The Effects of Airfoil Camber on Flutter Suppression Regarding Timoshenko Beam Theory

Abstract:

The application of Timoshenko beam theory is presented, thereby the effects of airfoil camber can be investigated analytically and numerically by considering rotary inertia and shear deformation in addition to moment of inertia, aerodynamic loading and bending/torsion coupling. Regarding a tuned blisk, the analysis is simplified to a single blade with plunge and pitch DOF. Pressure distribution of the airfoil surfaces and the resulting aerodynamic forces are calculated with ‘ANSYS/FLOTRAN’ during one-cycle time marching at several reduced frequencies. A parametric relation is then achieved by Roger’s approximation including quasi-inertia, quasi-damping, quasi-elastic and lag terms. The final aeroelastic equations are established by bending-torsion and aerodynamics-structure coupling which is solved by state space approach. This procedure is repeated at several free stream velocities until the real component of an eigenvalue equals zero. The latest velocity is the flutter speed. Following this procedure, flutter characteristics of two similar aeroleastic cases are determined considering only one difference in blade configuration; one with cambered and the other with uncambered airfoil. Comparison of these two cases shows the considerable suppression effect of airfoil camber on flutter.

• Periodical: Applied Mechanics and Materials (Volumes 110-116)
• Pages: 1531-1538
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.110-116.1531
• Online since: October 2011
• Authors: Abbas Rahi, Mortaza Shahravi, Darvish Ahmadi
• Keywords: Aeroelastic, Airfoil, Blade, Camberline, Flutter, Timoshenko Beam

References

[1] D. M. Tran, and C. Liauzun, 2006, Frequency and Time Domain Fluid-Structure Coupling Methods for Turbomachineries, unsteady aerodynamics, Aeroacoustics and Aeroelasticity of Turbomachines, Springer, 2006, pp.397-408.

DOI: 10.1007/1-4020-4605-7_29

[2] T. H. Fransson, and J. M. Verdon, Updated Report on Standard Configuration for Unsteady Flow Through Vibrating Axial-Flow Turbomachine-Cascades, 1992, ch. 3.

DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4613-9341-2_44

[3] F. Liu, J. Cai, Y. Zhu, H.M. Tsai, and A.S.F. Wong, Calculation of wing flutter by a coupled fluid-structure method, J. Aircraft, vol. 38, March-April 2001, pp.334-342.

DOI: 10.2514/2.2766

[4] S.M. Han, H. Benaroya, and T. Wei, Dynamics of transversely vibrating beams using four engineering theories, J. Sound Vib., vol. 25, March 1999, pp.935-988.

DOI: 10.1006/jsvi.1999.2257

[5] C. Lawrence, E. Spyropoulos, and T.S.R. Reddy, Unsteady cascade aerodynamic response using a multiphysics simulation code, NASA Glenn Research Center, January 2000, NASA/TM-209635.

[6] T.S.R. Reddy, R. Srivestava, and O. Mehmed, STROP2-LE: A mistuned aeroelastic analysis system based on a two dimensional linearized euler solver, NASA Glenn Research Center, May 2002, LEW-17477-1.

[7] F. M. Karadal, G. Seber, M. Sahin, V. Nalbantoglu, and Y. Yaman, State space representation of smart structures under unsteady aerodynamic loading, in AIAC Conf., Ankara, 2007, AIAC-034.

[8] S. Moffatt and L. He, Blade Forced Response Prediction for Industrial Gas Turbines, part 1: Methologies, in Proc. ASME Turbo Expo, Power for Land, Sea, and Air, Atlanta, Georgia, 2003. Figure 1. Root locus plots of the eigenvalues of the specified blade with uncambered airfoil (top) and cambered airfoil (bottom) Fig. 2 Time simulation of pitching/plunging vibration of the blade with uncambered airfoil (top) and with cambered airfoil (bottom).

DOI: 10.1115/gt2003-38640