UAV Sky-Y flight loads: a Multi-Disciplinary approach

Similar documents
Y. Lemmens, T. Benoit, J. de Boer, T. Olbrechts LMS, A Siemens Business. Real-time Mechanism and System Simulation To Support Flight Simulators

MSC/Flight Loads and Dynamics Version 1. Greg Sikes Manager, Aerospace Products The MacNeal-Schwendler Corporation

Methodology for Distributed Electric Propulsion Aircraft Control Development with Simulation and Flight Demonstration

STRUCTURAL DESIGN AND ANALYSIS OF ELLIPTIC CYCLOCOPTER ROTOR BLADES

Estimation of Reliable Design Loads During Extreme Strength and Durability Events at Jaguar Land Rover. SIMPACK User Meeting May 2011

Integrated CAE Solutions Multidisciplinary Structure Optimisation with CASSIDIAN LAGRANGE

Modeling, Structural & CFD Analysis and Optimization of UAV

EMEA. Rebecca Margetts Senior Engineer: Mathematical Modelling AgustaWestland. Development of a Helicopter Drivetrain Dynamics Model in MSC ADAMS

Annual Report Summary Green Regional Aircraft (GRA) The Green Regional Aircraft ITD

FIRST FLYING TECHNIQUES COCKPIT PREPARATION STARTUP TAXI

Evolution of MDO at Bombardier Aerospace

Friday, 27 June Realizing a small UAV for medical transport in developing countries Master thesis: Ferdinand Peters. Dr.One

Electric VTOL Aircraft

UNCLASSIFIED FY 2017 OCO. FY 2017 Base

HELICOPTER TAIL ROTOR ANALYSIS: EXPERIENCE IN AGUSTA WITH ADAMS

1.1 REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFTS

Coupled Aero-Structural Modelling and Optimisation of Deployable Mars Aero-Decelerators

DESIGN AND PERFORMANCE TEST OF A TWIN- FUSELAGE CONFIGURATION SOLAR-POWERED UAV

Aerodynamic Characteristic Analysis of UAV (Unmanned Aerial Vehicle) By Using CFD

EWADE th European Workshop on Aircraft Design Education - Naples 2011

FURTHER ANALYSIS OF MULTIDISCIPLINARY OPTIMIZED METALLIC AND COMPOSITE JETS

SILENT SUPERSONIC TECHNOLOGY DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM

Aerodynamic Testing of the A400M at ARA. Ian Burns and Bryan Millard

Evaluation of the Fatigue Life of Aluminum Bogie Structures for the Urban Maglev

Primary control surface design for BWB aircraft

Simulation of Ground Operations in Aircraft Design. Martin Spieck DLR - German Aerospace Center Institute of Aeroelasticity

Virtual Durability Simulation for Chassis of Commercial vehicle

Preliminary Design of a Mach 6 Configuration using MDO

Preface. Acknowledgments. List of Tables. Nomenclature: organizations. Nomenclature: acronyms. Nomenclature: main symbols. Nomenclature: Greek symbols

STAR European Conference 2010 AERODYNAMICS DEVELOPMENTS ON A LE MANS PROTOTYPE ORECA 01 LMP1

Unmanned Air Vehicles (UAVs): Classification, Legislation and Future applications Presenter: Dr-Ing Dimitrios E. Mazarakos

Full-Scale 1903 Wright Flyer Wind Tunnel Test Results From the NASA Ames Research Center

DSSI UAV. Unmanned Aerial Vehicle. Research & Development Project

THE KARANTANIA UNMANNED AERIAL SYSTEM

MARITIME AFTERNOON. Torben Ole Andersen. June 14, 2017 Aalborg University, Denmark

Flight and Terminal Ballistic Performance Demonstration of a Gun-Launched Medium Caliber Ramjet Propelled Air Defense Projectile

Environmentally Focused Aircraft: Regional Aircraft Study

Industrial Use of EsDs ETP4HPC Workshop 22 June 2017 Frankfurt DLR CFD Solver TAU & Flucs for external Aerodynamic

Design of Ultralight Aircraft

Aeroelastic Analysis of Aircraft Wings

Aircraft Level Dynamic Model Validation for the STOVL F-35 Lightning II

Customer Application Examples

THE NON-LINEAR STRENGTH-WORK OF ALL BODY CONSTRUCTIONS THE HELICOPTER IS - 2 DURING FAILURE LANDING

ADVENT. Aim : To Develop advanced numerical tools and apply them to optimisation problems in engineering. L. F. Gonzalez. University of Sydney

NEURON Unmanned Combat Aerial Vehicle

Optimization of Transition Manoeuvres for a Tail-Sitter Unmanned Air Vehicle (UAV)

Flight Research using Radio-controlled Small Airplanes

ROBUST PROJECT Norwegian Public Roads Administration / Force Technology Norway AS

BAYLOR UNIVERSITY DEPARTMENT OF ENGINEERING. EGR 4347 Analysis and Design of Propulsion Systems Fall 2002 ASSIGNMENT GUIDELINES

AEM 4321 / EE4231 Automatic Control Systems

Development of a Subscale Flight Testing Platform for a Generic Future Fighter

PIAGGIO AERO P.1HH HammerHead UAS

Multidisciplinary Design Optimization of a Truss-Braced Wing Aircraft with Tip-Mounted Engines

(1) Keywords: CFD, helicopter fuselage, main rotor, disc actuator

Appenidix E: Freewing MAE UAV analysis

Environmental issues for a supersonic business jet

Stress Analysis Of An Aerodynamically Loaded Structure Under Supersonic Conditions

SMATF1. A Computer Aided Development Procedure to Test Multiple System Integration

Dragon Eye. Jessica Walker Rich Stark Brian Squires. AOE 4124 Configuration Aerodynamics

w w w. o n e r a. f r

for Unmanned Aircraft

neuron An efficient European cooperation scheme

Large engine vibration analysis using a modular modelling approach

COMPUTATIONAL MODELING OF HEAVY DUTY TRUCK DRIVESHAFT

STIFFNESS CHARACTERISTICS OF MAIN BEARINGS FOUNDATION OF MARINE ENGINE

DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OF A MICRO AIR VEHICLE (µav) CONCEPT: PROJECT BIDULE

Automotive NVH with Abaqus. Abaqus 2018

A SOLAR POWERED UAV. 1 Introduction. 2 Requirements specification

LMS Imagine.Lab AMESim Ground Loads and Flight Controls

DYNAMICS OF A VERTICAL TAKEOFF AND LANDING (VTOL) UNMANNED AERIAL VEHICLE (UAV)

FLIGHT DYNAMICS AND CONTROL OF A ROTORCRAFT TOWING A SUBMERGED LOAD

Team Introduction Competition Background Current Situation Project Goals Stakeholders Use Scenario Customer Needs Engineering Requirements

'A CASE OF SUCCESS: MDO APPLIED ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF EMBRAER 175 ENHANCED WINGTIP' Cavalcanti J., London P., Wallach R., Ciloni P.

Identification of tyre lateral force characteristic from handling data and functional suspension model

ROBUST PROJECT Norwegian Public Roads Administration / Force Technology Norway AS

Modeling of Conventional Vehicle in Modelica

Super Squadron technical paper for. International Aerial Robotics Competition Team Reconnaissance. C. Aasish (M.

MAV and UAV Research at Rochester Institute of Technology. Rochester Institute of Technology

Aeroelastic Load Simulations and Aerodynamic and Structural Modeling Effects

Finite Element and Experimental Validation of Stiffness Analysis of Precision Feedback Spring and Flexure Tube of Jet Pipe Electrohydraulic Servovalve

Analysis and control of vehicle steering wheel angular vibrations

MULTIBODY ANALYSIS OF THE M-346 PILOTS INCEPTORS MECHANICAL CIRCUITS INTRODUCTION

Skycar Flight Control System Overview By Bruce Calkins August 14, 2012

ELECTRIC POWER TRAINS THE KEY ENABLER FOR CONTRA ROTATING PROPELLERS IN GENERAL AVIATION (& VICE VERSA)

Part II. HISTORICAL AND ENGINEERING ANALYSIS OF AIRSHIP PLAN-AND- DESIGN AND SERVICE DECISIONS

MORSE: MOdel-based Real-time Systems Engineering. Reducing physical testing in the calibration of diagnostic and driveabilty features

Using ABAQUS in tire development process

Span m [65.16 ft] Length m [43.89 ft] Height m [12.08 ft]

Dynamic Loads Analysis Using Detailed Aircraft and Landing Gear Modeling

Value Engineering of Engine Rear Cover by Virtual Simulation

A Coupled Adjoint-Based Method for Aeroelastic Design in the Open-Source SU2 Suite

Vehicle functional design from PSA in-house software to AMESim standard library with increased modularity

NVH CAE concept modeling and optimization at BMW.

Advanced Vehicle Performance by Replacing Conventional Vehicle Wheel with a Carbon Fiber Reinforcement Composite Wheel

Overview of BAE Systems Regional Aircraft

A Review on Cooperative Adaptive Cruise Control (CACC) Systems: Architectures, Controls, and Applications

UNCLASSIFIED. FY 2016 Base FY 2016 OCO

Aeroelasticity and Fuel Slosh!

CAMRAD II COMPREHENSIVE ANALYTICAL MODEL OF ROTORCRAFT AERODYNAMICS AND DYNAMICS

Analysts/Fund Managers Visit 19 April Autonomous Systems and Future Capability Mark Kane

Transcription:

UAV Sky-Y flight loads: a Multi-Disciplinary approach Daniele Catelani (MSC) G.M. Carossa, E. Baldassin, R. Digo, E. Marinone, O. Valtingojer (Alenia Aeronautica) 2010 Alenia Aeronautica S.p.A. The contents of this document are the intellectual property of Alenia Aeronautica S.p.A.. Apart from those contractually-agreed user rights, any copying or communication of this document in any form is forbidden without the written authorisation of Alenia Aeronautica S.p.A..

2 Target of the study - Integration of various disciplines (flight mechanics, aerodynamics, structures, loads) simulation models - Benchmark on flight simulation using Multi-Disciplinary approach - Air Vehicle Methodology improvement: the goal is to achieve the result through an unique simulation

3 Unmanned Air Vehicle (UAV) From surveillance to reconnaissance, from patrol to the most risky defence operations, the new frontier of aeronautics lies in the UAV (Unmanned Air Vehicle) domain development. Alenia Aeronautica, thanks to its effort in dealing with the various aspects of this new environment, is today the European leader in the UAV technology. Alenia Aeronautica major achievements in UAV domain: 2005 - Sky-X (1 flight May 05), the first in its c lass to have flown in Europe 2007 - Sky-Y (1 flight June 07), operating demonst rator to gain experience both in civil and military domains, aimed to Medium Altitude Long Endurance (MALE) missions.

4 Sky-Y Conceived as technology demonstrator for a MALE surveillance UAV. Its purpose is to develop enabling technologies that increase the aircraft s autonomous flight and data collection and distribution capabilities. Sky-Y has an all-composite structure, all-electric systems and a diesel engine of automotive derivation giving it up to 12 hours endurance. Dimensions Dimensions Length Length Span Span Weights Weights MTOW MTOW OEW OEW Fuel Fuel Payload Payload 9.725 m 9.725 9.937 m 9.937 1200 kg 1200 kg 850 kg 850 kg 200 kg 200 kg 150 150 kg kg Performances Performances LOS LOS Radius Radius 50 50 nm nm Range Range 500 nm 500 nm Altitude Altitude 25.000 25.000 ft ft Endurance Endurance 12 h 12 h Engine Engine 1 1 Diesel Diesel 160 HP 160 HP

5 Sky-Y - SMAT The SMAT (Sistema di Monitoraggio Avanzato del Territorio Advanced Monitoring System of Territory), lead by Alenia Aeronautica and Selex Galileo, is a research project mainly based on Sky-Y UAV. It is financed by Regione Piemonte and Distretto Aerospaziale Piemontese. Sky-Y Aim of SMAT is to study and demonstrate the feasibility of an automated surveillance system for environmental and civil security, traffic surveillance, pollution control, etc It will integrate three different UAV platforms with the existing ground infrastructures. Ground Control Station Ground Network Sensors Coordination center

6 Multi-Disciplinary (MD) simulation Dynamic model of UAV flight: coupling aerodynamic data set, structural models, FCS (Flight Control System) flexible structural model (including control surfaces) control surfaces actuator models aerodynamic and inertial loads due to flight manoeuvres Aerodynamic data set MB Data (Control surfaces) FEM Model with Inertial data Pilot input ADAMS FCS model Flight Loads Time History

7 MD process Requirements Pilot Input FCS model Aero data set Matching aerod/fem Action 1 FEM + pressure distribution Create modal data Action 2 Modal data Create MB model Action 3 MB controlled model Manoeuvre analysis Action 4 CAD & FEM & MB & CFD Pre processing Action 0 Extracting specific responses Action 5 Generic manoeuvre response Data Flight Tecnologies Domain Manoeuvre response data FEM + inertia data Structure Technologies Domain Loads on structure MB data: control surfaces System Technologies Domain Actuators loads and position

8 Aerodynamic data set The aerodynamic analysis is accomplished by using various analytical techniques such as Vortex Lattice or Euler formulation methods (CFD - Computational Fluid Dynamics). These analytical techniques allow to generate an aerodynamic model starting from the external shape of the air vehicle. Panels Macropanel Macropanel For a set of flight parameters (α, β, δ, Mach), relevant aero-coefficients on predefined grids of the aerodynamic mesh are calculated. These coefficients are assembled into the aerodynamic data set.

9 FEM model - Original FEM model: full A/C NASTRAN model used for aeroelastic analyis - Modification of FEM model: modifications have been applied to take into account static and dynamic analysis differences and MultiBody needs: - separation of FlexBodies from assembled FEM model - master nodes definition - number of modes definition - ADAMS MNF cards Aileron Airframe Rudder Elevator

10 Structural/Aerodynamic coupling CFD aero coefficent data set are transferred on the structural mesh (not coincident with the aerodynamic one) using RBE3 element Aerodynamic model mesh Structural model (FEM) Models coupling

11 Structural/Aerodynamic coupling CFD aero coefficent data set are transferred on the structural mesh (not coincident with the aerodynamic one) using RBE3 element Aerodynamic model mesh Structural model (FEM) Models coupling

12 Flight Control System (FCS) model A Flight Control System has been developed, using General State Equation (GSE) element (which allows discrete integration time step) Input data time history of pilot commands (aileron, elevator, rudder, throttle) are transferred through FCS model (Alenia Fortran routine black box) and GSE to control surfaces Output are controlled surfaces rotations

13 Assembly of MD model 1 Aerodynamic Forces in Adams CFD / Aerodynamic data From aero mesh to structural mesh FORCE 97 3059 0 1.06412.0165988.0667837-.997629 FORCE* 97 3060 0 1.25965 * -.00241019.0635587 -.997975 FORCE* 97 3074 0 9.1782 * -.00184328.0636041 -.997974 FORCE* 97 3075 0 9.61135 * -.00534181.0623677 -.998039 FORCE* 97 3076 0 1.90042 * -3.79548-4.0633518 -.997991 FORCE* 97 3078 0 5.7019 * -.0163088.050371 -.998597 FORCE 97 3079 0 12.9511.0182413.0660599-.997649 FORCE* 97 3080 0 11.2832 * -.0110068.0644774 -.997859 FORCE* 97 3094 0 18.1014 *.00230714.0638071 -.99796 From structural mesh to Adams input: Fortran routine Nodal forces VFORCE Grid Force Loads Modal forces MFORCE Case: L_20 1-0.0913778541 2 133.7172456723 3 9746.4592837781 4-4481.2175082156 5-49437.2106932607 6 778.0834281111 7-24.1865506319

14 Assembly of MD model 1 Aerodynamic Forces in Adams CFD / Aerodynamic data From aero mesh to structural mesh FORCE 97 3059 0 1.06412.0165988.0667837-.997629 FORCE* 97 3060 0 1.25965 * -.00241019.0635587 -.997975 FORCE* 97 3074 0 9.1782 * -.00184328.0636041 -.997974 FORCE* 97 3075 0 9.61135 * -.00534181.0623677 -.998039 FORCE* 97 3076 0 1.90042 * -3.79548-4.0633518 -.997991 FORCE* 97 3078 0 5.7019 * -.0163088.050371 -.998597 FORCE 97 3079 0 12.9511.0182413.0660599-.997649 FORCE* 97 3080 0 11.2832 * -.0110068.0644774 -.997859 FORCE* 97 3094 0 18.1014 *.00230714.0638071 -.99796 From structural mesh to Adams input: Fortran routine Nodal forces VFORCE Grid Force Loads Modal forces MFORCE Case: L_20 1-0.0913778541 2 133.7172456723 3 9746.4592837781 4-4481.2175082156 5-49437.2106932607 6 778.0834281111 7-24.1865506319

15 Assembly of MD model 2 Structural elements in Adams Separated FE bodies Master nodes MNF files Aeroelastic model MNF statements Flex Bodies FULL MultiBody model Connections

16 Assembly of MD model 2 Structural elements in Adams Separated FE bodies Master nodes MNF files Aeroelastic model MNF statements Flex Bodies FULL MultiBody model Connections

17 Assembly of MD model 3 FCS in Adams GSE subroutine GSE array state variables Pilot Input read pilot input link FCS to pilot input at sampled time get FCS output Aileron rotation Rudder rotation Elevator rotation Throttle link output to actuators mobile surfaces rotation thrust

18 Assembly of MD model 4 33 rigid bodies 7 Forces flex bodies 2 vector torques Simulation 1 single command component force 34 requests Solver parameters Full Adams model Connections aerodynamic 47 joints fixed thrust rev 15 drag bushings sph 1550 damping aerodynamic moment forces (vector forces) bushing or 27 modal forces disp Data splines matrices array vars Measures vel acc loads Graphics

19 Manoeuvres description The manoeuvre simulation is splitted in two phases: 1. Trim analysis defining the first instanct of the dynamic response. At the required speed, altitude, load factor (Nz), the equilibrium aircraft condition is found with angular acceleration = 0. Three kind of trimming have been considered: pull out (Nz 1 ) steady turn (Nz > 1) inverted flight (Nz = -1) 2. Dynamic analysis starting from trimmed position imposing pilot commands

20 MD simulation Trim Analysis Implemented Strategy for trimming the aircraft: pin the aircraft to the aggregate mass node (C++ feature) through revolute and bushing allowing pitch rotation define the required A/C condition in term of speed, altitude, load factor and trim type (GUI) apply a sequence of static analysis reducing bushing Kt to 0 apply methods to obtain robust trim solution: run rigid model first, then flexible one increment number of iterations and KT values find intermediate (not trimmed but closer) configuration and then restart GUI reduce error tolerance

21 MD simulation Trim Analysis Implemented Strategy for trimming the aircraft: pin the aircraft to the aggregate mass node (C++ feature) through revolute and bushing allowing pitch rotation define the required A/C condition in term of speed, altitude, load factor and trim type (GUI) apply a sequence of static analysis reducing bushing Kt to 0 apply methods to obtain robust trim solution: run rigid model first, then flexible one increment number of iterations and KT values find intermediate (not trimmed but closer) configuration and then restart GUI reduce error tolerance

22 MD simulation Trim Analysis results Results in tabular form and in GUI

23 MD simulation Dynamic Analysis Implemented strategy for Dynamic Analysis: start from trimmed analysis results or from position imposed by user (GUI) define pilot inputs in terms of longitudinal, lateral, directional and handle commands in the bulk data file define time for balancing and simulation run rigid or flexible model GUI

24 MD simulation Dynamic Analysis Implemented strategy for Dynamic Analysis: start from trimmed analysis results or from position imposed by user (GUI) define pilot inputs in terms of longitudinal, lateral, directional and handle commands in the bulk data file define time for balancing and simulation run rigid or flexible model GUI

25 MD simulation - results 1 PULL OUT

26 MD simulation - results 2 Alpha Drag PUSH DOWN Elevator

27 MD simulation - results 3 STEADY TURN

28 From Adams to FE: Nodal Loads (GPFORCES) Adams/Durability module exports Adams analysis as a modal deformation file (mdf) file Nastran Restart analysis is performed including GPFORCE/ALL The Nastran output (f06 file) contains GPFORCES informations on each structural node for each time step Patran is used for graphical visualisation A reading/writing Fortran (C++) routine could be developed for extracting hotspot informations (max forces, monitoring stations loads, etc.)

29 Nodal Loads: GPFORCES Example of output TIME = 2.120000E+00 G R I D P O I N T F O R C E B A L A N C E POINT-ID ELEMENT-ID SOURCE T1 T2 T3 R1 R2 R3 13120 13312 BEAM -2.755696E+03-2.819249E+04 1.426504E+03 4.351999E+00-2.657374E+00-3.209920E+01 13120 13313 BEAM 2.960352E+03 3.174499E+04-1.292652E+03-4.313663E+00 1.043627E+00 3.121524E+01 13120 13149 QUAD4 3.952978E+02-2.408490E+03 7.174867E+01 9.150950E-02 6.318014E-01-2.617756E-02 13120 13161 QUAD4-4.564485E+02 7.612727E+02 4.015422E+01-1.273894E-01 7.018989E-01-1.694177E-03 13120 13508 QUAD4-1.397564E+02-1.369168E+03 8.041031E+02 3.546397E-02 4.387868E-01 2.068550E-01 13120 13510 QUAD4-4.971187E+01-5.222424E+02-1.524998E+03-3.230371E-02-1.815095E-01-6.307498E-02 13120 13517 QUAD4 1.470395E+02-5.599373E+00 4.537404E+02-7.230631E-02 2.103570E-02 1.150132E-01 13120 13702 ROD 0.0 0.0 1.100292E+01 0.0 0.0 6.949344E-05 13120 *TOTALS* 1.709518E-07 4.396483E-08 4.000717E-07-9.861861E-11-1.026633E-09 2.421182E-11 0 13121 13305 BEAM 2.579122E+03 2.470907E+04-1.986231E+03 2.452257E+00 7.972231E-01-2.371344E+01 13121 13306 BEAM -3.192366E+03-2.892795E+04 2.296607E+03-2.716814E+00-4.582419E-01 2.383611E+01 13121 13160 QUAD4-3.231614E+02 1.796923E+03-1.525345E+02 6.193042E-02-8.084043E-02 1.519091E-03 13121 13172 QUAD4 6.732228E+02-2.212344E+02 2.058180E+01 2.989256E-01 3.210797E-02-5.509890E-03 13121 13510 QUAD4 1.673334E+02 1.608403E+03 1.488966E+03 5.392670E-03 2.683917E-01 3.503260E-02 13121 13512 QUAD4 9.584893E+01 1.034791E+03-1.667389E+03-1.016917E-01-5.586404E-01-1.537168E-01 13121 *TOTALS* 1.604205E-07 1.072726E-08 3.533314E-07 1.305214E-10 1.339109E-09-7.649933E-11

30 Nodal Loads: GPFORCES Example of output TIME = 2.120000E+00 G R I D P O I N T F O R C E B A L A N C E POINT-ID ELEMENT-ID SOURCE T1 T2 T3 R1 R2 R3 13120 13312 BEAM -2.755696E+03-2.819249E+04 1.426504E+03 4.351999E+00-2.657374E+00-3.209920E+01 13120 13313 BEAM 2.960352E+03 3.174499E+04-1.292652E+03-4.313663E+00 1.043627E+00 3.121524E+01 13120 13149 QUAD4 3.952978E+02-2.408490E+03 7.174867E+01 9.150950E-02 6.318014E-01-2.617756E-02 13120 13161 QUAD4-4.564485E+02 7.612727E+02 4.015422E+01-1.273894E-01 7.018989E-01-1.694177E-03 13120 13508 QUAD4-1.397564E+02-1.369168E+03 8.041031E+02 3.546397E-02 4.387868E-01 2.068550E-01 13120 13510 QUAD4-4.971187E+01-5.222424E+02-1.524998E+03-3.230371E-02-1.815095E-01-6.307498E-02 13120 13517 QUAD4 1.470395E+02-5.599373E+00 4.537404E+02-7.230631E-02 2.103570E-02 1.150132E-01 13120 13702 ROD 0.0 0.0 1.100292E+01 0.0 0.0 6.949344E-05 13120 *TOTALS* 1.709518E-07 4.396483E-08 4.000717E-07-9.861861E-11-1.026633E-09 2.421182E-11 0 13121 13305 BEAM 2.579122E+03 2.470907E+04-1.986231E+03 2.452257E+00 7.972231E-01-2.371344E+01 13121 13306 BEAM -3.192366E+03-2.892795E+04 2.296607E+03-2.716814E+00-4.582419E-01 2.383611E+01 13121 13160 QUAD4-3.231614E+02 1.796923E+03-1.525345E+02 6.193042E-02-8.084043E-02 1.519091E-03 13121 13172 QUAD4 6.732228E+02-2.212344E+02 2.058180E+01 2.989256E-01 3.210797E-02-5.509890E-03 13121 13510 QUAD4 1.673334E+02 1.608403E+03 1.488966E+03 5.392670E-03 2.683917E-01 3.503260E-02 13121 13512 QUAD4 9.584893E+01 1.034791E+03-1.667389E+03-1.016917E-01-5.586404E-01-1.537168E-01 13121 *TOTALS* 1.604205E-07 1.072726E-08 3.533314E-07 1.305214E-10 1.339109E-09-7.649933E-11

31 Conclusions Performed test simulating various types of manoeuvres evidence: ADVANTAGES: - the results are in agreement with the outputs of currently used method - integration of simulation models of different disciplines - easy I/O management by use of GUI DISADVANTAGES: - aerodynamics/structural modal simulation quite complex - requirements of high computing power (possibly HPC)

32 Way forward - extension of the module to generic airframe: generic number of mobile surfaces, different aerodynamic data set, different FCS - Introduction of aeroelastcity - implementation of hydraulic/electric systems (co-simulation) - simulation of landing / taxing introducing landing gear model in the airframe multibody model - improvement of output results

33 Questions?

Thank You