Experimental evaluation of a morphing leading edge concept
Source abstract
Abstract
This article presents an experimental evaluation of a morphing leading edge demonstrator by investigating its morphed shape, the level of induced strains in the airfoil skin, the actuation force, and the morphing mechanism’s capability to lock and transfer the applied loads. In addition, a finite element model of the demonstrator is assembled comprising an elastic morphing skin and a kinematic morphing mechanism. The obtained results are used to assess whether the demonstrator performs according to the design objectives, such as the target shape, the character of the morphing deformation and the morphing mechanism locking, applied during the design process. The comparison between experimental and numerical results yielded a good agreement in terms of observed morphed shape and pertaining strains. The average difference in morphed shape was less than 0.08% chord at the maximum actuator extension. The observed difference in the respective strains was less than 400 micro-strains. A significant difference, up to 70%, was observed in the actuation force, which was attributed to the modelling assumptions and to the force measurement technique employed in the experiment. Nevertheless, both results show good qualitative agreement showing similar trends.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Aeroelasticity and Vibration Control · Structural Analysis and Optimization · Composite Structure Analysis and Optimization
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Aerospace Structures & Computational Mechanics, Faculty of Aerospace Engineering, Delft University of Technology, Delft, The Netherlands
Clarkson University, Potsdam, NY, USA
Fraunhofer-Institut für Bauphysik, Stuttgart, Germany
References (31)
Show source-provided references
1. ACARE (2010) 2008 Addendum to the strategic research agenda. Available at: www.acare4europe.org
2. ANSYS (2015a) Mechanical APDL Element Reference, Release 15.0. Cheyenne, WY: SAS IP, Inc.
3. ANSYS (2015b) Mechanical APDL Theory Reference, Release 15.0. Cheyenne, WY: SAS IP, Inc.
4. 10.1177/1045389X1141408410.1177/1045389X11414084 ↗
5. 10.1016/j.ast.2007.10.00410.1016/j.ast.2007.10.004 ↗
6. 10.1177/1045389X1140908110.1177/1045389X11409081 ↗
7. De Gaspari A · 2014 · 9059 · 1
8. De Gaspari A · 2016 · 1
9. 10.1016/S1270-9638(00)01079-810.1016/S1270-9638(00)01079-8 ↗
10. 10.1016/j.tranpol.2014.02.01710.1016/j.tranpol.2014.02.017 ↗
11. 10.1177/147592171036526310.1177/1475921710365263 ↗
12. Kintscher M · 2014 · 1
13. 10.1108/1757986111118391110.1108/17579861111183911 ↗
14. Kirn J, Storm S (2014) Kinematic solution for a highly adaptive droop nose. In: Proceedings of ICAST, pp. 1–11. Available at: http://library.eawag-empa.ch/icast_proceedings_2014_open_access/ICAST2014015.pdf
15. Linak (2012) LA23: compact and strong electric push and pull actuator. Available at: https://www.linak.com/
16. Luna Innovations Inc (2012) LUNA optical distributed sensor interrogator. Available at: http://lunainc.com/
17. 10.1111/j.1460-2695.1987.tb00462.x10.1111/j.1460-2695.1987.tb00462.x ↗
18. Mauchle AR · 2012 · 418
19. 10.2514/6.2009-212810.2514/6.2009-2128 ↗
20. 10.2514/6.2012-158010.2514/6.2012-1580 ↗
21. Morgan HL · 1986 · 31
22. 10.1177/1045389X1772103610.1177/1045389X17721036 ↗
23. Shah C (2002) Mesh discretization error and criteria for accuracy of finite element solutions. In: Ansys users conference, pp. 1–12. Available at: https://www.ansys.com/-/media/ansys/corporate/resourcelibrary/conference-paper/2002-int-ansys-conf-9.pdf
24. 10.2514/6.2012-403810.2514/6.2012-4038 ↗
25. 10.1088/0964-1726/19/12/12401010.1088/0964-1726/19/12/124010 ↗
26. Thuwis GAA · 2011
27. U.S. Department of Defense · 1998
28. 10.1108/AEAT-02-2015-006710.1108/AEAT-02-2015-0067 ↗
29. 10.2514/6.2015-104910.2514/6.2015-1049 ↗
30. 10.2514/1.C03145610.2514/1.C031456 ↗
31. 10.1007/978-3-319-22413-810.1007/978-3-319-22413-8 ↗