{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.017094017094017096, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.565420560747664, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Comparison of Comprehensive Analyses Predicting Whirl Flutter Stability of the Wing and Rotor Aeroelastic Test System

Whirl flutter stability is a critical limitation for tiltrotor aircraft. This paper investigates whirl flutter predictions for the Wing and Rotor Aeroelastic Test System (WRATS) using comprehensive analysis, focusing on the comparison of the whirl flutter stability predictions between
 Comprehensive Analytical Model of Rotorcraft Aerodynamics and Dynamics (CAMRAD) II and the Rotorcraft Comprehensive Analysis System (RCAS). The analytical models were created using a modular approach to systematically validate the modeling process of the WRATS tiltrotor. Comparison of nonrotating
 frequencies for blade, flexbeam, flexbeam and cuff, and blade with flexbeam and cuff shows excellent agreement between CAMRAD II and RCAS. The assembled model is then used to predict the whirl flutter stability boundary for various configurations with varying levels of fidelity. Results show
 near exact agreement between the two analyses for a rigid rotor and linear aerodynamics, and good to fair agreement when an elastic rotor is used. Predicted wing beam mode frequencies and damping values are also compared against the wind tunnel test data, and the frequencies are shown to be
 reasonably well-predicted. However, damping values, and thus stability boundaries, are not accurately predicted.