Ground vibration tests (GVT) are a typical source of data for flutter prediction. In this paper, a simple, lowcost method to calculate flutter is presented. In this method, measured frequencies, mode shapes of an airplane are used and, additionally, the theoretical mass model of it. If the theoretical mass model is used, it is possible to calculate generalized masses of modes and cross mass couplings between them. The mass couplings of normal modes should be zero. Orthogonalization is correction of the mode shapes to lead the couplings to zero. The possible orthogonalization methods are presented in chapter 2. Based on eigenmodes of airplane configuration during GVT, it is possible to determine the eigenmodes of the same free airplane after a relatively small mass change, i.e. for another mass distribution that was not investigated by GVT. In the procedure presented in chapter 3, it is assumed that geometric and stiffness properties do not change. The methodology was used in the own flutter calculation software that is useful for flutter prediction of light airplanes and sailplanes. Santrauka Dažnuminiai bandymai žemėje yra tipinis informacijos šaltinis flaterio skaičiavimui. Šiame straipsnyje pateikiamas paprastas ir pigus flaterio skaičiavimo metodas. Šiame metode naudojamos lėktuvo išmatuotų dažnuminių modų formos ir teorinis lėktuvo masių modelis. Naudojant teorinį masių modelį galima apskaičiuoti apibendrintas modų mases ir masių ryšius tarp jų. Normalinių modų masių ryšys turi būti lygus nuliui. Ortogonalizavimu koreguojamos modų formos, siekiant ryšius sumažinti iki nulio. Galimi ortogonalizavimo metodai pateikti antrame skyriuje. Remiantis lėktuvo laisvųjų svyravimo modomis, gautomis dažnuminių bandymų žemėje metu, galima nustatyti kitokio masių pasiskirstymo įtaką laisvųjų svyravimų modoms. Procedūroje, pateiktoje trečiame skyriuje, manoma, kad geometrinės ir standumo savybės nesikeičia. Ši metodologija buvo panaudota savoje programinėje įrangoje flateriui skaičiuoti, kurią galima naudoti lengvų lėktuvų ir sklandytuvų flaterio skaičiavimui.

PurposeA low-cost but credible method of low-subsonic flutter analysis based on ground vibration test (GVT) results is presented. The purpose of this paper is a comparison of two methods of immediate flutter problem solution: JG2 – low cost software based on the strip theory in aerodynamics (STA) and V-g method of the flutter problem solution and ZAERO I commercial software with doublet lattice method (DLM) aerodynamic model and G method of the flutter problem solution. In both cases, the same sets of measured normal modes are used. Design/methodology/approachBefore flutter computation, resonant modes are supplied by some non-measurable but existing modes and processed using the author’s own procedure. For flutter computation, the modes are normalized using the aircraft mass model. The measured mode orthogonalization is possible. The flutter calculation made by means of both methods are performed for the MP-02 Czajka UL aircraft and the Virus SW 121 aircraft of LSA category. FindingsIn most cases, both compared flutter computation results are similar, especially in the case of high aspect wing flutter. The Czajka T-tail flutter analysis using JG2 software is more conservative than the one made by ZAERO, especially in the case of rudder flutter. The differences can be reduced if the proposed rudder effectiveness coefficients are introduced. Practical implicationsThe low-cost methods are attractive for flutter analysis of UL and light aircraft. The paper presents the scope of the low-cost JG2 method and its limitations. Originality/valueIn comparison with other works, the measured generalized masses are not used. Additionally, the rudder effectiveness reduction was implemented into the STA. However, Niedbal (1997) introduced corrections of control surface hinge moments, but the present work contains results in comparison with the outcome obtained by means of the more credible software.

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to find an influence of the reduced stiffness of actuators, located on the most outer parts of ailerons, flaperons, rudders, elevators and elevons on the excitation of flutter. This phenomenon is especially important for unmanned aerial vehicles because they continuously use all these control surfaces for trimming and stabilisation and on the other hand, the numerous statistics show that failure of elements of flight control systems are still the most probable reasons of aircraft critical failure.Design/methodology/approachFlutter calculations were performed by use of the classical modal approach. The normal vibrations of the free aircraft were measured in the ground vibration test (GVT). Test results were used either for verification of the FEM model of the structure – in this case for flutter calculation the MSC.Nastran software was used, or directly for flutter calculation. Based on the flutter analysis, the control surfaces critical for flutter were determined.FindingsThese so‐called critical control surfaces –, i.e. surfaces responsible for flutter excitation at first – are localized on outer parts of wing and empennage. It was found that the critical surfaces should have been mass balanced or should be irreversible. In the second case, i.e. when the control surfaces are irreversible, the actuators and drivers should have been of a high reliability, because disconnection of these elements could involve flutter.Research limitations/implicationsThis approach within the computational analysis is limited to linear case, otherwise NASTRAN software cannot be used for flutter analysis. GVTs could be performed successfully independently if the structure has linear or non‐linear properties.Practical implicationsIt was found that before any flight the stiffness in the flight control system of all control surfaces must carefully be checked and kept above the critical stiffness value. Safety level strongly depends on the reliability of actuators used on such unmanned aerial vehicles. The simulation of disconnection (as a result of damage) of selected control surfaces is possible even if the GVT were provided on undamaged vehicle. To do it, the rotational mode of so‐called “free control surface” should be prepared (as an artificial resonant mode) for all deflected control surfaces; next all the resonant modes should be orthogonalized, relative to this artificial control surfaces mode.Originality/valueThis paper was based on two big European and national projects, and all presented results are original and were never published before. Some selected graphs were shown during the EASN Workshop, Paris, September 2010 at the presentation entitled: “Aeroelastic analysis of remotely controlled research vehicles with numerous control surfaces”.

No abstract

No abstract