Multidisciplinary Design Optimization of the NASA Metallic and Composite Common Research Model Wingbox: Addressing Static Strength, Stiffness, Aeroelastic, and Manufacturing Constraints
Guardado en:
| Publicado en: | Aerospace vol. 12, no. 6 (2025), p. 476 |
|---|---|
| Autor principal: | |
| Otros Autores: | , |
| Publicado: |
MDPI AG
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | Citation/Abstract Full Text + Graphics Full Text - PDF |
| Etiquetas: |
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
|
MARC
| LEADER | 00000nab a2200000uu 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | 3223857028 | ||
| 003 | UK-CbPIL | ||
| 022 | |a 2226-4310 | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.3390/aerospace12060476 |2 doi | |
| 035 | |a 3223857028 | ||
| 045 | 2 | |b d20250101 |b d20251231 | |
| 084 | |a 231330 |2 nlm | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Dababneh Odeh |u Department of Aerospace and Aircraft Engineering, Kingston University London, Roehampton Vale, Friars Avenue, London SW15 3DW, UK | |
| 245 | 1 | |a Multidisciplinary Design Optimization of the NASA Metallic and Composite Common Research Model Wingbox: Addressing Static Strength, Stiffness, Aeroelastic, and Manufacturing Constraints | |
| 260 | |b MDPI AG |c 2025 | ||
| 513 | |a Journal Article | ||
| 520 | 3 | |a This study explores the multidisciplinary design optimization (MDO) of the NASA Common Research Model (CRM) wingbox, utilizing both metallic and composite materials while addressing various constraints, including static strength, stiffness, aeroelasticity, and manufacturing considerations. The primary load-bearing wing structure is designed with high structural fidelity, resulting in a higher number of structural elements representing the wingbox model. This increased complexity expands the design space due to a greater number of design variables, thereby enhancing the potential for identifying optimal design alternatives and improving mass estimation accuracy. Finite element analysis (FEA) combined with gradient-based design optimization techniques was employed to assess the mass of the metallic and composite wingbox configurations. The results demonstrate that the incorporation of composite materials into the CRM wingbox design achieves a structural mass reduction of approximately 17.4% compared to the metallic wingbox when flutter constraints are considered and a 23.4% reduction when flutter constraints are excluded. When considering flutter constraints, the composite wingbox exhibits a 5.6% reduction in structural mass and a 5.3% decrease in critical flutter speed. Despite the reduction in flutter speed, the design remains free from flutter instabilities within the operational flight envelope. Flutter analysis, conducted using the p-k method, confirmed that both the optimized metallic and composite wingboxes are free from flutter instabilities, with flutter speeds exceeding the critical threshold of 256 m/s. Additionally, free vibration and aeroelastic stability analyses reveal that the composite wingbox demonstrates higher natural frequencies compared to the metallic version, indicating that composite materials enhance dynamic response and reduce susceptibility to aeroelastic phenomena. Fuel mass was also found to significantly influence both natural frequencies and flutter characteristics, with the presence of fuel leading to a reduction in structural frequencies associated with wing bending. | |
| 610 | 4 | |a National Aeronautics & Space Administration--NASA | |
| 653 | |a Load | ||
| 653 | |a Finite element method | ||
| 653 | |a Fuels | ||
| 653 | |a Flutter analysis | ||
| 653 | |a Dynamic response | ||
| 653 | |a Fluid dynamics | ||
| 653 | |a Optimization techniques | ||
| 653 | |a Stiffness | ||
| 653 | |a Aeroelastic stability | ||
| 653 | |a Stability analysis | ||
| 653 | |a Load bearing elements | ||
| 653 | |a Free vibration | ||
| 653 | |a Manufacturing | ||
| 653 | |a Design | ||
| 653 | |a Composite materials | ||
| 653 | |a Estimation accuracy | ||
| 653 | |a Aircraft | ||
| 653 | |a Design optimization | ||
| 653 | |a Multidisciplinary design optimization | ||
| 653 | |a Wing boxes | ||
| 653 | |a Aerodynamics | ||
| 653 | |a Resonant frequencies | ||
| 653 | |a Variables | ||
| 653 | |a Mathematical models | ||
| 653 | |a Algorithms | ||
| 653 | |a Constraints | ||
| 653 | |a Structural members | ||
| 653 | |a Geometry | ||
| 653 | |a Flight envelopes | ||
| 653 | |a Aeroelasticity | ||
| 700 | 1 | |a Kipouros Timoleon |u Engineering Design Centre, Department of Engineering, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB2 1PZ, UK; tk291@eng.cam.ac.uk | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Whidborne, James F |u School of Aerospace, Transport and Manufacturing, Cranfield University, Bedford MK43 0AL, UK; j.f.whidborne@cranfield.ac.uk | |
| 773 | 0 | |t Aerospace |g vol. 12, no. 6 (2025), p. 476 | |
| 786 | 0 | |d ProQuest |t Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Database | |
| 856 | 4 | 1 | |3 Citation/Abstract |u https://www.proquest.com/docview/3223857028/abstract/embedded/7BTGNMKEMPT1V9Z2?source=fedsrch |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |3 Full Text + Graphics |u https://www.proquest.com/docview/3223857028/fulltextwithgraphics/embedded/7BTGNMKEMPT1V9Z2?source=fedsrch |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |3 Full Text - PDF |u https://www.proquest.com/docview/3223857028/fulltextPDF/embedded/7BTGNMKEMPT1V9Z2?source=fedsrch |