The aeroelastic phenomena analysis methods used in the Institute of Aviation for aircraft, excluding helicopters, are presented in the article. In industrial practice, a typical approach to those analyses is a linear approach and flutter computation in the frequency domain based on normal modes, including rigid body modes and control system modes. They are determined by means of the finite element method (FEM) model of structure or a result of ground vibration test (GVT). In the GVT case, relatively great vibration amplitudes are applied for a good examination of a not truly linear structure. Instead or apart from the measure of generalized masses, a very theoretical model is used for mode shapes cross orthogonality inspection and improvement. The computed or measured normal mode sets are the basis for flutter analysis by means of several tools and methods, like MSC.Nastran and ZONA commercial software as well as our own low-cost software named JG2 for the flutter analysis of low speed aeroplanes and for a preliminary analyses of other aircraft. The differences between the methods lie in determining normal mode set, unsteady aerodynamic model, flutter equation formulation, time of analysis, costs, etc. Examples with results comparison obtained by means of distinguished methods are presented. Some works in the field of aeroelastic analysis with nonlinear unsteady aerodynamic in the time domain using Tau-code and ANSYS Fluent software were also performed. Aeroelastic properties of deformed structures, like a sailplane with deflected wings, can be also analysed. The simplest way of this analysis is the semi-linear approach in which the deflections modify the aircraft geometry for normal modes determination.
If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.
 Chajec W. MDM-1 Fox flutter analysis based on GVT Mielec 1994.
 Chajec W. Seibert T. Flutter calculation based on GVT-results and theoretical mass model paper No. IFASD-2011-186 presented at the 15th International Forum on Aeroelasticity and Structural Dynamics 26-30 June Paris 2011.
 Chajec W. A Review of the methods of calculation analysis of flutter based on the I-23 aircraft Transactions of the Institute of Aviation No. 220 2010.
 Chajec W. Aeroelastic Calculation of Innovative Non-conventional Aircraft with Swinging Canard Surface paper No. IFASD-2013-11C presented at the 16th International Forum on Aeroelasticity and Structural Dynamics 24-27 June Bristol 2013.
 Chajec W. flutter computation based on ground vibration test results and mass data Editor: Petrova V. M. Advances in Engineering Research 12 Ch. 5 Nova Science Publishers Inc. 2016.
 Chajec W. Dziubiński A. MSC.NASTRAN ZONA ZAERO and ANSYS FLUENT flutter computation of rectangular wing with control surface – comparison with flutter wind tunnel results Transaction of Institute of Aviation No. 2 (243) pp. 53-72 2016 available at: http://ilot.edu.pl/prace_ilot/?spis_zeszytow/243_2016/5.html 2016.
 Chajec W. Dziubiński A. Modal approach in the fluid-structure interaction in aerospace Advances in Mechanics: Theoretical Computational and Interdisciplinary Issues. Proceedings of the 3rd Polish Congress of Mechanics (PCM) and 21st International Conference on Computer Methods in Mechanics (CMM) Gdansk Poland 8-11 September 2015 Taylor & Francis Ltd. 2015.
 Chajec W. Comparison of flutter calculation methods based on GVT results paper No. 52 presented at session 7th EASN International Conf. available at: http://www.easn.net/documents/ Warsaw 2017.
 Cieślak S. Evaluation of the ground vibration test credibility PhD dissertation Institute of Aviation Warsaw 2018.
 Cieśliński D. Data for flutter analysis in files ILR-33_FIN.nas (a FEM model) and ILR-33_flutter_parametry_lotu.xlsx (flight parameter for flutter analysis) 2018.
 Hollmann M. Modern aerodynamic flutter analysis 3rd Edition Aircraft Designs Inc. Monterey CA 2005.
 Honnons N. Mass data of smoke candles on wing tips with sketch and photos 2016.
 Kießling F. On simplified analytical flutter clearance procedures for light aircraft DLR-Forschungsbericht 89-56 Göttingen 1989.
 Krzymień W. Influence of structure static deflection on its proper vibration Polish National MSC Software Users’ Conference 1999.
 Lorenc Z. Ground vibration test of the Fox sailplane) Institute of Aviation Warsaw 1994.
 MSC FlightLoads and Dynamics User’s Guide. Version 2001.
 Marciniak B. et al. Development of the ILR-33 “Amber” sounding rocket for microgravity experimentation Aerospace Science and Technology Vol. 73 pp. 19-31 2018.
 Nowak M. et al. Methodology and software for flutter analysis of aircraft Report No. 1 Flutter computation methodology ZMCiG IPPT 287/71 a work for WSK “Delta” Mielec 1972.
 Nowak M. Potkański W. Flutter analysis of light aircraft methodology Transactions of the Institute of Aviation No. 65 1976.
 Stender W. Kießling F. Aeroelastic flutter prevention in gliders and small aircraft DLR-Mitteilung 91-03 Göttingen 1991.
 Strohmayer A. Chajec W. Krzymień W. The effect of wing-tip propulsors on Icaré 2 aeroelasticity three papers presented at session 2.3 of the 7th EASN International Conference available at: http://www.easn.net/documents/ Warsaw 2017.
 Rodden W. P. Johnson E. H. MSC NASTRAN Aeroelastic Analysis. User’s guide. Version 68 1994.
 Roszak R. et al. Fluid structure interaction for symmetric manoeuvre base on ultra light plane American Institute of Physics Melville New York 2011.
 Wiśniowski W. Ground vibration tests of flying objects – methods and results analysis Transactions of the Institute of Aviation No. 7 (209) 2010.
 ZAERO Version 9.2 Theoretical Manual ZONA Technology Inc. 2017.
 ZAERO Version 9.2 User’s Manual ZONA Technology Inc. 2017.
 Zboś T. MDM-1 Fox wing stiffness and wing deflection line at n = 2 file wing-box & bend line.xlsx 20.
 ZEUS: ZONA’s Euler unsteady aerodynamic solver for aeroelastic applications ZONA Technology Inc. 2011.