Lifting-Line Predictions for the Ideal Twist Effectiveness of Spanwise Continuous and Discrete Control Surfaces
Source abstract
Abstract
Modern materials and manufacturing technologies have allowed the construction of morphing wings that are able to continuously vary certain airfoil parameters such as twist, camber, or control surface deflection as a function of span. This work presents a twist effectiveness parameter as a means of comparing the ideal aerodynamic efficiency of spanwise continuous control surfaces (morphing wings) and spanwise discrete control surfaces (standard wings). A numerical algorithm is used to compute the twist effectiveness of both continuous and discrete control-surface designs over a wide range of planform shapes with evenly spaced actuation for inviscid, incompressible flow. Results included here show that using continuous control surfaces instead of discrete control surfaces reduces induced drag by less than 5% for most applications.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Dynamics and Control of Mechanical Systems · Aeroelasticity and Vibration Control · Structural Analysis and Optimization
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Utah State University, Logan, UT 84322, USA
U.S. Air Force Research Laboratory, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base (WPAFB), Dayton, OH 45433, USA
Funding
Air Force Office of Scientific Research (AFOSR) Lab Task · U.S. Office of Naval Research Sea-Based Aviation
References (37)
Show source-provided references
1. The Promise of Flight Fulfilled
2. Lougheed, V.V. (1911). The Secret Experiments of the Wright Brothers Victor Longhand, Popular Mechanics. Popular Mechanics, Hearst Corporation.
3. Marks, C.R., Zientarski, L., Culler, A.J., Hagen, B., Smyers, B.M., and Joo, J.J. (2015, January 5–9). Variable Camber Compliant Wing—Wind Tunnel Testing. Proceedings of the AIAA 2015-1051, 23rd AIAA/AHS Adaptive Structures Conference, Kissimmee, FL, USA.10.2514/6.2015-1051 ↗
4. Kaul, U.K., and Nguyen, N.T. (2014, January 16–20). Drag Optimization Study of Variable Camber Continuous Trailing Edge Flap (VCCTEF) Using OVERFLOW. Proceedings of the 32nd AIAA Applied Aerodynamics Conference, Atlanta, GA, USA.10.2514/6.2014-2444 ↗
5. Lebofsky, S., Ting, E., Nguyen, N.T., and Trinh, K.V. (2014, January 16–20). Aeroelastic Modeling and Drag Optimization of Flexible Wing Aircraft with Variable Camber Continuous Trailing Edge Flap. Proceedings of the 32nd AIAA Applied Aerodynamics Conference, Atlanta, GA, USA.10.2514/6.2014-2443 ↗
6. Ting, E., Dao, T., and Nguyen, N.T. (2015, January 5–9). Aerodynamic Load Analysis of a Variable Camber Continuous Trailing Edge Flap System on a Flexible Wing Aircraft. Proceedings of the 56th AIAA/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics, and Materials Conference, Kissimmee, FL, USA.10.2514/6.2015-1839 ↗
7. Nguyen, N., and Urnes, J. (2012, January 13–16). Aeroelastic Modeling of Elastically Shaped Aircraft Concept via Wing Shaping Control for Drag Reduction. Proceedings of the AIAA Atmospheric Flight Mechanics Conference, Minneapolis, MN, USA.10.2514/6.2012-4642 ↗
8. Kudva, J., Appa, K., Martin, C., Jardine, A., Sendeckyj, G., Harris, T., McGowan, A., and Lake, R. (1997, January 7–10). Design, Fabrication, and Testing of the DARPA/Wright Lab Smart Wing Wind Tunnel Model. Proceedings of the AIAA-1997-1198, 38th Structures, Structural Dynamics, and Materials Conference, Kissimmee, FL, USA.10.2514/6.1997-1198 ↗
9. Gilbert, W.W. (1980, January 4–6). Development of a Mission Adaptive Wing System for a Tactical Aircraft. Proceedings of the Aircraft Systems Meeting, Aircraft Design and Technology Meeting, Anaheim, CA, USA.10.2514/6.1980-1886 ↗
10. Hall, J.M. (1989). Executive Summary AFTI/F-111 Mission Adaptive Wing, Wright Research and Development Center. WRDC-TR-89-2083.
11. Hetrick, J., Osborn, R., Kota, S., Flick, P., and Paul, D. (2007, January 23–26). Flight Testing of Mission Adaptive Compliant Wing. Proceedings of the AIAA-2007-1709, 48th AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics, and Materials Conference, Honolulu, HI, USA.10.2514/6.2007-1709 ↗
12. Mechanism for Warp-Controlled Twist of a Morphing Wing10.2514/1.39328 ↗
13. Dale, A.S., Cooper, J.E., and Mosquera, A. (2013, January 8–11). Adaptive Camber-Morphing Wing using 0-υ Honecomb. Proceedings of the AIAA-2013-1510, 54th AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics, and Materials Conference, Boston, MA, USA.10.2514/6.2013-1510 ↗
14. Aerostructural Performance of Distributed Compliance Morphing Wings: Wind Tunnel and Flight Testing10.2514/1.J055073 ↗
15. Aerodynamic Shape Optimization of an Adaptive Morphing Trailing-Edge Wing10.2514/1.C033116 ↗
16. Reduced-Order Dynamic Model of a Morphing Airborne Wind Energy Aircraft10.2514/1.J058019 ↗
17. Performance of a Three-Dimensional Morphing Wing and Comparison with a Conventional Wing10.2514/1.J052764 ↗
18. Aerodynamic Modeling of Morphing Wings Using an Extended Lifting-Line Analysis10.2514/1.18323 ↗
19. Optimization of a Morphing Wing Based on Coupled Aerodynamic and Structural Constraints10.2514/1.39016 ↗
20. Aero-Structural Optimization of Three-Dimensional Adaptive Wings with Embedded Smart Actuators10.2514/1.J052715 ↗
21. Aerodynamic Investigations of a Morphing Membrane Wing10.2514/1.J051772 ↗
22. Concept Investigation of a Lightweight Composite Lattice Morphing Wing10.2514/1.J059579 ↗
23. Impact of Morphing Trailing Edges on Mission Performance for the Common Research Model10.2514/1.C034967 ↗
24. Tragflügel Theorie. Nachricten von der Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Gottingen
25. Prandtl, L. (1921). Applications of Modern Hydrodynamics to Aeronautics, NASA. NACA TR-116.
26. Lifting-Line Analysis for Twisted Wings and Washout-Optimized Wings10.2514/1.262 ↗
27. Phillips, W.F. (2010). Incompressible Flow over Finite Wings. Mechanics of Flight, Wiley. [2nd ed.].
28. Analytical Decomposition of Wing Roll and Flapping Using Lifting-Line Theory10.2514/1.C032399 ↗
29. Phillips, W.F., Hunsaker, D.F., and Taylor, J.D. (2019, January 17–21). Minimizing Induced Drag with Weight Distribution, Lift Distribution, Wingspan, and Wing-Structure Weight. Proceedings of the AIAA Aviation 2019 Forum, Dallas, TX, USA.10.2514/6.2019-3349 ↗
30. Modern Adaptation of Prandtl’s Classic Lifting-Line Theory10.2514/2.2649 ↗
31. Hodson, J., Hunsaker, D.F., and Spall, R. (2017, January 9–13). Wing Optimization Using Dual Number Automatic Differentiation in MachUp. Proceedings of the 55th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting, AIAA SciTech Forum, Grapevine, TX, USA.10.2514/6.2017-0033 ↗
32. Glauert, H. (1926). The Elements of Aerofoil and Airscrew Theory, Cambridge University Press.
33. McCormick, B.W. (1995). Numerical Model of a Lifting Line to Determine Induced Drag. Aerodynamics, Aeronautics, and Flight Mechanics, John Wiley & Sons. [2nd ed.].
34. Katz, J., and Plotkin, A. (2001). Lifting-Line solution by horseshoe elements. Low-Speed Aerodynamics, Cambridge University Press. [2nd ed.].10.1017/CBO9780511810329 ↗
35. Saffman, P.G. (1992). ; Vortex Dynamics, Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511624063 ↗
36. Kraft, D. (1988). A Software Package for Sequential Quadratic Programming, DLR German Aerospace Center—Institute for Flight Mechanics. Tech. Rep, DFVLR-FB 88-28.
37. Montgomery, Z.S., Hunsaker, D.F., and Joo, J.J. (2020, January 6–10). Aerodynamic Efficiency Analysis of Morphing Wings Relative to Non-Morphing Wings. Proceedings of the AIAA 2020-2008, AIAA Scitech 2020 Forum, Orlando, FL, USA.10.2514/6.2020-2008 ↗