Dylan Dooner, Nicholas Giannelis, Andrew Neely

DOI Number: N/A

Conference number: IFASD-2024-187

Two-dimensional coupled fluid-structure simulations have been performed using a commercial fluid simulation package to compare the response of a cantilever panel subject to
laminar shock-impingement (UNSW’s HyMAX) with baseline and elevated wall-temperatures at experimentally comparable flow conditions. This comparison serves as a preliminary study on the value of extending the existing HyMAX case to a heated condition. The thermal state was applied using an isothermal wall with altered elastic modulus and density in the structure. During the simulation, the tip x- and y-deflections, and x- and y-forces were tracked to produce timeseries. These timeseries were then processed using perturbation extraction, and autoregressive power spectral density estimation. Additionally, surface pressure coefficient distributions were extracted. From these results it is shown that the hot case experienced over double the y-force and y-deflection at a lower frequency within the same time-frame. At equivalent deflected states, the hot case experienced 8.4% more y-force when deflected down, and 3.5% less y-force when deflected up. This incremental force variance, coupled with a 28% reduction in elastic modulus and 2.5% reduction in density, leads to the aforementioned significant increase in deflection.

Read the full paper here

Email
Print
LinkedIn
The paper above was part of  proceedings of a CEAS event and as such the author has signed a publication agreement to have their paper published in the repository. In the case this paper is found somewhere else CEAS always links to the other source.  CEAS takes great care in making the correct content available to the reader. If any mistakes are found  in the listings please contact us directly at papers@aerospacerepository.org and we will correct the listing promptly.  CEAS cannot be held liable either for mistakes in editorial or technical aspects, nor for omissions, nor for the correctness of the content. In particular, CEAS does not guarantee completeness or correctness of information contained in external websites which can be accessed via links from CEAS’s websites. Despite accurate research on the content of such linked external websites, CEAS cannot be held liable for their content. Only the content providers of such external sites are liable for their content. Should you notice any mistake in technical or editorial aspects of the CEAS site, please do not hesitate to inform us.