Among a bunch of great questions/suggestions/feedback, I took a look at the fore/aft distribution of forces on the two spar tubes. The previous analysis ran a simple 50/50 split of the wing total forces to get things started. What is better? AVL can help provide the answer.
Under a 7g (using this now instead of 6g) load case at CL of 1.5 (assumed CLmax), the element forces can be plotted (seen above). This gives the distribution of CP along the airfoil chordwise and showing the distribution of force. For the root, here is the element force distribution:
Strip # 25 # Chordwise = 10 First Vortex =241
Xle = 3.16670 Ave. Chord = 5.0000 Incidence = 1.7500 deg
Yle = -0.59947 Strip Width = 1.20000 Strip Area = 5.999976
Zle = 4.03135 Strip Dihed. = -2.9939
cl = 1.56703 cd = 0.73643 cdv = 0.67992
cn = 1.66386 ca = 0.47903 cnc = 7.78287 wake dnwsh = 0.10109
cmLE= -0.55324 cm c/4 = -0.13727
I X Y Z DX Slope dCp
241 3.19462 -0.59918 4.03134 0.17282 0.28424 5.05604
242 3.41428 -0.59918 4.03134 0.37261 0.14534 2.82108
243 3.83407 -0.59918 4.03134 0.54628 0.08312 2.09844
244 4.41670 -0.59918 4.03134 0.67141 0.03037 1.77600
245 5.11040 -0.59918 4.03134 0.73689 -0.01091 1.54034
246 5.85353 -0.59918 4.03134 0.73689 -0.04508 1.32883
247 6.58005 -0.59918 4.03134 0.67141 -0.06874 1.10233
248 7.22542 -0.59918 4.03134 0.54628 -0.08517 0.86729
249 7.73230 -0.59918 4.03134 0.37261 -0.09597 0.62162
250 8.05563 -0.59918 4.03134 0.17282 -0.10036 0.35427
Xle = 3.16670 Ave. Chord = 5.0000 Incidence = 1.7500 deg
Yle = -0.59947 Strip Width = 1.20000 Strip Area = 5.999976
Zle = 4.03135 Strip Dihed. = -2.9939
cl = 1.56703 cd = 0.73643 cdv = 0.67992
cn = 1.66386 ca = 0.47903 cnc = 7.78287 wake dnwsh = 0.10109
cmLE= -0.55324 cm c/4 = -0.13727
I X Y Z DX Slope dCp
241 3.19462 -0.59918 4.03134 0.17282 0.28424 5.05604
242 3.41428 -0.59918 4.03134 0.37261 0.14534 2.82108
243 3.83407 -0.59918 4.03134 0.54628 0.08312 2.09844
244 4.41670 -0.59918 4.03134 0.67141 0.03037 1.77600
245 5.11040 -0.59918 4.03134 0.73689 -0.01091 1.54034
246 5.85353 -0.59918 4.03134 0.73689 -0.04508 1.32883
247 6.58005 -0.59918 4.03134 0.67141 -0.06874 1.10233
248 7.22542 -0.59918 4.03134 0.54628 -0.08517 0.86729
249 7.73230 -0.59918 4.03134 0.37261 -0.09597 0.62162
250 8.05563 -0.59918 4.03134 0.17282 -0.10036 0.35427
The X position does not start at zero because I use the nose of the glider as the origin location. An X position of 3.1667 is the LE at the root if you were curious. Plotting the X position vs the dCp value gives the distribution of pressure along the airfoil chord.
Now some simple statics can give the force distribution between the LE and TE. Assuming each CP acts like a force on a beam, the component of load carried by the LE and TE can be found by multiplying the force by a ratio of distance to the beam length. The beam looks like this:
Component of force F acting at a distance xa from simple support A is given by: F_a = F * xb / (xa + xb). Carrying out this algebra using the CP distribution from AVL along the root chord gives 74% on the LE and 26% on the TE. Note that different airfoils and loading conditions will have different CP distributions, so don't use this approximation for any other purposes. Also, this force split does not account for a tilting of the lift vector due to pulling angle of attack, but I will be considering this split sufficient for a static loading case. This is certainly more representative than 50/50...
Note from the AVL plot that the root airfoils are working harder than the tip airfoils, with regard to a CP peak at the LE vs more evenly distributed along the chord. Using the force distribution at the root (75/25) should provide a conservative estimate of the LE spar loading out toward the tips. I may also run 100% on the LE just to see what that looks like.
1 comment:
Hey Dan, sweet analysis. It is interesting to me that the initial results seem to indicate that overall stresses could actually be reduced in the case of the wing/strut relationship by shortening the strut itself and moving its connection point to the wing further amidships. Obviously a large design change but still interesting. Also I too was curious about the max deflections your seeing. Great work, watching with interest!
Post a Comment