Quote:
Originally Posted by kach22i
It is curious that both the Wikipedia entry on "Aeroelasticity" and Aerohead's reply focus on the structural effects of flutter.
Is there a way to exclude the structural effects and just focus on the aerodynamic energy it takes to create and dissipate flutter?
Are these two elements so intertwined that one cannot talk about one without talking about the other?
I suppose it would help if we define an "A" and a "B" situation.
A: Flutter caused by structural deficiency, and why is it bad.
B: Flutter caused by shape/body/form imperfection, and why is it bad.
It seems to be we are talking about "A" when the original poster wants to talk about "B".
EDIT:
The PDF in this link may help explore the different aspects of this topic, I like the pyramid diagram it begins with.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&url=...AAAAAdAAAAABAD
Finding the right question comes before finding the right answer.
Finding the right terms, the correct language is needed to communicate intended thought(s). |
Most certainly.
Thanks for the link, might take few reads for all that to sink in, but this stood out:
"There are no empirical or statistical design
methods for aeroelastic design; flutter is a very
complex phenomenon"