Abstract
This paper proposes a new approach to investigate the flutter phenomenon considering structural frequencies as uncertain parameters. An affine parameter state space model is used to describe the aeroelastic system and linear matrix inequalities (LMI) are employed to solve the stability analysis with a relaxation on the inequalities. Uncertainties are present during the design phases of an aircraft as well as when considering an operational set of similar aircraft. In the first case, uncertain aeroelastic models have great potential to reduce computational costs during the design phases, and, in the second one, to provide robust aeroelastic predictions under uncertain operational quantities of a set of aircraft. In this work, uncertain aeroelastic predictions for a three-degrees-of-freedom typical section obtained from the relaxed approach are compared to predictions considering the quadratic Lyapunov approach. In the first case, the structural modal frequency of a single degree-of-freedom is considered uncertain. In the second one, all degrees-of-freedom are uncertain. In all cases, the numerical results show that the relaxed approach proposed in this work is less conservative than the quadratic Lyapunov approach, providing a useful tool for flutter analysis including structural uncertainties.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
FEM: Finite Element Method.
a.c is the aerodynamic center, e.a the elastic axis, c.g center of gravity and s.m the section mid-chord.
References
Bisplinghoff RL, Ashley H, Halfman RL (1996) Aeroelasticity. Dover Publications, New York
Fung YC (1993) An Introduction to the theory of aeroelasticity. Dover Publications, NY
Bueno DD, Góes LCS, Gonçalves PJP (2015) Flutter analysis including structural uncertainties. Meccanica 50(8):2093–2101. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11012-015-0138-8
Bhatia KG (2003) Airplane aeroelasticity: practice and potential. J Aircr 40(6):1010–1018
Wu S, Livne E (2017) Alternative aerodynamic uncertainty modeling approaches for flutter reliability analysis. AIAA J 55(8):55334. https://doi.org/10.2514/1.J055334
Lind R, Brenner M (1997) Robust flutter margins of an f/a-18 aircraft from aeroelastic flight data. J Guid Control Dyn 20(3):597–604. https://doi.org/10.2514/2.4082
Zhigang W, Chao Y (2008) A new approach for aeroelastic robust stability analysis. Chin J Aeronaut 21(5):417–422. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1000-9361(08)60054-0
Dai Y, Yang C (2014) Methods and advances in the study of aeroelasticity with uncertainties. Chin J Aeronaut 27(3):461–474. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cja.2014.04.016
Süelözgen Ö (2021) Advanced aeroelastic robust stability analysis with structural uncertainties. CEAS Aeronaut J. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13272-020-00473-8
Moulin B (2005) Modeling of aeroservoelastic systems with structural and aerodynamic variations. AIAA J 43(12):2503. https://doi.org/10.2514/1.15023
Chung C, Shin S, Kim T (2008) A new robust aeroelastic analysis including aerodynamic uncertainty from varying mach numbers. In: 49th AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, structural dynamics, and materials conference . https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2008-2200. https://arc.aiaa.org/doi/abs/10.2514/6.2008-2200
Gahinet P, Apkarian P, Chilali M (1996) Affine parameter-dependent lyapunov functions and real parametric uncertainty. IEEE Trans Autom Control 41(3):436–442. https://doi.org/10.1109/9.486646
Bueno DD, Marqui CR, Goes LCS, Gonçalvez PJP (2012) Aeroelastic stability analysis using linear matrix inequalities. J Braz Soc Mech Sci Eng 34:545–551
Takarics B, Patartics B, Luspay T, Vanek B, Roessler C, Bartasevicius J, Koeberle SJ, Hornung M, Teubl D, Pusch M, Wustenhagen M, Kier TM, Looye G, Bauer P, Meddaikar YM, Waitman S, Marcos A (2020). Active flutter mitigation testing on the FLEXOP demonstrator aircraft https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2020-1970.https://arc.aiaa.org/doi/abs/10.2514/6.2020-1970
Theodorsen T (1935) General theory of aerodynamic instability and the mechanism of flutter. Report 496, National advisory commitee for aeronautics - NACA
Roger K (1977) Airplane math modeling methods for active control design. In: Structural aspects of active control
Ribeiro FA, Dowell EH, Bueno DD (2021) Enhancement to least square-based approach for time-domain unsteady aerodynamic approximation. J Aircr 58(1):111–124. https://doi.org/10.2514/1.C035824
Guerra T, Bernal M (2009) A way to escape from the quadratic framework. In: 2009 IEEE international conference on fuzzy systems, pp. 784–789 . https://doi.org/10.1109/FUZZY.2009.5277291
Bueno DD, Sandoval Góes LC, Gonçalves PJP (2014) Control of limit cycle oscillation in a three degrees of freedom airfoil section using fuzzy takagi-sugeno modeling. Shock and vibration. https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/597827
Barmish BR (1985) Necessary and sufficient conditions for quadratic stabilizability of an uncertain system. J Optim Theory Appl 4:399–408
Ramos DCW, Peres PLD (2001) A less conservative LMI condition for the robust stability of discrete-time uncertain systems. Syst Control Lett 43(5):371–378. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-6911(01)00120-7
Mozelli LA, Palhares RM, Avellar GSC (2009) A systematic approach to improve multiple lyapunov function stability and stabilization conditions for fuzzy systems. Inform Sci 179(8):1149–1162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2008.12.002
Acknowledgements
The first and third authors are thankful for the financial support provided from São Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP), Grant number 2019/24729-6 and from Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel (CAPES) Finance Code 001. They thank Dr. Flávio Andrade Faria for his suggestions and valuable discussion. The third author thanks to the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq), Grant number 314151/2021-4.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.
Additional information
Technical Editor: André Cavalieri.
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Appendices
Appendix A state space matrices
This appendix presents the submatrices shown in Eq. (6). They are given by
which is \((n_{lag}+1)m \times m\) dimensional, where \(\textbf{I}\) is \(m \times m\) identity matrix. Also,
where \(\textbf{0}\) is a \(m \times m\) matrix of zeros, and
Matrix \(\textbf{E}\) is given by
where \(\tilde{\textbf{0}}\) is a \([ (n_{lag}+1)m \times m]\) matrix of zeros, \(\tilde{\textbf{I}}\) is an identity matrix with dimension \(m(n_{lag}+1)\), and \(\textbf{M}_{a \phi }\) and \(\textbf{B}_{a \phi }\) are given by
Appendix B proof of LMI relaxation
This proof is adapted from [22] to consider that the uncertain aeroelastic system is described by an affine parameter model. Let \(V_L\) the Lyapunov function, considering the uncertain parameters \(\alpha _j\) (\(j=1,...,m\)) time invariant, \(\dot{p}_i=0\) \(\forall \; i=1,...,2^m\). Then, \(\dot{V}_L\) is given by \(\dot{V}_L = 2 \sum _{i = 1}^{2^m} p_i \dot{\textbf{x}}^T \textbf{P}_i \textbf{x}\) or, alternatively, \(2 \sum _{i = 1}^{2^m} p_i \textbf{x}^T \textbf{P}_i \dot{\textbf{x}}\) because \(\textbf{P}_i\) is symmetric.
Consider \(0 = 2\left( \textbf{x}^T\textbf{M}_1+\dot{\textbf{x}}^T\textbf{M}_2\right) \left[ \dot{\textbf{x}} - \textbf{E}^{-1}\left( \textbf{A}_{e0} + \sum _{i=1}^{2^m} p_i \textbf{A}_{ev_i} \right) \textbf{x} \right]\), if \(\textbf{A}_{e0}\) is null matrix, this equation corresponds to the proposal of [22], i.e., a polytopic model-based approach to obtain the relaxed LMI. However, considering the new affine parameter model (Eq. 13), the time derivative of \(V_L\) is given by \(\dot{V}_L = 2 \sum _{i=1}^{2^m}p_i \textbf{ x}^T \textbf{P}_i \dot{\textbf{ x}}\). Then, the following equation can be written
Note that it is added zero to \(\dot{V}_L\). The following equivalences are employed
Rearranging this equation and defining \(\textbf{z} = \{\textbf{x}^T \;\; \dot{\textbf{x}}^T \}^T\) it is possible to write \(\dot{V}_L = \sum _{i=1}^{2^m} \textbf{z}^T \left( \textbf{Z}_i + \textbf{Z}_{\textbf{A}_0}\right) \textbf{z}\), and demonstrate that \(\textbf{Z}_i\) is given by Eq. (18) and (19). The relaxed stability is verified if \(\dot{V}_L<0\), which is achieved for any \(\textbf{z}\) if, and only if, \(\textbf{Z}_i \prec - \textbf{Z}_{\textbf{A}_0}\) and \(\textbf{P}_i \succ 0\), \(i=1,...,2^m\).
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Ribeiro, F.A., De Marqui Júnior, C. & Bueno, D.D. Flutter analysis including structural uncertainties using a relaxed LMI-based approach. J Braz. Soc. Mech. Sci. Eng. 45, 199 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40430-023-04091-3
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40430-023-04091-3