470 likes | 631 Views
Title. Modeling and Simulation of the C-5 Aft Cargo Loading System. J.B. Lojko Engineer II H.F. Smith Sr. Structural Specialist Engr. Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company - Marietta. Agenda. System Description & Background DADS Model EASY5 Model Solution Development Testing
E N D
Title Modeling and Simulation of the C-5 Aft Cargo Loading System J.B. Lojko Engineer II H.F. Smith Sr. Structural Specialist Engr. Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company - Marietta
Agenda • System Description & Background • DADS Model • EASY5 Model • Solution Development • Testing • Solutions, Part 2 • NASTRAN Model • Conclusions & Lessons Learned
Mechanical System Description • Plug-type Door - Seals Aft Cargo Envelope • Height - 11.4 ft • Width - 19.0 ft • Door Weight 1845 lb • Carries Cabin Pressure Loads in Flight & Cargo or Vehicle Loads for Drive-in Loading • Pressure Door Opens Up for Aerial Delivery & Truck-bed or Down for Drive-in Loading • 2 Sets of Hinges and Actuators, Upper and Lower, Left and Right
Mechanical System Description • Aerial Delivery System • Aerial Delivery System (ADS) Requires Installation of a Pilot Parachute on the Lower Half of the Door • Pilot Parachute and Associated Hardware Weight 558 lb • Supporting Fuselage Structure Found to be Very Flexible
Hydraulic System Description • 3000 psi System • Opening • 2 gpm Split to 1 gpm at Actuators • Ramp Blocker Valve • Balanced Relief Valve • Closing • Initial Lift - Fuse • Slow Down - Fuse
First Contract • Fatigue Problems with Upper Hinge Prompted USAF to Place LM Aero-Marietta Under Contract to Improve the Reliability of this System • Initial Contract 1996 - Less Than Four Month Project • Geometry and Kinematics Created in CATIA • Ground Test Performed to Validate Simulations • Analysis Performed in CATIA Using CAT/DADS • Several Solutions Proposed • Hydraulic Modifications - Slow Door Opening • Structural Modifications - Increase Strength in Selected Areas
First Contract Actuator Load Comparison, Normal Operation, Test vs. DADS
First Contract Actuator Load Comparison, Slow Operation, Test vs. DADS
Second Contract • Follow On Contract 1999 • Incorporate Hydraulic Modifications to Reduce Door Opening Speed • First Attempt Failed • Use DADS/Plant & EASY5 to Analyze All Proposed Hydraulic Modifications Prior to Testing • Using Analysis-Led Design the Second Attempt at Modifying the Hydraulics was a Success
Model Definition • Model Simplified - Flexibility Greatly Reduced • 16 Bodies • 6 Control Elements • Left & Right Actuator Distance, DistanceD, Force • Forces • 1 Contact Force - Door Stop • 2 TSDAs - Lower & Upper Fuselage Stops • 2 RSDAs - Flexibility in Torque Arm/Hook
Model Definition • Approximately 20 Joints • Other • Curves - Door Stop Driver
Model Definition • 62 Components • Main Control Valve • Custom - HV Library • Balanced Relief Valve (Simplification) • Pilot-to-Open Check Valve • Fuses - Variable Orifice that Closes After Specified Volume of Flow is Sensed
Model Definition, cont. • Actuators - AP Component for use with DADS Model Extension Component • Ramp Blocker Valve - Critical that Pressure was Measured • Simple Fixed Orifice
Simulations • Conduct Simulations to Determine the Best Combination of Flow Regulators • Performance Criteria - Load Reduction vs. Opening Time • Constraint - Slowing Opening Time Could Impact Aircraft Operation • Current Flight Profile Could Change for ADS Preparation
Flow Regulators • Manifold, Cartridge Valve Flow Regulator • Fluid Regulators • Modify Current 2.0 gpm Flow Regulators • .5 gpm & 1.0 gpm • MS-Type Flow Regulator • Parker Hannifin • 1.5 gpm & 2.0 gpm
Tests • Baseline Test • Verify Door Operates Properly • 1st Test • 1.0/2.0 gpm Flow Regulators • Regulators Delivered as Specified • 2nd Test • .5/1.5 gpm Flow Regulators • Modified 2.0 -> .5 gpm Could Not Perform as Desired
Test Results • Baseline • Operated Properly • Approximately 10 second Opening • 1st Test • Approximately 19 second Opening • Predicted 21.29 second Opening
Test Results, cont. • 2nd Test • Approximately 22 second Opending • Predicted 40 seconds with Constant .5 gpm Flow • 2nd Test - Better Performance • Re-Run Simulations with Variable Flow Rate Regulator
Loads & Pressures • Goal of First Model • Hydraulic Modification Will It Work? • How Long to Open & Close Door • Not Concerned with Loads • After Test, Model Fidelity Improved to Assist Loads & Structural Analysis Organizations • Variable Flow Regulator Simulated • Balanced Relief Valves Added
Model Definition • Structural Flexibility in Fuselage Modeled • DADS/Flex Used to Model Torque Arm/Hook • Forces • 10 Bushings • MSC NASTRAN Model Used to Find Spring Constants • 4 RSDAs - Damping Only - Friction, Any Uncertainties
Model Definition • Flexible Bodies • Left & Right Torque Arm & Hook • MSC NASTRAN • 1st Simulation Craig-Bampton Modes not Defined Properly • Continue Work Upon Return to Marietta
DADS/Flex • Craig-Bampton Mode Errors • Fixed Constraints • Free Constraints • Axis Orientation • Local z-axis Parallel to Global y-axis for Revo & Cyli Joints • Several Axes Rotated about Global y-axis to Achieve Correct Load Path
Torque Fitting Representation • Torque Fitting and Arms Isolated • Interface Points Defined • Shaft Inboard and Outboard Bearings • Actuator Attach • Door/Arm Contact • Inboard Roller • Restraint Hook • Structure Idealized in NASTRAN • Mirrored for Right Side
Fitting Back-Up Representation • Fuselage Plug from FS 1964 to 2178 Used. Detailed Idealization of Back-up Frame Included. • Five Interface Points Chosen • Actuator Point • Inboard Upper Support Point • Outboard Upper Support Point • Inboard Lower Support Point • Outboard Lower Support Point • Mirrored for Right Side
NASTRAN Analysis Run • Normal Modes • Imposed Deflection Force Matrix Generation • Unit deflections imposed on interface point DOF’s one at a time with remaining interface point DOF’s constrained. • Analyses performed for each side separately for each substructure.
HYDRAULICS & CONTROLS MONODETAIL MODELS DYNAMICS MECHANICAL SYSTEM BUILDUP KINEMATICS (CAT/DADS) Methodology MECHANICAL SYSTEM PROTOTYPE
Integrated CAE • CATIA • Work From One Geometry Model (CATIA) • DADS (CAT/DADS) • Define Load Paths • NASTRAN • EASY5 • Clearly Define Requirements for Interfaces • INTEGRATED CAE WILL SAVE TIME & MONEY