Search

航空機胴体構造の耐衝撃安全性を評価するには，実現象を模擬できる解析モデルを作成し，種々の条件で検討を行う必要が有る．本稿では，その解析モデルを作成するためのモデル化基準を示し，その基準に基づいた解析モデル化技術を示す．ここでは， YS-11輪切り胴体の構造様式の違う2体に対して実際に作成した解析モデルを使用し，過去に実施された垂直落下試験結果について解析評価を行い，十分に試験を模擬する解析結果が得られることを示す．さらに，認証で求められる評価項目（乗客に負荷される衝撃力，客室内重量物の保持，生存空間の確保，脱出経路の確保）を評価する方法の提示，評定箇所での客室加速度の試験と再現解析の誤差が大部分の個所で20%以内の誤差に抑えられていることを示すことにより，本解析技術が，認証時に必要とされる既存の金属製胴体構造の耐衝撃性評価を満足する衝撃解析モデル化技術であることを示す．, To assess aircraft fuselage crashworthiness, a detailed fuselage structure analysis model that is verified with real tests results is required. In this paper, we present the rules which are used to build the analytical model and show how to build one. We indicate that there are close correspondences between the vertical drop test results for two YS-11 fuselage section and the analytical results with the model for those. Moreover, we demonstrate the method with the analysis with four criteria regarding occupant survivability: retention of items of mass, maintenance of acceptable loads experienced by the occupants, maintenance of a survivable volume and maintenance of the occupant egress paths. The peak deceleration values of the analysis results are within 20% error of the test results at almost all evaluation points on the fuselage floor. Therefore, the method of making the analytical model is shown as an applicable tool for acquiring the certification of the airframe crashworthiness., 形態: カラー図版あり, Physical characteristics: Original contains color illustrations, 資料番号: AA2130024000, レポート番号: JAXA-RM-21-012

Seventh Aerodynamics Prediction Challenge (APC-7) ワークショップ (2021年6月30日. オンライン開催), Seventh Aerodynamics Prediction Challenge workshop (APC-7) (June 30, 2021. Online meeting), 注記: 第53回流体力学講演会/第39回航空宇宙数値シミュレーション技術シンポジウム(ANSS)オンライン内で開催, 形態: カラー図版あり, Note: Workshop was held in The 53rd Fluid Dynamics Conference / The 39th Aerospace Numerical Simulation Symposium Online, Physical characteristics: Original contains color illustrations, 資料番号: AA2130007003, レポート番号: JAXA-SP-21-002

Additional file 2: Fig. S2. Plots of each ETS event showing the tremor epicenters (gray circles) and the locations of source faults estimated geodetically (rectangles with a bold line representing the upper edge). Orange rectangles represent the source faults reported by NIED (Hirose and Kimura 2012), blue ones by GSJ (Itaba et al. 2012; Kitagawa et al. 2012), and brown ones by GSJ and NIED (Itaba et al. 2013a, 2013b, 2014a, 2014b, 2015) (Table 3). Dark and light gray circles represent tremor epicenters within and outside the ETS period, respectively (Table 2). Red square denotes the array location.

Additional file 3: Fig. S3. Plots showing (upper) the migration of tremors and (lower) the spatial distribution of cumulative seismic energy of all ETS events other than those in Fig. 5 (ETS 3, 9, and 20). All symbols are the same as in Fig. 5. Fig. S4. Plots of all ETS events showing the spatial distribution of cumulative seismic energy release in the plane of the plate interface, with symbols showing the rupture extent along the strike direction (black bar) and the start point (red star). Black rectangles represent the location of high-energy patches as shown in Fig. 5.

Additional file 1: Fig. S1. Plots showing the relation between arrival time differences and elevation differences for the earthquakes shown by circles in Fig. 2a. The black lines are linear regression lines determined by the least-squares method with the constraint of passing through the origin.