@article{KochBoehnischVerdoncketal.2024, author = {Koch, Christopher and B{\"o}hnisch, Nils and Verdonck, Hendrik and Hach, Oliver and Braun, Carsten}, title = {Comparison of unsteady low- and mid-fidelity propeller aerodynamic methods for whirl flutter applications}, series = {Applied Sciences}, volume = {14}, journal = {Applied Sciences}, number = {2}, publisher = {MDPI}, address = {Basel}, issn = {2076-3417}, doi = {10.3390/app14020850}, pages = {1 -- 28}, year = {2024}, abstract = {Aircraft configurations with propellers have been drawing more attention in recent times, partly due to new propulsion concepts based on hydrogen fuel cells and electric motors. These configurations are prone to whirl flutter, which is an aeroelastic instability affecting airframes with elastically supported propellers. It commonly needs to be mitigated already during the design phase of such configurations, requiring, among other things, unsteady aerodynamic transfer functions for the propeller. However, no comprehensive assessment of unsteady propeller aerodynamics for aeroelastic analysis is available in the literature. This paper provides a detailed comparison of nine different low- to mid-fidelity aerodynamic methods, demonstrating their impact on linear, unsteady aerodynamics, as well as whirl flutter stability prediction. Quasi-steady and unsteady methods for blade lift with or without coupling to blade element momentum theory are evaluated and compared to mid-fidelity potential flow solvers (UPM and DUST) and classical, derivative-based methods. Time-domain identification of frequency-domain transfer functions for the unsteady propeller hub loads is used to compare the different methods. Predictions of the minimum required pylon stiffness for stability show good agreement among the mid-fidelity methods. The differences in the stability predictions for the low-fidelity methods are higher. Most methods studied yield a more unstable system than classical, derivative-based whirl flutter analysis, indicating that the use of more sophisticated aerodynamic modeling techniques might be required for accurate whirl flutter prediction.}, language = {en} } @article{KarschuckPoghossianSeretal.2024, author = {Karschuck, Tobias and Poghossian, Arshak and Ser, Joey and Tsokolakyan, Astghik and Achtsnicht, Stefan and Wagner, Patrick and Sch{\"o}ning, Michael Josef}, title = {Capacitive model of enzyme-modified field-effect biosensors: Impact of enzyme coverage}, series = {Sensors and Actuators B: Chemical}, volume = {408}, journal = {Sensors and Actuators B: Chemical}, publisher = {Elsevier}, address = {Amsterdam}, issn = {0925-4005 (Print)}, doi = {10.1016/j.snb.2024.135530}, pages = {12 Seiten}, year = {2024}, abstract = {Electrolyte-insulator-semiconductor capacitors (EISCAP) belong to field-effect sensors having an attractive transducer architecture for constructing various biochemical sensors. In this study, a capacitive model of enzyme-modified EISCAPs has been developed and the impact of the surface coverage of immobilized enzymes on its capacitance-voltage and constant-capacitance characteristics was studied theoretically and experimentally. The used multicell arrangement enables a multiplexed electrochemical characterization of up to sixteen EISCAPs. Different enzyme coverages have been achieved by means of parallel electrical connection of bare and enzyme-covered single EISCAPs in diverse combinations. As predicted by the model, with increasing the enzyme coverage, both the shift of capacitance-voltage curves and the amplitude of the constant-capacitance signal increase, resulting in an enhancement of analyte sensitivity of the EISCAP biosensor. In addition, the capability of the multicell arrangement with multi-enzyme covered EISCAPs for sequentially detecting multianalytes (penicillin and urea) utilizing the enzymes penicillinase and urease has been experimentally demonstrated and discussed.}, language = {en} } @inproceedings{Tepecik2024, author = {Tepecik, Atakan}, title = {AstroBioLab: Review of technical and bioanalytical approaches}, series = {4th YRA MedTech Symposium 2024 : February 1 / 2024 / FH Aachen}, booktitle = {4th YRA MedTech Symposium 2024 : February 1 / 2024 / FH Aachen}, editor = {Digel, Ilya and Staat, Manfred and Trzewik, J{\"u}rgen and Sielemann, Stefanie and Erni, Daniel and Zylka, Waldemar}, publisher = {Universit{\"a}t Duisburg-Essen}, address = {Duisburg}, organization = {MedTech Symposium}, isbn = {978-3-940402-65-3}, doi = {10.17185/duepublico/81475}, pages = {33 -- 34}, year = {2024}, abstract = {This study presents the concept of AstroBioLab, an autonomous astrobiological field laboratory tailored for the exploration of (sub)glacial habitats. AstroBioLab is an integral component of the TRIPLE (Technologies for Rapid Ice Penetration and subglacial Lake Exploration) DLR-funded project, aimed at advancing astrobiology research through the development and deployment of innovative technologies. AstroBioLab integrates diverse measurement techniques such as fluorescence microscopy, DNA sequencing and fluorescence spectrometry, while leveraging microfluidics for efficient sample delivery and preparation.}, language = {en} } @inproceedings{WittigRuettersBragard2024, author = {Wittig, M. and R{\"u}tters, Ren{\´e} and Bragard, Michael}, title = {Application of RL in control systems using the example of a rotatory inverted pendulum}, series = {Tagungsband AALE 2024 : Fit f{\"u}r die Zukunft: praktische L{\"o}sungen f{\"u}r die industrielle Automation}, booktitle = {Tagungsband AALE 2024 : Fit f{\"u}r die Zukunft: praktische L{\"o}sungen f{\"u}r die industrielle Automation}, editor = {Reiff-Stephan, J{\"o}rg and J{\"a}kel, Jens and Schwarz, Andr{\´e}}, publisher = {le-tex publishing services GmbH}, address = {Leipzig}, isbn = {978-3-910103-02-3}, doi = {10.33968/2024.53}, pages = {241 -- 248}, year = {2024}, abstract = {In this paper, the use of reinforcement learning (RL) in control systems is investigated using a rotatory inverted pendulum as an example. The control behavior of an RL controller is compared to that of traditional LQR and MPC controllers. This is done by evaluating their behavior under optimal conditions, their disturbance behavior, their robustness and their development process. All the investigated controllers are developed using MATLAB and the Simulink simulation environment and later deployed to a real pendulum model powered by a Raspberry Pi. The RL algorithm used is Proximal Policy Optimization (PPO). The LQR controller exhibits an easy development process, an average to good control behavior and average to good robustness. A linear MPC controller could show excellent results under optimal operating conditions. However, when subjected to disturbances or deviations from the equilibrium point, it showed poor performance and sometimes instable behavior. Employing a nonlinear MPC Controller in real time was not possible due to the high computational effort involved. The RL controller exhibits by far the most versatile and robust control behavior. When operated in the simulation environment, it achieved a high control accuracy. When employed in the real system, however, it only shows average accuracy and a significantly greater performance loss compared to the simulation than the traditional controllers. With MATLAB, it is not yet possible to directly post-train the RL controller on the Raspberry Pi, which is an obstacle to the practical application of RL in a prototyping or teaching setting. Nevertheless, RL in general proves to be a flexible and powerful control method, which is well suited for complex or nonlinear systems where traditional controllers struggle.}, language = {en} } @article{BoehnischBraunMuscarelloetal.2024, author = {B{\"o}hnisch, Nils and Braun, Carsten and Muscarello, Vincenzo and Marzocca, Pier}, title = {About the wing and whirl flutter of a slender wing-propeller system}, series = {Journal of Aircraft}, journal = {Journal of Aircraft}, publisher = {American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics}, issn = {1533-3868}, doi = {10.2514/1.C037542}, pages = {1 -- 14}, year = {2024}, abstract = {Next-generation aircraft designs often incorporate multiple large propellers attached along the wingspan (distributed electric propulsion), leading to highly flexible dynamic systems that can exhibit aeroelastic instabilities. This paper introduces a validated methodology to investigate the aeroelastic instabilities of wing-propeller systems and to understand the dynamic mechanism leading to wing and whirl flutter and transition from one to the other. Factors such as nacelle positions along the wing span and chord and its propulsion system mounting stiffness are considered. Additionally, preliminary design guidelines are proposed for flutter-free wing-propeller systems applicable to novel aircraft designs. The study demonstrates how the critical speed of the wing-propeller systems is influenced by the mounting stiffness and propeller position. Weak mounting stiffnesses result in whirl flutter, while hard mounting stiffnesses lead to wing flutter. For the latter, the position of the propeller along the wing span may change the wing mode shapes and thus the flutter mechanism. Propeller positions closer to the wing tip enhance stability, but pusher configurations are more critical due to the mass distribution behind the elastic axis.}, language = {en} }