留言板

尊敬的读者、作者、审稿人, 关于本刊的投稿、审稿、编辑和出版的任何问题, 您可以本页添加留言。我们将尽快给您答复。谢谢您的支持!

姓名
邮箱
手机号码
标题
留言内容
验证码

颤振边界预测的系统稳定性分析方法

李扬 周丽

李扬, 周丽. 颤振边界预测的系统稳定性分析方法[J]. 航空动力学报, 2018, 33(4): 980-988. doi: 10.13224/j.cnki.jasp.2018.04.025
引用本文: 李扬, 周丽. 颤振边界预测的系统稳定性分析方法[J]. 航空动力学报, 2018, 33(4): 980-988. doi: 10.13224/j.cnki.jasp.2018.04.025
Flutter boundary prediction research depending onsystem stability analysis methods[J]. Journal of Aerospace Power, 2018, 33(4): 980-988. doi: 10.13224/j.cnki.jasp.2018.04.025
Citation: Flutter boundary prediction research depending onsystem stability analysis methods[J]. Journal of Aerospace Power, 2018, 33(4): 980-988. doi: 10.13224/j.cnki.jasp.2018.04.025

颤振边界预测的系统稳定性分析方法

doi: 10.13224/j.cnki.jasp.2018.04.025
基金项目: 国家自然科学基金(51475228);江苏省普通高校研究生科研创新计划(CXZZ13_0146);机械结构力学及控制国家重点实验室(南京航空航天大学)开放课题资助(MCMS-0517K01);江苏高校优势学科建设工程资助

Flutter boundary prediction research depending onsystem stability analysis methods

  • 摘要: 对颤振边界预测方法中的颤振裕度法与自回归滑动平均模型(ARMA)稳定性分析方法进行研究,采用数值仿真算例研究这两种方法受参数识别误差的影响,采用风洞颤振试验算例对比分析其预测颤振边界的有效性与准确性,结果表明:①颤振裕度法的判据受阻尼比识别误差的影响较小,相对于阻尼比识别误差更容易受频率识别误差的影响,ARMA稳定性分析方法的判据相对于颤振裕度法更易受阻尼比识别误差的影响,颤振裕度法比ARMA稳定性分析方法鲁棒性更高;②对于机翼弯扭耦合颤振,两方法的判据变化趋势相近,相差采样频率4次方的数量级,两者随着风速的增加具有平缓的下降趋势,有助于较早地预测颤振边界;③对于面内弯曲为主的颤振,ARMA稳定性分析方法比颤振裕度法适用性更好。

     

  • [1] 李扬,周丽,杨秉才.基于自然激励技术的颤振边界预测[J].航空动力学报,2016,31(11):2744-2749.LI Yang,ZHOU Li,YANG Bingcai.Flutter boundary prediction based on natural excitation technique[J].Journal of Aerospace Power,2016,31(11):2744-2749.(in Chinese)
    [2] SCHLIPPE B V.The question of spontaneous wing oscillation:determination of critical velocity through flight-oscillation tests[J].Luftfahrtforschung,1936,13(2):41-45.
    [3] DIMITRIADIS G,COPPER J E.Flutter prediction from flight flutter test data[J].Journal of Aircraft,2001,38(2):355-367.
    [4] COOPER J E,EMMET P R,WRIGHT J,et al.Envelope function:a tool for analyzing flutter data[J].Journal of Aircraft,1993,30(5):785-790.
    [5] WALLKER R,GUPTA N.Real-time flutter analysis[R].NASA-CR-170412,1984.
    [6] 张伟伟,钟华寿,肖华,等.颤振飞行试验的边界预测方法回顾与展望[J].航空学报,2015,36(5):1367-1384.ZHANG Weiwei,ZHONG Huashou,XIAO Hua,et al.Review and prospect of flutter boundary prediction methods for flight flutter testing[J].Acta Aeronautica et Astronautica Sinica,2015,36(5):1367-1384.(in Chinese)
    [7] ZIMMERMAN N H,WEISSENBURGER J T.Prediction of flutter onset speed based on flight testing at subcritical speeds[J].Journal of Aircraft,1964,1(4):190-202.
    [8] HEEG J.Stochastic characterization of flutter using historical wind tunnel data[R].AIAA-2007-1769,2007.
    [9] ZENG J,KUKREJA S L.Flutter prediction for flight/wind-tunnel flutter test under atmospheric turbulence excitation[J].Journal of Aircraft,2013,50(6):1696-1709.
    [10] LEE B H K,BEN-NETICHA Z.Analysis of flight flutter test data[J].Canadian Aeronautics and Space Journal,2002,38(4):156-163.
    [11] POIREL D,DUNN S,PORTER J.Flutter-margin method accounting for modal parameter uncertainties[J].Journal of Aircraft,2005,42(5):1236-1243.
    [12] MATSUZAKI Y,ANDO Y.Estimation of flutter boundary from random responses due to turbulence at subcritical speeds[J].Journal of Aircraft,1981,18(10):826-868.
    [13] TORII H,MATSUZAKI Y.Flutter margin evaluation for discrete-time systems[J].Journal of Aircraft,2011,38(1):42-47.
    [14] MCNAMARAamara J J,FRIEDMANN P P.Flutter-boundary identification for time-domain computational aerolasticity[J].AIAA Journal,2007,45(7):1546-1555.
    [15] VINAGRE B,PODLUBNY I,HERNANDEZ A,et al.Some approximations of fractional order operators used in control theory and applications[J].Fractional Calculus and Applied Analysis,2000,3(3):231-248.
    [16] COPPER J E.Parameter estimation methods for flight flutter testing[R].Rotterdam:the 80th Meeting of AGARD Structures and Materials Panel,AGARD-CP-556,1995.
    [17] 唐炜,史忠科.飞机颤振模态参数的频域子空间辨识[J].航空学报,2007,28(5):1175-1180.TANG Wei,SHI Zhongke.Subspace identification in frequency-domain applied to aircraft flutter modal parameter identification[J].Acta Aeronautica et Astronautica Sinica,2007,28(5):1175-1180.(in Chinese)
    [18] KOENIG K.Pretension and reality of flutter-relevant tests[R].Rotterdam:the 80th Meeting of the AGARD Structures and Materials Panel,AGARD-CP-566,1995.
    [19] 沈路,李俊生,王鸿钧,等.改进Hilbert-Huang变换在齿轮故障诊断中的应用[J].航空动力学报,2009,24(8):1899-1903.SHEN Lu,LI Junsheng,WANG Hongjun,et al.Application of improved Hilbert-Huang transform method in gear fault diagnosis[J].Journal of Aerospace Power,2009,24(8):1899-1903.(in Chinese)
    [20] 钟兢军,董聪.环境激励下识别结构模态自然激励-时域分解法[J].振动与冲击,2013,32(18):121-125.ZHONG Junjun,DONG Cong.Natural excitation technique-time domain decomposition algorithm for structural modal identification under ambient excitations[J].Journal of Vibration and Shock,2013,32(18):121-125.(in Chinese)
    [21] 谭博,侯玉,郑华,等.一种改进的矩阵束模态参数估计方法[J].西北工业大学学报,2014,32(3):486-490.TAN Bo,HOU Yu,ZHENG Hua,et al.An improved matrix pencil algorithm for modal parameter identification[J].Journal of Northwestern Polytechnical University,2014,32(3):486-490.(in Chinese)
  • 加载中
计量
  • 文章访问数:  801
  • HTML浏览量:  4
  • PDF量:  597
  • 被引次数: 0
出版历程
  • 收稿日期:  2016-10-31
  • 刊出日期:  2018-04-28

目录

    /

    返回文章
    返回