Limit Cycle Oscillation Amplitude Tailorng Based on Describing Functions and \(\mu \) Analysis
- 1.4k Downloads
Freeplay is a nonlinearity commonly encountered in aeroservoelastic applications which is known to cause Limit Cycle Oscillations (LCOs), limited amplitude flutter phenomena not captured by a linear analysis. Uncertainties in the models are also known to play an important role in triggering instabilities which might not be present in the nominal case, or altering their features in an unpredictable way. This paper shows the process to build a framework to study the nonlinear behavior of a typical section affected by a freeplay in the control surface and uncertainties in its parameters’ values. Starting from the definition of the nominal aeroelastic model, the nonlinear framework is implemented by means of the Describing Function (DF) method and robust analysis is introduced by means of \(\mu \) technique. In addition, it is shown an idea to perform a tailoring of the LCO graph of the system with the practical goal to limit the oscillation amplitude. Implications and advantages of using DF and \(\mu \) as primary tools are highlighted, and prowess of the methodology is showcased with an example.
This work has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 636307, project FLEXOP.
- 1.Allemang RJ, Brown DL (1982) A correlation coefficient for modal vector analysis. In: 1st International modal analysis conferenceGoogle Scholar
- 8.Dowell E, Edwards J, Strganac T (2003) Nonlinear aeroelasticity. J Aircr 40(5)Google Scholar
- 12.Iannelli A, Marcos A, Lowenberg M (2016) comparison of aeroelastic modeling and robust flutter analysis of a typical section. In: IFAC ACA, August 2016Google Scholar
- 13.Iannelli A, Marcos A, Lowenberg M (2016) Modeling and robust body freedom flutter analysis of flexible aircraft configurations. In: IEEE MSC, September 2016Google Scholar
- 14.Karpel M (1981) Design for active and passive flutter suppression and gust alleviation. Technical report 3482, NASAGoogle Scholar
- 15.Khalil HK (1996) Nonlinear systems. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle RiverGoogle Scholar
- 16.Kotikalpudi A, Pfifer H, Seiler P (2016) Sensitivity of robust flutter boundary to model uncertainties in aeroservoelastic systems. In: AIAA Scitech, January 2016Google Scholar
- 17.Lind R, Brenner M (2012) Robust aeroservoelastic stability analysis. Advances in industrial control. Springer, LondonGoogle Scholar
- 19.Packard A, Doyle J (1993) The complex structured singular value. Automatica 29(1)Google Scholar
- 20.Pitt DM, Bansal P (2014) Uncertainties in control surface free-play and structural properties and their effect on flutter and LCO. In: AIAA Scitech conference, January 2014Google Scholar
- 21.Shukla H, Patil M (2016) Control of limit cycle oscillation amplitudes in nonlinear aerelastic systems using nonlinear normal modes. In: AIAA Scitech conference, January 2016Google Scholar
- 23.Theodorsen T (1935) General theory of aerodynamic instability and the mechanism of flutter. Technical report 496, NacaGoogle Scholar