You are on page 1of 16

Wing Finite Element Analysis Progress Report The structure of the aircrafts wing has been modelled using

g Strand7 finite element analysis software. The aerofoil shape was constructed with nodes spaced appropriately to capture stress gradients. The aerofoil shape was then copied to the rib locations along the span. Quad 4 plates were used to model all structural elements, ribs, spars, skin, slats and flaperons. Assigning different plate properties to each structure type has enabled us to begin the optimisation of the wing, finding the optimum combination of component thicknesses to minimise deflection, stress and weight while maintaining the wings structural integrity. Considerable time and thought has been expended on the accuracy of the wing loading, as it is a highly important component to obtaining accurate results. For our simple rectangular planform, straight wing, elliptical spanwise loading has been used. In the chordwise direction pressure coefficient graphs have been used to determine load distribution. Implementation of both these conditions is essential to the accurate representation of the wing and its behaviour.

1. Outline
The wing of the Pardalote is a simple rectangular planform, straight, strut-supported design. The Pardalote is being certified to FAR Part 23 regulations and thus is required to cope with inertial loads of +4.4g and -2.2g. To meet this certification requirement modelling of the wing under these conditions has to be undertaken to prove the wing does not fail. This modelling has been conducted using STRAND7 finite element analysis software. The modelling of other load cases has also been undertaken, including thorough analysis of TBAs patented swing-wing system, both for in flight and on ground handling.

2. Method
2.1 Model Construction Accurate knowledge of the pressure distributions which result in aerodynamics loads over the wing was essential to the successful finite element modelling process. Using theoretical aerodynamic modelling software, we have been able to determine which sections of the wing will experience these high pressures. The largest differences in pressure coefficients, and therefore applied stresses, occur where the air is moving fastest over the wing, namely around the top of the leading edge, before the maximum thickness. In these areas of high stress, where large changes occur over small areas, a higher element density was needed. The aerofoil shape, NACA 6515, was constructed with nodes spaced appropriately to capture the stress gradients as well as being representative of the specific design.

Figure: NACA 6515 Aerofoil shape.

Figure: Pardalote Wing Cross Section Once the aerofoil shape had been completed it was then copied to the rib locations along the span. Ribs were initially evenly spaced as this design is utilised in wings of aircraft we have researched to develop the Pardalote, namely the CH-701 STOL.

Figure: CH 701- STOL wing structure, showing rib placement. Quad 4 plates are being used to model all structural elements, the ribs, spars, skin, slats and flaperons except for the strut which is a simple beam member. Our research shows that the wings of aircraft of the size and type of the Pardalote are made of aluminium sheet and plate, rather than any solid beams. It is therefore more accurate to model these elements with plates in STRAND7 which allows for the same properties to be determined to match the real structure. The strut is modelled as a beam, and loaded and supported in that manner.

Figures: CH 701 STOL assembly, showing aluminium sheet nature of structure

Figure: Pardalote wing showing ribs, spars and skins. Assigning different plate properties to each structure type differentiated them from one another. Dimensions of wing skins, ribs, spars and flanges can all be manipulated independently. This has enabled us to optimise the wing, finding the strongest and lightest combination of component thicknesses. 2.2 Materials STRAND7 has a variety of materials to choose from, with complete physical specifications, in its database. As expressed in previous reports TBA intends to use 7075 series aluminium for major structural components, such as spars and ribs, and 2024 series aluminium for other structure such as skin. The 7075 aluminium has been chosen for its extremely high strength to weight ratio and weldability. The 2024 aluminium has been chosen because it is less expensive than 7075 and the strength required in skin is much lower than that of the major structural components. STRAND7 did not contain data for any 7000 series aluminium and so this information was sourced and entered into STRAND7. 2.3 Model Loading As mentioned in the previous section the loading of the model is crucial to its accuracy, and crucial to the entire design, construction and feasibility of the Pardalote. Pressure coefficient data from reliable theoretical aerodynamic software was utilised to determine the chordwise distribution of pressure and thus load. The chordwise load was divided into numerically finite amounts, each representing the mean value of the pressure coefficient distribution over that section of chord. There were 60 data points, for ease of entry into STRAND7 we divided the data into 6 increments of 10 points, taking the median of each set as the pressure value.

Pressure Distribution Over NACA 6515


2

0 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51 53 55 57 59

-2 Pressure Coefficient

-4 Upper Surface Lower Surface -6

-8

-10

-12 Chord Position in 60ths of Chord

Figure: Pressure coefficient graph, showing pressure coefficient distribution towards leading edge.

Top Value 8.6000 3.8000 2.3000 1.3000 0.4800 0.2000 Totals 16.6800 Percentage of Total Load Percentage 0.5156 0.2278 0.1379 0.0779 0.0288 0.0120 1.0000 0.8515

Bottom Value -0.0100 -0.9000 -0.7000 -0.5000 -0.4000 -0.4000 -2.9100 Percentage 0.0034 0.3093 0.2405 0.1718 0.1375 0.1375 1.0000 0.1485

In determining spanwise distribution from research it was determined that a roughly elliptical approximation would be most accurate (due to downwash effects lift decreases from root to tip along the span). This was calculated using a quarter ellipse, the area representing half the weight of the aircraft, as we were only analysing one wing. The area of an ellipse is ab:

Figure: General ellipse including parametric dimensions A quarter of an ellipse was used as it most accurately represented the span wise loading on the wing from root to tip. The area of a quarter of an ellipse is therefore ab. So letting a represent wingspan, 4.9 metres and the area as half the load we could determine b and then therefore the loads for each cell. The equation for an ellipse is
x2 y2 + =1 a2 b2 where a and b are the same as used for the area calculation

Now knowing a and b, and letting x represent span position and y represent load, a spanwise load distribution equation can be created. Rearranging and substituting load values this equation is (in metres and Newtons):
x2 y = 828.45 2 1 4.9 2

To convert this to a global face pressure (in Pa) in STRAND7 the equation above was divided by the total area of the plates selected (TA function in STRAND7).

3. Results
Using STRAND7 we have designed and modelled the wing for the Pardalote aircraft. The wing is capable of withstanding the loads prescribed by the FAR Part 23 regulations, 4.4g positive and 2.2g negative. As required modelling of the ground handling of the wing, i.e. the patented swing-wing mechanism has been performed. The results of this analysis show that ground handling imposes only small stresses on wing components. In addition to this we have determined the load for failure for the wing in both positive and negative loading cases.

3.1 Displacement Summary Table


Node Number 2142 373 1689 373 206 409 Normal Flight Load Case +1 g Displacement Node Location Type Slat, at wingtip DX (mm) Flaperon at wingtip DY (mm) Inboard Panel Breaker, Top DZ (mm) Flaperon at wingtip D(XYZ) (mm) 4th Rib, Top, Mid-chord RX (deg) Inboard Panel Breaker, Top, At Spar RZ (deg) Max Upwards Load Case +4.4 g Displacement Node Location Type Slat, at wingtip DX (mm) Flaperon at wingtip DY (mm) Rib 8 and Front Spar Intersection, Top DZ (mm) Flaperon at wingtip D(XYZ) (mm) 4th Rib, Top, Mid-chord RX (deg) Inboard Panel Breaker, Top, At Spar RZ (deg) Max Downwards Load Case - 2.2 g Displacement Node Location Type Slat, at wingtip DX (mm) Flaperon at wingtip DY (mm) Inboard Panel Breaker, Top DZ (mm) Flaperon at wingtip D(XYZ) (mm) 4th Rib, Top, Mid-chord RX (deg) Inboard Panel Breaker, Top, At Spar RZ (deg) Displacement Value 0.279 2.0146 -0.1434 2.026 -0.2053 -0.0981

Node Number 2142 373 64 373 206 409

Displacement Value 1.308 9.568 -0.6286 9.6239 -0.8389 -0.3703

Node Number 2142 373 1689 373 206 409

Displacement Value -0.6139 -4.4317 0.3154 4.4568 0.4515 0.2158

The above table displays the most significant displacements of the wing. Other values have been omitted to due their significance. For reference x is in the direction of flight, y is vertical, z is from root to tip. The displacement of the wing is a significant design consideration as large deflections lead to large stresses and increased fatigue of components. The Pardalotes wing displaces 2.0146, 9.568 and -4.4317 millimetres in the downward Y direction. Considering the 4.9m half span of the wing this is not a large deflection. This small deflection is also represented by a small rotation about the chordwise axis X. RX is only -0.8389 degrees for the maximum load case of +4.4 g which is extremely small under maximum load. The small displacement of the wing is due to the fact that the total load on the wing is dispersed and small in magnitude as the Pardalote on weighs 650kg. In addition the structural design of the wing makes for a strong yet light design which is reflected by the small deflections. The location of the displacements is as would have been expected, at the wing tips and the panel breakers. The wing tips

because they are the furthest point from the restraints and the panel breakers because they are one of the most highly stressed components in the wing.

Normal in-flight load (1 g)

Maximum Positive Load Case: +4.4g

Maximum Negative Load Case: -2.2g

3.2 Stress Summary Table


Plate Number 369 286 53 436 29 52 369 Normal Flight Load Case +1 g Stress Plate Location Type Inboard Panel Breaker XX Front Lug Attachment YY Outboard of Strut Attachment ZZ Inboard Panel Breaker, Top XY Front Spar between 3rd and 4th ribs YZ Inboard of Strut Attachment XZ Inboard Panel Breaker Von Mises Max Upwards Load Case +4.4 g Stress Plate Location Type Inboard Panel Breaker XX Front Lug Attachment YY Outboard of Strut Attachment ZZ Inboard Panel Breaker, Top XY Front Spar between 3rd and 4th Ribs YZ Inboard of Strut Attachment XZ Inboard Panel Breaker Von Mises Max Downwards Load Case - 2.2 g Stress Plate Location Type Inboard Panel Breaker XX Front Lug Attachment YY Outboard of Strut Attachment ZZ Root Rib, Rearmost Cutout XY Front Spar between 3rd and 4th ribs YZ Inboard of Strut Attachment XZ Inboard Panel Breaker Von Mises Stress Value (MPa) -4.2677 1.7245 3.3806 0.7464 1.1442 -1.3728 4.3262

Plate Number 369 286 53 436 29 52 369

Stress Value (MPa) -16.698 8.4178 16.629 -3.1421 5.6045 -6.5809 16.9052

Plate Number 369 286 53 521 29 52 369

Stress Value (MPa) 9.3882 -3.974 -7.4373 -1.6415 -2.5176 3.0198 9.5169

The above table shows the maximum absolute stresses for the three load conditions. The stresses in the wing are small compared to the yield stress of aluminium. This is expected as the structure is only supporting 650 kg and the large size of the wing allows for the stress to be sparsely distributed. The components experiencing the most stress are where joins occur, in particular panel breakers, lugs and strut attachment panels. These are the places that stress concentrations would be expected in an aircraft because of the different load magnitudes and directions experienced at joints in the structure.

Maximum Positive Load Case: +4.4g note stress in panel breakers

Maximum Negative Load Case: -2.2g

Figure ZX stress for -2.2 g case note stress at strut and lug attachments 3.3 Storage and Ground Handling Loads The Pardalotes patented swing-wing design enables the wings to be folded back for easy storage. It is important that the wings can support full flight loads, as well as inertial loads while being handled on the ground and stored. The gravitational load was modelled for the wing in its completely stored position, without any support from the strut. The displacements found were minimal. The displacement of the flaperon is due to the way it has been modelled. For handling and storage the flap cable will keep the flap in position.

4. Conclusion
By following accepted engineering practices and methods we have designed a wing meeting all regulatory and customer defined specifications, as well as being optimal for the mission of the aircraft. 4.1 Discussion of Problems As with any aircraft considerations of weight and structural integrity were paramount in the design of the wing. During the design and analysis process several problems were encountered. These are outlined below 4.1.1 Rib Placement Ribs were initially evenly spaced at 520 mm intervals. Extremely low deflections resulted from this arrangement. This initial design was considered as overdesigned and overweight so the removal of ribs was deemed necessary. After analysing stresses in the wing, it was decided that the removal of outboard ribs would be most effective in reducing weight whilst maintaining structural strength, as the majority of the load it located inboard. Doing so reduced the weight of the wing, however upon solving the problem for the new wing, there was significant panel buckling in panels where ribs had been removed. Rather than replacing the heavy ribs it was decided that panel breakers would be used to combat effects of buckling and maintain rigidity in the skin. Panel breakers change the second moment of area, so that more force is required to buckle the panel. This provided a simple, lightweight solution.

Figure: Internals of wing, showing panel breakers 4.1.2 Strut A strut supported wing was almost certainly going to be needed for our design, considering the high wing loading. Strut placement is important in ensuring that the strut takes a maximum safe amount of load without buckling or failure. It was decided that the strut would be best supported if attached to the intersection of the spar and a rib, so the stress in components transferring load to the spar would be small. The strut was placed in a variety of locations and the wing model solved. The optimum position was determined to be at the fourth rib. The cross section of the strut is a hollow circle with a diameter of 50mm and a thickness of 2mm made from 6061-T4 aluminium. For the sake of brevity full documentation of this process had been omitted.

Figure: Strut attaching at fourth rib. 4.1.3 Component Thicknesses The thicknesses of components were researched and found to be fairly standard for aircraft of the Pardalotes size and type. By changing the thicknesses one at a time and solving the model the influence of the thickness of each structure type was able to be seen.
Component Properties E G Material (MPa) (MPa) Aluminium Alloy: 7074 73000 Aluminium Alloy: 7074 73000 Aluminium Alloy: 6061 - T6 69000 Aluminium Alloy: 6063 - T1 69000 Aluminium Alloy: 6061 - T6 69000 Aluminium Alloy: 6061 - T4 69000 25860 (kg/m3) 2700.0 2700.0 2700.0 2700.0 2700.0 2700.0 D (mm)

Leading Edge Surface Wing Surface Spars Ribs Slat Strut

0.3340 0.3340 0.3340 0.3340 0.3340 0.3340

t (mm) 0.5000 0.5000 0.6500 0.6500 0.5000 2.0000

50.000

Table: Summary of component properties 4.1.4 Fatigue