Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-19T02:06:59.835Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Analysis of UAS-S4 Éhecatl aerodynamic performance improvement using several configurations of a morphing wing technology

Part of: Smart Aircraft

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 June 2016

O. Şugar Gabor ,
A. Koreanschi  and
R.M. Botez
O. Şugar Gabor*
Affiliation:
LARCASE (Laboratory of Applied Research in Active Controls), Avionics and Aeroservoelasticity, École de Technologie Supérieure, Department of Automated Production Engineering, Montréal, Québec, Canada
A. Koreanschi*
Affiliation:
LARCASE (Laboratory of Applied Research in Active Controls), Avionics and Aeroservoelasticity, École de Technologie Supérieure, Department of Automated Production Engineering, Montréal, Québec, Canada
R.M. Botez*
Affiliation:
Professor, Canada Research Chair in Aircraft Modeling and Simulation Technologies, LARCASE (Laboratory of Applied Research in Active Controls Avionics and Aeroservoelasticity), École de Technologie Supérieure, Department of Automated Production Engineering, Montréal, Québec, Canada
*
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected], [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The paper presents the results of the aerodynamic optimisation of an Unmanned Aerial System's wing using a morphing approach. The shape deformation of the wing is achieved by placing actuator lines at several positions along its span. For each flight condition, the optimal displacements are found by using a combination of the new Artificial Bee Colony algorithm and a classical gradient-based search routine. The wing aerodynamic characteristics are calculated with an efficient nonlinear lifting line method coupled with a two-dimensional viscous flow solver. The optimisations are performed at angles of attack below the maximum lift angle, with the aim of improving the Hydra Technologies UAS-S4 wing lift-to-drag ratio. Several configurations of the morphing wing are proposed, each with a different number of actuation lines, and the improvements obtained by these configurations are analysed and compared.

Keywords

Unmanned aerial systemmorphing wingnonlinear lifting line methodaerodynamic optimisation
Type
Research Article
Information
The Aeronautical Journal , Volume 120 , Issue 1231 , September 2016 , pp. 1337 - 1364
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. Okamoto, N.D. and Rhee, J. Educating students to understand the impact of engineering solutions in a global societal context, 8th UICEE Annual Conference on Engineering Education, 2005, Kingston, Jamaica.Google Scholar
2. Zingg, D.W., Diosady, L. and Billing, L. Adaptive aerofoils for drag reduction at transonic speeds, AIAA paper 2006-3656, November 2006.Google Scholar
3. Pecora, R., Barbarino, S., Concilio, A., Lecce, L. and Russo, S. Design and functional test of a morphing high-lift device for a regional aircraft, J Intelligent Material Systems and Structures, 2011, 22, (10), pp 1005–1023.Google Scholar
4. Barbarino, S., Pecora, R., Lecce, L., Concilio, A., Ameduri, S. and De Rosa, L. Aerofoil structural morphing based on SMA actuator series: numerical and experimental studies, J Intelligent Material Systems and Structures, 2001, 22, pp 987–1003.Google Scholar
5. Diodati, G., Concilio, A., Ricci, S., De Gaspari, A., Liauzun, C. and Godard, J.L. Estimated performance of an adaptive trailing-edge device aimed at reducing fuel consumption on a medium-size aircraft, 8690-14, Smart Structures/NDE Conference, 10-14 March 2013, San Diego, California, US.Google Scholar
6. Pecora, R., Amoroso, F. and Lecce, L. Effectiveness of wing twist morphing in roll control, J Aircraft, 2012, 49, (6), pp 1666–1674.Google Scholar
7. Neal, D.A., Good, M.G., Johnston, C.O., Robertshaw, H.H., Mason, W.H. and Inman, D.J. Design and wind tunnel analysis of a fully adaptive aircraft configuration, 45th AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics and Materials Conference, AIAA Paper 2004-1727, 19-22 April 2004, Palm Springs, California, US.Google Scholar
8. Supekar, A.H. Design, Analysis and Development of a morphable wing structure for Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Performance Augmentation, Master's Thesis, 2007, University of Texas at Arlington, Texas, US.Google Scholar
9. Gamboa, P., Alexio, P., Vale, J., Lau, F. and Suleman, A. Design and testing of a morphing wing for an experimental UAV, RTO-MP-AVT-146, 2007, Neuilly-sur-Seine, France.Google Scholar
10. Gano, S.E. and Renaud, J.E. Optimized unmanned aerial vehicle with wing morphing for extended range and endurance, Proceedings of 9th AIAA/ISSMO Symposium and Exhibit on Multidisciplinary Analysis and Optimization, AIAA Paper 2002-5668, 4-6 September 2002, Atlanta, Georgia, US.Google Scholar
11. Shyy, W., Jenkins, D. and Smith, R. Study of adaptive shape aerofoils at low Reynolds number in oscillatory flows, AIAA J, 2010, 35, pp 1545–1548.Google Scholar
12. do Vale, J., Leite, A., Lau, F. and Suleman, A. Aero-structural optimisation and performance evaluation of a morphing wing with variable span and camber, J Intelligent Material Systems and Structures, 2011, 22, (10), pp 1057–1073.Google Scholar
13. Falcao, L., Gomes, A.A. and Suleman, A. Aero-structural design optimization of a morphing wingtip, J Intelligent Material Systems and Structures, 2011, 22, (10), pp 1113–1124.Google Scholar
14. Previtali, F., Arrieta, A.F. and Ermanni, P. Performance of a three-dimensional morphing wing and comparison with a conventional wing, AIAA J, 2014, 52, (10), pp 2101–2113.Google Scholar
15. Bartley-Cho, J.D., Wang, D.P., Martin, C.A., Kudva, J.N. and West, M.N. Development of high-rate, adaptive trailing edge control surface for the smart wing phase 2 wind tunnel model, J Intelligent Material Systems and Structures, 2004, 15, pp 279–291.Google Scholar
16. Bilgen, O., Kochersberger, K.B., Diggs, E.C., Kurdila, A.J. and Inman, D.J. Morphing wing micro-air-vehicles via macro-fiber-composite actuators, Proceedings of 48th AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics and Materials Conference, AIAA Paper 2007-1785, 23-26 April 2007, Honolulu, Hawaii, US.Google Scholar
17. Bilgen, O., Kochersberger, K.B. and Inman, D.J. Macro-fiber composite actuator for a swept wing unmanned aerial vehicle, Special Issue on Flight Structures Fundamental Research in the USA, 2009, 113, pp 385–395.Google Scholar
18. Bye, D.R. and McClure, P.D. Design of a morphing vehicle, Proceedings of 48th AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics and Materials Conference, AIAA Paper 2007-1728, 23-26 April 2007, Honolulu, Hawaii, US.Google Scholar
19. Ivanco, T.G., Scott, R.C., Love, M.H., Zink, P.S. and Weisshaar, T.A. Validation of the Lockheed Martin morphing concept with wind tunnel testing, Proceedings of 48th AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics and Materials Conference, AIAA Paper 2007-2235, 23-26 April 2007, Honolulu, Hawaii, US.Google Scholar
20. Love, M.H., Zink, P.S., Stroud, R.L., Bye, D.R., Rizk, S. and White, D. Demonstration of morphing technology through ground and wind tunnel tests, Proceedings of 48th AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics and Materials Conference, AIAA Paper 2007-1729, 23-26 April 2007, Honolulu, Hawaii, US.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
21. Andersen, G.R., Cowan, D.L. and Piatak, D.J. Aeroelastic modelling, analysis and testing of a morphing wing structure, Proceedings of 48th AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics and Materials Conference, AIAA Paper 2007-1734, 23-26 April 2007, Honolulu, Hawaii, US.Google Scholar
22. Flanagan, J.S., Strutzenberg, R.C., Myers, R.B. and Rodrian, J.E. Development and flight testing of a morphing aircraft, the NextGen MFX1, Proceedings of 48th AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics and Materials Conference, AIAA Paper 2007-1707, 23-26 April 2007, Honolulu, Hawaii, US.Google Scholar
23. Botez, R.M., Molaret, P. and Laurendeau, E. Laminar flow control on a research wing: project presentation covering a three-year period, Canadian Aeronautics and Space Institute Annual General Meeting, January 2007, Toronto, ON, Canada.Google Scholar
24. Brailovski, V., Terriault, P., Coutu, D., Georges, T., Morellon, E., Fischer, C. and Berube, S. Morphing laminar wing with flexible extrados powered by shape memory alloy actuators, Proceedings of SMASIS08 ASME Conference on Smart Materials, Adaptive Structures and Intelligent Systems, 2008, Ellicott City, Maryland, US.Google Scholar
25. Pages, L., Trifu, O. and Paraschivoiu, I. Optimized laminar flow control on an airfoil using the adaptable wall technique, Proceedings of the Canadian Aeronautics and Space Institute Annual General Meeting, 2007, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.Google Scholar
26. Popov, A.V., Grigorie, L., Botez, R.M., Mamou, M. and Mébarki, Y., Modeling and testing of a morphing wing in an open loop architecture, AIAA J Aircraft, 2010, 47, (3), pp 917–923.Google Scholar
27. Grigorie, T.L., Popov, A.V. and Botez, R.M. Adaptive neuro-fuzzy controllers for an open loop morphing wing system, Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part G: J Aerospace Engineering, 2009, 223, (7), pp 965–975.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
28. Popov, A.V., Grigorie, L., Botez, R.M., Mamou, M. and Mébarki, Y. Real time airfoil optimisation of a morphing wing in a wind tunnel, AIAA J Aircraft, 2010, 47, (4), pp 1346–1354.Google Scholar
29. Popov, A.V., Grigorie, L., Botez, R.M., Mamou, M. and Mébarki, Y. Closed loop control of a morphing wing in a wind tunnel, AIAA J Aircraft, 2010, 47, (4), pp 1309–1317.Google Scholar
30. Grigorie, T.L., Popov, A.V., Botez, R.M., Mamou, M. and Mébarki, Y. On-off and proportional-integral controller for morphing wing. Part 1: Actuation mechanism and control design, Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part G: J Aerospace Engineering, 2012, 226, (2), pp 131–145.Google Scholar
31. Grigorie, T.L., Popov, A.V., Botez, R.M., Mamou, M. and Mébarki, Y. On-off and proportional-integral controller for morphing wing. Part 2: Control validation, numerical simulations and experimental tests, Proceedings of the Institution of Mech Engineers, Part G: J Aerospace Engineering, 2012, 226, (2), pp 146–162.Google Scholar
32. Sainmont, C., Paraschivoiu, I., Coutu, D., Brailovski, V., Laurendeau, E., Mamou, M.M.Y. and Khalid, M. Boundary layer behaviour on an morphing wing: simulation and wind tunnel tests, Canadian Aeronautics and Space Institute AERO09 Conference, 2009, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.Google Scholar
33. Grigorie, T.L., Botez, R.M. and Popov, A.V. Design and experimental validation of a control system for a morphing wing, AIAA Atmospheric Flight Mechanics Conference, August 2012, Minneapolis, Minnesota, US.Google Scholar
34. Grigorie, T.L., Botez, R.M., Popov, A.V., Mamou, M. and Mébarki, Y. A hybrid fuzzy logic proportional-integral-derivative and conventional on-off controller for morphing wing actuation using shape memory alloy, Part 1: Morphing system mechanisms and controller architecture design, Aeronautical J, 2012, 116, (1179), pp 433–449.Google Scholar
35. Grigorie, T.L., Botez, R.M., Popov, A.V., Mamou, M. and Mébarki, Y. A hybrid fuzzy logic proportional-integral-derivative and conventional on-off controller for morphing wing actuation using shape memory alloy, Part 2: controller implementation and validation, Aeronautical J, 2012, 116, (1179), pp 451–465.Google Scholar
36. Grigorie, T.L. and Botez, R.M. New adaptive controller method for SMA hysteresis modeling of a morphing wing, The Aeronautical J, 2010, 114, (1151), pp 1–13.Google Scholar
37. Piegl, L. and Tiller, W. The NURBS Book, 2nd ed., 1997, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Germany.Google Scholar
38. Farin, G.E. NURBS: From Projective Geometry to Practical Use, 2nd ed, 1999, A.K. Peters, Natick, MA, US.Google Scholar
39. de Boor, C. A Practical Guide to Splines, 1978, Springer-Verlag, New York, US, p 134. New York, USA.Google Scholar
40. Sugar Gabor, O., Koreanschi, A. and Botez, R.M. Optimization of an unmanned aerial systems' wing using a flexible skin morphing wing, SAE Int J Aerospace, September 2013, 6, pp 115–121, doi: 10.4371/3013-01-2095.Google Scholar
41. Sugar Gabor, O., Koreanschi, A. and Botez, R.M. An efficient numerical lifting line method for practical wing optimization through morphing, Canadian Aeronautics and Space Institute CASI AERO13 Conference, 30 April-2 May, 2013, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.Google Scholar
42. Phillips, W. and Snyder, D. Modern adaptation of Prandtl's classic lifting line theory, J Aircraft, 2000, 37, (4), pp 662–670.Google Scholar
43. Katz, J. and Plotkin, A. Lifting line solution by horseshoe elements, Low Speed Aerodynamics, from Wing Theory to Panel Methods, 1991, McGraw-Hill, New York, New York, New York, US.Google Scholar
44. Saffman, P. Vortex force and bound vorticity, Vortex Dynamics, 1992, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, US.Google Scholar
45. Drela, M. and Youngren, D. XFOIL version 6.96 documentaion, 2001.Google Scholar
46. Drela, M. XFOIL: an analysis and design system for low Reynolds number airfoils, Low Reynolds Number Aerodynamics, 1989, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Germany, pp 1–12.Google Scholar
47. Drela, M. An integral boundary layer formulation for blunt trailing edges, AIAA, 1989, pp 89–2200.Google Scholar
48. Drela, M. Implicit implementation of the full eN eN transition criterion, Proceedings of 21st Applied Aerodynamics Conference, AIAA Paper 2003-4066, 23-26 June 2003, Orlando, Florida.Google Scholar
49. Sugar Gabor, O., Koreanschi, A. and Botez, R.M. Numerical optimization of the S4 Éhecatl UAS airfoil using a morphing wing approach, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics AIAA 32nd Applied Aerodynamics Conference, 16-20 June 2014, Atlanta, Georgia, US.Google Scholar
50. Karaboga, D. and Basturk, B. A powerful and efficient algorithm for numerical function optimization: artificial bee colony (ABC) algorithm, J Global Optimization, 2007, 39, pp 459–471.Google Scholar
51. Karaboga, D. and Basturk, B. Artificial bee colony (ABC) algorithm for solving constrained optimization problems, IFSA 2007, LNAI 4529, pp 789–798.Google Scholar
52. Zhu, G. and Kwong, S. Best-guided artificial bee colony algorithm for numerical function optimization, Applied Mathematics and Computation, 2010, 217, (7), pp 3166–3173.Google Scholar
53. Bonnans, J.F., Gilbert, J.C., Lemarechal, C. and Sagastizabal, C.A. Numerical Optimization: Theoretical and Practical Aspects, revised 2nd ed, 2006, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Germany, p 490.Google Scholar
54. Powell, M.J.D. A method for nonlinear constraints in minimization problems, Optimization, 1969, Academic Press, New York, New York, US, pp 283–298.Google Scholar
55. ANSYS Fluent (software), ANSYS Inc., Canonsburg PA, US. Retrieved from www.ansys.com/Products/Simulation+Technology/Fluid+Dynamics/Fluid+Dynamics+Products/ANSYS+Fluent.Google Scholar
56. Menter, F.R. Review of the SST turbulence model experience from an industrial perspective, Int J Computational Fluid Dynamics, 2009, 23, (4), 2009, pp 305–316.Google Scholar
57. Menter, F.R., Langtry, R.B., Likki, S.R., Suzen, Y.B., Huang, P.G. and Volker, S. A correlation-based transition model using local variables: Part 1 – model formulation, ASME-GT2004-53452, 2004.Google Scholar