2021
DOI: 10.1016/j.ast.2020.106458
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Aerodynamic analysis and structural integrity for optimal performance of sweeping and spanning morphing unmanned air vehicles

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 16 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The drone's structural design might prioritize rigidity and stiffness, which could lead to higher stress levels during testing. While higher stress levels may indicate the ability to withstand applied loads, it could also suggest that the drone is less flexible and more susceptible to structural damage [15][16]. Therefore, Design 1 has been selected for topology optimization and subsequent fabrication due to its favorable performance characteristics, including lower velocity in the flow simulation, higher stress levels, and lower displacement in the stress analysis.…”
Section: Flow Analysis Results (Akış Analizi Sonuçları)mentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…The drone's structural design might prioritize rigidity and stiffness, which could lead to higher stress levels during testing. While higher stress levels may indicate the ability to withstand applied loads, it could also suggest that the drone is less flexible and more susceptible to structural damage [15][16]. Therefore, Design 1 has been selected for topology optimization and subsequent fabrication due to its favorable performance characteristics, including lower velocity in the flow simulation, higher stress levels, and lower displacement in the stress analysis.…”
Section: Flow Analysis Results (Akış Analizi Sonuçları)mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, it is essential to acknowledge that in direction 3, Design 3 outperformed the other designs, attaining a remarkable velocity of 30.794 m/s, whereas Design 1 lagged behind with a velocity of 24.43 m/s. This divergence highlights the significance of considering the directionspecific performance of drone frames, as various flight scenarios may require distinct design optimizations [16]. The variations in velocity among the designs can be attributed to their differing aerodynamic features, including the shape of the body and wings.…”
Section: Flow Analysis Results (Akış Analizi Sonuçları)mentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The components examined in the specific context investigated in this paper underwent meshing using the FEA method for static analysis. Meshing is an important step in FEA because it involves the discretization of complex geometries into smaller elements, which affects the accuracy and efficiency of subsequent numerical simulations [52]. The static analysis starts by applying a force to the relevant regions of the mechanically meshed system equivalent to the anticipated real-world conditions.…”
Section: Structural Simulation Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Because higher drag will reduce flight efficiency, from an aerodynamic point of view, drag will affect fuel consumption in flight operations which requires propulsion to work harder so that fuel requirements increase [6]- [8], this will also lead to emission pollution problems [9] and noise caused by aerodynamic noise [10]. The part of the aircraft that is used to process the force generated by the aerodynamic shape is the wing of the aircraft, so it is very  ISSN: 2088-8694 important to pay attention to aerodynamic efficiency in this section [11]. This statement shows that the shape of wings can improve the efficiency and aerodynamic of the aircraft.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%