When the panel is under limit cycle oscillation, the location of maximum vibration amplitude always locates at 0.75 of panel length under different dynamic pressure. However, this conclusion is drawn from engineer practice without further investigations on its theoretical basis. Thus, the current study focuses on the theoretical and mathematical basis of this problem. The pattern of the location of maximum amplitude is verified at first by using three numerical methods. Then, based on the law of energy conservation, the displacement function of linear panel oscillation is derived for theoretical investigation. The linear panel consists of two structural modes. Theoretical analysis shows that, under critical dynamic pressure, the generalized displacement responses of two structural modes have opposite phase, the same vibration amplitude and the same vibration frequency. As a result, the superposition of displacement function of two structural modes, which is the displacement function of panel, leads to the occurrence of maximum vibration amplitude at 0.7 of panel length. With more structural modes considered, the location of maximum moves to 0.75 of panel length.
Ye K, Ye ZY, Li CN, et al. Numerical investigation on the mechanism for the effects of plate vibration on the mixing and combustion of transverse hydrogen injection. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 2018; 43: 22636–22648.
2.
Ye K, Ye ZY, Wu J, et al. Effects of plate vibration on the mixing and combustion of transverse hydrogen injection for scramjet. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 2017; 42: 21343–21359.
3.
YeZYMengXZLiuC, et al.Progress and prospects on aeroelasticity of hypersonic vehicles. Acta Aerodynamica Sinica2018; 36: 984–994.
4.
Ye LQ and Ye ZY, Effects of shock location on aeroelastic stability of flexible panel. AIAA J 2018; 56: 3732–3744.
5.
YeLQYeZYWangX. Aeroelastic stability analysis of heated flexible panel subjected to an oblique shock. Chinese J Aeronaut2018; 31: 1650–1666.
6.
Eason TG and Spottswood S. A structures perspective on the challenges associated with analyzing a reusable hypersonic platform. AIAA paper 2013-1747, 2013.
7.
GjerekBDrazumericRKoselF. Flutter behavior of a flexible airfoil: multiparameter experimental study. Aerosp Sci Technol2014; 36: 75–86.
8.
HasheminejadSMAghayiMM. Aeroelastic analysis and active flutter suppression of an electro-rheological sandwich cylindrical panel under yawed supersonic flow. Aerosp Sci Technol2015; 42: 118–127.
9.
ChenGLiDZhouQ, et al.Efficient aeroelastic reduced order model with global structural modifications. Aerosp Sci Technol2018; 76: 1–13.
10.
YangZXiaW. Analytical models, numerical solutions and advances in the study of panel flutter. Adv Mech2010; 40: 81–98.
11.
DowellEH. Nonlinear oscillations of a fluttering plate. AIAA J1966; 4: 1267–1275.
12.
Gülçat Ü. Fundamentals of modern unsteady aerodynamics. The Netherlands: Springer, 2016, pp.200–203.
13.
Nydick I, Friedmann P and Zhong X. Hypersonic panel flutter studies on curved panels. AIAA paper 1995–1485, 1995.
14.
Bein T, Friedmann P, Zhong X, et al. Hypersonic flutter of a curved shallow panel with aerodynamic heating. AIAA paper 1993-1318, 1993.
15.
Selvam RP, Qu ZQ and Zheng Q. Three-dimensional nonlinear panel flutter at supersonic Euler flow. AIAA paper 2002-1485, 2002.
16.
Meng XZ, Ye ZY and Liu C. Nonlinear Analysis on Piston Theory. AIAA J 2019; 1–5.
17.
LeeCYKimJH. Thermal post-buckling and snap-through instabilities of FGM panels in hypersonic flows. Aerosp Sci Technol2013; 30: 175–182.
18.
McNamaraJJFriedmannPP. Aeroelastic and aerothermoelastic analysis in hypersonic flow: past, present, and future. AIAA J2011; 49: 1089–1122.
19.
SinghaMKGanapathiM. A parametric study on supersonic flutter behavior of laminated composite skew flat panels. Compos Struct2005; 49: 55–63.
20.
CullerAJMcNamaraJJ. Studies on fluid-thermal-structural coupling for aerothermoelasticity in hypersonic flow. AIAA J2010; 48: 1721–1738.
21.
ChaiYYSongZGLiFM. Investigations on the influences of elastic foundations on the aerothermoelastic flutter and thermal buckling properties of lattice sandwich panels in supersonic airflow. Acta Astronaut2017; 140: 176–189.
22.
Ye K, Ye ZY, Li CN, et al. Effects of the aerothermoelastic deformation on the performance of the three-dimensional hypersonic inlet. Aerosp Sci Technol 2019; 84: 747–762.
23.
Ye K, Ye Z Y, Feng Z H, et al. Numerical investigation on the aerothermoelastic deformation of the hypersonic wing. Acta Astronaut 2019; 160: 76–89.
24.
Xue R, Ye ZY, Ye K, et al. Composite material structure optimization design and aeroelastic analysis on forward swept wing. P I Mech Eng G-J Aer 2019; 233: 4679–4695.
25.
Spottswood S, Easton T and Beberniss T. Influence of shock-boundary layer interactions on the dynamic response of a flexible panel. In: Proceedings of the ISMA, ISMA, Leuven, 17–19 September 2012, pp.603–616.
26.
Spottswood S, Beberniss T and Easton T. Full-field dynamic pressure and displacement measurements of a panel excited by shock boundary-layer interaction. AIAA paper 2013–2016, 2013.
27.
VisbalM. Viscous and inviscid interactions of an oblique shock with a flexible panel. J Fluids Struct2014; 48: 27–45.
28.
WangQCWangZGSunMB, et al.The amplification of large-scale motion in a supersonic concave turbulent boundary layer and its impact on the mean and statistical properties. J Fluid Mech2019; 863: 454–493.
29.
WangQCWangZGZhaoYX. Visualization of Gortler vortices in supersonic concave boundary layer. J Vis2018; 21: 57–62.
30.
WangQCWangZG. Structural characteristics of the supersonic turbulent boundary layer subjected to concave curvature. Appl Phys Lett2016; 108: 114–102.
31.
WangQCWangZGZhaoYX. The impact of streamwise convex curvature on the supersonic turbulent boundary layer. Phys Fluids2017; 29: 116–106.
32.
McNamaraJJCrowellARFriedmannPP. Approximate modeling of unsteady aerodynamics for hypersonic aeroelasticity. J Aircraft2010; 47: 1932–1945.
33.
HanHZhangCWangF. An approximate model of unsteady aerodynamics for hypersonic problems at high altitude. Chinese J Theoretical Appl Mech2013; 45: 690–698.
34.
LiuWZhangCAHanHQ, et al.Local piston theory with viscous correction and its application. AIAA J2017; 55: 942–954.
35.
IbrahimRABeloiuDMPettitCL. Influence of boundary conditions relaxation on panel flutter. J Fluid Struct2005; 21: 743–67.
36.
SongZGLiFM. Investigations on the flutter properties of supersonic panels with different boundary conditions. Int J Dynam Control2014; 2: 346–353.
37.
LiFMSongZG. Aeroelastic flutter analysis for 2D kirchhoff and mindlin panels with different boundary conditions in supersonic airflow. Acta Mech2014; 225: 3339–3351.
38.
RajaSPashilkarAASreedeepR. Flutter control of a composite plate with piezoelectric multilayered actuators. Aerosp Sci Technol2006; 10: 435–441.
39.
ShiryayevOVSlaterJC. Aeroelastic system identificationusing the minimum model error method. J Guidance Control Dynamics2006; 29: 936–943.
40.
XieDXuMDowellEH. Proper orthogonal decomposition reduced-order model for nonlinear aeroelastic oscillations. AIAA J2014; 52: 229–241.
