Hostname: page-component-77f85d65b8-5ngxj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-04-19T15:46:53.242Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Structural performance envelopes in load space

Part of: Smart Aircraft International Symposium on Smart Aircraft 2019 Collection

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 November 2020

A. Dharmasaroja ,
C.G. Armstrong Open the ORCID record for C.G. Armstrong [Opens in a new window] ,
A. Murphy Open the ORCID record for A. Murphy [Opens in a new window] ,
T.T. Robinson Open the ORCID record for T.T. Robinson [Opens in a new window] ,
N.L. Iorga  and
J.R. Barron
A. Dharmasaroja
Affiliation:
School of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Queen’s University Belfast, Belfast, UK
C.G. Armstrong
Affiliation:
School of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Queen’s University Belfast, Belfast, UK
A. Murphy*
Affiliation:
School of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Queen’s University Belfast, Belfast, UK
T.T. Robinson
Affiliation:
School of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Queen’s University Belfast, Belfast, UK
N.L. Iorga
Affiliation:
Airbus, Bristol, UK
J.R. Barron
Affiliation:
Airbus, Toulouse, France
*
a.murphy@qub.ac.uk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Visualising the loads that a structure can tolerate provides a key insight into the structural design process, especially for materials and structures that are governed by complex failure criteria. This paper proposes a general method for efficient construction of performance envelopes in load space, and demonstrates the approach with two examples. The performance envelope identifies all possible failure modes, all the redundant and non-redundant structural constraints, and the limiting failure mode in a particular direction in load space. Once the envelope has been constructed, the structural reserve factors can be calculated extremely quickly. In design such envelopes are most useful for structural analysis processes which involve a very large number of load cases, and where the cost of constructing an envelope for a given feature is relatively modest.

Keywords

structural designcharacteristic loadsload spacereserve factorscomposite laminatecomposite failurestiffened panel

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
The Aeronautical Journal , Volume 125 , Issue 1283 , January 2021 , pp. 127 - 150
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Royal Aeronautical Society

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

REFERENCES

Zhang, X.S., de Sturler, E. and Paulino, G.H. Stochastic sampling for deterministic structural topology optimization with many load cases: Density-based and ground structure approaches, Comput. Methods Appl Mech Eng, 2017, 325, pp 463–487. doi: 10.1016/j.cma.2017.06.035CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, W, Li, Q., Steven, G.P. and Xie, Y.M. An evolutionary shape optimization for elastic contact problems subject to multiple load cases, Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng, 2005, 194, pp 3394–3415. doi: 10.1016/j.cma.2004.12.024CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kim, T.U. and Hwang, I.H. Optimal design of composite wing subjected to gust loads, Comput Struct, 2005, 83, pp 1546–1554. doi: 10.1016/j.compstruc.2005.02.002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Houston, G., Quinn, D., Murphy, A. and Bron, F., Design rules for stiffened panel buckling containment features, Thin-Walled Structures, July 2017, 116, pp 69–81, ISSN 0263-8231, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tws.2017.03.006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCune, R.W., Murphy, A, Price, M. and Butterfield, J., The influence of friction stir welding process idealization on residual stress and distortion predictions for future airframe assembly simulations, Manuf Sci Eng, 2012, 134, 031011 (9 pages). doi: 10.1115/1.4006554CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Khodaparast, H.H. and Cooper, J.E., Rapid prediction of worst-case gust loads following structural modification, AIAA J, 2015, pp 242–254. doi: 10.2514/1.j052031Google Scholar
Iorga, L., Malmedy, V., Stodieck, O., Coggon, S. and Loxham, J., Preliminary sizing optimisation of aircraft structures: Industrial challenges and practices, 6th Aircraft Structural Design Conference, 2019.Google Scholar
Niu, M.C., Composite Airframe Structures, 1st ed, Conmilit Press, 1992, Hong Kong.Google Scholar
Niu, M.C., Airframe Stress Analysis and Sizing, Conmilit Press, Hong Kong, 1999.Google Scholar
Murphy, A., Lynch, F., Price, M. and Gibson, A. Modified stiffened panel analysis methods for laser beam and friction stir welded aircraft panels, Proc Inst Mech Eng G: J Aerosp Eng, 2006, 220(4), pp 267–278. doi:10.1243/09544100JAERO51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dharmasaroja, A., Armstrong, C.G., Murphy, A., Robinson, T.T., McGuinness, S.H.M., Iorga, N.L. and Barron, J.R. Load case characterization for the aircraft structural design process, AIAA J, 2017, 55, pp 2783–2792. doi: 10.2514/1.J055544CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gotsman, C., Gu, X. and She, A. Fundamentals of spherical parameterization for 3D meshes, ACM Trans Graph, 2003, 22, pp. 358–363. doi: 10.1145/882262.882276CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zwicke, M. and Gotsman, C. Meshing point clouds using spherical parameterization, SPBG 2004 Symposium on Point - Based Graphics, Aire-la-Ville, Switzerland, 2004. doi: 10.2312/SPBG/SPBG04/173-180CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shewchuk, J., Delaunay Refinement Mesh Generation, PhD thesis, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, 1997.Google Scholar
Cheng, S-W., Dey, T.K. and Shewchuk, J., Delaunay Mesh Generation, CRC Press, 2012.Google Scholar
Barber, C.B., Dobkin, D.P. and Huhdanpaa, H. The quickhull algorithm for convex hulls, ACM Trans Math Softw, 1996, 22, pp. 469–483.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boissonnat, J.D., Mourrain, B., Rote, G., Vegter, G. and Steiner, D.C. Meshing of surfaces, Effective Computational Geometry for Curves and Surfaces, Springer-Verlag, 2006, pp. 181–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daniel, I.M. and Ishai, O. Engineering Mechanics of Composite Material, 2nd ed, Oxford University Press, 2006.Google Scholar
Jones, R.M. Mechanics of Composite Materials, 2nd ed, Taylor & Francis, 1999.Google Scholar
Tuttle, M. Structural Analysis of Polymeric Composite Materials, 2nd ed, CRC Press, 2003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hinton, M., Kaddour, A. and Soden, P. A comparison of the predictive capabilities of current failure theories for composite laminates, judged against experimental evidence, Composites Sci Technol, 2002, 62, pp 1725–1797. doi: 10.1016/S0266-3538(02)00125-2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pinho, S., Modelling failure of laminated composites using physically-based failure models, PhD thesis, Imperial College, London, 2005.Google Scholar
Marcelo, L., Volnei, T. and Dirk, V. A new damage model for composite structures, Composite Struct, 2012, 94, pp 635–642. doi: 10.1016/j.compstruct.2011.08.031Google Scholar
Puck, A. and Mannigel, M. Physically based non-linear stress–strain relations for the inter-fibre fracture analysis of FRP laminates, Composites Sci Technol, 2007, 67, pp 1955–1964. doi: 10.1016/j.compscitech.2006.10.008CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Puck, A and Schürmann, H. Failure analysis of FRP laminates by means of physically based phenomenological models, Composites Sci Technol, 1998, 58, pp 1045–1067. doi: 10.1016/S0266-3538(96)00140-6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Puck, A. and Schürmann, H. Failure analysis of FRP laminates by means of physically based phenomenological models, Composites Sci Technol, 2002, 62, pp 1633–1662. doi: 10.1016/S0266-3538(01)00208-1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dharmasaroja, A. Efficient modelling of performance envelopes and load patterns in aircraft structures. PhD Thesis, Queen’s University Belfast, Belfast, N. Ireland, 2015.Google Scholar
Mathworks, Choosing a solver, [Online]. Available: http://mathworks.com/help/ [Accessed 2015].Google Scholar
Glassner, A.S. An Introduction to Ray Tracing, Academic Press, 1989, London.Google Scholar
Möller, T and Trumbore, B. Fast, minimum storage ray-triangle intersection, J Graph Tools, 1997, 2, pp 21–28. doi: 10.1080/10867651.1997.10487468CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bentley, J.L. Multidimensional binary search trees used for associative searching. Commun ACM, 1975, 18(9), pp 509–517. doi: 10.1145/361002.361007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, Q. and Griffiths, J.G. Least squares ellipsoid specific fitting, Geometric Modelling and Processing, Beijing, 2004. doi: 10.1109/GMAP.2004.1290055CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Niu, M.C., Airframe Structural Design, Conmilit Press, 1998, Hong Kong.Google Scholar
ESDU structures sub-series. Buckling of rectangular specially orthotropic plates, Engineering Sciences Data Units, Data Item 80023, ESDU International.Google Scholar
Bruhn, E.F. Analysis and Design of Flight Vehicle Structures. 1st ed, Tri-State Offset Company, 1973.Google Scholar
Liu, W. and Butler, R. Optimum buckling design of composite wing cover panels with manufacturing constraints, 48th AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics, and Materials Conference, Honolulu, Hawaii, USA, 23–26 April 2007, AIAA 2007-2215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iorga, L., Malmedy, V., Polynkin, A. and Albani, F. Large-Scale Numerical Optimisation for Preliminary Sizing of Aircraft Structures, 5th Aircraft Structural Design Conference, Royal Aeronautical Society, Manchester, UK, October 2016.Google Scholar
Department Of Defense. Composites Materials Handbook: Volume 3. Polymer Matrix Composites Materials Usage, Design, and Analysis. Military Handbook, MIL-HDBK-17-3F, June 17th, 2002.Google Scholar