Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Efficient reduced-order aerodynamic modeling for fast prediction of transonic flutter boundary

  • Published:
International Journal of Dynamics and Control Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this study, a reduced-order aerodynamic modeling framework by integration of a novel training data interpolation approach and the Eigensystem realization algorithm (ERA) is presented for fast prediction of transonic flutter boundary over a range of flight parameters. First, aerodynamic impulse responses are computed by using the technique of computational fluid dynamics (CFD) at grid points within parameter space, which are selected to cover the transonic regime of concern. Next, the training data interpolation approach by combining the discrete empirical interpolation method with the Kriging technique is used to generate the aerodynamic impulse response at arbitrary flight condition, without performing unsteady CFD simulations. Finally, the interpolated impulse response is used by ERA to extract the linear state-space aerodynamic model, which is coupled with the structural model for flutter characteristics analysis. To illustrate the proposed approach, a NACA 0012 airfoil of two degrees of freedom at zero mean angle of attack is investigated. The transonic flutter boundaries of the airfoil agree well with those obtained by using CFD-based technique.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Lucia DJ, Beran PS, Silva WA (2004) Reduced-order modeling: new approaches for computational physics. Prog Aeronaut Sci 40(1–2):51–117

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Hall KC, Thomas JP, Dowell EH (2000) Proper orthogonal decomposition technique for transonic unsteady aerodynamic flows. AIAA J 38(10):1853–1862

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Chen G, Li Y, Yan G (2010) A nonlinear POD reduced order model for limit cycle oscillation prediction. Sci China Phys Mech Astron 53(7):1325–1332

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Thomas JP, Dowell EH, Hall KC (2004) Modeling viscous transonic limit cycle oscillation behavior using a harmonic balance approach. J Aircr 41(6):1266–1274

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Huang R, Hu HY, Zhao YH (2014) Nonlinear reduced-order modeling for multiple-input/multiple-output aerodynamic systems. AIAA J 52(6):1219–1231

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Kim T, Hong M, Bhatia KG, Sengupta G (2005) Aeroelastic model reduction for affordable computational fluid dynamics-based flutter analysis. AIAA J 43(12):2487–2495

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Kou J, Zhang W, Yin M (2016) Novel Wiener models with a time-delayed nonlinear block and their identification. Nonlinear Dyn 85(4):2389–2404

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Zhang W, Wang B, Ye Z, Quan J (2012) Efficient method for limit cycle flutter analysis based on nonlinear aerodynamic reduced-order models. AIAA J 50(5):1019–1028

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Huang R, Liu HJ, Yang ZJ, Zhao YH, Hu HY (2018) Nonlinear reduced-order models for transonic aeroelastic and aeroservoelastic problems. AIAA J 56(9):3718–3731

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Liu HJ, Gao XM (2020) Identification of nonlinear aerodynamic systems with application to transonic aeroelasticity of aircraft structures. Nonlinear Dyn 100:1037–1056

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Juang JN, Pappa RS (1985) An eigensystem realization algorithm for modal parameter identification and model reduction. J Guid Control Dyn 8(5):620–627

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Silva WA (1985) Identification of nonlinear aeroelastic systems based on the Volterra theory: progress and opportunities. Nonlinear Dyn 39(1–2):25–62

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. Raveh DE (2004) Identification of computational-fluid dynamics based unsteady aerodynamic models for aeroelastic analysis. J Aircr 41(3):620–632

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Cowan TJ, Arena AS, Gupta KK (2001) Accelerating computational fluid dynamics based aeroelastic predictions using system identification. J Aircr 38(1):81–87

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Mannarino A, Mantegazza P (2015) Nonlinear aerodynamic reduced order modeling by discrete time recurrent neural networks. Aerosp Sci Technol 47:406–419

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Mackman TJ, Allen CB, Ghoreyshi M, Badcock KJ (2013) Comparison of adaptive sampling methods for generation of surrogate aerodynamic models. AIAA J 51(4):797–808

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Huang R, Li HK, Hu HY, Zhao YH (2015) Open/closed-loop aeroservoelastic predictions via nonlinear, reduced-order aerodynamic models. AIAA J 53(7):1812–1824

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Rowley CW (2005) Model reduction for fluids, using balanced proper orthogonal decomposition. Int J Bifurc Chaos 15(03):997–1013

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  19. Ma Z, Ahuja S, Rowley CW (2011) Reduced order models for control of fluids using the Eigensystem realization algorithm. Theor Comput Fluid Dyn 25(1):233–247

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Glaz B, Liu L, Friedmann PP (2010) Reduced-order nonlinear unsteady aerodynamic modeling using a surrogate based recurrence framework. AIAA J 48(10):2418–2429

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Amsallem D, Cortial J, Farhat C (2010) Towards real-time computational-fluid-dynamics-based aeroelastic computations using a database of reduced-order information. AIAA J 48(9):2029–2037

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Skujins T, Cesnik C (2012) Toward an unsteady aerodynamic ROM for multiple Mach regimes. In: 53rd AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC structures, structural dynamics and materials conference, Honolulu, Hawaii, April 2012

  23. Liu HJ, Hu HY, Zhao YH, Huang R (2014) Efficient reduced-order modeling of unsteady aerodynamics robust to flight parameter variations. J Fluid Struct 49:728–741

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Winter M, Breitsamter C (2016) Neurofuzzy-model-based unsteady aerodynamic computations across varying freestream conditions. AIAA J 54(9):2705–2720

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Liu HJ, Huang R, Zhao YH, Hu HY (2017) Reduced-order modeling of unsteady aerodynamics for an elastic wing with control surfaces. J Aerosp Eng 30(3):1–19

    Google Scholar 

  26. Ghoreyshi M, Cummings RM, Ronch AD, Badcock KJ (2013) Transonic aerodynamic load modeling of X-31 aircraft pitching motions. AIAA J 51(10):2447–2464

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Liu HJ, Zhao YH (2018) Efficient training data generation for reduced-order modeling in a transonic flight regime. Int J Aerosp Eng 2018:1–12

    Google Scholar 

  28. Halder R, Damodaran M, Khoo BC (2020) Signal interpolation augmented linear nonintrusive reduced-order model for aeroelastic applications. AIAA J 58(1):426–444

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Mannarino A, Dowell EH (2015) Reduced-order models for computational-fluid-dynamics-based nonlinear aeroelastic problems. AIAA J 53(9):2671–2685

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Oneill CR, Arena A (2005) Time domain training signals comparison for computational fluid dynamics based aerodynamic identification. J Aircr 42(2):421–428

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Silva WA, Bartels RE (2004) Development of reduced-order models for aeroelastic analysis and flutter prediction. J Fluid Struct 19(6):729–745

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Chaturantabut S, Sorensen DC (2010) Nonlinear reduced order modelling via discrete empirical interpolation. SIAM J Sci Comput 32(5):2737–2764

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  33. Simpson TW, Poplinski JD, Koch PN, Allen JK (2001) Metamodels for computer-based engineering design: survey and recommendations. Eng Comput Germany 17(2):129–150

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 11902146) and the National Science Foundation of Jiangsu Province (Grant Nos. BK20190664 and BK20190394).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. State Key Laboratory of Mechanics and Control of Mechanical Structures, Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Nanjing, People’s Republic of China

    Haojie Liu & Rui Huang

  2. School of Physical and Mathematical Sciences, Nanjing Tech University, Nanjing, People’s Republic of China

    Xiumin Gao

Authors
  1. Haojie Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Xiumin Gao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Rui Huang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rui Huang.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Liu, H., Gao, X. & Huang, R. Efficient reduced-order aerodynamic modeling for fast prediction of transonic flutter boundary. Int. J. Dynam. Control 8, 1080–1088 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40435-020-00694-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40435-020-00694-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation