The mission adaptive wing (MAW) consisted of leading-and trailing-edge variable-camber surfaces that could be deflected in flight to provide a near-ideal wing carnber shape for any flight condition. These surfaces featured smooth, flexible upper surfaces and fully enclosed lower surfaces, distingadshing them from conventional flaps that have discontirmous surfaces and Nomenclature Refe.rence values in brackets, [], based on a trapezoidal planform at a leading-edge sweepback angle of 26°scaled up, from Hcf. 17. *Aerospace Engineer. Member AIAA.

Traditional techniques in structural load measurement entail the correlation of a known load with strain-gage output from the individual components of a structure or machine. The use of strain gages has proved successful and is considered the standard approach for load measurement. However, remotely measuring aerodynamic loads using deflection measurement systems to determine aeroelastic deformation as a substitute to strain gages may yield lower testing costs while improving aircraft performance through reduced instrumentation weight. With a reliable strain and structural deformation measurement system this technique was examined. The objective of this study was to explore the utility of a deflection-based load estimation, using the active aeroelastic wing F/A-18 aircraft. Calibration data from ground tests performed on the aircraft were used to derive left wing-root and wing-fold bending-moment and torque load equations based on strain gages, however, for this study, point deflections were used to derive deflection-based load equations. Comparisons between the strain-gage and deflection-based methods are presented. Flight data from the phase-1 active aeroelastic wing flight program were used to validate the deflection-based load estimation method. Flight validation revealed a strong bending-moment correlation and slightly weaker torque correlation. Development of current techniques, and future studies are discussed. = measured load of sample l n = number of strain gages P l = true load of sample l PCM = pulse code modulation S i = i th strain-gage signal Nomenclature

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract