Active and Passive Structural Design Concepts for Improved

Empennage Effectiveness of Aircraft

Franz Weifi, Johannes Schweiger, John Simpson
DaimlerChrysler Aerospace AG, Military Aircraft
P.O. Box 801 160, D-81663, MUnchen, Germany

Thomas Kulirich
Universitt der Bundeswehr MUnchen
Werner-Heisenberg-Weg 39, D-85577 Neubiberg, Germany

ABSTRACT
Active structures concepts for the design of aircraft have been investigated for several years. Concerning static aeroelastic
applications, all concepts known to the authors are trying to improve the design of aircraft wings. In the case of wings
however, the design space for active structures concepts is limited by a multitude of functional requirements. Empennage

surfaces on the other hand only have to meet two basic requirements: sufficient stability and manoeuvrability for the
longitudinal and lateral motion ofthe aircraft.
In the case of vertical tails, the aerodynamic effectiveness for the side force and for the rudder yawing moment are usually
reduced by the flexibility of the structure. This causes a weight increase for the structure, which is especially unpleasant for
tail surfaces because of the rearward shift of the center of gravity.
Today, multidisciplinary structural optimization methods can be used to minimize the weight penalty for static aeroelastic

effectiveness requirements. But an amount of penalty still remains. A smart solution for additional weight savings, if
possible below the conventional basic strength design of the structure, would therefore be very welcome for any new aircraft
design.
The paper will describe a new design approach for vertical tails. The concept is based on a smart system for the attachment
of the complete tail surface to the fuselage. If properly designed, the variable stiffness of this system will provide improved
aerodynamic effectiveness ofthe tail at any flight condition compared to the rigid aircraft.
In a first step, the structure for the vertical tail of a fighter aircraft is designed for static strength and buckling stability by
means of a structural optimization program, which is based on finite element methods. The impacts of static aeroelastic
effectiveness and flutter stability criteria on the structural design are shown. A modified structural model is then used to

incorporate the active system for the attachment. The stiffness properties for this system are optimized for improved
aerodynamic effectiveness while maintaining sufficient flutter stability and structural strength for the complete tail.

Keywords: All-movable vertical tail, all-movable fin, empennage, aeroelasticity, lateral stability, yaw effectiveness, active
structures, structural optimization, multidisciplinary optimization.

In Smart Structures and Materials 2000: Smart Structures and Integrated Systems, Norman M. Wereley,
Editor, Proceedings of SPIE Vol. 3985 (2000) 0277-786X1001$1 5.00

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.spiedigitallibrary.org/ on 07/30/2016 Terms of Use: http://spiedigitallibrary.org/ss/TermsOfUse.aspx

121

1. INTRODUCTION
Traditionally, aircraft structure and flight control design could be handled as quite independent processes. The flight control
concept was defined as a part of the conceptual design process. After this, the structural design concept was defined, taking
into account that the structure had to be strong enough to bear the loads for all desired manoeuvres, including the forces

from the predefined control surfaces. The detailed dimensions of the individual structural components could then be
determined by a refined assessment and distribution of aerodynamic and inertia loads. For each of the following design
loops, these loads were considered invariable from changes of the local mass distributions, from resulting changes of the
control forces, or from aeroelastic effects on the aerodynamic loads. These changes could only be analyzed after each major
design loop, and then be used as an update for the next loop.
This hierarchical approach allowed no feed-back from the structural design to the flight control system design. In the past,
flexibility or structural dynamic effects could only be identified and quantified very late in the design process. This resulted
in additional weight, degraded performance, or costly redesigns. On the flight control side, adjustments to optimize the

handling qualities could be made quite easily during the flight test program, as long as the flight control system was
manually actuated. This was also possible, if servo actuators were used. Even an analog electrical flight control system with
feed-back loops allowed quick fixes or adjustments by trial and error methods.

For a modem airplane the development of the digital flight control system is a time consuming and costly process.
Therefore, it is today much more important, to know the aeroelastic characteristics of the airplane as good and as early as
possible during the design process.
In order to provide enough lateral stability at high dynamic pressures, the vertical tail of a fighter aircraft needs a certain
amount of static aeroelastic effectiveness for the side force and yawing moment. Traditional fin concepts need, in order to
perform lateral maneuvers, also sufficient effectiveness for the yawing moment due to rudder deflection. At higher dynamic
pressure such a vertical tail of a fighter aircraft the effectiveness will be strongly reduced by deformations, provoked of
aerodynamic loads.
The function ofthe rudder can also be integrated into the main surface. This so-called all-movable vertical tail (AMVT) can
be actuated with a conventional hydraulic actuator, which is stiff enough to provide the required quick responses.
This fact becomes even more important, when active aeroelastic concepts are considered for a design. They will either have
their own control system, which may create strong interactions with the aircraft's main flight control system, or they are
directly controlled by this one. In this case, it means direct impacts on the flight control system's authority and stability.

2. ELEMENTARY ASPECTS OF VERTICAL TAIL DESIGN

The structure of the vertical tail results from two basic requirements: Directional stability and directional control. That
means it has to provide
a proper amount of directional stability throughout the whole flight envelope, i.e. for high and low Mach numbers and
at all altitudes and angles ofattack (static stability)

.
.
.
.

sufficient yaw damping (dynamic stability)

directional control, e. g. during a crosswind approach or an engine failure of a multi-engine transport a/c in the take-off

phase

maneuverability (fighter a/c).

The size of the total vertical tail area is determined by the stability requirements mentioned above, whereas the rudder
configuration and size depend very much on the desired control characteristics. Usually, for supersonic jet aircraft the

critical point is directional stability, leading to a large fin area and high sweep angle. For modern subsonic transport aircraft,
the size ofthe fin-and-rudder configuration normally results from control requirements in asymmetric flight conditions.
There are several ways of increasing directional stability with the fin area remaining constant, e.g. artificial stability using
active flight control technology or a "smart actuator". But an increase in directional stability by any means can only lead to

a smaller vertical tail area if the actual area results from directional stability requirements and NOT from control
requirements. As a consequence, the aircraft that are most likely to benefit from artificial directional stability are supersonic
fighter and supersonic transport aircraft.

122

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.spiedigitallibrary.org/ on 07/30/2016 Terms of Use: http://spiedigitallibrary.org/ss/TermsOfUse.aspx

The directional stability of an aircraft is usually expressed as a dimensionless coefficient:

N = CqS b

with C, -- < 0 =

a/c is directionally stable

cnp is the sum ofthe contributions of all a/c parts

(c )Aircrafi = Cnfl (c )Fus + (c

with the contribution of fuselage

the aircraft, that means

(c ) + z 1c +

and vertical tail (C)1 being the most important. The fuselage tends to destabilize
>0. The negative contribution of the vertical tail (CflJS)VT must turn this into the desired

amount of stability.
(Cflp)vT is defined as

c)=

vr =

CyaIT [i

] . _Lf ii
.

77VT

dynamic pressure correction factor

Svr

ref. area ofthe vertical tail

SW
lv-J,

wing ref. area

distance between center of gravity (a/c) and center of pressure (vertical tail)

wing span

(
(S\

CYczvr

cy

-J)

11VT

correction term, fuselage-tail-interference

gradient of side force

is highly dependent on the Mach number (effect of compressibility) and therefore it is the reason for the
The gradient
decreasing stability of an aircraft flying at high Mach numbers. Figure 1 shows how Cyavr varies with Ma. C may also be
influenced by compression shocks from various aircraft parts.

43.5 - -

3-

Acker.

DATCOM
.SSS_ - .S

2.5

2-

W000WARD

1.5 -

0.5 -

00

0.5

I
1

Ma

1.5

Figure 1: Cya dependence on Mach number

123

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.spiedigitallibrary.org/ on 07/30/2016 Terms of Use: http://spiedigitallibrary.org/ss/TermsOfUse.aspx

An increase of C7 throughout the whole Ma-altitude-envelope. especially at very high and very low Mach numbers, could
lead to a smaller un area, as long as control requirements arc fulfilled. This could he achieved h using a smart actuator in
combination with an appropriate hinge position.

3. CLASSICAL VERTICAL TAIL CONCEPT

On account of comparison with the AMVT-design. a conventional vertical tail (ligure 2) has been investigated and
optimized. For this task the structure analysis and optimiiation LAGRANGF was used, which is based on the finite element
method. Although the structural weight is usually used as the objective function for the optinliiatioiL the major advantage of
this tool is not the weight saving. but the simultaneous fulfillment of aeroelastic constraints, static strength and stahilit
requirements achieved.

Figure 2: classical vertical tail concept

3.1. Structural concept

The vertical tail, which is shown in Figure 2. is suspended on three points. The front fitting carries the transverse loads, while
the other points are used for bending moments. The spars and ribs as well as the nose structure are made of aluminum. The

skins of' fin box and rudder are composite material, based on a symmetrical layer stack with 0. 45 and 90 fibre
directions, whereas 0 shows in direction of the main spar. For the actuation of the rudder a three point suspension concept
is used, familiar in military aircraft design. In one of the shanks an actuator is installed. This method distinguishes itself
with an almost load free fixation at the rear point. All side loads of the rudder are absorbed by the rudder hearings.

3.2. Aeroelastic characteristics

In a first step, the structure for a fixed root vertical tail with rudder of a lighter aircraft is designed kr static strength and
buckling stability. The individual layers of the composite skins are used as design variables. Now in the course of a design
optimization for the conventional case one will find results such as depicted in l'igure 3.

124

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.spiedigitallibrary.org/ on 07/30/2016 Terms of Use: http://spiedigitallibrary.org/ss/TermsOfUse.aspx

E
E

0,20

______

+,." ,,,J,
dynamic pr essure IkPa]

Figure 3 : aeroelastic effectiveness for fixed root tail

mass [kg]

Figure 4: variation of Ceffectiveness

Here, the aeroelastic effectiveness versus dynamic pressure for lateral stability and for the rudder yawing moment for the
fixed root tail are shown. In this case, the side force effectiveness remains high because of the high taper and low aspect
ratios. The rudder effectiveness in comparison shows the typical loss for fighter aircraft tails because of the torsional
deformation of the fin torque box. The diagram, shown in Figure 4, is the result of an optimization study with aeroelastic
constraints of C-. It can be seen that a small increase of Ccosts a lot of additional skin weight.

4. ALL-MOVABLEVERTICAL TAIL
4.1. Active aeroelastic concepts
In a more traditional sense, active aeroelastic concepts can be defined as active control concepts for the cure of static or
dynamic aeroelastic deficiencies with respect to stability, manoeuvrability, loads, or aerodynamic performance. Such cures
are gust load alleviation or active flutter suppression concepts, where control surfaces are actively deflected to counteract
loads or create unsteady aerodynamic damping forces. One reason why these systems did not become common practice, is
the insufficient static aeroelastic effectiveness of typical control surfaces like ailerons or rudders.
For several years, the expression "active aeroelastic" is more used for concepts, where aeroelastic effects are exploited in a
beneficial way to improve aircraft performance, handling, or directional stability compared to a rigid aircraft. Using this
definition, only static aeroelastic concepts are addressed.

Possible benefits from aeroelasticity were already addressed in the seventies and eighties, when advanced composite
materials together with formal structural optimization methods offered the possibility of aeroelastic tailoring for aircraft
structures'. These cases, based on active deflections of control surfaces, require a flexible aircraft structure, which is mostly
given at the wing. Another concept, for lateral and vertical manoeuvres is the active effectiveness control of all-movable
empennages. With a proper hinge line location and a variable connection stiffness it should be possible to meet the two
basic requirements of an empennage, sufficient stability and maneuverability for the longitudinal and lateral motion of the
aircraft, with reduced surfaces.

4.2. Structural concept

The AMVT-structure, given in Figure 6, is based on the FE-model of the conventional vertical tail concept, so the outer
geometry is nearly the same. Also the initial properties have been adopted, except for the stiffened up root rib, to convey
loads to the bearing. During the optimization it was shown, that it is not enough to stiffen up only the root rib, so also a
frame construction with spars and ribs, shown in Figure 5, were allocated to design variables. The main data of the examined
structure is given in Table 1.

The fin is suspended as a taileron or a canard. In the finite element model the rotational stifthess is given by a spring. The

connection between bearing pin and root rib is done in a very simple way with beam elements, because the essential
application of this model is the hinge line variation.

125

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.spiedigitallibrary.org/ on 07/30/2016 Terms of Use: http://spiedigitallibrary.org/ss/TermsOfUse.aspx

I igure : frame constniction of tin Connection

reference area
reference length /
leading edge angle
angle of 25%-line
angle of 50%-line
lever arm of vertical tail
Figure 6: all-movable vertical tail. FE-model

4.4 ni
2.35 in
34
21

3.4 ni

Fable 1: vertical tail data

4.3. Influence of hinge line location and attachment stiffness

One

parameter, which is essential for the features of a AMVT. is the position of the hinge line. It can he shown, that the
obtainable effectiveness as well as the attained hinge moments depend on this attribute. Io Ililfill the hole interval of
possible bearing positions, live different concepts were treated, shown in Figure 7.

III. at 6% l,

HI, at 24%

HI. at 35% 1.

III. at 47% /,,

Ill, at 530 /

Figure 7: analvied hinge line positions

For un types, like in this study. a right amount of et'fectiveness at all flight conditions without negative impacts on the static
loads can he achieved, if the fin root attachment concept is changed. By moving the hinge line to the rear. a highly effective
all-movable fin can be designed. If' the axis of the attachment spigot is positioned behind the most rear aerodynamic center

of pressure. any desired aeroelastic effectiveness can be realized by an active variable stiffness elenient in the main
attachment. This fin can be actuated with a conventional hydraulic actuator with reduced power. if' the hinge line location is
chosen adequately and it is stiff enough to provide the required quick responses. The principle of a variable stitThess vertical
tail concept is given in Figure 6.
In Figure 8. the influence of the hinge line location chord-wise (6% tip to 53% of reference length I) is shown. 'l'hc side
force effectiveness for a constant side-slip angle versus the Mach-number at sea-level is given for a rotation stiffness of
750ksnvrad (for comparison, the value for normal rudder actuators is between 150 and 450 kNm,rad). Nevertheless the most

26
Downloaded From: http://proceedings.spiedigitallibrary.org/ on 07/30/2016 Terms of Use: http://spiedigitallibrary.org/ss/TermsOfUse.aspx

backward fixed fin (53% l) inclines to diverge at higher dynamic pressure, the effectiveness increase rapidly. In reduced
manner this is also valid for the fin, fixed at 47% of l,, but this AMVT is stable in the whole envelope. In the transonic
region, there is high effectiveness, which decreases at higher velocity, when also the aerodynamic force center moves
backwards. The aerodynamic leverage decreases, and so does the effectiveness. This can especially be observed in the third
which has an effectiveness greater than one at subsonic and changes at supersonic to a value lower than
example (35%
one.
The progression of the resulting hinge moments, which are given in Figure 9, are indicating the diverging behavior of the
AMVT with an hinge line behind the most rear aerodynamic center of pressure. A hinge line position at 35% l, is an
interesting option for supersonic aircrafts, to minimize the hinge moments in a wide Mach-number range. Most of the
realized AMVTs have chosen this kind of bearing.
In this way any desired effectiveness (Figure 10) can be realized by an active variable stiffness element in the main
attachment. An idea of such a solution is described in chapter 7.

C.)

C)

C
C)

Figure 8: side force effectiveness

Figure 9: hinge moments

Effectiveness C

HL at 40%

Effectiveness C,

HL at 49%

Effectiveness C,

HLat57%

Figure 10: actuator stiffness versus effectiveness for different hinge line positions

127

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.spiedigitallibrary.org/ on 07/30/2016 Terms of Use: http://spiedigitallibrary.org/ss/TermsOfUse.aspx

5. IMPACTS FROM ACTIVE AEROELASTIC CONCEPTS ON THE STRUCTURAL DESIGN

In order to incorporate active aeroelastic concepts into the structural design, it is no longer sufficient to specify aeroelastic
constraints like for flutter or control surface effectiveness, and apply it to the structural optimization process for a predefined
structural concept.
Boundaries for the variable stiffness are defined by flutter stability requirements. Limitations from this side are small,
because at low speeds, where a high static aeroelastic effectiveness is required for a reduced size vertical tail, a small

stiffness is sufficient for flutter stability, and at high speeds, the fin will be in line with the high attachment stiffness
requirement from dynamic pressure which is also compatible with the flutter requirement.

10'

Io oa6M812l4
HLat35%

HLat47%

HL at 53%

Figure 1 1 : attachment stiffness requirements for active vertical tail

The design space for aeroelastic effects must be as wide as possible in the beginning. That means, the sensitivities of basic

geometry parameters for wings and control surfaces, the positions of control surfaces, and their functions must be
considered as design variables from the beginning.
The analytical description of active aeroelastic concepts must directly be included in the structural analysis model because
of the impacts from the passive structure's design constraints on the effectiveness of active aeroelastic systems. In order to
make them efficient, it is required to understand, design and simulate the interfaces between components and the passive,
load-carrying structure.

6. NEEDS FOR THE INTEGRATED DESIGN OF AIRPLANES WITH ACTIVE AEROELASTIC CONCEPTS
It is obvious that integrated design and multi-disciplinary optimization processes are an absolute must for active aeroelastic
concepts.
Multidisciplinary optimization (MDO) does not mean to combine single discipline analysis tools by formal computing
processes. It means first a good understanding of what is going on. This is already essential for a conventional design. Only
after this understanding, can the creative design of an active concept start.
It is then very important to choose the proper analysis methods for the individual disciplines. Usually, not the highest level
of accuracy is suitable for the simulation of important effects for other disciplines. This also refers to refinement of the
analysis models, where local details are not interesting for interactions. It is more important to keep the models a versatile as

possible for changes of the design concepts to allow the simulation of many variants as possible. This also means an
efficient process for the generation of models, including the knowledge of the user for this process. Fully automated model
generators can create terrible results, if the user can not interpret or understand the modeling process.
Also the quality and completeness of analysis models is essential, as far as impacts on neighbor disciplines are concerned.
Especially for formal optimization processes, model errors will create discrepant results. To achieve good results, a careful
selection and combination of the design variables and the completeness of the design requirements are important.

128

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.spiedigitallibrary.org/ on 07/30/2016 Terms of Use: http://spiedigitallibrary.org/ss/TermsOfUse.aspx

7. CONSIDERATIONS ON VARIABLE ATTACHMENT AND ACTUATION STIFFNESS CONCEPTS

Described in chapter 4.3, an active AMVT design with increased effectiveness is possible with a variable attachment and
actuation stiffness. This can be done mechanically, hydraulically or as a combination of both. An example for a variable
stiffness actuation system is already used for the new F/A-18E/F8. Here the hydraulic pressure switches from 207 bar to
345 bar (3000 to 5000 PSI) at high dynamic pressures to compensate aeroelastic losses.
Another possibility is a construction, shown in Figure 6, wherein the moment balanced bearing of this actuator is replaced
by an active spring element. This method would facilitate an easier hierarchical adaptation to the traditional flight control
system. A principle of an active variable stiffness element can be realized with smart material components9'4.

8. CONCLUSIONS
The qualities and quantities of impacts from aeroelasticity on structural loads, aerodynamic performance, manoeuvrability,

stability and agility of the flight control system of an airplane became more and more important in recent years. Allmovable fin concepts are offering attractive possibilities to improve aircraft performance. In order to achieve them,
analytical methods for the integrated multi-disciplinary design with respect to structural, arodynamic, and aeroelastic
properties are required.

An actively controlled all-movable fin concept needs no additional weight for aeroelastic effectiveness. Its size can be
reduced to the value, where sufficient directional stability is provided by the proper amount of effectiveness from the
variable attachment stiffness as long as control requirements are fulfilled simultaneously. This concept reverses the
traditional design approach for improved aeroelastic effectiveness, where an increase is achieved by additional stiffness.
Whereas the minimum size ofthe passive design for the diverging tail is limited by stability and control requirements at low
speeds, where no aeroelastic effectiveness improvements are possible, the active vertical tail also provides increased
effectiveness at low speeds.
The development of active aeroelastic concepts should therefore not merely be seen as a task in aeroelasticity. It must be a

creative part of the overall flight control system design, together with the aerodynamic and structural design. If this is
possible, great achievements from active aeroelastic concepts can be expected for future designs of airplanes and all kinds of
flying vehicles.

REFERENCES
Kullrich, T.: Untersuchung von aktiven undpassiven aeroelastischen Auslegungskonzeptenfur Seitenleiiwerke,
Diplomarbeit December 1999, Universitt der Bundeswehr MUnchen.
2. Weisshaar, T. A.: Aeroelastic Tailoring Creative Use ofUnusual Materials, AIAA-87-0976-CP.
3. Shirk, M. H.; Hertz, T. J.; Weisshaar, T. A.: A Survey ofAeroelastic Tailoring Theory, Practice, Promise.,
AIAA-84-0982-CP.
1.

4.

Schweiger, J.; Simpson, J.; Weiss, F.; Coetzee, E.; Boller, Ch.: Needsfor the analysis and intedrated design
optimization ofactive andpassive structurefor active aeroelastic wings, SPIE's 6th Aimual International Symposium
on "Smart Structures and Materials", Newport Beach, CA, 1999.
5. Schweiger, J.; Krammer, J.; Coetzee, E.: MDO Applicationfor Active Flexible Aircraft Design,
7th AIAA/NASA/ISSMO Symposium on Multidisciplinary Analysis and Optimization. CP-4l69, St. Louis, MO, 1998.
6. Schweiger, J.; Krammer, J.; Hmlein, H.: Development andApplication ofthe IntegratedStructural Design Tool
LAGRANGE, 6th AIAA/NASAIISSMO Symposium on Multidisciplinary Analysis and Optimization, CP-4 169,
Seattle, WA, 1996.
7. Sensburg, 0.; Schneider, G.; Tischler, V.; Venkayya, V.: A Unique Designfor a Diverging Flexible Vertical Tail.
Specialists ' Meeting on Structural Aspects ofFlexible Aircraft Control, RTA Meeting on Design Issues, Ottawa,
Canada, October 1999.
8. Balanced Upgrade, Flight International, January 20-26 1999.
9. Simpson, J.; Schweiger, J.: Industrial Approach to Piezo-electric Damping of Large Fighter Aircraft Components,
SPIE's 5th Annual International Symposium "Smart Structures and Materials", San Diego, CA, 1998.

129

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.spiedigitallibrary.org/ on 07/30/2016 Terms of Use: http://spiedigitallibrary.org/ss/TermsOfUse.aspx