CN112380624B - Helicopter cabin skeleton rigidity optimization method - Google Patents
Helicopter cabin skeleton rigidity optimization method Download PDFInfo
- Publication number
- CN112380624B CN112380624B CN202011309583.8A CN202011309583A CN112380624B CN 112380624 B CN112380624 B CN 112380624B CN 202011309583 A CN202011309583 A CN 202011309583A CN 112380624 B CN112380624 B CN 112380624B
- Authority
- CN
- China
- Prior art keywords
- cabin
- cabin skeleton
- optimization
- skeleton
- scheme
- Prior art date
- Legal status (The legal status is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the status listed.)
- Active
Links
Images
Classifications
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
- G06F—ELECTRIC DIGITAL DATA PROCESSING
- G06F30/00—Computer-aided design [CAD]
- G06F30/10—Geometric CAD
- G06F30/15—Vehicle, aircraft or watercraft design
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
- G06F—ELECTRIC DIGITAL DATA PROCESSING
- G06F30/00—Computer-aided design [CAD]
- G06F30/20—Design optimisation, verification or simulation
- G06F30/23—Design optimisation, verification or simulation using finite element methods [FEM] or finite difference methods [FDM]
Abstract
The invention relates to the technical field of aircraft structural strength design and verification, in particular to a helicopter cockpit skeleton stiffness optimization simulation analysis method. The method comprises the following steps: s1: finite element modeling of a cabin skeleton; s2: optimizing, analyzing and modeling the rigidity of the cabin skeleton; s3: and evaluating an optimization result to obtain a cabin skeleton rigidity optimization scheme. According to the method, on the premise of not influencing the airtightness of the cabin door and the normal work of the locking mechanism, a simulation optimization analysis model is established, the maximum influence of unit weight gain on the overall rigidity is an optimization design target, and the optimal layering strengthening scheme of different areas is given.
Description
Technical Field
The invention relates to the technical field of aircraft structural strength design and verification, in particular to a helicopter cockpit skeleton stiffness optimization simulation analysis method.
Background
The cockpit is an important constituent structure positioned at the front section of the helicopter, not only provides an internal space for a pilot, but also is a mounting platform of systems such as helicopter control and avionics systems, and mainly comprises components such as a cockpit skeleton, a skin and a cabin door. At present, the cockpit of a domestic helicopter is mainly made of light composite materials such as carbon fibers, and during structural design, the static strength of the cockpit is generally checked only, and the deformation requirement cannot be clearly given, so that the problems of poor cabin door sealing performance, difficult lock catch closing and the like caused by excessive deformation in the later use process are frequent, and the user experience and even the flight safety are seriously influenced. Therefore, the optimized design for improving the bearing capacity and rigidity of the cabin skeleton is a basic condition for ensuring the normal use of the helicopter.
In the traditional cabin skeleton simulation analysis method, a detailed modeling method is mostly adopted for simulation, the structure needs to be integrally reinforced again during analysis, and then a test is carried out for verification.
Due to the fact that the structural form of the framework and the overall layering scheme are changed, redesign and unnecessary weight increase of the composite material mold are often caused, huge test cost is generated, and the traditional method is long in analysis period and low in efficiency.
Disclosure of Invention
The purpose of the invention is as follows: the invention provides a helicopter cabin skeleton rigidity optimization method, which is characterized in that a simulation optimization analysis model is established on the premise of not influencing the airtightness of a cabin door and the normal work of a locking mechanism, the maximum influence of unit weight gain on the overall rigidity is an optimization design target, and optimal layering strengthening schemes in different areas are provided.
The technical scheme of the invention is as follows: in order to achieve the aim, the helicopter cabin skeleton rigidity optimization method is characterized by comprising the following steps of:
s1: finite element modeling of the cabin skeleton;
s2: optimizing, analyzing and modeling the cabin skeleton rigidity;
s3: evaluating an optimization result to obtain a cabin skeleton rigidity optimization scheme; evaluating the structural scheme and the weight cost according to the result of optimization evaluation, if the structural scheme and the weight cost are not satisfied, repeating the step S2 to perform iterative optimization,
finally, the optimal cabin skeleton rigidity optimization scheme is obtained.
In a possible embodiment, the step S1 specifically includes the following steps:
s101: simulating a cabin skeleton by adopting a shell unit;
the locking point connection between the cabin door and the cabin skeleton is simulated by a rigid body element RBE3, the most severe working condition is considered during analysis, only the main stress part is considered during modeling, the non-main stress part is removed, and the connection between the cabin door and the cabin skeleton is simulated by the rigid body element;
s102: assigning material properties;
inputting a basic layering sequence of the composite material of the cabin skeleton according to actual layering information based on a classical lamination theory, and assigning corresponding material attributes to the shell units;
s103: carrying out boundary definition;
defining the boundary comprises determining a load working condition and determining a constraint condition; the load working condition is determined by taking the working condition with the most serious load as the load working condition; determining the constraint condition means that the whole cabin framework is fixedly connected with the middle fuselage of the helicopter, and 3 degrees of freedom of a connection area of the cabin framework and the middle fuselage of the helicopter are constrained.
In a possible embodiment, the step S2 specifically includes the following steps:
s201: on the basis of finite element modeling of the cabin framework, partitioning the cabin framework;
s202: respectively calculating to obtain initial maximum deformation s for each cabin skeleton partition 1 Longitudinal equivalent elastic modulus and transverse equivalent elastic modulus; e x 、E y Is an optimization design variable related to the number of layers of composite material layering, the laying angle, the layering sequence and the layering material;
calculating the longitudinal equivalent elastic modulus E according to the following calculation formula I x (ii) a Calculating the transverse equivalent elastic modulus E according to the following formula II y ：
Wherein E is 11 Is the longitudinal elastic modulus of the composite material;
E 22 is the transverse elastic modulus of the composite material;
G 12 is the in-plane shear modulus of the composite material;
u 12 the cedar ratio of the composite material in XY direction;
theta is an included angle between the X direction of the reference coordinate system and the longitudinal direction of the composite material fiber;
s203: respectively implementing a strengthening scheme on each cabin skeleton partition;
s204: respectively calculating and counting the longitudinal equivalent elastic modulus and the transverse equivalent elastic modulus of each cabin skeleton partition subjected to the implementation of each strengthening scheme, and the maximum deformation;
s205: calculating the deformation difference deltas of each cabin skeleton subarea before and after implementing each strengthening scheme according to the formula III,
Δs＝s 2 -s 1 formula III
Wherein the maximum deformation after implementation of the reinforcing embodiment is s 2 Initial maximum deformation amount is s 1 ；
Calculating the mass increment Deltam of each cabin skeleton partition before and after the strengthening scheme is implemented according to the formula four,
Δm＝m 2 -m 1 formula IV
Wherein the mass after implementation of the reinforcing scheme is m 2 Initial mass m 1 ；
Defining a parameter 'deformation difference/mass increment' as a deformation mass increment ratio Y, and calculating the deformation mass increment ratio Y according to the formula V;
carrying out statistics on the deformation quality increment ratio Y obtained by calculation before and after different strengthening schemes are implemented on each cabin skeleton partition;
s206: optimization design analysis with commercial software for equivalent modulus of elasticity E in the longitudinal direction x Transverse equivalent modulus of elasticity E y As a design variable, the deformation mass increment ratio Y is used as a function value, and a response surface is formed by fitting;
if the response surface is a plane, the rigidity characteristic is a linear problem; if the response surface is a curved surface with a single peak, the rigidity characteristic is a unimodal nonlinear problem; if a plurality of peaks exist in the response surface, the rigidity characteristic is indicated to be a multi-peak nonlinear problem.
In a possible embodiment, the partitioning of the cabin skeleton in step S201 includes a front region 1, a vertical region 2, and a lateral region 3; the front area 1 is positioned at the front end of the cabin skeleton; the vertical area 2 is positioned at the lower cross beams at two sides of the cabin skeleton; the transverse areas 3 are positioned at the upper longitudinal beams on the two sides of the cabin framework.
In a possible embodiment, in step S203, the reinforcement scheme is performed on each cabin skeleton partition, including adding and/or changing the direction of the lay-up.
In a possible embodiment, the steps S203-S204 are repeated for each cabin skeleton partition, and multiple reinforcement schemes are adopted to obtain the longitudinal equivalent elastic modulus E under each reinforcement scheme x Transverse equivalent modulus of elasticity E y And a statistical value of the deformation mass increment ratio Y.
In a possible embodiment, in the step S3, according to an optimal design objective with the largest influence of unit weight gain on the overall stiffness, and in combination with the response surface obtained by fitting in the step S205, an optimal reinforcement scheme for each cabin framework partition is determined, so as to form a cabin framework stiffness optimization scheme; the smaller the amount of change in the amount of deformation at the same weight gain, the greater the stiffness per unit mass increase and the higher the structural efficiency.
In one possible embodiment, simulation optimization analysis is performed using Hypermesh software.
The invention has the beneficial effects that: the invention provides a helicopter cockpit skeleton rigidity optimization method, which adopts a structure optimization and parameter optimization method under the condition of meeting the strength design requirement, obtains the influence rule of unit weight gain of different subareas on the integral rigidity, effectively reduces unnecessary weight gain, avoids large-scale detail calculation, and effectively improves the design efficiency.
Drawings
FIG. 1 is a flow chart of the method of the present invention
Figure 2 is a schematic view of the skeleton structure of the cockpit of the present invention
Figure 3 is a schematic view of the cabin skeleton partition according to an embodiment of the present invention
FIG. 4 is a graph showing the response of 1 unit weight gain in the front region of the cabin frame to the overall stiffness of an embodiment of the present invention
FIG. 5 is a graph showing the effect of 2 unit weight gain on overall stiffness in a vertical region of a cabin frame according to an embodiment of the present invention
FIG. 6 is a response graph of the effect of 3 unit weight gain on overall stiffness in the transverse region of the cabin frame according to the embodiment of the invention
FIG. 7 is a response graph of the effect of unit weight gain of the cabin skeleton on the overall stiffness according to the embodiment of the invention
Wherein:
1-a front region; 2-vertical region; 3-lateral region
Detailed Description
In order to make the objects, technical solutions and advantages of the present invention more apparent, the present invention is further described in detail below with reference to the accompanying drawings and embodiments. It should be understood that the specific embodiments described herein are merely illustrative of the invention and are not intended to limit the invention.
As shown in fig. 1, a helicopter cabin skeleton stiffness optimization method is characterized by comprising the following steps:
s1: finite element modeling of a cabin skeleton;
s2: optimizing, analyzing and modeling the rigidity of the cabin skeleton;
s3: evaluating an optimization result to obtain a cabin skeleton rigidity optimization scheme; and (4) evaluating the structural scheme and the weight cost according to the result of optimization evaluation, and if the structural scheme and the weight cost are not satisfactory, repeating the step S2 to perform iterative optimization to finally obtain the optimal cabin skeleton stiffness optimization scheme.
In a possible embodiment, the step S1 specifically includes the following steps:
s101: simulating a cabin skeleton by adopting a shell unit;
the locking point connection between the cabin door and the cabin skeleton is simulated by using a rigid body element RBE3, the most severe working condition is considered during analysis, only main stressed components are considered during modeling, non-main stressed components are removed, and the connection between the cabin door and the cabin skeleton is simulated by using the rigid body element;
s102: assigning material properties;
inputting a basic layering sequence of the composite material of the cabin skeleton according to actual layering information based on a classical lamination theory, and assigning corresponding material attributes to the shell units;
s103: carrying out boundary definition;
defining the boundary comprises determining a load working condition and determining a constraint condition; the load working condition is determined by taking the working condition with the most serious load as the load working condition; determining the constraint condition means that the whole cabin framework is fixedly connected with the middle fuselage of the helicopter, and 3 degrees of freedom of a connection area of the cabin framework and the middle fuselage of the helicopter are constrained.
In a possible embodiment, the step S2 specifically includes the following steps:
s201: on the basis of finite element modeling of the cabin framework, partitioning the cabin framework;
s202: respectively calculating to obtain initial maximum deformation s for each cabin skeleton partition 1 Longitudinal equivalent elastic modulus and transverse equivalent elastic modulus;
calculating the equivalent longitudinal elastic modulus E according to the following calculation formula I x (ii) a Calculating the transverse equivalent elastic modulus E according to the following formula II y ：
Wherein, E 11 Is the longitudinal elastic modulus of the composite material;
E 22 is the transverse elastic modulus of the composite material;
G 12 is the in-plane shear modulus of the composite material;
u 12 the cedar ratio of the composite material in XY direction;
theta is an included angle between the X direction of the reference coordinate system and the longitudinal direction of the composite material fiber;
s203: respectively implementing a strengthening scheme on each cabin skeleton partition;
s204: respectively calculating and counting the longitudinal equivalent elastic modulus and the transverse equivalent elastic modulus of each cabin skeleton partition subjected to the implementation of each strengthening scheme, and the maximum deformation; e x 、E y Is optimized in design variables, and the number of layers and the laying angle of the composite material laying layerThe layering sequence and the layering material;
s205: calculating the deformation difference deltas of each cabin skeleton subarea before and after implementing each strengthening scheme according to the formula III,
Δs＝s 2 -s 1 formula III
Wherein the maximum deformation after implementation of the reinforcing embodiment is s 2 Initial maximum deflection of s 1 ；
The mass difference am of each cabin skeleton partition before and after implementing the reinforcement scheme is calculated according to equation four,
Δm＝m 2 -m 1 formula IV
Wherein the mass after implementation of the reinforcing scheme is m 2 Initial mass m 1 ；
Defining a parameter 'deformation difference/mass increment' as a deformation mass increment ratio Y, and calculating the deformation mass increment ratio Y according to the formula V;
carrying out statistics on the deformation quality increment ratio Y obtained by calculation before and after the strengthening scheme is implemented on each cabin skeleton partition;
s206: optimization design analysis with commercial software for equivalent modulus of elasticity E in the longitudinal direction x Transverse equivalent modulus of elasticity E y As a design variable, taking the deformation mass increment ratio Y as a function value, and fitting to form a response surface;
if the response surface is a plane, the rigidity characteristic is shown to be a linear problem; if the response surface is a curved surface with a single peak, the rigidity characteristic is a unimodal nonlinear problem; if a plurality of peaks exist in the response surface, the rigidity characteristic is indicated to be a multi-peak nonlinear problem.
In one possible embodiment, the first step in step S2 is to partition the cabin skeleton, including a front region 1, a vertical region 2, and a lateral region 3; the front area 1 is positioned at the front end of the cabin skeleton; the vertical area 2 is positioned at the lower cross beams at two sides of the cabin skeleton; the transverse areas 3 are positioned at the upper longitudinal beams on the two sides of the cabin framework.
In a possible embodiment, in step S203, the reinforcement scheme is performed on each cabin skeleton partition, including adding and/or changing the direction of the lay-up.
In a possible embodiment, the steps S203-S204 are repeated for each cabin skeleton partition, and multiple reinforcement schemes are adopted to obtain the longitudinal equivalent elastic modulus E under each reinforcement scheme x Transverse equivalent modulus of elasticity E y And a statistical value of the deformation mass increment ratio Y.
In a possible embodiment, in the step S3, according to an optimal design objective with the largest influence of unit weight gain on the overall stiffness, and in combination with the response surface obtained by fitting in the step S205, an optimal reinforcement scheme for each cabin framework partition is determined, so as to form a cabin framework stiffness optimization scheme; the smaller the amount of change in the amount of deformation at the same weight gain, the greater the stiffness per unit mass increase, and the greater the structural efficiency.
In one possible embodiment, simulation optimization analysis is performed using Hypermesh software.
Example 1
Taking the front area 1 as an example, performing simulation optimization analysis by adopting Hypermesh software, and firstly giving an initial ply [45C1/0C2/0C1/0C1/0C2/45C1 ]]Calculating to obtain the initial longitudinal equivalent elastic modulus E x =11844.5MPa, equivalent modulus of elasticity E in transverse direction y =7515.2MPa, initial maximum deformation 10.2mm;
the implementation of the reinforcement scheme is additional layering, and the reinforcement scheme is specific [45C1/0C2/0C1/0C1/0C1/0C2/45C1]The equivalent modulus of elasticity E in the longitudinal direction after implementation of the reinforcing embodiment is calculated x =21873.8MPa, equivalent modulus of elasticity E in transverse direction y =16625.1MPa, deformation difference from initial maximum deformation amount of 0.64mm, mass increment from initial mass of 5.03E-04t; as shown in Table 1, the equivalent modulus of elasticity E in the machine direction under various reinforcing schemes was calculated and counted x Transverse equivalent modulus of elasticity E y And a deformation mass increment ratio Y, other reinforcement scheme calculation method and the above methodThe same; with E x ，E y As a design variable, the deformation mass increment ratio Y is taken as a function value, and the fitting function is
Constructing a corresponding response surface as shown in figure 4,
according to an optimal design target with the maximum influence of unit weight gain on the overall rigidity and a response surface obtained by fitting, obtaining a reinforcement scheme corresponding to Y of 1.26E +03 as an optimal reinforcement scheme of the front area 1;
the optimization process of other subareas of the cabin skeleton is analogized in turn, and the longitudinal equivalent elastic modulus E x Transverse equivalent modulus of elasticity E y And the deformation mass increment ratio Y statistics are shown in tables 2 and 3;
table 1 is a frontal area optimization scheme for the inventive cockpit skeleton, with results corresponding to fig. 4.
TABLE 1 optimization of the frontal area of the cabin skeleton
Table 2 shows the vertical domain optimization of the inventive cabin skeleton, the results corresponding to fig. 5.
TABLE 2 vertical region optimization scheme for cabin skeleton
Table 3 is a lateral zone optimization scheme of the inventive cockpit skeleton, the results corresponding to fig. 6.
TABLE 3 lateral region optimization scheme for cockpit skeleton
Table 4 shows the cabin skeleton optimization scheme of the present invention, with the results corresponding to fig. 7.
TABLE 4 optimization scheme for cabin skeleton
The above embodiments are only used for illustrating the technical solutions of the present application, and not for limiting the same; although the present application has been described in detail with reference to the foregoing embodiments, it should be understood by those of ordinary skill in the art that: the technical solutions described in the foregoing embodiments may still be modified, or some technical features may be equally replaced; such modifications and substitutions do not substantially depart from the spirit and scope of the embodiments of the present application, and are intended to be included within the scope of the present application.
Claims (5)
1. A helicopter cockpit skeleton rigidity optimization method is characterized by comprising the following steps:
s1: finite element modeling of a cabin skeleton; the step S1 specifically includes the steps of:
s101: simulating a cabin skeleton by adopting a shell unit;
the locking point connection between the cabin door and the cabin skeleton is simulated by a rigid body element RBE3, the most severe working condition is considered during analysis, only the main stress part is considered during modeling, the non-main stress part is removed, and the connection between the cabin door and the cabin skeleton is simulated by the rigid body element;
s102: assigning material properties;
inputting a basic layering sequence of the composite material of the cabin skeleton according to actual layering information based on a classical lamination theory, and assigning corresponding material attributes to the shell units;
s103: carrying out boundary definition;
defining the boundary comprises determining a load working condition and determining a constraint condition; the load working condition is determined by taking the working condition with the most serious load as the load working condition; determining constraint conditions, namely, fixedly connecting the whole cabin framework with a middle fuselage of the helicopter, and constraining 3 degrees of freedom of a connecting area of the cabin framework and the middle fuselage of the helicopter;
s2: optimizing, analyzing and modeling the rigidity of the cabin skeleton;
the step S2 specifically includes the steps of:
s201: on the basis of finite element modeling of the cabin framework, partitioning the cabin framework;
s202: respectively calculating to obtain initial maximum deformation, longitudinal equivalent elastic modulus and transverse equivalent elastic modulus aiming at each cabin skeleton partition;
calculating the equivalent longitudinal elastic modulus E according to the following calculation formula I x (ii) a Calculating the transverse equivalent elastic modulus E according to the following formula II y ：
Wherein E is 11 Is the longitudinal elastic modulus of the composite material;
E 22 is the transverse elastic modulus of the composite material;
G 12 is the in-plane shear modulus of the composite material;
u 12 the cedar ratio of the composite material in XY direction;
theta is an included angle between the X direction of the reference coordinate system and the longitudinal direction of the composite material fiber;
s203: respectively implementing a strengthening scheme on each cabin skeleton partition; in step S203, the step of performing a reinforcement scheme on each cabin skeleton partition includes adding a layer and/or changing a layer direction;
s204: respectively calculating and counting the longitudinal equivalent elastic modulus and the transverse equivalent elastic modulus of each cabin skeleton partition subjected to the implementation of each strengthening scheme, and the maximum deformation; e x 、E y Is an optimization design variable related to the number of layers of composite material layering, the laying angle, the layering sequence and the layering material;
s205: calculating the deformation difference deltas of each cabin skeleton subarea before and after implementing each strengthening scheme according to the formula III,
Δs＝s 2 -s 1 formula III
Wherein the maximum deformation after implementation of the reinforcing embodiment is s 2 Initial maximum deflection of s 1 ；
The mass difference am of each cabin skeleton partition before and after implementing the reinforcement scheme is calculated according to equation four,
Δm＝m 2 -m 1 formula IV
Wherein the mass after implementation of the reinforcing scheme is m 2 Initial mass m 1 ；
Defining a parameter 'deformation difference/mass increment' as a deformation mass increment ratio Y, and calculating the deformation mass increment ratio Y according to the formula V;
carrying out statistics on the deformation quality increment ratio Y obtained by calculation before and after the strengthening scheme is implemented on each cabin skeleton partition;
s206: optimization design analysis with commercial software for equivalent modulus of elasticity E in the longitudinal direction x Transverse equivalent modulus of elasticity E y As a design variable, the deformation mass increment ratio Y is used as a function value, and a response surface is formed by fitting;
s3: evaluating an optimization result to obtain a cabin skeleton rigidity optimization scheme; and (4) evaluating the structural scheme and the weight cost according to the result of optimization evaluation, and if the structural scheme and the weight cost are not satisfactory, repeating the step S2 to perform iterative optimization to finally obtain the optimal cabin skeleton stiffness optimization scheme.
2. A helicopter cabin skeleton stiffness optimization method according to claim 1, characterized by the first step in step S2 of zoning the cabin skeleton, comprising a front zone (1), a vertical zone (2), a lateral zone (3); the front area (1) is positioned at the front end of the cabin skeleton; the vertical areas (2) are positioned at the cross beams at the lower parts of two sides of the cabin skeleton; the transverse areas (3) are positioned at the upper longitudinal beams on the two sides of the cabin framework.
3. The method for optimizing the rigidity of the helicopter cabin skeleton according to claim 2, characterized in that the steps S203-S204 are repeated for each cabin skeleton partition, and a plurality of reinforcement schemes are adopted to obtain the longitudinal equivalent elastic modulus E under each reinforcement scheme x Transverse equivalent modulus of elasticity E y And a statistical value of the deformation mass increment ratio Y.
4. A helicopter cabin skeleton stiffness optimization method according to any one of claims 1-3, characterized in that in step S3, according to the optimization design objective that the unit weight gain has the largest influence on the overall stiffness, the optimal reinforcement scheme for each cabin skeleton partition is determined, so as to form a cabin skeleton stiffness optimization scheme; the smaller the amount of change in the amount of deformation at the same weight gain, the greater the stiffness per unit mass increase, and the greater the structural efficiency.
5. The helicopter cabin skeleton stiffness optimization method of claim 1, wherein Hypermesh software is used for simulation optimization analysis.
Priority Applications (1)
| Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
|---|---|---|---|
| CN202011309583.8A CN112380624B (en) | 2020-11-20 | 2020-11-20 | Helicopter cabin skeleton rigidity optimization method |
Applications Claiming Priority (1)
| Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
|---|---|---|---|
| CN202011309583.8A CN112380624B (en) | 2020-11-20 | 2020-11-20 | Helicopter cabin skeleton rigidity optimization method |
Publications (2)
| Publication Number | Publication Date |
|---|---|
| CN112380624A CN112380624A (en) | 2021-02-19 |
| CN112380624B true CN112380624B (en) | 2022-10-28 |
Family
ID=74584508
Family Applications (1)
| Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| CN202011309583.8A Active CN112380624B (en) | 2020-11-20 | 2020-11-20 | Helicopter cabin skeleton rigidity optimization method |
Country Status (1)
| Country | Link |
|---|---|
| CN (1) | CN112380624B (en) |
Families Citing this family (1)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN113636098B (en) * | 2021-10-18 | 2022-01-25 | 成都飞机工业（集团）有限责任公司 | Design method of process stiffening piece for aircraft component |
Citations (1)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN107563094A (en) * | 2017-09-21 | 2018-01-09 | 上海交通大学 | Three-dimensional woven carbon fibre composite fender optimization method |
Family Cites Families (4)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| US9274036B2 (en) * | 2013-12-13 | 2016-03-01 | King Fahd University Of Petroleum And Minerals | Method and apparatus for characterizing composite materials using an artificial neural network |
| CN107016182A (en) * | 2017-03-30 | 2017-08-04 | 中国航空工业集团公司西安飞机设计研究所 | A kind of composite hatch door optimization method |
| CN107844669A (en) * | 2017-12-01 | 2018-03-27 | 中国直升机设计研究所 | A kind of full machine static(al) FEM updating of helicopter and verification method |
| CN110704953B (en) * | 2019-09-30 | 2020-08-14 | 西北工业大学 | Analysis method for design sensitivity of static air elastic energy of high-aspect-ratio wing |
-
2020
- 2020-11-20 CN CN202011309583.8A patent/CN112380624B/en active Active
Patent Citations (1)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN107563094A (en) * | 2017-09-21 | 2018-01-09 | 上海交通大学 | Three-dimensional woven carbon fibre composite fender optimization method |
Also Published As
| Publication number | Publication date |
|---|---|
| CN112380624A (en) | 2021-02-19 |
Similar Documents
| Publication | Publication Date | Title |
|---|---|---|
| Kenway et al. | Aerostructural optimization of the Common Research Model configuration | |
| CN107679343B (en) | Optimization method of continuous fiber reinforced thermosetting composite material seat framework | |
| Vitali et al. | Multi-fidelity design of stiffened composite panel with a crack | |
| CN106874573B (en) | Design method of partitioned variable-thickness composite material laminated plate | |
| CN105184390A (en) | Integrated optimization method of static strength, rigidity, stability of wallboard structure | |
| CN108829914B (en) | Structure and process integrated design method of FRP structural member | |
| CN112380624B (en) | Helicopter cabin skeleton rigidity optimization method | |
| KR20120082112A (en) | Analysis system and method for composite materials | |
| CN105447269A (en) | Non-structural mass trimming method for airplane in steady overload state | |
| CN108959685A (en) | A kind of equivalent modeling method of solar wing windsurfing | |
| CN111898295A (en) | Finite element modeling method of variable-rigidity composite laminated plate | |
| Lu et al. | Fatigue damage modeling in laminated composite by using Rx-FEM and strength tracking method | |
| CN114169144A (en) | Random load spectrum compiling method under force-heat-vibration composite environment | |
| CN112131770B (en) | Functional gradient continuum structure lightweight design method considering reliability | |
| CN110334364B (en) | Composite structural strength checking system | |
| CN113987689A (en) | Composite material grid reinforced pressure frame comprehensive optimization design method based on shape modification | |
| Carrera et al. | A component-wise approach in structural analysis | |
| Chedrik | Two-level design optimization of aircraft structures under stress, buckling and aeroelasticity constraints | |
| CN112149322B (en) | Finite element analysis method for curing deformation of composite material reinforced structure | |
| CN114912306A (en) | Modeling method of 2.5D woven composite material flat plate structure multi-scale model | |
| Zink et al. | Robust design for aeroelastically tailored/active aeroelastic wing | |
| Corvino et al. | Weight and cost oriented multi-objective optimisation of impact damage resistant stiffened composite panels | |
| Chu et al. | The Optimization Process of Aircraft Side Panel’s Weight Reduction Based on Orthogonal Experiment | |
| Wang et al. | Research on the Optimization of Automobile Plastic Front Frame Structure | |
| Lionetti | MDO analysis of composite wing |
Legal Events
| Date | Code | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| PB01 | Publication | ||
| PB01 | Publication | ||
| SE01 | Entry into force of request for substantive examination | ||
| SE01 | Entry into force of request for substantive examination | ||
| GR01 | Patent grant | ||
| GR01 | Patent grant |