TRANSDUCER GEOMETRY FOR AMPLIFICATION OF AXIAL LOAD RESPONSE AND SUPPRESSION OF NON-AXIAL RESPONSE

Abstract

This present disclosure is about a wind tunnel balance axial section. A wind tunnel balance is a sensor that measures six force/moment components from a test model in a wind tunnel. An axial section, one of the six measurement sections in the balance, is the hardest section to design because it is often required to measure an axial force which is much smaller than other force components. Therefore, there is a specific design requirement for the axial section to selectively amplify the axial force response and suppress the non-axial responses. This disclosure presents a sensor mechanism composed of elastic linkages to achieve this design requirements for the axial section.

Claims

1. A strain gauge assembly comprising: a base with a ground end and a model end positioned along a major axis; a pair of measuring beams substantially elongate in shape positioned oblique to the base's major axis; a series of strain gauges affixed to the measuring beams and configured to measure strain experienced by the measuring beams; and a series of flexures operatively connecting the measuring beams to the ground end and model end of the base; wherein, the series of flexures are arranged and configured to elastically deform and amplify the strain experienced by at least one strain gauge from the series of strain gauges when the base experiences an axial load.

2. The strain gauge assembly of claim 1, wherein the series of flexures comprises a substantially X-shaped flexure operatively connecting a first measuring beam from the pair of measuring beams to a second measuring beam from the pair of measuring beams.

3. The strain gauge assembly of claim 1, wherein the series of flexures comprises a pair of ground end flexures operatively connecting the ground end of the base to one of the measuring beams from the pair of measuring beams, and a pair of model end flexures operatively connecting the model end of the base to the other measuring beam from the pair of measuring beams.

4. The strain gauge assembly of claim 3, wherein the pair of ground end flexures are operatively connected to each other by an intermediate ground end flexure, and the pair of model end flexures are operatively connected to each other by an intermediate model end flexure.

5. The strain gauge assembly of claim 3, wherein the strain gauge further comprises a pair of intermediate bodies respectively disposed between and operatively connecting the measuring beams and the end flexures.

6. The strain gauge assembly of claim 1, wherein the series of flexures includes a central flexure substantially parallel to the base's major axis operatively connecting the ground end of the base to the model end of the base.

7. The strain gauge assembly of claim 1, wherein the measuring beams are substantially trapezoidal in shape.

8. The strain gauge assembly of claim 1, wherein the flexures that make up the series of flexures include substantially elliptical fillets on either end.

9. The strain gauge assembly of claim 1, wherein at least one strain gauge from the series of strain gauges is a Wheatstone bridge.

10. The strain gauge assembly of claim 1, wherein the base, the pair of measuring beams, and series of flexures are formed of a single isotropic material.

Description

DESCRIPTION OF DRAWINGS

[0019] The patent or application file contains at least one drawing executed in color. Copies of this patent or patent application publication with color drawing(s) will be provided by the Office upon request and payment of the necessary fee.

[0020] FIG. 1 is the traditional wind tunnel balance.

[0021] FIG. 2 is the presently disclosed axial section of a wind tunnel balance using topology optimization.

[0022] FIG. 3 shows the sensor areas in 3D.

[0023] FIG. 4 shows the deformation of the axial section under axial load.

[0024] FIG. 5 shows the deformation of the axial section under normal load.

[0025] FIG. 6 shows the gauging strategy used between the two measuring beams.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0026] FIG. 2 shows the disclosed axial section of the internal wind tunnel balance. Topology optimization was used to design a 2D geometry that generates high strain reading under axial load and small strain reading under normal load. One can review the detailed topology optimization formulation in [21], but this document is focused on explaining the working principle of this new geometry. The design is symmetric about the Y axis considering all combinations of changeable load directions. The flexure points are numbered on the left half (ground end) of the symmetry plane from (7) to (14) as shown in FIG. 2. Flexures (7) and (9) are the outermost flexures, referred to as ground end flexures, an intermediate ground end flexure (8) connects flexures (7) and (9), upper flexure (10) and central flexure (11) are the upper and lower extremities, (12) is the measuring beam (where strain gauges are located), and (13) and (14) form the X-shaped flexure. All referenced flexures have corresponding mirrored flexures on the right half (model half) of the base, except for flexure (11) which intersects the central Y axis. The origin and coordinate system are marked by (15). The 2D design is extruded about the Z axis (outwards from page) with the thickness being the same dimension as the height along the Y axis (as shown in FIG. 3). It is noted that this flexural geometry uses isotropic properties and there is no need to combine different kinds of materials, so it can be easily manufactured using EDM cutting or 3D printing. Those of ordinally skill in the art would recognize that many different types of rigid materials having the necessary elastic properties may be used to form the disclosed geometry, including various isotropic metal alloys and composites.

[0027] In this article, the working principle is described using the numbering of the left half of the symmetry plane. The flexures (7?14) act as either compressive beams or compliant hinges under the various loading conditions. Many of the flexures exhibit bending behavior similar to distinct components in the traditional axial design. The key difference is the type of bending of the measuring beams (12); they bend in an S shape under non-axial loads which differs from the C shape bending seen in traditional designs. This results in either side of the measuring beam experiencing both positive and negative stress at the same time.

[0028] For strain gauge measurement, the expanded view in FIG. 2 shows the measuring beam in greater detail. The strain gauges are attached along the straight lengths of (12a) and (12b). The corner fillets (12e) are elliptical with the major axis parallel with the length of the beam. This is applied across all corner fillets of the model to reduce stress concentration factors to a greater extent than circular fillets [22]. To attach the strain gauge on the lateral surface of the beam, one needs to secure sufficient lateral space from the beam. Two specific geometry features are considered to secure the space. First, the beam is slightly inclined off the Y axis by 7.5 degrees (12f), as opposed to conventional designs being fully vertical. Second, the measuring beam is designed to be sufficiently long. These adjustments may result in a shift of the stress gradient along the length of the beam, such as stress center shifted to the upper/lower fillets. To relocate the stress distribution back to the center, the measuring beam is designed as an isosceles trapezoid with the diagonals being 85.8 degrees normal to the base (12g). This also enables uniform strain distribution and enhances measurement accuracy when an axial load is applied.

[0029] FIG. 3 illustrates the design in 3D. This structure is a 2D surface extruded with its thickness dimension the same as the height, forming a square cross-section when viewed in the axial direction (X axis). With the design being uniform along the Z axis, the effects of the out of plane loads are minimal on the strain gauge locations in a standard Wheatstone bridge configuration. FIG. 3 also shows the sensor areas in 3D, where sensors are placed at the very edges of the beams and arranged in a complete bridge configuration.

[0030] The detailed working principle is described in FIGS. 4 and 5 for the responses by axial and normal loading, respectively. In the load analysis, the leftmost surface is fixed and the loads are applied to the rightmost surface. The colored contour indicates the stress distribution where red as the highest (tension) and blue as the lowest (compression). Under axial load shown in FIG. 4, the measuring beams (12) respond in single bendingeither tension or compression along each surface of the measuring beam. The pseudo-rigid body rotation (17) is generated centered at the leftmost connections (7, 9) as the pivot points. The rotation of the larger intermediate bodies (17) is enabled by the flexures (10, 11) located higher/lower than the flexures (7, 9) that connect to the fixed base. These rotations are opposite on a horizontal vertical plane, causing the upper section of the measuring beam to rotate counterclockwise and the lower clockwise (18). The X-shaped flexure (13, 14) at the upper center also works in line with this effect, deforming into the direction of two parallel vertical beams and causing the upper body of the measuring beam to rotate counterclockwise further. As a result, the two bodies connected to the measuring beam rotate in opposite directions, and the measuring beam bends in single bending and allows for a larger Y-directional stress measurement.

[0031] FIG. 5 shows the model under normal load. Different from FIG. 4, the measuring beams (12) respond in double bending like an S shapethe measuring beam is in tension at upper-left and lower-right, and in compression at upper-right and lower-left. This effect is shown in more detail in the expanded view of FIG. 5. The bodies connected to (7), (8), and (9) are rotated in the same direction in any orientation of normal load (clockwise direction in FIG. 5). To prevent excessive deflection under normal load, beam (8) restricts the amount of rotation of its connected bodies by being positioned directly between flexures (7) and (9) as indicated by (19). The body connected to flexure (9) is still able to rotate slightly clockwise on both halves of the symmetry plane, and the two clockwise rotations create a double bending in the lowest flexure (20). This rotation also affects the measuring beam, where the lower half is in compression on the left and tension on the right due to the clockwise rotation of the lower connecting body (23). Flexure 8, which is the lower half of the X-shaped flexure, is connected to the far-right side of the upper body of the measuring beam (21). When under normal load, the X-shaped beam directs a moment to the measuring beam by rotating the body connected to its upper half clockwise (22). This causes the upper-right side to be in compression and the upper-left side to be in tension. Since the measuring beam now has two opposing bending behaviors on its upper and lower halves, either side of the length of the beam experiences both positive and negative stresses (and zero in the middle) along the gauge measurement area. This results in a cancellation effect for the strain gauge since the overall sum of strain measured throughout the length is close to zero. This behavior is consistent between all load orientation combinations of normal load and pitching moment. As with the axial loading, this stress distribution is uniform throughout the thickness (Z) direction and allows for a flexible placement for strain gauging.

[0032] FIG. 6 shows the gauging strategy used between the two measuring beams. The Wheatstone bridge circuit outputs a value that combines the sensor readings according to the following expression:

(S.sub.a+S.sub.c)?(S.sub.b+S.sub.d)

where S.sub.x denotes the sensor reading from sensor-x in FIG. 6. The bridge circuit response by three different loads are summarized in Table 1. It is observed that the axial load response is amplified through the measuring beam and non-axial load responses are suppressed. Under axial load, the pairs of sensors 12a-12c and 12b-12d have equal reading of magnitude (S) but different sign from each pair. Using the equation above, the final bridge reading value is effectively amplified by four times (4S). Under normal load, the pairs of sensors 12a-12c and 12b-12d are equal in magnitude (T and U) but opposite in sign. This produces a final output to zero. Under pitching moment, the sensor pairs of each measuring beam (12a-12c and 12b-12d) are the same sign but close in magnitude (V=W). This also produces a final output that is almost an order of magnitude lower than the axial response. The result is a feasible axial section that can be produced with an extrudable manufacturing method or 2D subtractive method (such as laser cutting or wire EDM) that only requires a fraction of time and resources when compared to a traditional design.

REFERENCES

[0033] [1] S. A. Liu, H. L. Tzo, A novel six-component force sensor of good measurement isotropy and sensitivities, Sensors Actuators A Phys. 100 (2002) 223-230. [0034] [2] J. O. Templeman, B. B. Sheil, T. Sun, Multi-axis force sensors: A state-of-the-art review, Sensors Actuators A Phys. 304 (2020) 111772. [0035] [3] M. K. Kang, S. Lee, J. H. Kim, Shape optimization of a mechanically decoupled six-axis force/torque sensor, Sensors Actuators, A Phys. (2014). [0036] [4] Burns D, Parker P, Phillips B, Wind Tunnel Balance Design: A NASA Langley Perspective. Old Dominion University. 2019 April [0037] [5] D. E. Burns, P. A. Parker, B. D. Phillips, T. L. Webb I I I, D. Landman, Wind Tunnel Balance Design: A NASA Langley Perspective, 2020. [0038] [6] C. Tropea, A. L. Yarin, Handbook of experimental fluid mechanics, Springer Science & Business Media, 2007. [0039] [7] B. F. R. Ewald, Multi-component force balances for conventional and cryogenic wind tunnels, Meas. Sci. Technol. 11 (2000) R81-R94. [0040] [8] J. Zhai, B. Ewald, K. Hufnagel, An investigation on the interference of internal six-component wind tunnel balances with FEM, in: ICIASF '95 Rec. Int. Congr. Instrum. Aerosp. Simul. Facil., 1995: pp. 16/1-1610. [0041] [9] R. M. Hansen, Mechanical Design and fabrication of strain-gage balance, 1956. [0042] [10] M. Dubois, Six-component strain-gage balances for large wind tunnels, Exp. Mech. 21 (1981) 401-407. [0043] [11] G. A. Kebede, A. R. Ahmad, S.-C. Lee, C.-Y. Lin, Decoupled Six-Axis Force-Moment Sensor with a Novel Strain Gauge Arrangement and Error Reduction Techniques, Sensors. 19 (2019). [0044] [12] Q. Liang, J. Long, G. Coppola, D. Zhang, W. Sun, Novel decoupling algorithm based on parallel voltage extreme learning machine (PV-ELM) for six-axis F/M sensors, Robot. Comput. Integr. Manuf. (2019). [0045] [13] H. Lee, H. J. Lim, A. Chattopadhyay, Data-driven system health monitoring technique using autoencoder for the safety management of commercial aircraft, Neural Comput. Appl. (2020). [0046] [14] H. Lee, G. Li, A. Rai, A. Chattopadhyay, Real-time anomaly detection framework using a support vector regression for the safety monitoring of commercial aircraft, Adv. Eng. Informatics. 44 (2020) 101071. [0047] [15] L. Swapna, B. Katta, B. S. Suresh, Shape Optimization of a Drag Force Element of a Force Transducer for Wind Tunnel Measurements, 5 (2015) 33-38. [0048] [16] S. Skube, H. Bennett, Wind tunnel balance and method of use, U.S. Pat. No. 10,267,708 B2, 2019. [0049] [17] S. Zhang, X. Li, H. Ma, H. Wen, Mechanical analysis of normal force interference on axial force measurement for internal sting balance, Aerosp. Sci. Technol. 58 (2016) 351-357. [0050] [18] L. Swapna, B. Katta, B. S. Suresh, Shape Optimization of a Drag Force Element of a Force Transducer for Wind Tunnel Measurements, 5 (2015) 33-38. [0051] [19] M. Samard?ic, D. Marinkovski, Z. Anastasijevi?, D. Cur?i?, Z. Raji?, An elastic element of the forced oscillation apparatus for dynamic wind tunnel measurements, Aerosp. Sci. Technol. 50 (2016) 272-280. [0052] [20] S. Zhang, X. Li, H. Ma, H. Wen, Mechanical analysis of normal force interference on axial force measurement for internal sting balance, Aerosp. Sci. Technol. 58 (2016) 351-357. [0053] [21] M. Sung, S. Lee, and D. Burns, Robust Topology Optimization of a Flexural Structure Considering Multi-Stress Performance for Force Sensing and Structural Safety, Struct. Multidiscip. O., Vol. 65, No. 1, pp. 1-21, 2022 [0054] [22] Heywood R B, Photoelasticity for Engineers, Pergamon Press Ltd. 1969.