Techniques to generate and optimize the load spectra for an aircraft
Source abstract
Abstract
In this article, described the various techniques to generate the load spectra for an aircraft and optimize the generated loading sequence. The generation of loading sequence is carried out from the Flight Data Recorder (FDR), which records various parameters in flight. In this article main focus is on ‘g’ accelerations as these are used for load spectra generation. This article describes the techniques viz., (i) Peak-trough counting, (ii) Level cross counting algorithms to count the number of exceedances. After implementing and using these techniques, listed the advantages and disadvantages of these techniques. For a successful usage of generated load sequence for a test/analysis, it is necessary to optimize the generated loading sequence or turning points. The optimization of generated load sequence is carried out by filtering small cycle amplitudes of load/‘g’ ranges. At different range levels the filtering has been carried out, to arrive at an optimum range level of filtering. In order to be certain that the optimized spectra has not lost its severity and shape it has been re-plotted with the original spectra on the same graph. This optimization exercise useful in reducing the testing time.
Source: openaire · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Probabilistic and Robust Engineering Design · Structural Health Monitoring Techniques · Fatigue and fracture mechanics
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (27)
Show source-provided references
1. Amzallag, C., Gerey, J.P., Robert, J.L., Bahuaudt, J.: Standardization of the rainflow counting method for fatigue analysis. Int. J. Fatigue 16, 287–293 (1994)10.1016/0142-1123(94)90343-3 ↗
2. Anthes, R.J.: Modified rainflow counting keeping the load sequence. Int. J. Fatigue 19(7), 529–535 (1997)10.1016/S0142-1123(97)00078-9 ↗
3. ASTM Standard E1049: Standard Practices for Cycle Counting in Fatigue Analysis, vol. 5. ASTM Standard E1049, Philadelphia, PA (2005)
4. Berens, A.P.: Determination of sample size in flight loads program, service fatigue loads monitoring, simulation and analysis. ASTM STP 671, 36–48 (1979)
5. Broek, D.: The Practical Use of Fracture Mechanics, Textbook. Kluwer Academic Publishers, USA (1988)
6. De Jonge, J.B.: The Analysis of Load-Time Histories by Means of Counting Methods, NLR MP 82039 U. National Aerospace Laboratories, The Netherlands (1982)
7. De Jonge, J.B.: Additional Information about FALSTAFF, National Aerospace Laboratory, NLR TR 79056 U, 12 June (1979)
8. Denyer, A.G.: Flight-by-flight spectrum development, service fatigue loads monitoring, simulation and analysis. ASTM STP 671, 158–175 (1979)
9. Downing, S.D., Socie, D.F.: Simple rainflow algorithm. Int. J. Fatigue 4(1), 31–40 (1982)10.1016/0142-1123(82)90018-4 ↗
10. Ghoshal, S., Sunder, R.: Parametric Analysis of Fatigue under Random Loading, PD ST 8933. NAL, Bangalore (1989)
11. Glinka, G., Kam, J.C.P.: Rainflow counting algorithm for very long stress histories. Int. J. Fatigue 9(4), 223–228 (1987)10.1016/0142-1123(87)90025-9 ↗
12. Heuler, P., Klatschke, H.: Generation and use of standardized load spectra and load time histories. Int. J. Fatigue 27, 974–990 (2005)10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2004.09.012 ↗
13. Hong, N.: A modified rainflow counting method. Int. J. Fatigue 13(6), 465–469 (1991)10.1016/0142-1123(91)90481-D ↗
14. Johannesson, P.: Extraction of load histories and spectra. Fatigue Fract. Eng. Mater. Struct. 29, 201–207 (2006)10.1111/j.1460-2695.2006.00982.x ↗
15. Kaplan, M.P., Reiman, A., Landy, M.A., et al.: Derivation of flight-by-flight spectra for fighter aircraft, service fatigue loads monitoring, simulation and analysis. ASTM STP 671, 193–207 (1979)
16. Lee Y.-L., Pan, J.: Fatigue Testing and Analysis, Theory and Practice, Elsevier Publication. ISBN: 0-7506-7719-8 (2004)
17. McInnes, C.H., Meehan, P.A.: Equivalence of four-point and three-point rainflow cycle counting algorithm. Int. J. Fatigue 30(3), 547–559 (2008)10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2007.03.006 ↗
18. Military Specification, Airplane Strength and Rigidity Reliability Requirements, Repeated Loads and Fatigue, MIL-A-008866B, 22 August (1975)
19. Molent, L., Aktepe, B.: Review of fatigue monitoring of agile military aircraft, Blackwell Science Ltd. Fatigue Fract. Eng. Mater. Struct. 23, 767–785 (2000)10.1046/j.1460-2695.2000.00330.x ↗
20. Olagnon, M.: Practical Computation of Statistical properties of rainflow counts. Int. J. Fatigue 16(5), 306–314 (1994)10.1016/0142-1123(94)90267-4 ↗
21. Raju, K.N., Lakshminarayana, H.V., Dattaguru, B.: Workshop on ‘Fracture, Fatigue and Failure Analysis’, Part: III, Fatigue, Organised by National Aerospace Laboratories, Bangalore, February 26–March 10 (1979)
22. Schijve, J.: Fatigue of Structures and Materials, Textbook. Kluwer Academic Publishers (Springer Verlag), Dordrecht, The Netherlands (2001)
23. Schijve, J.: Fatigue damage in aircraft structures, not wanted, but tolerated? Int. J. Fatigue 31, 998–1011 (2009)10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2008.05.016 ↗
24. Schutz, W.: Fatigue life prediction: Calculation or Experiment? Life Assessment of Dynamically loaded Materials and Structures, ECF-5, September 17–21 (1984)
25. Van Dijk G.M., de Jonge J.B.: Introduction to a fighter aircraft loading standard for fatigue evaluation, NLR MP 75017 U, 20 May (1975)
26. van Gelder, P.: GENESIS 4 Fatigue, National Aerospace Laboratory NLR, the Netherlands. Developed as part of the NLR LOADPROC project. (2001)
27. WAFO: A Matlab Toolbox for Wave Analysis for Fatigue and Oceanography, Random Waves and Loads, The WAFO group, Lund University, Lund Institute of Technology, Centre for Mathematical Sciences, Mathematical Statistics, August (2000)