MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2587443300

Numerical and experimental validation of the optimization methodologies for a wing-tip structure equipped with conventional and morphing ailerons

2016· article· en· W2587443300 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
Andreea Koreanschi

Bibliographic record

VenueEspace École de technologie supérieure (École de technologie supérieure) · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAeroelasticity and Vibration Control
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaConsortium de Recherche et d’innovation en Aérospatiale au QuébecMcGill University
KeywordsMorphingWingAerodynamicsAileronAirfoilWind tunnelAerospace engineeringAirplaneEngineeringMultidisciplinary design optimizationComputer scienceArtificial intelligence
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In order to answer the problem of ‘how to reduce the aerospace industry’s environment footprint?’ new morphing technologies were developed. These technologies were aimed at reducing the aircraft’s fuel consumption through reduction of the wing drag. The morphing concept used in the present research consists of replacing the conventional aluminium upper surface of the wing with a flexible composite skin for morphing abilities.
\n
\nFor the ATR-42 ‘Morphing wing’ project, the wing models were manufactured entirely from composite materials and the morphing region was optimized for flexibility. In this project two rigid wing models and an active morphing wing model were designed, manufactured and wind tunnel tested.
\n
\nFor the CRIAQ MDO 505 project, a full scale wing-tip equipped with two types of ailerons, conventional and morphing, was designed, optimized, manufactured, bench and wind tunnel tested. The morphing concept was applied on a real wing internal structure and incorporated aerodynamic, structural and control constraints specific to a multidisciplinary approach.
\n
\nNumerical optimization, aerodynamic analysis and experimental validation were performed for both the CRIAQ MDO 505 full scale wing-tip demonstrator and the ATR-42 reduced scale wing models.
\n
\nIn order to improve the aerodynamic performances of the ATR-42 and CRIAQ MDO 505 wing airfoils, three global optimization algorithms were developed, tested and compared. The three algorithms were: the genetic algorithm, the artificial bee colony and the gradient descent. The algorithms were coupled with the two-dimensional aerodynamic solver XFoil. XFoil is known for its rapid convergence, robustness and use of the semi-empirical en method for determining the position of the flow transition from laminar to turbulent. Based on the performance comparison between the algorithms, the genetic algorithm was chosen for the optimization of the ATR-42 and CRIAQ MDO 505 wing airfoils.
\n
\nThe objectives for which the genetic algorithm optimizer found the optimal shapes for the studied airfoils were: 1) extension of the laminar flow towards the trailing edge, 2) extension of the turbulent region towards the leading edge and 3) improvement of the lift coefficient through the use of a morphing aileron method. The first two objectives were achieved through manipulation of the transition region using wing upper-surface morphing. The third objective was achieved through the development of two methods for aileron shape morphing.
\n
\nThe optimization algorithm was improved during the CRIAQ MDO 505 project for convergence speed by introducing a two-step cross-over function. Structural constraints were introduced in the algorithm at each aero-structural optimization interaction, allowing a better manipulation of the algorithm and giving it more capabilities of morphing combinations.
\n
\nThe CRIAQ MDO 505 project envisioned a morphing aileron concept for the morphing upper surface wing. For this morphing aileron concept, two optimization methods were developed. The methods used the already developed genetic algorithm and each method had a different design concept. The first method was based on the morphing upper surface concept, using actuation points to achieve the desired shape. The second method was based on the hinge rotation concept of the conventional aileron but applied at multiple nodes along the aileron camber to achieve the desired shape. Both methods were constrained by manufacturing and aerodynamic requirements. The purpose of the morphing aileron methods was to obtain an aileron shape with a smoother pressure distribution gradient during deflection than the conventional aileron.
\n
\nThe aerodynamic optimization results were used for the structural optimization and design of the wing, particularly the flexible composite skin. Due to the structural changes performed on the initial wing-tip structure, an aeroelastic behaviour analysis, more specific on flutter phenomenon, was performed. The analyses were done to ensure the structural integrity of the wing-tip demonstrator during wind tunnel tests.
\n
\nThree wind tunnel tests were performed for the CRIAQ MDO 505 wing-tip demonstrator at the IAR-NRC subsonic wind tunnel facility in Ottawa. The first two tests were performed for the wing-tip equipped with conventional aileron. The purpose of these tests was to validate the control system designed for the morphing upper surface, the numerical optimization and aerodynamic analysis and to evaluate the optimization efficiency on the boundary layer behaviour and the wing drag.
\n
\nThe third set of wind tunnel tests was performed on the wing-tip equipped with a morphing aileron. The purpose of this test was to evaluate the performances of the morphing aileron, in conjunction with the active morphing upper surface, and their effect on the lift, drag and boundary layer behaviour.
\n
\nTransition data, obtained from Infrared Thermography, and pressure data, extracted from Kulite and pressure taps recordings, were used to validate the numerical optimization and aerodynamic performances of the wing-tip demonstrator.
\n
\nA set of wind tunnel tests was performed on the ATR-42 rigid wing models at the Price-Paidoussis subsonic wind tunnel at Ecole de technologie Superieure. The results from the pressure taps recordings were used to validate the numerical optimization. A second derivative of the pressure distribution method was applied to evaluate the transition region on the upper surface of the wing models for comparison with the numerical transition values.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.563
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.234 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEspace École de technologie supérieure (École de technologie supérieure)Same topicAeroelasticity and Vibration ControlFrench-language works237,207