Aerospace

Science

and Technology,

1997, no 2, 111-123

Experimental Observation and Discussion of the Wing Rock Phenomenon

G. Guglieri,
Politecnico di Torino,

F. Quagliotti
Spaziale
Italy.

Dipartimento di Ingegneria Aeronautica e Corso Duca degli Abmzzi, 24 - 10129 Totino,

Manuscript

received March 29, 199.5; revised version

September

7, 1995.

Guglieri Abstract

G., Quagliotti

F., Aerospace

Science

and

Technology,

1997, no 2, 111-123.

An experimental contribution to the investigation of the wing rock phenomenon is presented. Free to roll experiments and flow visualizations were performed on a 80 delta wing, at different subsonic airspeeds and angles of attack. The relevant aspects of the limit cycle characteristics are analyzed on the basis of the experimental evidence. Some comparisons among the results of similar experiences carried out in different laboratories are introduced and discussed. An analytical nonlinear formulation of the differential equation governing the single degree of freedom approximation of the roll mode was validated. Keywords: Experimental aerodynamics - Low speed wind tunnel testing. - Aircraft dynamics - Aircraft maneuverability - Flight mechanics

NOTATIONS
in eq. (10)

t*

TPI
coefficients

non dimensional

wing span
wing root chord rolling moment coefficient

(L/qSb)

oscillation frequency
model inertia

reduced oscillation frequency (r f b/V) rolling moment dynamic pressure (p V/2) model wing surface wind tunnel cross section Reynolds number (based on c)
time

non dimensional time (t/t*)

Aerospace SC~UVX

reference time (b/2V) Politecnico di Torino/Technical versity airspeed body-fixed axes angle of attack angle of sideslip roll angle release roll angle oscillation amplitude in roll sweep angle friction moment coefficient air density pitch angle angular velocity (2 7r f) time derivative averaged data

State Uni-

and Technology,

0034-1223,

97/02/$

7,00/O

Gauthier-Villars

112

G. Guglieri,

F. Quagliotti

I - INTRODUCTION The wing rock phenomenon is a self sustained oscillatory mode typical of several modern high performance aircraft, which exhibit constant amplitude rolling oscillations at moderate and high angle of attack. Such dynamic systems typically possess limit cycles, which become stable after a build up phase. These oscillations are sustained around a state at which the energy generation at lower amplitudes and the dissipation at larger amplitudes are balanced [l]. From the stability point of view, wing rock is associated with the nonlinear trend of roll damping derivatives, which leads to hysteresis and sign changes of the stability parameters when increasing the angle of bank during aircraft maneuvers [2]. The presence of these nonlinearities introduces an important question for both the dynamicist and the designer of stability augmentation systems, concerning the modeling of the phenomenon. As a matter of fact, the nonlinear damping contributions and the effect of hysteresis must be included in the mathematical modeling of the aerodynamic reactions in order to reproduce the complete wing rock dynamics [3]. Using a lower order approximate system based on lateral and directional linearized motion equations it is possible to demonstrate that wing rock can be considered as an unstable Dutch roll mode, developing into a limit cycle. This motion may consist of considerable yaw, roll and sideslip at lower Q, although it becomes a pure rolling mode when high angle of attack flight is considered [4]. Several studies have already developed stability criteria that give an indication of aircraft behavior at high angles of attack. These methods are supported by the analysis of the classical stability derivatives and generally they are not able to predict the amplitude and the frequency of the oscillatory aircraft motion [.5]. Many aspects which concern vortex flow dynamics are involved in the analysis of wing rock. The onset of these roll oscillations is sensitive to any configuration change, such as the introduction of slender forebodies, leading edge extensions and highly swept delta wing planforms. The experimental investigations, based on both intensive flight testing and wind tunnel research activity, confirm that the aerodynamics of the problem is related to the motion of the vertical structures emanating from these configuration elements. Low speed wind tunnel experiments are the primary source of basic informations devoted to the understanding of this phenomenon. Simplified configurations are generally adopted for the study of the problem, so that the analysis of the aerodynamic mechanism of wing rock for slender delta wings can be extended to complex aircraft geometries. The measurement of damping derivatives for a 80 delta wing model with both rotary techniques and forced oscillation tests [6, 71 established that these parameters are unstable for symmetric flight in the

angle of attack range at which wing rock oscillations are observed. By increasing the angle of bank a stabilizing decrement of the roll damping derivatives is found. Free to roll experiments [6, 71 demonstrated that the limit cycle characteristics can be influenced by the friction acting on the bearings and by the rotation axis displacement with respect to the model longitudinal axis. The same set of experimental results confirmed that the energy exchange theory is a valid approach for the explanation of this oscillatory mode. The instantaneous work done by a single degree of freedom mechanical system is given by the product of external torque and roll rate:
dE --LG. dt

(1)

The sign and the magnitude of dE/dt depend on the energy exchanged by the system. When wing rock oscillations are considered, the integral of the work done by the external torque -i.e. by the aerodynamic moment L- during a time interval becomes: AE = qSb
= qSb

t2

Cl Jt1pz Cl .IVP1

(t) (Pdt (4 dp. (2)

The equation AE = 45%

fe Cl (cp) dv = 0

(3)

is required for the balance between dissipation and generation of energy and for a stable oscillatory limit cycle. By means of simple analytical considerations it is possible to prove that clockwise Cr versus cphysteresis loops give a positive AE. An example is given during the oscillatory build up phase of wing rock. The contrary is verified for counterclockwise loops in presence of dissipation. Hence, when more than a single loop is observed over a period, each one must be considered with its own sign and magnitude. The experimental data show that the wing rock limit cycle is described by a central clockwise loop at moderate roll angle (generation of energy) and by two external counterclockwise loops at large cp (dissipation). Therefore, the energy exchange concept requires that the energy increment (i.e. the integral delimited by the principal loop) is dissipated by the other two external loops (AE = 0). A complete set of free to roll experiments [8], performed on two models with different leading edge sweep angles (A = 76 and A = 80), proved that the presence of the fuselage (used as a fairing for roll bearings) influenced the location of primary vortices. Consequently, both wing rock and vortex stability characteristics were substantially modified.
Aerospnce Science and Technology

Experimental

Observation

and Discussion of the Wing Rock Phenomenon

113

It was also established that the oscillation amplitude of wing rock increases with airspeed, while one significant effect of V was found for the non dimensional reduced frequency k. Recently, an experimental program [9, 10, 111, that included free to roll experiments, flow visualizations and pressure measurements on a 80 delta wing model, has substantially clarified that some of the most significant aspects concerning the aerodynamics of wing rock are related with hysteresis: 1. the normal position z/b of vortex cores in the crossflow plane in dynamic regime is affected by hysteresis when a comparison is made with static flow visualizations; no evidence of hysteresis is found for the spanwise position y/b of the vortices; 2. the hysteresis of the pressure distributions on the windward part of the wing depends on the angular velocity during the roll motion; 3. the vortex strength is not constant during the wing rock oscillations. The first effect generates the aerodynamic stiffness in roll that drives the wing rock motion, due to the combined increase and decrease of suction on the leeward part of the wing under the two vortex cores while their positions z/b change gradually as a function of cp. The other two contributions create the damping term required to sustain the oscillatory limit cycle. The energy exchange for the self sustained mode is stable (AE = 0) when the equilibrium of these aerodynamic effects is verified. It was also shown that the presence of vortex breakdown promotes the suppression of the oscillatory motion. This effect is related with the different effective sweep experienced by the two leading edges during the roll motion: o(cp) = arctan (tan 0 cos cp) h(p) = A f arctan (tan 0 sin cp). (4) (5)

Some important conclusions can be derived by the analytic investigation of the stability characteristics of the wing rock motion based on the phase plane representation of the phenomenon [ 12, 13, 141. The problem is solved on the basis of the equivalence with mechanical systems, which typically exhibit nonlinear damping. A possible model of the nonlinearities in roll moment is generally provided, although an infinite combination of similar terms could approximate the same limit cycle. Diverse mathematical formulations of the differential equation governing the single degree of freedom approximation of the roll mode were suggested and validated by means of a complete parametric identification using both numerical simulations and experimental data: Cl (t) = a0 + a1 ip + a2 (p
+ ~3lPl~+~4/cplG

(Ref 12)

c,(t)

a1cp+azcp+
+ a4 p2 (p +

a3p3
~5(p+~

(Ref 13)

Cl

@o(P)

+R(cp)(C7+~2((P)(P2

+a3(P)(P3+Q(P)G4.

(Ref 14)

As a matter of fact, a problem with these analytical studies is that the mathematical model is not directly related with the understanding of the flowfield characteristics. II - THE EXPERIMENTAL SETUP

When the motion is performed as a sequence of static conditions, the effective sweep of the wing half that rolls up (leeward) increases and that of the other (windward) decreases, resulting in an aft and forward motion, respectively, of the corresponding chordwise vortex breakdown locations. This motion leads to an increase of vortex induced lift on the leeward wing half and a decrease on the windward wing half, both contributing to a statically destabilizing rolling moment. The opposite effect is generated during wing rock -in dynamic motion regime- as vortex breakdown locations X/C are affected by hysteresis that produces a stabilizing damping contribution. Hence, the dynamic onset of vortex burst due to the increase of incidence and sweep of the wing alters the stability of the system, both reducing the amplitude and increasing the oscillation frequency of the limit cycle.
1997, no 2

Free to roll experiments were performed on a 80 delta wing for a! = 21 . . . 45, V = 15 m/s . . . 40 m/s, Re = 486000 . . . 1290000 and cpo = 0 . . . 90. The experimental tests were carried out in the D3M low speed wind tunnel of Politecnico di Torino, which is a closed circuit tunnel with a maximum airspeed of 90 m/s. The test section is circular (3 m in diameter). The turbulence level is 0.3% at V = 50 m/s. The model is a 80 delta wing (Tub. 1) with sharp leading and trailing edges, made in aluminium alloy. The dimensions are: root chord c = 479 mm, span b = 169 mm, thickness 12 mm, bevel angle 20. The wing longitudinal body axis and me bearing axis coincide. The rotating system was statically balanced. The C-shaped support was mounted on a vertical strut (see Fig. 1) which was able to rotate so that the angle of attack could change while the model centroid remained at the center of the test section. This motion was performed by a step motor interfaced with a specific control unit. The rotation angle and the

114
Table 1. - The geometrical
characteristics of several 80 delta wing

G. Guglieri,

F. Quagliotti

The angular rates were evaluated numerically and a central difference representation was adopted:

Model

S/Sd

[mm1
Ref Ref Ref Ref TPI 6 8 9 14 1760 428 422 200 479 620 1.50 149 70 169 0.041 0.032 0.085 0.019 0.006

cp= (-1 i . at

av _ w;yi-1
Pi+1 2% +

+ 0 (At)2
(pi-1

(6) + 0 (AQ2

At2

where At = 0.02 s and the truncation error is At2. The rolling moment considering that coefficient was evaluated
(7)

Side view

where IZ. = 1.0117 . 10e3 Kgm2 inertia.

is the rotational

The coefficient Ci includes the effect of friction (Cl,):

Cl = CL + Cl, = CL, + CL,, + p.f (p, p) (8)

Fig. 1. - The experimental

setup

(free

to roll

mode).

wing incidence were measured by means of a hybrid track rotary potentiometer. The model was connected to a horizontal shaft supported by rolling bearings. In order to minimize the friction of the angular transducer, the motion of the wing was measured by an optical encoder, linked with the rotating shaft using an elastic joint without backlash. This digital transducer was able to provide a resolution of 0.45/bit. A pneumatic brake was adopted to keep the wing in the initial angular position. During wind on runs, a trigger signal was sent by the operator to the data acquisition unit and the model was released by a pneumatic cylinder fit inside of the vertical arm of the C-shaped support. The digital signals generated by the encoder, which identify the sign, the increment and the zero crossing of cp(t), were conditioned by an electronic device consisting of an incremental counter and a 12 bit digital to analog converter. Both the analog output and the zero crossing trigger signal were multiplexed with a rate of 50 samples/s over a period of 45 s. The data acquisition system was based on a 12 bit analog to digital converter and an oscilloscope for the real time signal monitoring. The measurements of cp(t) were corrected for any accidental erroneous digital shift induced by the vibrations of the optical transducer. The zero crossing impulse was used as a reference. The amplitude and the oscillation frequency of the limit cycles were identified after the numerical elaboration of the time histories p (t) with a spectral analyzer.

where Ciuer is the aerodynamic rolling moment coefficient. The non linear term pc~fwas neglected taking into account that the constant contribution of the rotor CiO, is dominant. A direct measurement of the torque due to friction in wind off conditions confirmed that CiO, is negligible (L,f = 4.5 . lo-* Nm). were performed at the vortex dynamics in the crossflow plane. A smoke probe was positioned in front of the model apex (see Fig. 2). The sheet of light was placed along the trailing edge (section at x/c = 1.0) and a video camera was aligned with the rotation axis, that was marked by a led.
V = 10 m/s with the aim of tracking

Some low speed visualizations

>
t

Top view

camera Model suppoft,.

I,

9fl

Fig. 2. - The experimental

setup

(flow

visualizations).

The images were digitized step after step so that the dynamic vortex core displacements could be accurately measured and reduced to the body axes frame.
Aerospace Science and Technology

Experimental

Observation 60 50

and Discussion of the Wing Rock Phenomenon I : / / 1 1

I

115

6 Time
(a = 32.P,

?O

12

Fig.

3.

- The

wing

rock

phemonemon:

the oscillatory

build

up phase

Re = 636000).

III - THE EXPERIMENTAL

ANALYSIS

Table

2. - The lower

stability

boundaries

of wing

rock limit

cycle.

The wing rock phenomenon (Fig. 3) becomes stable after a build up phase. During this initial phase, the oscillation amplitude is magnified by the aerodynamic instability. This destabilizing effect is clearly shown in Figure 4 at time tr. The clockwise hysteresis loop of the rolling moment coefficient proves that energy is being taken into the system (AE > 0). On the contrary, when the limit cycle is stabilized at time tz, the shape of the Cr (cp) plots is substantially changed. A central clockwise loop (AE > 0) is always present (- 18 < cp(t) < 18 in Fig. 4) while two additional dissipative contributions (AE < 0) are found for larger roll angles. The balance of the energy exchanged by the system over a period confirms that the limit cycle is dynamically stable (AE = 0). The aerodynamic coefficient Cr is a linear function of cp for lower roll angles. The increase of the oscillation amplitude Acp promotes the reduction of the derivative dCr/dp, as a consequence of the nonlinear characteristics of the restoring moment acting on the oscillating system. This behavior is confirmed by the phase plane representation of the phenomenon and by the distortion of the elliptic orbits $ (cp) for external initial conditions cpa. The amplitude of the final state (Fig. 5) is a nonlinear function of incidence. The maximum -reached at a = 32- is influenced by airspeed (Acp = 39 at Re = 486000 and Acp = 47 at Re = 1290000). After a sharp drop for 35 < Q < 37, Acp decreases almost linearly reaching the upper limit for the mechanical rig (o = 45). The oscillation should be completely suppressed at Q = 50 on the basis of a linear extension of Acp (01).
1997, no 2

Re

aON

[c&l
486000 636000 959000 1290000 27" 25" 25O 25"

The effect of airspeed on Acp is only evident for lower angles of attack. The non dimensional frequency k (Fig. 6) is fairly constant for lower angles of attack, while a positive increment of w, occurs for QI > 35. The influence of airspeed on k is almost negligible and the increase of the angular rate is directly proportional to V (f = 2Hz at Re = 486000 and f = 7Hz at Re = 1290000). The onset of stable wing rock oscillations &JN depends on airspeed. Some tests were performed reducing the angle of incidence during the oscillation of the mode (Tab. 2), in order to evaluate the lower limit QOFF for the stability of the limit cycle. The comparisons among several experiences (Fig. 7) prove that the results presented are substantially similar to those given in Ref 9 by Arena and Nelson. The agreement with Ref 6 is limited to the lower angle of attack range (o 5 35). Finally, important differences are found among the majority of the experimental data and the oscillation amplitudes measured in Ref 8 by Levin and Katz. The maximum is shifted (AQ: = -7) and the amplitude is reduced. The explanation of these discrepancies is the peculiar model geometry, which altered the vortex

116

G. Guglieri,

F. Quagliotti

-0.03

1 3

4 Roll Angle

0.1 0 0.05

0.06 0.04 0.02 0.00 -0.02 -0.04 -0.06 -0.08

-0.1

0 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 I 0 Roll Angle

cycle (time tz).

20

30

40

50

Fig.

4.

- The

energy

exchange

during

build

up (time

tl)

and

limit

dynamics, due to the presence of a fuselage. As a matter of fact, even the onset of vortex breakdown was consistently anticipated (Ao = -loo). The comparisons performed for the oscillation frequency (Fig. 6) confirm accordance with the measurements presented in Ref 9. The trend of k (~)~~r is coincident but shifted to higher values. This difference is a direct consequence of the different rotational inertia of the experimental apparatus adopted in Ref 9. The experiences performed by Arena and Nelson established that the oscillation frequency is proportional to l/G and that the amplitude A(p is

not substantially changed by I,,. A further influence on the results is related with the higher friction of the rotating system adopted at TPI, which introduces an artificial increment of damping. The consequence is a small reduction of 0~ and a moderate increase of wn. Hence, this last effect contributes to enhance the discrepancies among the trends Acp measured (a) in different laboratories. A set of experiments was devoted to the analysis of the limit cycle characteristics after different initial conditions cpo. The conclusion is that both amplitude and frequency are not significantly influenced by this
Aerospace Science and Technology

Experimental

Observation

and Discussion of the Wing Rock Phenomenon

117

53

40

30 z20

10

O-

20

30

40

SC

a
Fig. 5. - The oscillation amplitude at different angles of attack and Reynolds numbers.

0.1 1

-I

0.07 A4
0.06 t

.. I ~--&-i--*--~ / 1 1 i i 30

0.00 r 20
Fig. 6. - The oscillations frequency at different angles

1 / 40

-0--....A..---El----GL--A-

Re= 486000 Re = 636000 Re = 959000 Re = 1290000 Ref. (9)

50

a
of attack and Reynolds numbers.

parameter (Figs. 8 and 9), although very different build up time histories are established by increasing the release roll angle. The tracking of the vortex positions in the crossflow plane supports the validity of some experimental
1997. no 2

observations [9] concerning the explanation driving mechanism of wing rock.

of the

The hysteresis of the normal coordinate z/b (Fig. lo), while only a marginal time lag is shown for the spanwise vortex core position y/b (Fig. 11).

118

G. Guglieri,

F. Quagliotti

IO

20

30

40

50

60

a
Fig. 7. - The oscillation amplitude as a function of 01: comparison of different experimental data.

30

00

-60

-20

20

60

IO0

Release Roll Angle

Fig. 8. - The effect of release roll angle on limit cycle oscillation amplitude (CE = 32.5O, Re = 636000).

During the limit cycle, the vortex cores move symmetrically on the two parts of the wing, so that &- (t) =. z1 (t f +4J. The reduction of the distance z/b between vortex core and wing upper surface generates a local

increment of suction. The opposite is verified when the normal distance is increased. Therefore the term (zT - ~1) becomes an indicator of the differential lift acting on the rolling wing. The clockwise cyclic variation of this asymmetry parameter (Fig. 12) proves
Aerospace Science and Technology

Experimental

Observation

and Discussion of the Wing Rock Phenomenon

119

,I:

-0.09 F

-c).@6-j 0.05--

,_. :

:. -0.04-: 0.03..-

" .0.02 -0.01

-100

-60

-20

20

60

Release Roll Angle

Fig. 9. - The effect of release roll angle on limit cycle oscillation frequency (a = 32.5, Re = 636000).

0.9
0.8 0.7 0.6

~ ..;... . .;.

--a--- Right vortex --A--m Left vortex

L-----Y,

-so

-40

-30

-20

-10

10

30

30

40

50

60

Roll Angle
Fig. 10. - The vortex core displacement (normal axis) in dynamic conditions (CI = 32.5O).

1997. no 2

120

G. Guglieri,

F. Quagliotti

1 .o 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2

eh

0.0
-0.2 -0.4 -0.6 -0.8 -1 .o

Roll Angle
Fig. 11. - The vortex core displacement (lateral axis) in dynamic conditions (0 = 32.5).

cl.3

0.2 0. I p;Jk
0.0

.j

-0.1

-0.2

Roll Angle
Fig. 12. - The magnitude of vortex core asymmetry in dynamic conditions (0 = 32.5).

Aerospace

Science

and Technology

Experimental

Observation

and Discussion of the Wing Rock Phenomenon

121

that both the dynamic displacement of the two primary vortices and the restoring aerodynamic moment are coupled. The limit cycle presented in Figure 12 is not Hence, no direct affected by vortex breakdown. relationship can be established between the onset of wing rock and the stability of the primary vortices. On the contrary, the magnitude of amplitude and frequency of the limit state is strongly coupled with this phenomenon, which are observed for a! > 37. The sudden changes of the parameters LIcp and I, for 35 < Q! < 37 are important consequences of vortex burst, which modifies the dynamic stability of the rolling system [9]. Furthermore, the variability of the oscillation amplitude ag, is larger for Q > 37 due to the natural unsteadiness of vortex breakdown locations (a% = 6% at a = 32 and g% = 20% at a = 37). The phase plane representation of the wing rock oscillations shows that the phenomenon is dominated by nonlinear damping and a relationship can be established with the analytical models of some single degree of freedom limit cycle oscillators [I]. The shape of the orbits is elliptic, reflecting the existence of a family of almost sinusoidal solutions: cp(t) = a (t) cm (w, t + b (t))
(9)

Fig.

13. - The phase

plane

plot

for 01 = 32.5

and Re = 636000

(9% = 0).

where a (t) is the amplitude and b (t) is the phase lag. Anyway, during the initial cycles of motion, the trajectories with larger amplitudes deform from the purely elliptical shape. This behavior is often seen in dynamical systems which contain a nonlinear restoring moment [9]. The experimental analysis of the roll attractor demonstrates that the limit cycle is not dependent on the initial condition cpa and the same stable orbits are found with both internal and external release roll angles. On the contrary, the build up phase modifies its characteristics when a comparison (Figs. 13 and 14) is made between time histories (p (cp) with different initial conditions. The plot of the experimental results proves that the center of the elliptic cycles is shifted from the origin ~Icp = 2.5. This asymmetry is a possible consequence of the support interference. Static flow visualizations confirmed that the wing vortices were somewhat displaced even for cp = 0. Nevertheless, the comparisons with other reference experimental data substantiate that this angular offset did not alter the features of the phenomenon. Different analytical nonlinear models were considered. The parameters were identified by means of least square approximation of the experimental data with internal initial conditions cpo. The consistency of the time histories cp(t) reproduced by numeric integration was analyzed and the following best fit formulation was identified (see Figs. 15 and 16).
1997. no 2

Fig. (90

14. - The phase = 90).

plane

plot

for CY = 32.Y

and Re = 636000

Roll Angle

Fig. 15. - The reproduced a = 32.P (cpo N O).

build

up trajectory

of limit

cycle

for

9 + +

a0 P + a3 p3

a1 + + -I- a4 p2

azicpicii + =

(10)

where the time derivatives are non dimensional.

122

G. Guglieri,

F. Quagliotti

0.1 5 0.1 3 0.1 1 0.09 0.07 0.05 0.03 0.31 -0.01 -0.03 -0.05 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46

a
Fig. 16. - The coefficients in the analytical expression for the rolling moment (Re = 636000).

The prediction of the wing rock oscillations is always accurate for cpc < 0~. On the contrary an unexpected divergence is found for external initial conditions (cpO > 60). The discrepancy between experiments and analytical approximations is explained considering that the model includes a cubic term. Previous studies [ 131 proved that the importance of this contribution is related with the divergence of the motion starting with peculiar initial conditions, such as large cpa. As a matter of fact, the coefficient of the cubic term (p3 changes its magnitude when the parametric identification procedure is performed using experimental results with dffferent initial conditions. Hence, a correct mathematical model should include a cubic parameter a3 (a, cpa) evaluated from experimental data with different release roll angles. This extended formulation correctly predicts stable limit cycles for cpo < 85. IV - CONCLUDING REMARKS

the validity of the energy exchange theory. During the oscillatory motion the trend of the rolling moment coefficient is nonlinear and the presence of hysteresis is evident. The hysteresis of vortex core position along the 2 axis, which is the primary explanation of the driving mechanism of wing rock, was evaluated by means of flow visualizations. The vortex burst and the onset of wing rock are not related by any direct mechanism. Stable oscillations were observed without evident breakdown of the leading edge vortices. The experimental results confirm that the vortex breakdown alters the limit cycle characteristics with a reduction of A(p while the non dimensional oscillation frequency k increases abruptly. The limit cycles are stable for 0 < cpo < 90 and Cpa= 0. The amplitude and the frequency of the final state are not influenced by cpo. The internal phase plane trajectories are elliptic while some nonlinear effect is evident for those orbits with external initial conditions cpo. This behavior was reproduced by a nonlinear analytical model, based on a parametric analysis of the experimental results. Due to the presence of the cubic term a3 (p3 in the suggested mathematical model, an unexpected divergence is predicted for peculiar initial conditions, such as larger initial roll angles. In order to extend the validity of the parametric identification, an adjustment of the analytical formulation is required.
Aerospace Science and Technology

Free to roll experiments were performed on a 80 delta wing undergoing self induced wing rock oscillations. The tests were carried out at different angles of attack, airspeeds and initial roll angles in order to investigate the influence of the experimental parameters on the limit cycle. The amplitude of the oscillatory mode is a nonlinear function of incidence and its maximum is reached at Q = 32. Stable limit cycles were observed for a 2 25". The progressive reduction of the angle of attack during the self sustained oscillations suppressed the wing rock motion at Q < 25. The analysis of the aerodynamic coefficient Ci (cp) during the build up phase and the limit cycle supports

Experimental

Observation

and Discussion of the Wing Rock Phenomenon

123

REFERENCES
[l] Guckenheimer J., Holmes J. - Nonlinear
Dynamical Systems and Bifurcations Oscillations, of Vector Fields,

[S] Levin D., Katz J. - Dynamic Load Measurements with Delta Wings Undergoing Self Induced Roll Oscillations, J. of Aircraft, 1984, 21, No. 1, 30-36. [9] Arena Jr. A. S. - An Experimental
Investigation and Computational of Slender Wings Undergoing Wing Rock, Study Known as Wing

Springer-Verlag, New York, 1990, 66-82. [2] Orlik-Rtickermann K. - Aerodynamic Aspects of Aircraft Dynamics at High Angles of Attack, J. of
1983, 20, No. 9, 737-752. of [3 ] Schiff L. B., Tobak M. - Some Applications Aerodynamic Formulations to Problems in Aircraft Dynamics, AGARD Lecture Series No. 144, 1981. _ Aircraft,

Ph. D. Dissertation, University of Notre-Dame, 1992. [lo] Arena Jr. A. S., Nelson R. C. - An Experimental
of the Nonlinear Dynamic Phenomenon Rock, AIAA No. 90-2812, 1990.

[ll]

[4] Liebst B. S., Nolan R. C. - Method for the Prediction of the Onset of Wing Rock, J. of Aircraft, 1994, 31, No. 6, 1419-1421. [5] Kalviste J. - Aircraft Stability Characteristics at High Angles of Attack, AGARD Conference Proceedings No. 235, 1978. [6] Nguyen L. T., Yip L. P., Chambers J. R. - SelfInduced Wing Rock of Slender Delta Wings, AIAA Atmospheric Flight Mechanics Conference, Albuquerque, USA, 1981. [7] Nguyen L. T., Whipple R. D., Brandon J. M. Recent Experiences of Unsteady Aerodynamic Effects 071 Aircraj? Flight Dynamics at High Angles of Attack,

Arena Jr. A. S., Nelson R. C. - Measurement of Unsteady Surface Pressure on a Slender Wing Undergoing a Self Induced Oscillation, Exp. in Fluids, 1994, 16, No. 6, 414-416.

[12] Hsu C. H., Lan C. E. - Theory of Wing Rock, J. of Aircraf, 1985, 22, No. 10, 920-924. [13] Nayfeh A. H., Elzebda J. M., Mook D. T. - Analytical Study of the Subsonic Wing Rock Phenomenon for Slender Delta Wings, J. of Aircraft, 1989, 26, No. 9,
805-809.

[14] Yoshinaga T., Tate A., Noda J. - Wing Rock of Delta

Wings with fn Analysis by the Phase Plane Method,

AGARD Conference Proceedings No. 386, 1988.

AIAA Atmospheric Flight Mechanics Conference, Monferey, USA, 1993.

1997, no 2