Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T20:50:18.811Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Aileron size and location to minimise induced drag during rolling-moment production at zero rolling rate

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 April 2021

J.R. Brincklow Open the ORCID record for J.R. Brincklow [Opens in a new window]  and
D.F. Hunsaker
J.R. Brincklow*
Affiliation:
Utah State UniversityLogan, UTUSA
D.F. Hunsaker
Affiliation:
Utah State UniversityLogan, UTUSA
*
josh.brincklow@gmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Most modern aircraft employ discrete ailerons for roll control. The induced drag, rolling moment, and yawing moment for an aircraft depend in part on the location and size of the ailerons. In the present study, lifting-line theory is used to formulate theoretical relationships between aileron design and the resulting forces and moments. The theory predicts that the optimum aileron geometry is independent of prescribed lift and rolling moment. A numerical potential flow algorithm is used to evaluate the optimum size and location of ailerons for a wide range of planforms with varying aspect ratio and taper ratio. Results show that the optimum aileron design to minimise induced drag always extends to the wing tip. Impacts to induced drag and yawing moment are also considered, and results can be used to inform initial design and placement of ailerons on future aircraft. Results of this optimisation study are also compared to theoretical optimum results that could be obtained from morphing-wing technology. Results of this comparison can be used to evaluate the potential benefits of using morphing-wing technology rather than traditional discrete ailerons.

Keywords

AileronOptimisationAdverse YawInduced DragLifting-linePotential flowRolling MomentRoll InitiationNumerical Lifting-line MethodWing Design
Type
Research Article
Information
The Aeronautical Journal , Volume 125 , Issue 1287 , May 2021 , pp. 807 - 829
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Royal Aeronautical Society

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

Hoogervorst, J.E.K. and Elham, A. Wing aerostructural optimization using the individual discipline feasible architecture, Aerosp Sci Technol, 2017, 65, pp 90–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ast.2017.02.012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, C.L. Wing loading, icing and associated aspects of modern transport design, J Aeronaut Sci, 1940, 8, pp. 43–54. https://doi.org/10.2514/8.10478.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Soinne, E. Aerodynamically balanced ailerons for a commuter aircraft, Prog Aerosp Sci, 2001, 37, pp 497–550.10.1016/S0376-0421(01)00012-4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Masefield, O.L.P. Design of a manual roll control for a trainer aircraft, Loughborough Univ, 1990.Google Scholar
Kaul, U.K. and Nguyen, N.T. Drag optimization study of Variable Camber Continuous Trailing Edge Flap (VCCTEF) Using OVERFLOW, 32nd AIAA Applied Aerodynamics Conference, Atlanta, GA: American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 2014. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2014-2444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hetrick, J., Osborn, R., Kota, S., Flick, P. and Paul, D. Flight testing of mission adaptive compliant wing, 48th AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics, and Materials Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2007-1709.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Joo, J.J., Marks, C.R., Zientarski, L. and Culler, A.J. Variable camber compliant wing - design, 23rd AIAA/AHS Adaptive Structures Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2015-1050.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marks, C.R., Zientarski, L., Culler, A.J., Hagen, B., Smyers, B.M. and Joo, J.J. Variable camber compliant wing - wind tunnel testing, 23rd AIAA/AHS Adaptive Structures Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2015-1051.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, S.C., Rumpfkeil, M.P. and Joo, J.J. Fluid-structure interaction of a variable camber compliant wing, 53rd AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Kissimmee, Florida, 2015. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2015-1235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Joo, J.J., Marks, C.R. and Zientarski, L. Active wing shape reconfiguration using a variable camber compliant wing system, 20th International Conference on Composite Materials, Copenhagen, 2015, p. 12.10.2514/6.2015-1050CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marks, C.R., Zientarski, L. and Joo, J.J. Investigation into the effect of shape deviation on variable camber compliant wing performance, 24th AIAA/AHS Adaptive Structures Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2016-1313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Phillips, W.F. Lifting-line analysis for twisted wings and washout-optimized wings, J Aircr, 2004, 41, pp 128–136. https://doi.org/10.2514/1.262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lebofsky, S., Ting, E., Nguyen, N.T. and Trinh, K.V. Aeroelastic modeling and drag optimization of flexible wing aircraft with variable camber continuous trailing edge flap, 32nd AIAA Applied Aerodynamics Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Atlanta, GA, 2014. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2014-2443.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hunsaker, D.F., Phillips, W.F. and Joo, J.J. Aerodynamic shape optimization of morphing wings at multiple flight conditions, 55th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Grapevine, Texas, 2017. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2017-1420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Montgomery, Z.S., Hunsaker, D.F. and Joo, J.J. A methodology for roll control of morphing aircraft, AIAA Scitech 2019 Forum, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, San Diego, California, 2019. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2019-2041.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hunsaker, D.F., Montgomery, Z.S. and Joo, J.J. Control of adverse yaw during roll for a class of optimal lift distributions, AIAA Scitech 2020 Forum. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Orlando, FL, 2020. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2020-1264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feifel, W.M. Combination of aileron and flap deflection for minimum induced drag roll control. Tech Soaring, 1980, 5, pp 15–23.Google Scholar
Prandtl, L., Tragflügel Theorie, Nachricten von der Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Göttingen, Geschäeftliche Mitteilungen, Klasse, 1918.Google Scholar
Prandtl, L. Appplications of modern hydrodynamics to aeronautics. NACA, 1921, TR-116.Google Scholar
Kutta, M.W. Auftriebskräfte in Strömenden Flüssigkeiten. Illustrierte Aeronautische Mitteilungen, 1902, 6, pp 133–135.Google Scholar
Joukowski, N.E. Sur les Tourbillons Adjionts. Traraux de la Section Physique de la Societé Imperiale des Amis des Sciences Naturales, 1906, 13, pp 261–284.Google Scholar
Phillips, W.F. Analytical decomposition of wing roll and flapping using lifting-line theory. J Aircr, 2014, 51, pp 761–778. https://doi.org/10.2514/1.C032399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Phillips, W.F. Overview of Aerodynamics. Mechanics of Flight, 2nd ed. Wiley, Hoboken, NJ, 2010, pp 66–82.Google Scholar
Glauert, H. The Elements of Aerofoil and Airscrew Theory, Cambridge University Press, London, 1926.Google Scholar
Phillips, W.F., Alley, N.R. and Goodrich, W.D. Lifting-line analysis of roll control and variable twist, J Aircr, 2004, 41, pp 1169–1176.Google Scholar
Phillips, W.F. and Hunsaker, D.F. Designing wing twist or planform distributions for specified lift distributions, J Aircr, 2019, 56, pp 847–849. https://doi.org/10.2514/1.C035206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hunsaker, D.F., Montgomery, Z.S. and Joo, J.J. Analytic and computational analysis of wing twist to minimize induced drag during roll, Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part G: Journal of Aerospace Engineering, 2019. https://doi.org/doi.org/10.1177/0954410019886939.Google Scholar
Phillips, W.F. and Snyder, D.O. Modern adaptation of Prandtl’s classic lifting-line theory, J Aircr, 2000, 37, pp 662–670. https://doi.org/10.2514/2.2649.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hodson, J., Hunsaker, D.F. and Spall, R. Wing optimization using dual number automatic differentiation in MachUp, 55th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Grapevine, Texas, 2017. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2017-0033.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Katz, J. and Plotkin, A. Low-Speed Aerodynamics: From Wing Theory to Panel Methods, McGraw-Hill, 1991.Google Scholar
Saffman, P.G. Vortex Dynamics, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1992.Google Scholar
Abbott, I.H. and Doenhoff, A.E.V. Theory of Wing Sections: Including a Summary of Airfoil Data, Dover Publications, New York, NY, 1959.Google Scholar
Broyden, C.G. The convergence of a class of double-rank minimization algorithms, IMA J Appl Math, 1970, 6, pp 76–90. https://doi.org/10.1093/imamat/6.1.76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fletcher, R. A new approach to variable metric algorithms, Comput J, 1970, 13, pp 317–322.Google Scholar
Goldfarb, D. A family of variable metric updates derived by variational means, Math Comput, 1970, 24, pp 23–26.Google Scholar
Shanno, D. Conditional of Quasi-Newton methods for function minimization, Math Comput, 1970, 24, pp 647–656.10.1090/S0025-5718-1970-0274029-XCrossRefGoogle Scholar