Arning-Scalabilty of Model Flight Test Results

Ingenieurbro Dr. Richard K.
Arning
Scalability of Model Flight Test Results

R. Arning
DGLR-Workshop on System Identification,

Parameter Estimation and Optimisation
Ottobrunn, June 9th, 2005
Page 1
Microsystems & Electronics; Optronic Systems & Signal Processing
Overview
Overview
Motivation of scaled model flight testing
Applicability of method
Quality influences
Results
Page 2
Applicability
Applicabilityof
ofmethod
method
Quality and relevance vs. model size ?
X-38
ALFLEX
F-18
X-33
NASA
NASA
NASA
Page 3
Motivation
Motivationof
ofscaled
scaledmodel
modelflight
flighttesting
testing
Advantages:
Full set (6-DOF) measurement of dynamic derivatives
No wind tunnel / sting mounting interference
Early flight data

Low cost
Low risk
Page 4
Applicability
Applicabilityof
ofmethod
method
Regions of constructional realisation for dynamically scaled
models below 200 N MTOW and 200 N/m2 wing loading
G [N][N]
Weight
200
180
Segelflzg.
Glider
160
Motor
Motorsegler
Sailplane
Glider
General
Sportflzg.+
Aviation
Transportflzg.
140
120
100
80
Verkehrsflzg.
Airliner
60
40
Raumflzg.
Spaceplane
20
0
1
Spannweite
[m]
Span [m]
Wing loading for fighter

aircraft models above limit
Page 5
Limit for airliner models due to extreme

high wing loading;
In general: To small Reynolds numbers
Applicability
Applicabilityof
ofmethod
method
Applicable to aircraft:
with relative low relative mass ratio:
m
S b
at low speeds (uncompressible flow)

with acceptable chord length at scale sized (wing, tail)
1, 5
Re model
)
)
lmodel model altitude

Re original
=
l

original
original
altitude
Applicable to general aviation and below category aircrafts &

space planes during take-off and landing phase
NOT applicable: In stall region and for performance testing
Page 6
Applicability
Applicabilityof
ofmethod
method
RS 180 Sportsman
1:4,8-scale
Tail-Spin testing
Ingenieurbro
Dr. Richard K. Arning
MS 893 Morane
1:4-scale
Speed Canard
1:4-scale
Tail-Spin testing
System identification
of winglets influence
TT-62
1:5-scale
ASK-21
1:3-scale
PHOENIX
1:7-scale
ELAC
1:31.3-scale
(closed and open loop)
Page 7
of airbrakes influence
Proof-of Concept /
Engine failure characteristics
Quality
Qualityinfluences
influences
scale center of gravity
dynamically scaled mass m
dynamically scaled moments of inertia I
dynamically scaled control system (if relevant)
quality of sensors and calibration (integrated),
redundancy of sensor information
additional external equipment (e.g. nose-boom)
*
*
simplification of aerodynamic model Cl = Cl0 + Cl + Cl + Cl + Clpp + Clr r
coverage of flight envelope and maneuvers by

recorded flight data
Page 8
Quality
Qualityinfluences
influences
Sensors and data acquisition system
Telemetriebodenstation
Page 9
Quality
Qualityinfluences
influences
Page 10
Quality
Qualityinfluences
influences
400
KD [Pa/V]
350
300
250
200
150
-12.0
-8.0
-4.0
= -5
= 10
= 25
= 0
= 15
= 30
= 5
= 20
0.0
4.0
8.0
12.0
[]
Page 11
Quality
Qualityinfluences
influences
10-2
1.E+00
1
ro
Gyro Allan-Deviation [/s]
Gy
1.E-01
0.1
Ac
ce
le
ro
m
10-3
et
er
10-4
1.E-02
0.01
1.E-03
0.001
0.001
1. E -03
1. E -02
0.01
1. E -01
0.1
1. E +00
1. E +01
10
1. E +02
100
1. E +03
1000
1. E +04
104
Integration Time [s]
Page 12
10-5
105
1. E +05
Accel. Allan-Deviation [g=9.81m/s]
Allan-plot of MEMS accelerometer and gyro
Quality
Qualityinfluences
influences
Estimated 1-Sigma Value of measurement system
ELAC 1997
2005 possible
rotational rates
1,5 /s
< 0,5 /s
acceleration
0,05 g
< 0,01 g
0,5
control surfaces deflection
0,3
0,3
dynamic pressure
mass
Ix, Iy, Iz
Ixz
Ixy, Iyz
10 g
3%
2 deviation from main axis
set to 0
combine with
vel. measurement
2g
3%
1
measure
position of center of gravity
2 mm
1 mm ?
position of aerodynamic
30 mm
30 mm
measurements
Page 13
Quality
Qualityinfluences
influences
Example: Minaturised control system
Autopilot HW with fully integrated MEMS-based

flight control sensors, 100 Hz control frequency
Micro UAV:
DO-MAV
500 grams
Weight < 25 grams

Page 14
0,42 m span
Quality
Qualityinfluences
influences
ELAC-space plane configuration with
additional external installations

(e.g. noseboom, skids)
wind tunnel model scale factor 1:65
ELAC-space plane
configuration free flying
model (rudder
actuation)
Page 15
Results:
Results:Comparison
Comparisonwind
windtunnel
tunnel //free
freeflight
flight
Cl [-]
0,0
Cl [-]
0,00
Cl [-]
0,10
Freiflug
Freiflug
-0,2
Freiflug
-0,05
Windkanal
0,08
Windkanal
Windkanal
0,06
-0,10
-0,4
0,04
-0,15
-0,6
-0,8
6,0
8,0
10,0
12,0
14,0
16,0
-0,20
6,0
0,02
8,0
10,0
12,0
14,0
16,0
[-]
[-]
Clp [-]
0,00
8,0
10,0
12,0
14,0
16,0
[-]
Clr [-]
1,0
Freiflug
-0,10
Comparison of roll
moment derivatis btween
flight test and wind tunnel
measurements
0,8
Windkanal
0,6
-0,20
0,4
-0,30
-0,40
6,0
0,00
6,0
Freiflug
0,2
8,0
10,0
12,0
[-]
Page 16
14,0
16,0
0,0
6,0
Vortex-Lattice
8,0
10,0
12,0
14,0
16,0
[-]
Results:
Results:Comparison
Comparisonwith
withliterature
literatureabout
about
deviation
deviationof
ofwind
windtunnel
tunneland
andfree
freeflight
flightdata
data
From differences in wind tunnel and flight tests derived parameter uncertainties of rolling
damping moment coefficient for space plane X-33
(Cobleigh: Development of the X-33 Aerodynamic Uncertainty Model
NASA TP-1998-206544, April 1998)
Page 17
Results:
Results:Comparison
Comparisonwith
withliterature
literatureabout
abouttypical
typical
deviation
deviationof
ofwind
windtunnel
tunneland
andfree
freeflight
flightdata
data
FALKE-Orbiter
Space-Shuttle
Study 1
Study 2
ELAC
Orbiter
C A
C A
C W
C m
C m
C mq
C mq VL
C mq DC
C Q
C Q
C Q
C l
C l
C l
C lp
C lr VL
C n
C n
C n
C np VL
C nr
model
+0.08
+/- 0.050
+0.008
+0.036
+0.8%
+15.7%
+/- 0.0125
-0.010
+0.036
+/- 0.008
-0.009
-0.001
-6.4%
+0.3%
+12.5%
-0.04
+0.07
+0.008
+/- 0.022
-5%
-20%
+40% +/- 28%

+/- 80%
-33.3% -19.2%
+13.0% +19.1%
-15%
-16
+/- 25%
-10.0%
-1.2%
-0.140 +0.200
0.067
0.104
+/- 0.028
0.043
0.063
+/- 0.086
-0.046
-0.030
+/- 0.045
0.001
0.042
+0.024
+/- 0.030
-10%
-25%
+40% +/- 25%
-10.8%
4.2%
-6%
-30%
+60% +/- 0.011
-0.040
-0.200
+70% -1.2%
16.6%
+150% 36.0%
152.7%
+57%
-40%
-200%
+0.009
-17%
+/- 0.030
-0.065 +0.046
-0.070
-0.007
+/- 0.024
+/- 0.017
-0.056
-0.025
-30%
+60% +/- 26%

-200%
+/-4%
-35%
VL: Vortex-Lattice
Page 18
-41.3% -25.2%
+100% -42.4% -13.9%
+40% -27.5%
DC: DATCOM-Methode
0.5%
300
Results:
Results:Comparison
Comparison
with
withliterature
literatureabout
about
typical
typicaldeviation
deviationof
ofwind
wind
tunnel
tunneland
andfree
freeflight
flight
data
data
250
200
[%]
150
100
50
0
-50
-100
Cmq DC
Cmq VL
Cmq WK
Cm
Cm
CW
CA
-150
300
200
Comparison of ELAC
result (deviation model
flight testing / wind tunnel)
with parameter
uncetainties from
literature for X-33
0
-100
-200
-300
Page 19
Cnr
Cnp VL
Cn
Cn
Cn
Clr VL
Clp
Cl
Cl
Cl
CQ
CQ
-400
CQ
[%]
100
Summary
Summary
Method is applicable to subsonic/low speed flight
regime and configurations with specific lower mass

density (e.g. GA)
Quality of miniaturised (low-cost) sensors (drift &
sensitivity) has been improved significantly over the
recent years; aerodynamic sensors and nose-boom
integration remain challenging
Even miniaturised autopilots are available today to
investigate configurations with closed control loop and
realistic position of center of gravity
For applications to determine the quasi-unsteady
aerodynamics of these configuration the method is

reliable enough today
Page 20

Arning-Scalabilty of Model Flight Test Results

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Arning-Scalabilty of Model Flight Test Results

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Ingenieurbro Dr. Richard K.

Scalability of Model Flight Test Results

DGLR-Workshop on System Identification,

Microsystems & Electronics; Optronic Systems & Signal Processing

Microsystems & Electronics; Optronic Systems & Signal Processing

Microsystems & Electronics; Optronic Systems & Signal Processing

No wind tunnel / sting mounting interference

Early flight data

Microsystems & Electronics; Optronic Systems & Signal Processing

Wing loading for fighter

Limit for airliner models due to extreme

Microsystems & Electronics; Optronic Systems & Signal Processing

at low speeds (uncompressible flow)

lmodel model altitude

Applicable to general aviation and below category aircrafts &

Microsystems & Electronics; Optronic Systems & Signal Processing

Microsystems & Electronics; Optronic Systems & Signal Processing

coverage of flight envelope and maneuvers by

Microsystems & Electronics; Optronic Systems & Signal Processing

Microsystems & Electronics; Optronic Systems & Signal Processing

Microsystems & Electronics; Optronic Systems & Signal Processing

Microsystems & Electronics; Optronic Systems & Signal Processing

Gyro Allan-Deviation [/s]

Integration Time [s]

Microsystems & Electronics; Optronic Systems & Signal Processing

Accel. Allan-Deviation [g=9.81m/s]

Allan-plot of MEMS accelerometer and gyro

control surfaces deflection

position of center of gravity

Microsystems & Electronics; Optronic Systems & Signal Processing

Autopilot HW with fully integrated MEMS-based

Weight < 25 grams

Microsystems & Electronics; Optronic Systems & Signal Processing

additional external installations

Microsystems & Electronics; Optronic Systems & Signal Processing

Microsystems & Electronics; Optronic Systems & Signal Processing

Microsystems & Electronics; Optronic Systems & Signal Processing

+40% +/- 28%

+40% +/- 25%

+60% +/- 0.011

+60% +/- 26%

Microsystems & Electronics; Optronic Systems & Signal Processing

Microsystems & Electronics; Optronic Systems & Signal Processing

regime and configurations with specific lower mass

aerodynamics of these configuration the method is

Microsystems & Electronics; Optronic Systems & Signal Processing

Potrebbero piacerti anche