Integrated CAE Solutions Multidisciplinary Structure Optimisation with CASSIDIAN LAGRANGE
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Like this? Share it with your network

Share

Integrated CAE Solutions Multidisciplinary Structure Optimisation with CASSIDIAN LAGRANGE

on

  • 993 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
993
Views on SlideShare
864
Embed Views
129

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
28
Comments
0

4 Embeds 129

http://www.altairhtc.com 102
http://www.altairatc.com 14
http://altairatc.com 11
http://translate.googleusercontent.com 2

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

Integrated CAE Solutions Multidisciplinary Structure Optimisation with CASSIDIAN LAGRANGE Presentation Transcript

  • 1. Integrated CAE Solutions Multidisciplinary Structure Optimisation with CASSIDIAN LAGRANGECassidian Air Systems 2011 European HyperWorks Technology ConferenceDr. Fernass Daoud, Head of Design Automation and Optimization
  • 2. Contents • Introduction: Cassidian Air Systems • Motivation: Challenges & Opportunities of the Airframe Design Process • Multidisciplinary Airframe Design Optimization at Cassidian Air Systems  Traditional Airframe Design vs. automated Multidisciplinary Design Optimization  Multidisciplinary Airframe Design Optimization Procedure LAGRANGE • ApplicationsContents  Overview on past applications  Application to the Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Talarion • LAGRANGE profile in Hypermesh • Benefits of the Automated Airframe Design Process Dr. Gerd Schuhmacher © 2010 CASSIDIAN - All rights reserved Page 2
  • 3. Introduction: EADS and Cassidian Structure EADS Airbus Cassidian EADS Astrium Eurocopter Divsions Tom Enders (CEO) Lutz Bertling (CEO) Stefan Zoller François Auque (CEO) Fabrice Brégier (COO)Introduction (CEO) Airbus Military Domingo Ureña-Raso Cassidian Business Cassidian Cassidian Cassidian MBDA Systems Electronics Air Systems Units A. Bouvier H. Guillou B. Wenzler B. Gerwert Dr. Gerd Schuhmacher © 2010 CASSIDIAN - All rights reserved Page 3
  • 4. Contents • Introduction: Cassidian Air Systems • Motivation: Challenges & Opportunities of the Airframe Design Process • Multidisciplinary Airframe Design Optimization at Cassidian Air Systems  Traditional Airframe Design vs. automated Multidisciplinary Design Optimization  Multidisciplinary Airframe Design Optimization Procedure LAGRANGE • ApplicationsContents  Overview on past applications  Application to the Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Talarion • LAGRANGE profile in Hypermesh • Benefits of the Automated Airframe Design Process Dr. Gerd Schuhmacher © 2010 CASSIDIAN - All rights reserved Page 5
  • 5. Motivation Challenges of the Multidisciplinary Airframe Design Process • The aircraft design process requires the combination of a broad spectrum of commercial as well as company specific analysis and sizing methods: – a broad spectrum of A/C (company-) specific strength and stability analysis methods – company specific aerodynamic and aero-elastic / loads analysis methods – company specific composite analysis, design and manufacturing methods.Motivation • The aircraft design is driven by a huge number of multidisciplinary design criteria (manoeuvre, gust and ground loads, aeroelastic efficiencies, flutter speeds, strength and stability criteria, manufacturing requirements etc.) resulting from different disciplines (loads, flight controls, dynamics, stress, design, etc.) • The design process needs to consider and meet all these design driving criteria simultaneously, in order to determine an optimum compromise solution, i.e. all disciplines and multidisciplinary design criteria driving the airframe structural sizes and the composite lay-up need to be combined and have to interact within an integrated airframe design process. Dr. Gerd Schuhmacher © 2010 CASSIDIAN - All rights reserved Page 6
  • 6. Contents • Introduction: Cassidian Air Systems • Motivation: Challenges & Opportunities of the Airframe Design Process • Multidisciplinary Airframe Design Optimization at Cassidian Air Systems  Traditional Airframe Design vs. automated Multidisciplinary Design Optimization  Multidisciplinary Airframe Design Optimization Procedure LAGRANGE • ApplicationsContents  Overview on past applications  Application to the Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Talarion • LAGRANGE profile in Hypermesh • Benefits of the Automated Airframe Design Process Dr. Gerd Schuhmacher © 2010 CASSIDIAN - All rights reserved Page 8
  • 7. Traditional Airframe Design vs. automated Multidisciplinary Design Optimization Automation of the Global Airframe Development Process 1. Aerodynamic Analysis and Loft Optimization Aerodynamics Optimization LAGRANGE: Automation of Loads 2. Loads Analysis and Sizing Loop and Aeroelastics Load Loops Structures + Loads (2007-11) 3. Structural Analysis and Sizing Structural Optimization (until 2006) Dr. Gerd Schuhmacher © 2010 CASSIDIAN - All rights reserved Aerodynamic Shape + Structural Sizes (2012+) Page 9
  • 8. Traditional Airframe Design vs. automated Multidisciplinary Design Optimization Traditional Sizing Process Aerodynamic Loft, SDC Requirements, Panel Model Inboard Profile Parameter envelope Structural Key- Concept Diagram FCS Mass Loads Dynamic Loads Loop Model Material **) Dynamic Selection modified for Dyn. Loads GFEM*) Flutter Sizing Loop not Property Update Manual Sizing fulfilled (global / local for follow up Loops strength & stability checks) Aerodynamics, Preliminary Design Design Property Selection Stress 1. Loop: (guess / engineering judgement) Check Stress Loads Dynamics *) No mass application => no correlation between stiffness & masses Mass Dr. Gerd Schuhmacher **) Dynamic landing and dynamic gust loads. NOT SYNCHRONISED with static loads © 2010 CASSIDIAN - All rights reserved Page 10
  • 9. Traditional Airframe Design vs. automated Multidisciplinary Design Optimization Multidisciplinary Airframe Design Optimization Process Aerodynamic Loft, Flight Physics Checks with tools Structural Inboard Profile from traditional Concept Loads Sizing Process Panel Model select design Key- driving manoeuvres Dynamic Diagram Check Dynamic Nodal loads MDO Manual Sizing (Loads, (global / local Material Stress, strength & stability checks) Selection Dynamics) Loads GFEM**) Mass Check Balanced Prelim. Dynamic GFEM Checks ***) Aerodynamics Design Property Update Property Selection for prob. follow up Loops Stress 1. Loop : (acc. to mass breakdown) Loads Dynamics *) Within Block 0 dynamic nodal loads will be Check Stress provided externally. Integration into process ongoing Mass **) stiffness & masses in correlation Dr. Gerd Schuhmacher © 2010 CASSIDIAN***) rights reserved - All 1st Global Sizing Loop performed Page 11
  • 10. Contents • Introduction: Cassidian Air Systems • Motivation: Challenges & Opportunities of the Airframe Design Process • Multidisciplinary Airframe Design Optimization at Cassidian Air Systems  Traditional Airframe Design vs. automated Multidisciplinary Design Optimization  Multidisciplinary Airframe Design Optimization Procedure LAGRANGE • ApplicationsContents  Overview on past applications  Application to the Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Talarion • LAGRANGE profile in Hypermesh • Benefits of the Automated Airframe Design Process Dr. Gerd Schuhmacher © 2010 CASSIDIAN - All rights reserved Page 12
  • 11. Multidisciplinary Airframe Design Optimization Procedure LAGRANGEMultidisciplinary Airframe Design Optimization Procedure LAGRANGE Large Spectrum of applications in Military and Civil Aircraft Design Eurofighter A380 Leading Edge Rib Composite Wing & Fin Multidisciplinary Analysis and Optimization Software Tool A400M Rear Fuse- lage & Cargo Door FEM Aerodynamics Skill Tools Design for Manufacturing Statics Doublet Higher Strength Lattice Order Composite Design A350 Wing Aeroelasticity Buckling Models & Manu- Steady Flutter Gust fact. Constraints Postbuckling Dynamics Talarion Stability • Developed by CASSIDIAN Air Systems since 1984 • More then 140 man-years of development A350 Fuselage X31 CFC Wing Dr. Gerd Schuhmacher © 2010 CASSIDIAN - All rights reserved Page 13
  • 12. Multidisciplinary Analyses within the Optimization ProcessMultidisciplinary Airframe Design Optimization Procedure LAGRANGE • Simultaneous consideration of aiframe design driving disciplines during analysis and optimisation: Stress Optimisation Stressing criteria (strength & stability) Optimisation model On basis of GFEM Criteria model (with mass data) Optimisation runs Loads Selected design driving manoeuvres Manufacturing including flight conditions for each Aeroelasticity manoeuvre Minimum & maximum Aeroelastic Aerodynamic thickness / dimensions Dynamics efficiencies HISSS model Composite manuf. rules Flutter speed Coupling model Thickness jumps, etc. Frequency (Beaming) requirements Gust Flutter speed Aeroelastic requirements DLM model Dr. Gerd Schuhmacher for unsteady © 2010 CASSIDIAN - All rights reserved aeroelasticity Page 14
  • 13. Structural Components to be optimizedMultidisciplinary Airframe Design Optimization Procedure LAGRANGE c b b h 1 b e D e Composite & Metallic Stringer • Cross-sectional dimensions Composite & Metallic Skin: • Ply thicknesses • Ply thicknesses / fibre orientation e.g. composite skin (wing, fuselage, taileron) Shear walls & longerons • Cross-sectional dimensions • Skin thicknesses Metallic frames: • Cross-sectional dimensions Stringer-stiffened panels: Dr. Gerd Schuhmacher • Cross-sectional dimensions © 2010 CASSIDIAN - All rights reserved • Skin thicknesses Page 15
  • 14. Multidisciplinary Analysis TypesMultidisciplinary Airframe Design Optimization Procedure LAGRANGE • Multidisciplinary structure optimisation (variable structure & variable loads) Analysis Model HISSS FEM Linear Statics Criteria Model Linear Dynamics Optimisation Model Steady Aeroelastics … Unsteady Aeroelastics … Dr. Gerd Schuhmacher © 2010 CASSIDIAN - All rights reserved Page 16
  • 15. Design Variables and Design CriteriaMultidisciplinary Airframe Design Optimization Procedure LAGRANGE • Multidisciplinary structure optimisation (variable structure & variable loads) Analysis Model HISSS FEM Linear Statics Criteria Model Linear Dynamics Optimisation Model Steady Aeroelastics … Unsteady Aeroelastics Parametric model defining the design c variables: b b • Cross-sectional area of bars (sizing) h 1 • Thickness of shell or membrane b e D e elements (sizing) • Omega profile • Ply thickness of composites (sizing) • T profile • Fibre orientation in composite stacks • Box profile (angles) • C profile • Coordinates of FE nodes (shape) • LZ profile • Coordinates of control points (CAD, NURBS)  Geometric Sizes + • Trimming variables (angles of attack) Dr. Gerd Schuhmacher Composite-Lay-up © 2010 CASSIDIAN - All rights reserved Page 17
  • 16. Design Variables and Design CriteriaMultidisciplinary Airframe Design Optimization Procedure LAGRANGE • Multidisciplinary structure optimisation (variable structure & variable loads) Analysis Model HISSS FEM Linear Statics Criteria Model Linear Dynamics Optimisation Model Steady Aeroelastics … Unsteady Aeroelastics Parametric model defining the design variables: • Cross-sectional area of bars (sizing) • Thickness of shell or membrane elements (sizing) • Ply thickness of composites (sizing) • Fibre orientation in composite stacks (angles) • Coordinates of FE nodes (shape) • Coordinates of control points (CAD, NURBS) • Trimming variables (angles of attack) Dr. Gerd Schuhmacher © 2010 CASSIDIAN - All rights reserved Page 18
  • 17. Design Variables and Design CriteriaMultidisciplinary Airframe Design Optimization Procedure LAGRANGE • Multidisciplinary structure optimisation (variable structure & variable loads) Analysis Model HISSS FEM Linear Statics Criteria Model Linear Dynamics Optimisation Model Steady Aeroelastics … Unsteady Aeroelastics Parametric model defining the design variables: • Cross-sectional area of bars (sizing) • Thickness of shell or membrane elements (sizing) • Ply thickness of composites (sizing) • Fibre orientation in composite stacks (angles) • Coordinates of FE nodes (shape) • Coordinates of control points (CAD, NURBS) • Trimming variables (angles of attack) Dr. Gerd Schuhmacher © 2010 CASSIDIAN - All rights reserved Page 19
  • 18. Design Variables and Design CriteriaMultidisciplinary Airframe Design Optimization Procedure LAGRANGE • Multidisciplinary structure optimisation (variable structure & variable loads) Analysis Model HISSS FEM Linear Statics Criteria Model Linear Dynamics Optimisation Model Steady Aeroelastics Strength (diverse models Unsteady Aeroelastics depending on failure criteria) … Parametric model defining the design variables: Analytical buckling analysis (also theory 2nd order) Damage Tolerance & Repairability • Cross-sectional area of bars (sizing) Local stability analysis (for critical  comp   xxxx s • Thickness of shell or membrane allow parts of cross-section), crippling elements (sizing)  tens   yyyy s allow Displacements (stiffness • Ply thickness of composites (sizing) requirements) • Yamada-Sun • Fibre orientation in composite stacks Constraints for natural frequencies • Puck (angles) aeroelastic requirements (steady, • Tsai-Hill • Coordinates of FE nodes (shape) unsteady): efficiencies, flutter, etc. • …. • Coordinates of control points (CAD, Manufacturing constraints NURBS) Constraints for trimmed flight and • Trimming variables (angles of attack) landing manoeuvres Dr. Gerd Schuhmacher © 2010 CASSIDIAN - All rights reserved Page 20
  • 19. Design Variables and Design CriteriaMultidisciplinary Airframe Design Optimization Procedure LAGRANGE • Multidisciplinary structure optimisation (variable structure & variable loads) Analysis Model HISSS FEM Linear Statics Criteria Model Linear Dynamics Optimisation Model Steady Aeroelastics Strength (diverse models Unsteady Aeroelastics depending on failure criteria) … Parametric model defining the design weff variables: Analytical buckling analysis (also theory 2nd order) • Cross-sectional area of bars (sizing) Local stability analysis (for critical • Thickness of shell or membrane parts of cross-section), crippling • Skin & Column Buckling elements (sizing) Displacements (stiffness for isotropic, orthotropic • Ply thickness of composites (sizing) requirements) and anisotropic skins • Fibre orientation in composite stacks Constraints for natural frequencies (angles) • Post-Buckling for isotropic • Coordinates of FE nodes (shape) aeroelastic requirements (steady, unsteady): efficiencies, flutter, etc. and composite structures • Coordinates of control points (CAD, Manufacturing constraints NURBS) Constraints for trimmed flight and • Trimming variables (angles of attack) landing manoeuvres Dr. Gerd Schuhmacher © 2010 CASSIDIAN - All rights reserved Page 21
  • 20. Design Variables and Design CriteriaMultidisciplinary Airframe Design Optimization Procedure LAGRANGE • Multidisciplinary structure optimisation (variable structure & variable loads) Analysis Model HISSS FEM Linear Statics Criteria Model Linear Dynamics Optimisation Model Steady Aeroelastics Strength (diverse models Unsteady Aeroelastics depending on failure criteria) … Parametric model defining the design variables: Analytical buckling analysis (also theory 2nd order) • Cross-sectional area of bars (sizing) Local stability analysis (for critical • Thickness of shell or membrane parts of cross-section), crippling elements (sizing) Displacements (stiffness • Ply thickness of composites (sizing) requirements) • Fibre orientation in composite stacks Constraints for natural frequencies (angles) aeroelastic requirements (steady, • Coordinates of FE nodes (shape) unsteady): efficiencies, flutter, etc. • Coordinates of control points (CAD, Manufacturing constraints NURBS) Constraints for trimmed flight and • Trimming variables (angles of attack) landing manoeuvres Dr. Gerd Schuhmacher © 2010 CASSIDIAN - All rights reserved Page 22
  • 21. Contents • Introduction: Cassidian Air Systems • Motivation: Challenges & Opportunities of the Airframe Design Process • Multidisciplinary Airframe Design Optimization at Cassidian Air Systems  Traditional Airframe Design vs. automated Multidisciplinary Design Optimization  Multidisciplinary Airframe Design Optimization Procedure LAGRANGE • ApplicationsContents  Overview on past applications  Application to the Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Talarion • LAGRANGE profile in Hypermesh • Benefits of the Automated Airframe Design Process Dr. Gerd Schuhmacher © 2010 CASSIDIAN - All rights reserved Page 25
  • 22. Overview on past applications Eurofighter (1985) X-31A Wing (1990) Stealth Demonstrator (1995) Composite Wing & Fin Composite Wing Full A/C DesignOverview on past applications Trainer Wing (2000) A400M (2004-2006) Advanced UAV (2006 + ) Composite Wing& Fin Rear Fuselage Skin+Frames Composite Wing Dr. Gerd Schuhmacher © 2010 CASSIDIAN - All rights reserved Page 26
  • 23. Overview on selected Applications A350 XWB VTP Optimisation A350 XWB Wing Optimisation Optimum Composite ca. 3000 DV • Optimum Composite Sizing Layout within 2 250 000 Constraints Aeroelastics Sizing of 40 Variants with Month (MAS- 3 FTE * 6 Month for AI Acquisition phase)Application of MDO at Cassidian (2) Toulouse • ca. 20 % weight saving ! A350 XWB Fuselage Optimisation Sec. 13-14 A30X Wing Optimisation • Optimum Composite Sizing • Optimum Composite Sizing of several variants with 2 with 2 FTE * 5 Month FTE * 12 Month (AI UK) • Feasible Design without • > 35 % weight saving weight increase ! (PAG) ca. 15000 DV (compared to AL-design)! 1000 000 Constraints Topology & Sizing Optimization A380 Leading Edge Rib Optimization of Sec. 19, A350 • > 20 % weight reduction ! • > 40 % weight reduction ! Dr. Gerd Schuhmacher Page 27 © 2010 CASSIDIAN - All rights reserved Page 27
  • 24. Contents • Introduction: Cassidian Air Systems • Motivation: Challenges & Opportunities of the Airframe Design Process • Multidisciplinary Airframe Design Optimization at Cassidian Air Systems  Traditional Airframe Design vs. automated Multidisciplinary Design Optimization  Multidisciplinary Airframe Design Optimization Procedure LAGRANGE • ApplicationsContents  Overview on past applications  Application to the Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Talarion • LAGRANGE profile in Hypermesh • Benefits of the Automated Airframe Design Process Dr. Gerd Schuhmacher © 2010 CASSIDIAN - All rights reserved Page 34
  • 25. Application to the Unmanned Aerial Vehicle TalarionApplication to the Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Talarion Unmanned surveillance and reconnaissance aircraft Appr. Dimensions: Length: 14 m; Height: 4,5 m ; Span 26 m Take-off weight : 8000 kg class Performance Loiter Speed: >200 ktas Ceiling: > 43 kft Endurance: > 20 h class Dr. Gerd Schuhmacher © 2010 CASSIDIAN - All rights reserved Page 35
  • 26. Talarion Rapid Fuselage Design Study • Objective:Application to the Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Talarion – Mass estimation Automation of both loops: • In consideration of Loads & Sizing Loop – Flight-Physical constraints – Strength – Stability Aerodynamic Model – Manufacturing FE Model Analysis Model: Fully coupled structure-aerodynamic (Aeroelastic) Dr. Gerd Schuhmacher © 2010 CASSIDIAN - All rights reserved Page 36
  • 27. Steady manoeuvre loads analysis within LAGRANGE Phase 1: Manoeuvre load simulationApplication to the Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Talarion • Requirements: – (full aircraft) finite element model – (full aircraft) aerodynamic model HISSS (Higher Order Sub- and Supersonic Singularity Method) or DLM (Doublet Lattice) panel model – Coupling model: Beaming & Splining Methods used in order to aerodynamic transfer aerodynamic loads to the FE-Model model and structural deflections to the Aero-Model i.e. fully coupled analysis models, without condensation FE model Dr. Gerd Schuhmacher © 2010 CASSIDIAN - All rights reserved Page 37
  • 28. Steady manoeuvre loads analysis within LAGRANGE Manoeuvre Load SimulationApplication to the Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Talarion • Based on the Mission and Structural Design Criteria the flight envelope is established and scanned (103 - 105 manoeuvres) in order to determine the design driving, steady manoeuvres with maximum loads  Down selection of design driving steady manoeuvres (~102 manoeuvres). Dr. Gerd Schuhmacher © 2010 CASSIDIAN - All rights reserved Page 38
  • 29. Steady manoeuvre loads analysis within LAGRANGE Manoeuvre Load SimulationApplication to the Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Talarion • Each design driving, steady manoeuvre can be described by the – Mass configuration and CoG position – Altitude – Mach number – Accelerations and rotational speeds (up to 9 values) • Global Equilibrium of Forces and Moments has to be achieved for these pre-scribed manoeuvres of the elastic aircraft: Fy(inertia) + Fy(aerodynamic) = 0 Fz(inertia) + Fz(aerodynamic) = 0 Flight Parameter Mx(inertia) + Mx(aerodynamic) = 0 My(inertia) + My(aerodynamic) = 0 Mz(inertia) + Mz(aerodynamic) = 0 Dr. Gerd Schuhmacher © 2010 CASSIDIAN - All rights reserved Page 39
  • 30. Steady manoeuvre loads analysis within LAGRANGE Trimming ProcessApplication to the Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Talarion • For each steady manoeuvre (Mass, CoG, Altitude, Mach, Accelerations) the angles of attack (pitch angle, yaw angle and the AoA of the control surfaces are determined by minimizing the residual forces. Flight Parameter Fy(inertia) + Fy(aerodynamic) = 0 Fz(inertia) + Fz(aerodynamic) = 0 Mx(inertia) + Mx(aerodynamic) = 0 antimetric ailerons: sym. elevators: rudder: mainly trim roll axis mainly trim pitch axis mainly trim yaw axis My(inertia) + My(aerodynamic) = 0 sym. elevators: Mz(inertia) + Mz(aerodynamic) = 0 mainly trim pitch axis alfa = - xx ° antimetric ailerons: mainly trim roll axis beta = - yy ° delta aileron = zz ° β: delta elevator = hh ° mainly trim sideslip delta rudder = kk ° β α α: mainly trim lift Dr. Gerd Schuhmacher © 2010 CASSIDIAN - All rights reserved Page 40
  • 31. Under Development Integration of Transient Gust into Optimisation A “gust case” is defined as a combination of:Application to the Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Talarion a) steady manoeuvre: flight condition and mass configuration (c.o.g. position !) (altitude & aircraft speed; usually 1g cruise) b) gust condition: wave-length and up- or down wind gust velocity and incidence angle (usually sinusoidal shaped)  leading to huge amount of different gust cases (up to ~10000), which have to be considered ! evaluated example: time steps ~ (approx. 1000) gust up- wind profile flight condition gust wave (incl. mass configuration) length Dr. Gerd Schuhmacher © 2010 CASSIDIAN - All rights reserved Page 43
  • 32. Under Development Gust Process Many gust blocksApplication to the Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Talarion gust block for selected mass configuration Many gust cases gust case = Database incremental gust analysis (HDF5) • specific mass configuration, evaluation of all • specific incidence angle, gust cases for • specific wave length, selected mass • specific speed, configuration • specific altitude + basic flight attitude • trimmed aeroelastic steady manoeuvre • for specific mass configuration, • specific altitude, • specific speed • to be superimposed to an incremental gust • Implementation of the Incremental Gust Response and the Sensitivities is completed. • Implementation process for the fully automated determination of the design driving time steps and the superposition to manoeuvre load cases is ongoing. Dr. Gerd Schuhmacher © 2010 CASSIDIAN - All rights reserved Page 44
  • 33. Application to the Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Talarion Summary for Phase 1: Manoeuvre, Gust and Landing Loads AnalysisApplication to the Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Talarion • The manoeuvre load simulation of elastic aircraft (fully coupled aerodynamic- structure model) is combined with a trimming process (optimisation task) in order to provide the distributed, elastic aircraft manoeuvre loads. • The distributed aerodynamic and inertia loads are directly applied to the global, non-condensed FE model, providing the stresses and displacements for the subsequent strength and stability analysis. • Gust loads are determined as incremental dynamic response. The time steps Currently under development resulting in maximum local stresses are determined and the resulting deflections are superimposed to the corresponding steady manoeuvres. • Landing Gear Loads are determined by an external Multi-Body-Analysis and then applied to the global full aircraft model in order consider them in the sizing process. • By incorporating the loads analysis into the optimisation platform LAGRANGE both very time consuming loops (loads & sizing) are automated. Dr. Gerd Schuhmacher © 2010 CASSIDIAN - All rights reserved Page 45
  • 34. Talarion Rapid Fuselage Design Study Phase 2: Multidisciplinary Sizing optimisationApplication to the Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Talarion Analysis Model Aeroelastic analysis Manoeuvre Simulation Criteria Model trimming Process Optimisation Model • Strength analysis: • Damage tolerance • Ply thickness of composite skin • Von Mises • Thickness of metallic shear walls • Skin buckling (for composite skin and • Cross-sectional areas of stringers metallic shear walls) • Trimming variables • Column buckling • Flight-Physics: • Force equilibrium in Y, Z • Moment equilibrium around X, Y, Z Dr. Gerd Schuhmacher © 2010 CASSIDIAN - All rights reserved Page 46
  • 35. Talarion Rapid Fuselage Design Study • Optimisation Model:Application to the Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Talarion Composite skin Composite/Metallic Stringer Metallic Shear Walls 2312 elements linked to 43 patches 4212 elements linked to 174 patches 8087 elements linked to 712 45° -45° patches 90° 0° Stacking sequence: 45° -45° 90° 16 layers 174 design variables 712 design variables 0° 0° 90° -45° linked to 3 design variables (1 * 174 patches) (1 * 712 patches) 45° 0° 90° -45° 45° 129 design variables (3 * 43 patches) Total: 1015 design variables Dr. Gerd Schuhmacher © 2010 CASSIDIAN - All rights reserved Page 47
  • 36. Talarion Rapid Fuselage Design Study • Optimisation Model: antimetric ailerons: sym. elevators: rudder:Analysis Model: Steady Aeroelasticity mainly trim roll axis mainly trim pitch axis mainly trim yaw axis sym. elevators: mainly trim pitch axis antimetric ailerons: mainly trim roll axis β: mainly trim sideslip β α α: mainly trim lift 5 design variables for each load case ~ 50 Load cases ________________________________ ~250 Design variables Dr. Gerd Schuhmacher © 2010 CASSIDIAN - All rights reserved Page 48
  • 37. Talarion Rapid Fuselage Design Study • Criteria Model:Application to the Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Talarion Strength Stability Composites: Maximum strain (Damage Tolerance) 36992 constraints * 34 load cases Metallic: Skin & shear wall buckling: Stringer Column Buckling: Von Mises stress 1080 constr. * 34 load cases 419 constr. * 34 load cases 12299 constraints * 34 load cases 1.675.894 strength constraints 50966 buckling constraints Total: 1.726.860 constraints Dr. Gerd Schuhmacher © 2010 CASSIDIAN - All rights reserved Page 49
  • 38. Talarion Rapid Fuselage Design Study • Criteria Model: Flight-Physics Flutter Displacement ManufacturingOptimisation at Cassidian Air Systems U max ttot  max ttot1 ttot2 c b b h M 1 0 b e D e Y  0 x M 0 Z  0 y Layer thickness fitting: M z 0 8layer * 47 steps = 376 ~ 5 Displacement Minimum relative group 5 constraints / load case constraints / load case thickness: 147 Minimum absolute stack ~ 50 load cases 50 load cases thickness: 49 _________________ _________________ ________________ ______________ ~ 250 constraints 1 flutter constraint / ~ 250 constraints 572 constraints mass configuration Dr. Gerd Schuhmacher © 2010 CASSIDIAN - All rights reserved Page 50
  • 39. Talarion Rapid Fuselage Design Study • Skin Thickness & overall Reserve Factor:Application to the Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Talarion Total Thickness Overall Rf Composite Skin Dr. Gerd Schuhmacher © 2010 CASSIDIAN - All rights reserved Page 51
  • 40. Talarion Rapid Fuselage Design Study • Thickness of Metallic Shear Walls, Frames, Floors & overall ReserveApplication to the Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Talarion Factor: Total Thickness Overall Rf All Results are available in different formats (colour plots, Excel Tables, Database etc.) Metallic Shear Walls, Frames, Floor Dr. Gerd Schuhmacher © 2010 CASSIDIAN - All rights reserved Page 52
  • 41. Contents • Introduction: Cassidian Air Systems • Motivation: Challenges & Opportunities of the Airframe Design Process • Multidisciplinary Airframe Design Optimization at Cassidian Air Systems  Traditional Airframe Design vs. automated Multidisciplinary Design Optimization  Multidisciplinary Airframe Design Optimization Procedure LAGRANGE • ApplicationsContents  Overview on past applications  Application to the Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Talarion • LAGRANGE profile in Hypermesh • Benefits of the Automated Airframe Design Process Dr. Gerd Schuhmacher © 2010 CASSIDIAN - All rights reserved Page 53
  • 42. Under Development LAGRANGE Profile in HyperMesh Four distinct decks of the Lagrange input file to be considered ... Design Control Deck ... Chap. 3 LAGRANGE Input deck (control commands) ... ENDCONTROL ... HM user-page Case Control ... Deck ... NASTRAN- BEGIN BULK Chap. 4 Deck ... Bulk Data Deck ... ... ENDDATA ... ... Chap. 5 Optimization Data Deck ... to (optimization data) ENDE Chap. 8 LAGRANGE Profile I/O  loads reduced NASTRAN template  uses standard NASTRAN I/O- procedures (CCD & BDD)  provides extended I/O- features (DCD and ODD)Dr. Gerd Schuhmacher© 2010 CASSIDIAN - All rights reserved Page 54
  • 43. Under Development Automatic Generation of DVs and BFs (defopt) External defopt- usage fully supported manage config-files execution of external binary  defopt writes files to disk  data to be imported  generic process extendible for further external executablesDr. Gerd Schuhmacher© 2010 CASSIDIAN - All rights reserved Page 55
  • 44. Under Development Manual Generation / Editing of DVs and BFs => Analysis => ODD => Model browser => OutputBlocksDr. Gerd Schuhmacher© 2010 CASSIDIAN - All rights reserved Page 56
  • 45. Contents • Introduction: Cassidian Air Systems • Motivation: Challenges & Opportunities of the Airframe Design Process • Multidisciplinary Airframe Design Optimization at Cassidian Air Systems  Traditional Airframe Design vs. automated Multidisciplinary Design Optimization  Multidisciplinary Airframe Design Optimization Procedure LAGRANGE • ApplicationsContents  Overview on past applications  Application to the Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Talarion • LAGRANGE profile in Hypermesh • Benefits of the Automated Airframe Design Process Dr. Gerd Schuhmacher © 2010 CASSIDIAN - All rights reserved Page 57
  • 46. Benefits of the Automated Airframe Design Process • The optimization assisted airframe design process has been established and applied within all design phases of a broad range of A/C projects (civil and military applications; components, large assemblies & full A/C). • The multidisciplinary design optimisation with LAGRANGE leads to a feasible airframe design which satisfies the requirements of all relevant disciplines with minimum weight.Summary • The automation of both loops: structural sizing and loads loop results in an drastic reduction of development time and effort. • The strategic decision for an continued development the in-house MDO tool LAGRANGE is due to the specific aerospace design criteria on one hand (no Commercial Of The Shelf tool available) and the tremendous benefits and competitive advantages on the other hand. • The in-house software availability allows the fast adaption to advanced analysis methods as well as to new technological product and customer requirements. • Further Applications and Co-Operations are welcome ! Dr. Gerd Schuhmacher © 2010 CASSIDIAN - All rights reserved Page 59
  • 47. Thank you for your attention!The reproduction, distribution and utilization of this document as well asthe communication of its contents to others without express authorizationis prohibited. Offenders will be held liable for the payment of damages.All rights reserved in the event of the grant of a patent, utility model or design.Dr. Gerd Schuhmacher© 2010 CASSIDIAN - All rights reserved Page 60
  • 48. Benefits of Design Automation • Multidisciplinary optimisation with LAGRANGE provides a structural design which satisfies the requirements of all relevant disciplines with minimum weight • Automation of both loops: structural sizing and load analysis (through fullOptimisation at Cassidian Air Systems coupling to aerodynamic analysis tools) • Huge multidisciplinary criteria model covering requirements of all structure design driving disciplines • Drastic reduction of development time and effort (>50%) • Reduced cost due to automation of the design process – Estimated Saving for Talarion Development Process: • Traditional Manual Process: e.g. 6 Load Loops (LL) * 1 J / LL * 40 FTE (Stress, Loads, Dynamics, Mass, Design, etc.) = 240 Man-Years • With MDO Process: 2 Load Loops * 0,65 J / LL * 40 FTE = 52 Man-Years • Estimated Saving: 188 Man-Years (37,6 Mill. €) !!! • Product/project specific requirements can be integrated (if required) in the platform easily (Property of CASSIDIAN Air Systems) – Over 3 Million lines of code, 140 Man-Yeas development Dr. Gerd Schuhmacher © 2010 CASSIDIAN - All rights reserved Page 61