Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

64 vues

Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

- The Flutter· of a Uniform Cantilever Wing
- 4 Rectangular Concrete Tanks
- 10 MVA Short Circuit (Thermal & Dynamic)
- Ae6015 Rockets and Missiles l t p c
- Wind Turbine Dynamica, NREL, 2008
- Innovation in Flight: Research of the Nasa Langley Research Center - II
- get_start
- Aerodynamics,An Introduction
- VIBRATION_2_MARK_QA.doc
- BS Aeronautical 2011 2012
- books
- Flutter and Aeroelastic Stability
- Water Tank on Ground
- EZHIL
- prodstdV8i_
- 1-s2.0-0020768395000976-main
- Flutter Calculations for a Model Wing Usint the MSC Nastran Structural Analysis Program
- Wood
- Beam Cantiliever Calculation
- Water Retaining Structure

Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 11

M.R. Moosavi

a

, A.R. Naddaf Oskouei

a

, A. Khelil

b,

*

a

Department of Mechanical Engineering, Imam Hossein University, P.O. Box 16535-187, Tehran, Iran

b

Departement Genie Civil, ERIN IUT Nancy Brabois, 54601 Villers Les Nancy cedex 1, France

Received 15 July 2003; received in revised form 16 August 2004; accepted 14 October 2004

Available online 8 December 2004

Abstract

In this paper, a procedure is developed based on Galerkin method to predict the speed and

frequency in which utter occurs. The nite element structural model used for the wing is a three-

DOF cantilever beam, in which one coordinate is related to the vertical displacement and the other

two are corresponding to bending and rotation. This beam element has Hermit-cubic-type in bending

and linear in rotation characteristics. Consequently, an eigenvalue problem with non-symmetric

matrix coefcients was derived. It was found that as free stream velocity increases from zero up to

0.554 (for incompressible ow) and 0.526 Mach (for compressible ow), the real parts of the

eigenvalues have negative signs and the system become stable. Further increasing of free-stream

velocity causes the amplitude of the frequencies approach zero and become positive, which indicates

dynamic instability, or utter of the system.

q 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Aeroelasticity; Subsonic wing utter; Quasi-steady aerodynamic; Galerkin method; Eigenvalue

problem

1. Introduction

One of the most critical multidisciplinary activities in aircraft, reusable launch vehicle,

and aerospace plane design is aeroelastic instability predictions and avoidance. In order to

achieve desired minimum weight design of ight vehicles, the aeroelastic instabilities,

such as utter and divergence of lifting surfaces, must be included before the initial ight

tests.

0263-8231/$ - see front matter q 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

doi:10.1016/j.tws.2004.10.001

Thin-Walled Structures 43 (2005) 617627

www.elsevier.com/locate/tws

* Corresponding author. Tel.: C03 83 68 25 36; fax: C03 83 68 25 32.

E-mail address: khelil@iutnb.uhp-nancy.fr (A. Khelil).

Early pioneering work on utter was utter suppression, which was based on the

aerodynamic energy concept [1]. This approach is based on the energy required to

sustain simple harmonic motion in a typical section, having pitch, plunge, and control

surface generalized degrees of freedom. When the sign of energy is positive, energy

must be supplied, and the system is stable. General criteria and control laws for

system stability were derived and demonstrated in wind-tunnel tests. Other work

pursued in parallel was on frequency-domain aerodynamics and classical control

techniques [2].

Aeroelasticity is the science of analyzing the mutual interaction between the

aerodynamics and structure dynamics of a moving system such as aerospace vehicles.

Examples of some aeroelastic problems of aerospace vehicles are:

Panel and wing utter of space vehicles

Limit cycle oscillations of ghter aircraft with external stores

Vertical tail buffeting of twin-tailed ghter aircraft

Helicopter/shipboard dynamic interface

Fluidstructure interaction in multi-blade rotorcraft

Active aeroelastic wings

Higher harmonic control of helicopter rotor blades.

Although the physical aeroelastic problem is an interaction between the uid and

structure, the numerical aeroelastic problem is a complex multidisciplinary problem that

involves strong interaction between several physical and numerical disciplines. The

physical disciplines are the uid dynamics around the uid dynamics of the aerospace

vehicle and the structure dynamics of the exible bodies. The numerical disciplines are the

numerical interfacing between the uid and structure interfaces and the grid motion due to

the exibility of the structure [3].

One way to solve the aeroelastic problem is to combine all the modules of the

physical and numerical disciplines into one monolithic code. However, such giant

monolithic codes are difcult to develop and maintain, and their nature, cannot

contain up-to-date technology. Another way to solve the problem is to integrate the

individual analysis modules into a multidisciplinary computing environment in which

the analysis modules can run concurrently with synchronized data transfer between

the analysis modules [4,5].

A major breakthrough in aeroelasticity has been the development of time-domain

aerodynamics, based on rational function approximation to the unsteady aerodynamic

loading in the frequency domain. These approaches add a considerable number of

augmented states to the equations of motion. The number of these augmented states can he

reduced using the minimum state method [6,7].

Later, alternative two-dimensional compressible aerodynamic tools in the time

domain were developed by Leishman and Nguyen [8]. This model is suitable for both

incompressible and compressible cases. These models are based on indicial

aerodynamics and require a fairly large number of augmented aerodynamic states.

Recently, these time-domain unsteady aerodynamic models have also been extended

to two-dimensional wing/control surface combinations. A very signicant portion of

M.R. Moosavi et al. / Thin-Walled Structures 43 (2005) 617627 618

the experimental research on utter suppression has been conducted on aeroelastically

scaled wind-tunnel models, with an emphasis on wing/store utter suppression.

Because of the complexity of the problem, a large number of studies have been

theoretical in nature, aimed at understanding the basic problems, or supporting the

experimental work conducted. Almost 25 years have gone by since the eld has

started [9].

2. Flutter of cantilever wings

A classical example of non-self-adjoint problems consists of the combined bending and

torsional vibration of a cantilever aircraft wing in steady air ow shown in Fig. 1. Before

we begin describing the problem, we should dene the two axes shown in Fig. 1a, the

inertia axis and the elastic axis. The inertia axis is dened as the locus of the mass centers

of the cross sections and the elastic axis is the locus of the shear centers, whereas a shear

center is a point at which shearing force produces a pure bending and a moment about it

produces a pure torsion. We denote the bending deection of the elastic axis by w(x, t) and

the torsional rotation about the elastic axis by q(x, t), where w is positive if it acts

downward and q is positive if the leading edge is up (Fig. 1b). The angle q is referred

to the local angle of attack. We take the x-axis to coincide with the elastic axis, which is

assumed to be straight, and denote the distance between the leading edge and the elastic

axis at any point x by y

0

(x), the distance between the elastic axis and the inertia axis by

y

q

(x) and the chord length by c(x). The bending deection of the elastic axis is shown in

Fig. 1c. The speed of the air ow relative to the wing denoted by U is assumed to be

constant.

The boundary-value problem for the free vibration of the wing in the presence of

aerodynamic forces is described by the following differential equations [57]

Fig. 1. (a) Elastic axis and inertia axis for a cantilever aircraft wing in steady air ow; (b) wing cross section;

(c) bending deection of the elastic axis.

M.R. Moosavi et al. / Thin-Walled Structures 43 (2005) 617627 619

v

2

vx

2

EI

v

2

w

vx

2

_ _

Cm

v

2

w

vt

2

Cmy

q

v

2

q

vt

2

C

rU

2

2

c

!

dC

L

dq

q C

1

U

vw

vt

C

c

U

3

4

K

y

0

c

_ _

vq

vt

_ _

Z0; 0!x!L (1a)

K

v

vx

GJ

vq

vx

_ _

Cmy

q

v

2

w

vt

2

CI

q

v

2

q

vt

2

C

rU

2

2

c

2

cp

8U

vq

vt

C

1

4

K

y

0

c

_ _

dC

L

dq

q C

1

U

vw

vt

C

c

U

3

4

K

y

0

c

_ _

vq

vt

_ _ _ _

Z0; 0!x!L (1b)

which, the boundary conditions are

w Z0;

vw

vx

Z0; q Z0; at x Z0; EI

v

2

w

vx

2

Z0;

v

vx

EI

v

2

w

vx

2

_ _

Z0; GJ

vq

vx

Z0; at x ZL (2)

where

EI bending stiffness,

GJ torsional stiffness,

m mass per unit length,

I

q

mass moment of inertia per unit length,

r air density and

C

L

local lift coefcient.

The aerodynamic forces and moments were derived by means of the so-called quasi-

steady strip theory whereas the local lift coefcient C

L

is proportional to the

instantaneous angle of attack q. The derivative dC

L

/dq is assumed to be constant, with

a theoretical value of 2p for incompressible ow and an experimental value of a little bit

less than 2p. The quasi-steady assumption implies that the aerodynamic forces and

moments depend only on the instantaneous deformations; and prior history of the motion

can be ignored, which simplies the equations of motion greatly [3]. In fact, the resulting

equations of motion and boundary conditions are linear and homogeneous. Still, the

system is non-self-adjoint.

The boundary-value problem admits a solution in the exponential form

w(x; t) ZW(x)e

lt

; q(x; t) ZQ(x)e

lt

(3)

where W(x), Q(x) and l are in general complex. Inserting Eq. (3) into Eqs. (1a), (1b) and

(2) and dividing through by e

lt

, we obtain the differential eigenvalue problem consisting of

M.R. Moosavi et al. / Thin-Walled Structures 43 (2005) 617627 620

the differential equations

d

2

dx

2

EI

d

2

W

dx

2

_ _

C

rU

2

2

c

dC

L

dq

QCl

rU

2

c

dC

L

dq

WCc

3

4

K

y

0

c

_ _ _ _

Q

Cl

2

m(W Cy

0

Q)

Z0; 0!x!L (4a)

K

d

dx

GJ

dQ

dx

_ _

C

rU

2

2

c

2

1

4

K

y

0

c

_ _

dC

L

dq

Q

Cl

rU

2

c

2

1

4

K

y

0

c

_ _

dC

L

dq

WCc

1

4

K

y

0

c

_ _

3

4

K

y

0

c

_ _

dC

L

dq

C

p

8

_ _

Q

_ _

Cl

2

(my

q

WCI

q

Q)

Z0; 0!x!L (4b)

and the boundary conditions

W Z0;

dW

dx

Z0; QZ0; at x Z0; EI

d

2

W

dx

2

Z0;

d

dx

EI

d

2

W

dx

2

_ _

Z0; GJ

dQ

dx

Z0 at x ZL (5)

The differential eigenvalue problem, Eqs. (4a), (4b) and (5), has no closed-form

solution, so that we consider an approximate solution by means of Galerkins method. To

this end, we assume a solution in the form

W(x) Zf

T

1

(x)a

1

; Q(x) Zf

T

2

(x)a

2

(6)

in which f

1

and f

2

are vectors of comparison functions and a

1

and a

2

are vectors of

undetermined coefcients; where f

1

and a

1

are of dimension n

1

and f

2

and a

2

of

dimension n

2

, and n

1

Cn

2

Zn. The vector f

1

satises the boundary conditions are follows

f

1

(0) Z0; f

/

1

}

xZ0

Z0

EIf

//

1

}

xZL

Z0; (EIf

//

1

)

/

}

xZL

Z0

(7a)

and the vector f

2

satises the following boundary conditions

f

2

(0) Z0; GJf

/

2

}

xZL

Z0 (7b)

where primes denote the ordinary derivatives w.r.t. x. Inserting Eq. (6) into Eqs. (4a) and

(4b), premultiplying Eq. (4b) by f

2

and integrating over the length of the beam, we obtain

the following algebraic eigenvalue problem

K CU

2

H ClUL Cl

2

M|a Z0 (8)

M.R. Moosavi et al. / Thin-Walled Structures 43 (2005) 617627 621

where aZ[a

T

1

a

T

2

]

T

and the various matrices have the submatrices

K

11

Z

_

L

0

f

1

(EIf

//

1

T)

//

dx Z

_

L

0

EIf

//

1

f

//

1

T dx

K

12

Z0 K

21

Z0

K

22

ZK

_

L

0

f

2

(GJf

/

2

T)

/

dx Z

_

GJf

/

2

f

/

2

T dx H

11

Z0

H

12

Z

r

2

dC

L

dq

_

L

0

cf

1

f

T

2

dx

H

21

Z0

H

22

Z

r

2

dC

L

dq

_

L

0

c

2

1

4

K

y

0

c

_ _

f

1

f

T

2

dx

L

11

Z

r

2

dC

L

dq

_

L

0

cf

1

f

T

1

dx

L

12

Z

r

2

dC

L

dq

_

L

0

c

2

3

4

K

y

0

c

_ _

f

1

f

T

2

dx

L

21

Z

r

2

dC

L

dq

_

L

0

c

2

1

4

K

y

0

c

_ _

f

2

f

T

1

dx

L

22

Z

r

2

_

L

0

c

3

1

4

K

y

0

c

_ _

3

4

K

y

0

c

_ _

dC

L

dq

C

p

8

_ _

f

2

f

T

2

dx

M

11

Z

_

L

0

mf

1

f

T

1

dx

M

12

Z

_

L

0

my

q

f

1

f

T

2

dx

M

12

Z

_

L

0

my

q

f

2

f

T

1

dx

M

22

Z

_

L

0

I

q

f

2

f

T

2

dx

(9)

The eigenvalue problem (8) can be expressed in the standard form

Ax Zlx (10)

in which xZ[a

T

la

T

]

T

and

A Z

0 I

KM

K1

(K CU

2

H) KM

K1

UL

_ _

(11)

The eigenvalue l is a continuous function of the air speed U. When UZ0, the system is

conservative and l is pure imaginary. For Us0, lZaCiu. It can be shown that [1] for

sufciency small U and for dC

L

=dq!2p the wing is losing energy to the surrounding air,

so that the motion represents damped oscillation. This implies asymptotic stability, so that

a!0. At some point, as U increases, a turns from negative to positive, as shown in Fig. 2,

so that the motion turns from asymptotically stable to unstable. At point aZ0, at which the

motion is merely stable and ready to become unstable, the air speed reaches the critical

M.R. Moosavi et al. / Thin-Walled Structures 43 (2005) 617627 622

value U

cr

. There can be more than one critical point but the lowest one is the most

important. Because in actual ight, U increases from all initial zero value. There are two

types of critical values, depending on the imaginary part u. When aZ0 and uZ0, so that

lZ0, the wing is said to be in critical divergent condition. When aZ0 and us0, the wing

is said to be in critical utter condition. To calculate U

cr

, it is necessary to solve the

eigenvalue problem repeatedly by increasing the value of U, beginning with a small

magnitude. In the beginning all the eigenvalues will have negative real part. Then the rst

value of U for which the real part of eigenvalue becomes zero is U

cr

.

At rst estimate of U

cr

can be obtained by approximating W and Q by means of a single

term each, n

1

Zn

2

Z1. Then, letting lZiu in Eq. (10) and pre-multiplying by block-diag.

[I M], we can obtain U

cr

from the following determinantal equation

det

Kiu 0 1 0

0 Kiu 0 1

Kk

11

KU

2

cr

h

12

K(ium

11

CU

cr

l

11

) K(ium

12

CU

cr

l

12

)

0 K(k

22

CU

2

cr

h

22

) K(ium

12

CU

cr

l

21

) K(ium

22

CU

cr

l

22

)

_

_

_

_

Zu

4

(m

11

m

22

Km

2

12

) Kiu

3

U

cr

[m

11

l

22

Cm

22

l

11

Km

12

(l

12

Cl

21

)]

Ku

2

[U

2

cr

(l

11

l

22

Kl

12

l

21

Kh

12

m

12

Ch

22

m

11

) Ck

22

m

11

Ck

11

m

22

]

KiuU

cr

[U

2

cr

(h

12

h

21

Ch

22

l

11

) Ck

22

l

11

Kk

11

l

22

] Ck

11

(U

2

cr

h

22

Ck

22

)

Z0 (12)

Eq. (12) is a complex variable equation. Therefore, its satisfaction requires that both the

real and imaginary part to be zero, which derives a solution for both u and U

cr

. Indeed,

equating the imaginary part to zero, we obtain

u

2

Z

U

2

cr

(h

12

l

21

Ch

22

l

11

) Ck

22

l

11

Kk

11

l

22

m

12

(l

12

Cl

21

) K(m

11

l

22

Cm

22

l

11

)

(13)

Then, inserting Eq. (13) into the real part of Eq. (12), we obtain the quadratic equation in

U

2

cr

aU

4

cr

CbU

2

cr

Cc Z0 (14)

where

Fig. 2. The real part of eigenvalue vs. the air speed.

M.R. Moosavi et al. / Thin-Walled Structures 43 (2005) 617627 623

a Z(h

12

l

21

Ch

22

l

11

)(h

12

l

21

Ch

22

l

11

) K(m

11

m

22

Km

2

12

) K(l

11

l

22

Kl

12

l

21

Kh

12

m

12

Ch

22

m

11

)[m

12

(l

12

Cl

21

) K(m

11

l

22

Cm

22

l

11

)] (15)

b Z2(h

12

l

21

Ch

22

l

11

)(k

22

l

11

Kk

11

l

22

)(m

11

m

22

Km

2

12

) K[(h

12

l

21

Ch

22

l

11

)(k

22

m

11

Ck

11

m

22

) C(l

11

l

22

Kl

12

l

21

Kh

12

m

12

Ch

22

m

11

)][m

12

(l

12

Cl

21

) K(m

11

l

22

Cm

22

l

11

)] Ck

11

k

22

[m

12

(l

12

Cl

21

) K(m

11

l

22

Cm

22

l

11

)]

2

c Z(k

22

l

11

Kk

11

l

22

)

2

(m

11

m

22

Km

2

12

) K(k

22

l

11

Kk

11

l

22

)(k

22

m

11

Ck

11

m

22

)[m

12

(l

12

Cl

21

) K(m

11

l

22

Cm

22

l

11

)] Ck

11

k

22

[m

12

(l

12

Cl

21

) K(m

11

l

22

Cm

22

l

11

)]

2

Consequently, the solution of Eq. (14) simplied as follows:

U

2

cr

ZK

b

2a

G

1

2a

b

2

K4ac

_

(16)

Hence, there are four values for U

cr

. For utter to occur, at least one of these values must

be real and positive. Then, an approximation for the critical air speed U

cr

is given by the

smallest real positive value.

3. Validation

In order to validate the accuracy of the model developed so far, Golands wing was

used. The utter result in incompressible ow by using the quasi-steady method was

calculated, which is compared with the exact one [5]. It can be seen in Table 1 that the

correlation is excellent for the onset of utter speed and utter frequency. Followed by the

rst step, compressibility effect on Golands wing was investigated and the comparison

results are also displayed in Table 1. It can be seen that the compressibility only causes

about 5.0% decrease of the utter speed and 2.2% decrease of the utter frequency

compared with the incompressible model predicted. This is consistent with the well-

known fact that at the lower range of the compressible subsonic speeds, the effect of

compressibility on utter is quite small.

Table 1

Comparison of the calculated utter results

Method Description Flutter speed (Mach#) Flutter frequency (Hz)

Exact 2-D incompressible ow 0.554 11.25

Galerkin 2-D incompressible ow 0.554 11.15

Galerkin 2-D compressible ow 0.526 10.90

M.R. Moosavi et al. / Thin-Walled Structures 43 (2005) 617627 624

4. Numerical example

Consider a wing with constant chord and the following characteristics (Fig. 1):

L Z10 m; y

cg

Z0:6c; m Z200 kg; r Z1:220 kg=m

3

; c Z3 m;

y

0

Z0:5c;

dC

L

dq

Z2p

A nite element model of the wing gives natural frequencies and mode shapes similar to

those derived experimentally. The rst four modes represent the rst and the second

bending and torsion, with corresponding frequencies as 9.60, 38.20, 48.35, and 91.54 Hz,

respectively.

Applying the approach developed in this paper it was found that

u

F

Z96 rad=s and V

F

Z191 m=s

as shown in Figs. 35.

We also applied the Galerkin method to both incompressible and compressible ow in

two dimensions. The results are then compared with the exact values obtained from [5].

Comparison results show good agreement between our applied method and the exact one.

See Table 1.

5. Conclusions

A new approach has been introduced for calculating the utter condition of a linear

3-DOF aeroelastic system. By using this approach with FEM, it can be employed for any

Fig. 3. Velocity vs. damping.

M.R. Moosavi et al. / Thin-Walled Structures 43 (2005) 617627 625

higher order aeroelastic system. Based on the model developed here, the effect of

aerodynamic compressibility on utter has been considered. The major conclusions are:

Compressibility at high subsonic speeds has a signicant effect on utter speed of the

wing. The compressibility causes a drop of the utter speed and utter frequency as

compared to the incompressible ow. In addition, the mechanism of utter may be

dramatically changed by compressibility.

Elastic tailoring can effectively change the onset of utter. However, this may be

achieved at the cost of dramatically increasing the response intensity.

Fig. 4. Damping vs. frequency.

Fig. 5. Velocity vs. frequency.

M.R. Moosavi et al. / Thin-Walled Structures 43 (2005) 617627 626

References

[1] Nissim E. Flutter suppression using active controls based on the concept of aerodynamic energy. NASA TM

6199; June 1971.

[2] Friedmann PP. The renaissance of aeroelasticity and its future. J Aircraft 1999;36(1):10521.

[3] Bisplinghoff RL, Ashley H, Halfman RL. Aeroelasticity. Reading, MA: Addisson-Wesley; 1955.

[4] Dowell EH, et al. A modern course in aeroelasticity, 3rd ed. Norwell, MA: Kulwer Academic; 1995.

[5] Lin J, Iliff KW. Aerodynamic lift and moment calculations using a closed-form solution of the Possio

equation. NASA/TM-2000-209019; 2000.

[6] Karpel M. Design for active and passive utter suppression and gust alleviation. NASA CR3482; June 1981.

[7] Karpel M, Hoadley ST. Physically weighted approximations of unsteady aerodynamic forces using the

minimum-state method. NASA TP 3025; March 1991.

[8] Leishman JG, Nguyen KQ. State space representation of unsteady airfoil behavior. AIAA J 1990;28(5):

83644.

[9] Hariharan N, Leishman JG. Unsteady aerodynamics of a apped airfoil in subsonic ow by indicial concepts.

J Aircraft 1996;33(5):85568.

M.R. Moosavi et al. / Thin-Walled Structures 43 (2005) 617627 627

- The Flutter· of a Uniform Cantilever WingTransféré parm085
- 4 Rectangular Concrete TanksTransféré parajitgijare
- 10 MVA Short Circuit (Thermal & Dynamic)Transféré parajitkalel
- Ae6015 Rockets and Missiles l t p cTransféré parYokesvaran K
- Wind Turbine Dynamica, NREL, 2008Transféré parJulhio DiGa
- Innovation in Flight: Research of the Nasa Langley Research Center - IITransféré parsandglasspatrol
- get_startTransféré parredoctober24
- Aerodynamics,An IntroductionTransféré parHumayun Yousaf
- VIBRATION_2_MARK_QA.docTransféré parJeneev Jeeve
- BS Aeronautical 2011 2012Transféré parromer88
- booksTransféré parAmr Salem
- Flutter and Aeroelastic StabilityTransféré parAljo Dumdumaya
- Water Tank on GroundTransféré pardsananda
- EZHILTransféré parRaja Ram
- prodstdV8i_Transféré parKayBee Datiles
- 1-s2.0-0020768395000976-mainTransféré parCarlos Teixeira
- Flutter Calculations for a Model Wing Usint the MSC Nastran Structural Analysis ProgramTransféré pardiegopena
- WoodTransféré parJillian Howard
- Beam Cantiliever CalculationTransféré parpuneet
- Water Retaining StructureTransféré parAnonymous WvPYWbt4KA
- Final RC Slides.pdfTransféré parCarlos Gil
- Aeroelastic Phenom[1]Transféré parAsur Cortes G
- CFX12_03_Physics1.pdfTransféré parAdrian García Moyano
- 5119671Transféré parmlouredocasado
- Singly Reinforced SectionTransféré paranepameer
- Suspension BridgesTransféré parSilver Olguín Camacho
- Jha AE212syllabusTransféré parMirza Muneeb Ahsan
- rmTransféré parDurai Raj Kumar
- SECTION 507.docxTransféré parFerDenanUrotZz
- articuloenriematUTM.3raPublicacinJulioTransféré parlblancoing

- dsfdsTransféré parkrlalit
- Canusa PDS NA Type PTransféré parFranco Tanda
- Exploring-Splunk.pdfTransféré parchotaajay
- Internship Report on Nayyer Carpets IndustriesTransféré parbbaahmad89
- CCTV PolicyTransféré parKeenanMartinez
- T661x UART Protocol - Customer Rev1Transféré pardmvas
- al h2Transféré parYashas C Shekar
- Flowserve PumpsTransféré parhasan099
- PDF_ChallanList_4-18-2017 12-00-00 AMTransféré parPrince Digital Computers
- BBMP1103 Mathemaics for Management AssignmentTransféré parAngel Deborah John
- Silvers v. Google, Inc. - Document No. 201Transféré parJustia.com
- Mariam the Effects of Sacco to the Perfomance of Financial Institutitions (Proposal)Transféré parSuleiman Abdul
- Eos Eol Notice c51 730121Transféré parolfa0
- Friday, February 10, 2012 [Sex Issue]Transféré paruwogazette
- Tis Jis Sp SectionTransféré parK Bhattacharya
- Akulinichev Cern 2012Transféré parRISKA FITRIANI
- c166 App OcdsTransféré parcarver
- Dark Fiber versus Lit FiberTransféré parmisbin66
- LABOR REVIEW – MIDTERMS REVIEWER .docxTransféré parJoni Aquino
- Geopolymer Formation and Its Unique PropertiesTransféré parmohammadi_790141120
- oracle-goldengate-for-database-2031145.pdfTransféré pardoanduchai
- Association of Opinion Journalists - Annual Convention ProgramTransféré parThe American Security Project
- Science Study NotesTransféré parDanaEHorochowski
- Anician MythsTransféré parOrsi Szilágyi
- PT2258Transféré parzektor
- A Case Study of ShellTransféré parSidharthaBorah
- ADVANCED+GEOTECHNICAL+ANALYSES.pdfTransféré parRaul Zapana Zela
- Alternative Certificate - Foundation Competences ProtectedTransféré parFlavian Costin
- Uco bankTransféré parPuja Sahay
- Topic - 4 (Informed Search and Exploration) [14.02.17].pptTransféré parmusabbir