Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T11:06:59.022Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Design and flight test of active flutter suppression on the X-56A multi-utility technology test-bed aircraft

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 May 2016

E. L. Burnett ,
J. A. Beranek ,
B. T. Holm-Hansen ,
C. J. Atkinson  and
P. M. Flick
E. L. Burnett*
Affiliation:
Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company, Palmdale, California
J. A. Beranek
Affiliation:
Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company, Palmdale, California
B. T. Holm-Hansen
Affiliation:
Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company, Palmdale, California
C. J. Atkinson
Affiliation:
Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company, Palmdale, California
P. M. Flick
Affiliation:
Air Force Research Laboratory, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Efforts to develop the next generation of aircraft with ever-increasing levels of performance – higher, farther, faster, cheaper – face great technical challenges. One of these technical challenges is to reduce structural weight of the aircraft. Another is to look to aircraft configurations that have been unrealizable to date. Both of these paths can lead to a rigid flex coupling phenomenon that can result in anything from poor flying qualities to the loss of an aircraft due to flutter. This has led to a need to develop an integrated flight and aeroelastic control capability where structural dynamics are included in the synthesis of flight control laws. Studies have indicated that the application of an integrated flight and aeroelastic control approach to a SensorCraft high-altitude long-endurance vehicle would provide substantial performance improvement(1,2). Better flying qualities and an expanded flight envelope through multi-flutter mode control are two areas of improvement afforded by integrated flight and aeroelastic control. By itself, multi-flutter mode control transforms the flutter barrier from a point of catastrophic structural failure to a benign region of flight. This paper discusses the history and issues associated with the development of such an integrated flight and aeroelastic control system for the X-56A aircraft.

Keywords

aeroelasticityflight controlaeroelasticsflight controlsmultiple flutter mode controlflutterrigid flex couplingX-56A
Type
Research Article
Information
The Aeronautical Journal , Volume 120 , Issue 1228 , June 2016 , pp. 893 - 909
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Aeronautical Society 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1.Nicolai, L.M., Hunten, K., Zink, S. and Flick, P. System benefits of active flutter suppression for a SensorCraft-type vehicle, AIAA/ISSMO Multidisciplinary Analysis Optimization Conference, 13-15 September 2010, Fort Worth, Texas, US, AIAA-2010-9349.Google Scholar
2.Tilmann, C.P., Flick, P.M., Martin, C.A. and Love, M.H. High-altitude long-endurance technologies for SensorCraft, RTO Paper MP-104-P-26, RTO AVT-099 Symposium on Novel and Emerging Vehicle and Vehicle Technology Concepts, 7-11 April 2003, Brussels, Belgium.Google Scholar
3.Holm-Hansen, B.T., Atkinson, C., Beranek, J., Burnett, E.L., Nicolai, L. and Youssef, H. Envelope expansion of a flexible flying wing by active flutter suppression, Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International Conference, August 2010.Google Scholar
4.Roger, K.L., Hodges, G.E. and Felt, L.Active flutter suppression—a flight test demonstration, J Aircr, 1975, 12, (6), pp 551–556.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5.Sensburg, O., Honlinger, H., Noll, T.E. and Huttsell, L.J.Active flutter suppression on an F-4F aircraft, J Aircr, 1982, 19, (5), pp 354–359.Google Scholar
6.Guinn, W.A., Rising, J.J.D. and Walt, J. Development of an advanced pitch active control system for a wide body jet aircraft, NASA Contractor Report 172277, 1 February 1984.Google Scholar
7.O'Connell, R.F. Design, development and implementation of an active control system for load alleviation for a commercial transport airplane, 49th AGARD Structures and Materials Panel, 9 October 1979, Cologne, Germany.Google Scholar
8.O'Connell, R.F. and Messina, A.F.Development of an active flutter margin augmentation system for a commercial transport, J Guidance and Control, 1980, 3, (4), pp 352–360.Google Scholar
9.Wykes, J.H., Mori, A.S. and Borland, C.J. B-1 structural mode control system, AIAA Aircraft Design, Flight Test and Operations Meeting, 7-9 August, 1972, Los Angeles, California, US, AIAA 72-772.Google Scholar
10.Wykes, J.H., Byar, T.R., MacMiller, C.J. and Greek, D.C. Analyses and tests of the B-1 aircraft structural mode control system, NASA Contractor Report 144887, January 1980.Google Scholar
11.Jacobson, S.B., Britt, R.T., Freim, D. and Kelly, P. Residual pitch oscillation (RPO) flight test and analysis on the B-2 bomber, 39th AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics and Materials Conference and Exhibit, 1998.Google Scholar
12.Britt, R.T., Jacobson, S.B. and Arthurs, T.D.Aeroservoelastic analysis of the B-2 bomber, J Aircr, 2000, 37, pp 745–752.Google Scholar
13.Love, M., Zink, P., Wieselmann, P. and Youngren, H. Body freedom flutter of high aspect ratio flying wings, AIAA-2005-1947.Google Scholar
14.Burnett, E.L., Atkinson, C., Beranek, J., Sibbitt, B., Holm-Hansen, B.T. and Nicolai, L. NDOF simulation model for flight control development with flight test correlation, AIAA Modeling and Simulation Technologies Conference, 2-5 August 2010, Toronto, Canada, AIAA-2010-7780.Google Scholar
15.Pendlton, E., Flick, P., Paul, D., Voracek, D., Reichenbach, E. and Griffin, K. The X-53: a summary of the active aeroelastic wing flight research program, AIAA Structures, Structural Dynamics and Materials Conference, 23-26 April 2007, Honolulu, Hawaii, US, AIAA 2007-1855.Google Scholar
16.Beranek, J., Nicolai, L., Buonanno, M., Burnett, E.L., Atkinson, C., Holm-Hansen, B. and Flick, P. Conceptual design of a multi-utility aeroelastic demonstrator, AIAA/ISSMO Multidisciplinary Analysis Optimization Conference, 13-15 September 2010, Fort Worth, Texas, US, AIAA-2010-9350.Google Scholar
17.Holm-Hansen, B., Burnett, E.L., Beranek, J., Atkinson, C., Kuchinsky, B. and Calhoun, J. Development and testing of an aeroservoelastic test bed, American Control Conference, 17-19 June 2013, Washington, D.C., US, Paper MoA19.3.Google Scholar
18.Holm-Hansen, B., Beranek, J., Burnett, E.L. and Atkinson, C. Aeroelastic flight research on the X-56A, Aerospace Control and Guidance Systems Committee Meeting 113, 12-14 March 2014, Englewood, Colorado, US, Paper 5.2.Google Scholar