Leading-Edge Actuator Layout for Control Surface Flutter Suppression

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing aircraft control surface systems face challenges in flutter suppression, particularly with electromechanical actuators, which require complex maintenance and may not be feasible due to hydraulic system limitations, and mass balancing adds unnecessary weight.

Innovation Solution

The actuator is installed at the leading edge of the control surface to optimize mass balance, reducing the need for additional weight and simplifying maintenance by aligning the center of gravity favorably.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If counter-balance weights are added to control surfaces to suppress flutter, then flutter suppression is improved, but weight of the control surface increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveflutter suppressionVSAvoidcontrol surface weight
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSWeight of moving object

Solution Approach 1:

The actuator and counter-balance weight functions are merged into a single integrated unit. The actuator housing serves as the counter-balance mass, eliminating the need for separate counter-balance weights while maintaining flutter suppression effectiveness.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #5Merging (Combining)

Solution Approach 2:

The actuator structure performs multiple functions: it provides actuation force to move the control surface and simultaneously serves as the counter-balance mass for flutter suppression. This multi-functional design eliminates redundant components.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

2Reliability

If powered hydraulic actuators are used for flutter suppression, then active damping is improved, but device complexity increases due to mode select valves and damping chambers

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveactive dampingVSAvoidactuator mechanism complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The complex valve and damping chamber mechanisms are extracted and removed from the actuator design. Instead, a simplified electromechanical actuator with integrated counter-balance mass is used, achieving passive flutter suppression without the complexity of active damping control systems.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #2Taking out (Extraction)

Solution Approach 2:

The hydraulic actuation system with complex valve mechanisms is replaced with an electromechanical actuator system. This substitution eliminates the need for mode select valves, damping chambers, and associated hydraulic control complexity while maintaining actuation capability.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

3Reliability

If electromechanical actuators are used as dampers with shortened coils, then active damping is achieved, but manufacturing precision requirements increase due to backlash constraints

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveactive dampingVSAvoidbacklash requirements
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSManufacturing precision

Solution Approach 1:

The design accepts the use of standard off-the-shelf electromechanical actuators with typical tolerances rather than custom-designed actuators with tight backlash specifications. The integrated counter-balance mass approach makes the system tolerant of normal manufacturing variations.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #27Cheap short-living objects (Disposable)

Solution Approach 2:

The system transitions from requiring static precision (tight backlash control) to dynamic performance. The actuator operates in a controlled regime where dynamic characteristics and the passive mass balance effect dominate, making the system less sensitive to manufacturing tolerances.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

4Reliability

If complex built-in tests are applied to hydraulic actuators to prevent dormant failures, then reliability is improved, but device complexity and maintenance requirements increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedormant failure preventionVSAvoidtest system complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The hydraulic actuator system with complex built-in test requirements is replaced with a solid-state electromechanical actuator. This substitution eliminates hydraulic leaks, valve failures, and the need for complex built-in test systems, reducing both complexity and maintenance burden.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

Solution Approach 2:

The electromechanical actuator with integrated counter-balance mass is inherently more reliable and requires fewer diagnostic and maintenance systems. The passive mass balance design provides inherent stability that reduces the need for complex monitoring and testing infrastructure.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

Data Source

PatentEP3960622B1Actuator mechanism for control surface mass balance alleviation
Publication Date: 2026.04.15 EMBRAER SA
  • EP3960622B1 patent drawingFigure 1~2
  • EP3960622B1 patent drawingFigure 3~4
  • EP3960622B1 patent drawingFigure 5

AI summary

Installation of powered actuators in the leading edge of a control surface in order to have a better weight distribution. The systems described herein propose an actuation system with a static ground structure used to move a control surface of an aircraft. The actuation system, and the ground structure are aligned with the center of rotation of the control surface, providing the aircraft with flutter suppression. This proposal is an approach to use the actuator in a place favorable to the mass balancing and reducing or even dismissing the usage of mass balancing, saving weight and cost.