Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-nr4z6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-14T05:09:31.637Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Structural wing optimisation targeting economical mission performance of a passenger aircraft

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 April 2023

S. Rechtik Open the ORCID record for S. Rechtik [Opens in a new window]  and
F. Daoud Open the ORCID record for F. Daoud [Opens in a new window]
S. Rechtik*
Affiliation:
Airbus Defence and Space, Rechliner Strasse, 85077 Manching, Germany
F. Daoud
Affiliation:
Technical University of Munich, TUM School of Engineering and Design, Chair of Aerospace Structure Design, Lise-Meitner-Straße 8, 85521, Ottobrunn, Germany
*
*Corresponding author. Email: stephan.rechtik@airbus.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In an aircraft design, optimisation has become a common practice, especially when structural and aerodynamics interactions are considered. Performance measures often used in an industrial setting include structural weight, drag, lift to drag ratio, fuel burn or maximum range. It is a common practice to evaluate such performance indicators only on a handful of sample points. To achieve a truly economical aircraft design it is necessary to include a fully integrated mission analysis during a multidisciplinary structural optimisation, as there is a strong coupling between a flight behaviour and actual operational conditions of an aircraft. This paper makes a case for a modular approach to a mission analysis implementation that could utilise a variety of physical models and their combinations, offsetting some of the computational demands related to a fully integrated mission analysis and allowing to focus resources where they are needed.

Keywords

Airframe designWing designMultidisciplinary optimizationStructural optimizationMission performanceMission simulation
Type
Research Article
Information
The Aeronautical Journal , Volume 127 , Issue 1316 , October 2023 , pp. 1717 - 1736
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2023. 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.)

References

Tollmien, W., Schlichting, H., Görtler, H. and Riegels, F.W. Über tragflügel kleinsten induzierten widerstandes. In Ludwig Prandtl Gesammelte Abhandlungen. Springer, 1961, Berlin Heidelberg, pp 556–561.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haftka, R.T. Optimization of flexible wing structures subject to strength and induced drag constraints, AIAA J., 1977, 15, (8), pp 1101–1106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kennedy, G.J. Parallel Solution Methods for Aerostructural Analysis and Design Optimization. In 13th AIAA/ISSMO Multidisciplinary Analysis Optimization Conference, number September, 2010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reuther, J., Jameson, A., Farmer, J., Martinelli, L. and Saunders, D. Aerodynamic shape optimization of complex aircraft configurations via an adjoint formulation. In 34th Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, January 1996.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, W.K. and Venkatakrishnan, V. Aerodynamic design optimization on unstructured grids with a continuous adjoint formulation, Comput. Fluids, 1999, 28, (4–5), pp 443–480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Samareh, J. Aerodynamic shape optimization based on free-form deformation. In 10th AIAA/ISSMO Multidisciplinary Analysis and Optimization Conference. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, August 2004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Drela, M. Pros & Cons of Airfoil Optimization. In Frontiers of Computational Fluid Dynamics 1998. World Scientific Publishing, 1998, Singapore, pp 363–381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cliff, S.E., Reuther, J.J., Saunders, D.A. and Hicks, R.M. Single-point and multipoint aerodynamic shape optimization of high-speed civil transport, J. Airc., 2001, 38, (6), pp 997–1005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nemec, M., Zingg, D.W. and Pulliam, T.H. Multipoint and multi-objective aerodynamic shape optimization, AIAA J., 2004, 42, (6), pp 1057–1065.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buckley, H.P., Zhou, B.Y. and Zingg, D.W. Airfoil optimization using practical aerodynamic design requirements, J. Aircr., 2010, 47, (5), pp 1707–1719.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Toal, D.J.J. and Keane, A.J. Efficient multipoint aerodynamic design optimization via cokriging, J. Aircr., 2011, 48, (5), pp 1685–1695.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liem, R., Kenway, G. and Martins, J.R.R.A. Multi-point, multi-mission, high-fidelity aerostructural optimization of a long-range aircraft configuration. In 12th AIAA Aviation Technology, Integration, and Operations (ATIO) Conference and 14th AIAA/ISSMO Multidisciplinary Analysis and Optimization Conference. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, September 2012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kenway, G.K.W. and Martins, J.R.R.A. Multipoint high-fidelity aerostructural optimization of a transport aircraft configuration, J. Aircr., 2014, 51, (1), pp 144–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lukaczyk, T.W., Wendorff, A.D., Colonno, M., Economon, T.D., Alonso, J.J., Orra, T.H. and Ilario, C. SUAVE: An open-source environment for multi-fidelity conceptual vehicle design. In 16th AIAA/ISSMO Multidisciplinary Analysis and Optimization Conference. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, June 2015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Botero, E.M., Wendorff, A., MacDonald, T., Variyar, A., Vegh, J.M., Lukaczyk, T.W., Alonso, J.J., Orra, T.H. and Ilario da Silva, C. SUAVE: An open-source environment for conceptual vehicle design and optimization. In 54th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, January 2016.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacDonald, T., Botero, E., Vegh, J.M., Variyar, A., Alonso, J.J., Orra, T.H. and Ilario da Silva, C.R. SUAVE: An open-source environment enabling unconventional vehicle designs through higher fidelity. In 55th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, January 2017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clarke, M., Smart, J., Botero, E.M., Maier, W. and Alonso, J.J. Strategies for posing a well-defined problem for urban air mobility vehicles. In AIAA Scitech 2019 Forum. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, January 2019.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hendricks, E.S., Falck, R.D. and Gray, J.S. Simultaneous propulsion system and trajectory optimization. In 18th AIAA/ISSMO Multidisciplinary Analysis and Optimization Conference, 2017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Falck, R.D., Chin, J., Schnulo, S.L., Burt, J.M. and Gray, J.S. Trajectory optimization of electric aircraft subject to subsystem thermal constraints. In 18th AIAA/ISSMO Multidisciplinary Analysis and Optimization Conference. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, June 2017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jasa, J.P., Hwang, J.T. and Martins, J.R.R.A. Design and trajectory optimization of a morphing wing aircraft. In 2018 AIAA/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics, and Materials Conference. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, January 2018.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Adler, E. and Martins, J.R. Aerostructural wing design optimization considering full mission analysis. In AIAA SCITECH 2022 Forum. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, January 2022.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raymer, D. Aircraft Design: A Conceptual Approach, Sixth Edition. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc., 2018, Reston, VA.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mavris, D. and DeLaurentis, D. Methodology for examining the simultaneous impact of requirements, vehicle characteristics, and technologies on military aircraft design. In 22nd Congress of the International Council on the Aeronautical Sciences (ICAS), Harrogate, England, August 27–31, 2000.Google Scholar
European Union Aviation Safety Agency. Certification specifications and acceptable means of compliance for large aeroplanes, cs-25, amendment 22, 2018.Google Scholar
Risse, K., Schäfer, K., Schültke, F. and Stumpf, E. Ceras - central reference aircraft data system. Webpage, 2014.Google Scholar
Bischoff, M. Theorie und Numerik einer dreidimensionalen Schalenformulierung. PhD thesis, 1999.Google Scholar
Harder, R.L. and Desmarais, R.N. Interpolation using surface splines, J. Aircr., 1972, 9, (2), pp 189–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoffman, J. Numerical Methods for Engineers and Scientists, Marcel Dekker, 2001, New York.Google Scholar
Economon, T.D., Palacios, F., Copeland, S.R., Lukaczyk, T.W. and Alonso, J.J. Su2: An open-source suite for multiphysics simulation and design, AIAA J., 2016, 54, (3), pp 828–846.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dormand, J.R. and Prince, P.J. A family of embedded runge-kutta formulae, J. Comput. Appl. Math., 1980, 6, (1), pp 19–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar