable-Camber Continuous Trailing-Edge Flaps

Aircraft designers are to a growing extent using vehicle flexibility to optimize performance with objectives such as gust load alleviation and drag minimization. More complex aerodynamically optimized configurations may also require dynamic loads and perhaps eventually flutter suppression. This paper considers an aerodynamically optimized truss-braced wing aircraft designed for a Mach 0.745 cruise. The variable camber continuous trailing edge flap concept with a feedback control system is used to enhance aeroelastic stability. A linearized reduced order aerodynamic model is developed from unsteady Reynolds averaged Navier-Stokes simulations. A static output feedback controller is developed from that model. Closed-loop simulations using the reduced order aerodynamic model show that the controller is effective in stabilizing the vehicle dynamics.

Bartels, Robert E.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Study of Mach 0.8 Transonic Truss-Braced Wing Aircraft Wing-Strut Interference Effects

This paper presents computational study of transonic wing-strut interference effects of the Mach 0.8 Transonic Truss-Braced Wing (TTBW) aircraft using the high-fidelity CFD solver FUN3D. The study is conducted for the wing-strut and the wing-alone configurations at design Mach number0.8 and Reynolds number14.0 ́106.The interference effects are calculated by comparing the wing aerodynamics along the spanwise direction between the wing-strut and the wing-alone configurations. The presence of the strut underneath the wing induces a suction peak on the lower surface of the wing, which causes changes in aerodynamic forces and moments. The interference effects of the Mach 0.8 TTBW aircraft are compared with the Mach 0.745 TTBW aircraft. A transonic wing-strut interference aerodynamic correction model is developed for use in a lower-fidelity tool, VSPAERO, for rapid aerodynamic analysis of the Mach 0.8 TTBW aircraft.

TTBW↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Aerodynamic Optimization of Mach 0.745 Transonic Truss-Braced Wing Aircraft with Variable-Camber Continuous Trailing-Edge Flap

This paper presents an aerodynamic optimization study of the Mach 0.745 Transonic Truss-Braced Wing (TTBW) aircraft with Variable-Camber Continuous Trailing-Edge Flap (VC-CTEF). The VCCTEF is a novel wing shaping control concept to improve aircraft aerodynamic efficiency. Drag reduction studies are conducted for three different VCCTEF configurations with 6-, 10-, and 21-spanwise sections, respectively. A simple VCCTEF actuator weight model is proposed to account the weight penalty of the actuator in the design. A vortex-lattice model of the TTBW model is developed with transonic small disturbance, integral boundary-layer, and wing-strut interference corrections for rapid aerodynamic performance evaluations. The VSPAERO model has been validated against wind tunnel test data. The optimization results show that the 21-spanwise sections VCCTEF has largest absolute drag coefficient reduction, however, the 6-spanwise sections VCCTEF provides a relatively better solution for drag reduction when the actuator weight penalty is considered. A high-fidelity CFD solver FUN3D is used to validate the VCCTEF optimization.

Aerodynamic Optimization↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Multi-point Jig Twist Optimization of Mach 0.745 Transonic Truss-Braced Wing Aircraft and High-Fidelity CFD Validation

This paper presents a multi-point jig twist optimization study of the Mach 0.745 Transonic Truss-Braced Wing (TTBW) aircraft using an in-house developed aero-structural analysis solver VSPAERO coupled to BEAM3D. A vortex-lattice model of the TTBW model is developed, and a transonic small disturbance /integral boundary layer correction method is implemented in the VSPAERO model to account for transonic and viscous flow effects. A correction method for the wing-strut interference aerodynamics is developed and applied to the VSPAERO solver. Also, a structural dynamic finite-element model of the TTBW aircraft is developed. This finite-element model includes the geometric nonlinear effect due to the tension in the struts which causes a deflection-dependent nonlinear stiffness. The VSPAERO model is coupled to the corresponding finite-element model to provide a rapid aero-structural analysis. The VSPAERO model has been validated against wind tunnel test data and FUN3D CFD simulation data. Three different flight conditions corresponding to Mach 0.745 at 40,000 ft are selected for the TTBW aircraft jig twist optimization to reduce the drag coefficients at the design and off-design cruise lift coefficients. The preliminary optimization results show that the TTBW aircraft with the optimized jig twist achieves a drag reduction of about 9 counts, 7 counts, and8 counts corresponding to the lift coefficients 0.68, 0.73, and 0.78, respectively. A high-fidelity CFD solver FUN3D is used to validate the jig twist optimization.

Multi-point↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Improvements in Simulating a Mach 0.80 Transonic Truss-Braced Wing Configuration using the Spalart-Allmaras and k-ω SST Turbulence

Teams from the NASA Ames Research Centers (ARC) and Langley Research Center (LaRC) have been working on validating their computational fluid dynamics (CFD) results for the Boeing Mach 0.80 Transonic Truss-Braced Wing (TTBW) configuration. Experimental data used for the validation were gathered from a test conducted of a 4.5% scale Mach 0.80 TTBW model in the NASA Ames Research Center 11-by 11-Foot Transonic Wind Tunnel. The CFD simulations were initially run with both LAVA and USM3D Mixed Element solvers utilizing the Spalart-Allmaras (SA) turbulence model. A discrepancy was observed between CFD and experimental loads and moments ranging on average from 0.047 to 0.063 for lift coefficient, 16.5 to 27 in drag counts, and -0.02 to -0.032 for pitching moment, varying with the solver used. With introducing the refactored version of LAVA these values dropped to 0.034 to 0.047 for lift coefficient, 7.74 to 16.5 in drag counts, and lastly -0.012 to -0.02 for pitching moment. Based on findings from Boeing, who observed an improved comparison to experimental data when using the k-ω Shear Stress Transport (SST) turbulence model, the NASA teams conducted simulations with SST to investigate turbulence modeling sensitivities. OVERFLOW and USM3D V6 solvers were used for the comparison of SST and SA simulations. CFD results using the SST turbulence model demonstrate an improvement in matching with experimental CL values, reducing the discrepancies seen by 0.021-0.055 (62-93% reduction in discrepancy respective to the OVERFLOW and USM3D V6). The SST model has varying effects on CD, based on the solver / grid paradigm; for USM3D this prediction is only improved at higher angles of attack (above the cruise design point) resulting in a reduced discrepancy of 8.8–25 drag counts However, at the mid-to-low angles of attack, SST increases the CD discrepancy by 4-55 counts, increasing at lower angles of attack. For OVERFLOW this discrepancy only exists at the low angles of attack and maxes out at 10 counts of drag. Above α = 1.5° OVERFLOW SST reduces discrepancy by 9.3 drag counts on average.

AATT↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Fuel-Optimal Trajectory Optimization of Mach 0.745 Transonic Truss-Braced Wing with Variable Camber Continuous Trailing Edge Flap

This paper describes a fuel-optimal trajectory optimization of the Mach 0.745 Transonic Truss-Braced Wing with the variable camber continuous trailing edge flaps (VCCTEF) capable of changing the chordwise pressure distribution and spanwise lift distribution to minimize drag. The trajectory optimization is posed as a minimization of the fuel burn over a fixed cruise range. The trajectory optimization is formulated by the adjoint method which results in a two-point boundary value problem. A numerical shooting method is implemented to solve the minimum-fuel trajectory optimization. The results indicates a fuel burn reduction of 793 lbs or 5.5% for a cruise range of 3000 miles. An approximate trajectory optimization is proposed using a single adjoint variable. This leads to a greatly simplified analytical solution of the adjoint solution. The results of the approximate trajectory optimization are in excellent agreement with those obtained by the shooting method. The approximate trajectory optimization produces a fuel burn reduction of 615 lbs or 4.3%.

Trajectory Optimization↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Aeroelastic Trim Drag Optimization of Mach 0.745 Transonic Truss-Braced Wing Aircraft with Variable-Camber Continuous Trailing-Edge Flap

This paper presents an aeroelastic trim drag optimization study of the Mach 0.745 Transonic Truss-Braced Wing (TTBW) aircraft with the Variable-Camber Continuous Trailing-Edge Flap (VCCTEF). An aero-structural analysis solver VSPAERO with transonic small disturbance, integral boundary-layer, and wing-strut interference corrections coupled to finite-element code BEAM3D is developed to provide a rapid aircraft aeroelastic performance evaluation. The VSPAERO model has been validated against wind tunnel test data. Aeroelastic trim drag optimization studies are conducted for a VCCTEF configuration with 6-spanwise sections. Three different flight conditions corresponding to Mach 0.745 are selected for the TTBW aircraft aeroelastic trim drag optimization at the design and off-design cruise lift coefficients. The preliminary optimization results show that the TTBW aircraft with the optimized VCCTEF deflection achieves a drag reduction of about 9.1 counts, 5.9 counts, and 11.8 counts corresponding to the lift coefficients 0.68, 0.73, and 0.78, respectively. A high-fidelity CFD solver FUN3D is used to validate the aeroelastic trim drag optimization.

Aeroelastic trim drag↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Aerodynamic Optimization of Mach 0.8 Transonic Truss-Braced Wing Aircraft using Variable Camber Continuous Trailing Edge Flap

This paper presents an aerodynamic optimization study of the Mach 0.8 Transonic Truss-Braced Wing (TTBW) aircraft with Variable Camber Continuous Trailing Edge Flap (VC-CTEF). The VCCTEF is a novel wing shaping control concept to improve aircraft aerodynamic efficiency. Drag reduction studies are conducted for two different VCCTEF configurations with 6- and 10-spanwise sections, respectively. A simple VCCTEF actuator weight model is used to account the weight penalty of the actuator in the design for the Mach 0.8 TTBW aircraft. A vortex-lattice model of the Mach 0.8 TTBW aircraft is developed with transonic small disturbance, integral boundary-layer, and wing-strut interference corrections for rapid aerodynamic performance evaluations. The VSPAERO model has been validated against the wind tunnel test data. The optimization results show that the 6-spanwise sections VCCTEF provides a relatively better solution for drag reduction when the actuator weight penalty is considered. A high-fidelity CFD solver FUN3D is used to verify the VCCTEF optimization design.

Aerodynamic optimization↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Aeroelastic Analysis of Mach 0.8 Transonic Truss-Braced Wing Aircraft

This paper presents an aeroelastic analysis of the Mach 0.8 Transonic Truss-Braced Wing(TTBW) aircraft jig shape using an in-house developed tool based on VSPAERO. A vortex-lattice model of the Mach 0.8 TTBW model is developed, and a transonic and viscous flow correction method is implemented to account for transonic and viscous flow effects. A correction method for the wing-strut interference aerodynamics is developed and applied to the VSPAERO solver. The Galerkin method is used to calculate the geometry deformation under aerodynamic force. The aero-structural analysis solver VSPAERO coupled to the mode shapes computed by NASTRAN using the Galerkin method provides a rapid aircraft aero-structual analysis. A high-fidelity CFD solver FUN3D is used to verify the results. The aeroelastic simulation results show that the aeroelastic lift coefficient is reduced about0.05∼0.07, drag polar is not affected by aeroelasticity, and the pitching moment is reduced about 30% at Mach0.8 and altitude 40,000 ft.

TTBW Aeroelastic↗