Engineering topics

Brodersen, Olaf P.

Publications and source records attributed to Brodersen, Olaf P..

7 records

NASA NTRS2017

Summary of Data from the Sixth AIAA CFD Drag Prediction Workshop: CRM Cases 2 to 5

Results from the Sixth AIAA CFD Drag Prediction Workshop Common Research Model Cases 2 to 5 are presented. As with past workshops, numerical calculations are performed using industry-relevant geometry, methodology, and test cases. Cases 2 to 5 focused on force/moment and pressure predictions for the NASA Common Research Model wing-body and wing-body-nacelle-pylon configurations, including Case 2 - a grid refinement study and nacelle-pylon drag increment prediction study; Case 3 - an angle-of-attack buffet study; Case 4 - an optional wing-body grid adaption study; and Case 5 - an optional wing-body coupled aero-structural simulation. The Common Research Model geometry differed from previous workshops in that it was deformed to the appropriate static aeroelastic twist and deflection at each specified angle-of-attack. The grid refinement study used a common set of overset and unstructured grids, as well as user created Multiblock structured, unstructured, and Cartesian based grids. For the supplied common grids, six levels of refinement were created resulting in grids ranging from 7x10(exp 6) to 208x10(exp 6) cells. This study (Case 2) showed further reduced scatter from previous workshops, and very good prediction of the nacelle-pylon drag increment. Case 3 studied buffet onset at M=0.85 using the Medium grid (20 to 40x10(exp 6) nodes) from the above described sequence. The prescribed alpha sweep used finely spaced intervals through the zone where wing separation was expected to begin. Although the use of the prescribed aeroelastic twist and deflection at each angle-of-attack greatly improved the wing pressure distribution agreement with test data, many solutions still exhibited premature flow separation. The remaining solutions exhibited a significant spread of lift and pitching moment at each angle-of-attack, much of which can be attributed to excessive aft pressure loading and shock location variation. Four Case 4 grid adaption solutions were submitted. Starting with grids less than 2x10(exp 6) grid points, two solutions showed a rapid convergence to an acceptable solution. Four Case 5 coupled aerostructural solutions were submitted. Both showed good agreement with experimental data. Results from this workshop highlight the continuing need for CFD improvement, particularly for conditions with significant flow separation. These comparisons also suggest the need for improved experimental diagnostics to guide future CFD development.

Tinoco, Edward N.↗

NASA NTRS2013

Investigations of Fluid-Structure-Coupling and Turbulence Model Effects on the DLR Results of the Fifth AIAA CFD Drag Prediction Workshop

The accurate calculation of aerodynamic forces and moments is of significant importance during the design phase of an aircraft. Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes (RANS) based Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) has been strongly developed over the last two decades regarding robustness, efficiency, and capabilities for aerodynamically complex configurations. Incremental aerodynamic coefficients of different designs can be calculated with an acceptable reliability at the cruise design point of transonic aircraft for non-separated flows. But regarding absolute values as well as increments at off-design significant challenges still exist to compute aerodynamic data and the underlying flow physics with the accuracy required. In addition to drag, pitching moments are difficult to predict because small deviations of the pressure distributions, e.g. due to neglecting wing bending and twisting caused by the aerodynamic loads can result in large discrepancies compared to experimental data. Flow separations that start to develop at off-design conditions, e.g. in corner-flows, at trailing edges, or shock induced, can have a strong impact on the predictions of aerodynamic coefficients too. Based on these challenges faced by the CFD community a working group of the AIAA Applied Aerodynamics Technical Committee initiated in 2001 the CFD Drag Prediction Workshop (DPW) series resulting in five international workshops. The results of the participants and the committee are summarized in more than 120 papers. The latest, fifth workshop took place in June 2012 in conjunction with the 30th AIAA Applied Aerodynamics Conference. The results in this paper will evaluate the influence of static aeroelastic wing deformations onto pressure distributions and overall aerodynamic coefficients based on the NASA finite element structural model and the common grids.

Keye, Stefan↗

NASA NTRS2013

Summary of Data from the Fifth AIAA CFD Drag Prediction Workshop

Results from the Fifth AIAA CFD Drag Prediction Workshop (DPW-V) are presented. As with past workshops, numerical calculations are performed using industry-relevant geometry, methodology, and test cases. This workshop focused on force/moment predictions for the NASA Common Research Model wing-body configuration, including a grid refinement study and an optional buffet study. The grid refinement study used a common grid sequence derived from a multiblock topology structured grid. Six levels of refinement were created resulting in grids ranging from 0.64x10(exp 6) to 138x10(exp 6) hexahedra - a much larger range than is typically seen. The grids were then transformed into structured overset and hexahedral, prismatic, tetrahedral, and hybrid unstructured formats all using the same basic cloud of points. This unique collection of grids was designed to isolate the effects of grid type and solution algorithm by using identical point distributions. This study showed reduced scatter and standard deviation from previous workshops. The second test case studied buffet onset at M=0.85 using the Medium grid (5.1x106 nodes) from the above described sequence. The prescribed alpha sweep used finely spaced intervals through the zone where wing separation was expected to begin. Some solutions exhibited a large side of body separation bubble that was not observed in the wind tunnel results. An optional third case used three sets of geometry, grids, and conditions from the Turbulence Model Resource website prepared by the Turbulence Model Benchmarking Working Group. These simple cases were intended to help identify potential differences in turbulence model implementation. Although a few outliers and issues affecting consistency were identified, the majority of participants produced consistent results.

Levy, David W.↗

NASA NTRS2010

Summary of the Fourth AIAA CFD Drag Prediction Workshop

Results from the Fourth AIAA Drag Prediction Workshop (DPW-IV) are summarized. The workshop focused on the prediction of both absolute and differential drag levels for wing-body and wing-body-horizontal-tail configurations that are representative of transonic transport air- craft. Numerical calculations are performed using industry-relevant test cases that include lift- specific flight conditions, trimmed drag polars, downwash variations, dragrises and Reynolds- number effects. Drag, lift and pitching moment predictions from numerous Reynolds-Averaged Navier-Stokes computational fluid dynamics methods are presented. Solutions are performed on structured, unstructured and hybrid grid systems. The structured-grid sets include point- matched multi-block meshes and over-set grid systems. The unstructured and hybrid grid sets are comprised of tetrahedral, pyramid, prismatic, and hexahedral elements. Effort is made to provide a high-quality and parametrically consistent family of grids for each grid type about each configuration under study. The wing-body-horizontal families are comprised of a coarse, medium and fine grid; an optional extra-fine grid augments several of the grid families. These mesh sequences are utilized to determine asymptotic grid-convergence characteristics of the solution sets, and to estimate grid-converged absolute drag levels of the wing-body-horizontal configuration using Richardson extrapolation.

Vassberg, John C.↗

NASA NTRS2008

Comparison of NTF Experimental Data with CFD Predictions from the Third AIAA CFD Drag Prediction Workshop

Recently acquired experimental data for the DLR-F6 wing-body transonic transport con figuration from the National Transonic Facility (NTF) are compared with the database of computational fluid dynamics (CFD) predictions generated for the Third AIAA CFD Drag Prediction Workshop (DPW-III). The NTF data were collected after the DPW-III, which was conducted with blind test cases. These data include both absolute drag levels and increments associated with this wing-body geometry. The baseline DLR-F6 wing-body geometry is also augmented with a side-of-body fairing which eliminates the flow separation in this juncture region. A comparison between computed and experimentally observed sizes of the side-of-body flow-separation bubble is included. The CFD results for the drag polars and separation bubble sizes are computed on grids which represent current engineering best practices for drag predictions. In addition to these data, a more rigorous attempt to predict absolute drag at the design point is provided. Here, a series of three grid densities are utilized to establish an asymptotic trend of computed drag with respect to grid convergence. This trend is then extrapolated to estimate a grid-converged absolute drag level.

Vassberg, John C.↗

NASA NTRS2008

Grid Quality and Resolution Issues from the Drag Prediction Workshop Series

The drag prediction workshop series (DPW), held over the last six years, and sponsored by the AIAA Applied Aerodynamics Committee, has been extremely useful in providing an assessment of the state-of-the-art in computationally based aerodynamic drag prediction. An emerging consensus from the three workshop series has been the identification of spatial discretization errors as a dominant error source in absolute as well as incremental drag prediction. This paper provides an overview of the collective experience from the workshop series regarding the effect of grid-related issues on overall drag prediction accuracy. Examples based on workshop results are used to illustrate the effect of grid resolution and grid quality on drag prediction, and grid convergence behavior is examined in detail. For fully attached flows, various accurate and successful workshop results are demonstrated, while anomalous behavior is identified for a number of cases involving substantial regions of separated flow. Based on collective workshop experiences, recommendations for improvements in mesh generation technology which have the potential to impact the state-of-the-art of aerodynamic drag prediction are given.

Mavriplis, Dimitri J.↗

NASA NTRS2007

Summary of the Third AIAA CFD Drag Prediction Workshop

The workshop focused on the prediction of both absolute and differential drag levels for wing-body and wing-al;one configurations of that are representative of transonic transport aircraft. The baseline DLR-F6 wing-body geometry, previously utilized in DPW-II, is also augmented with a side-body fairing to help reduce the complexity of the flow physics in the wing-body juncture region. In addition, two new wing-alone geometries have been developed for the DPW-II. Numerical calculations are performed using industry-relevant test cases that include lift-specific and fixed-alpha flight conditions, as well as full drag polars. Drag, lift, and pitching moment predictions from previous Reynolds-Averaged Navier-Stokes computational fluid Dynamics Methods are presented, focused on fully-turbulent flows. Solutions are performed on structured, unstructured, and hybrid grid systems. The structured grid sets include point-matched multi-block meshes and over-set grid systems. The unstructured and hybrid grid sets are comprised of tetrahedral, pyramid, and prismatic elements. Effort was made to provide a high-quality and parametrically consistent family of grids for each grid type about each configuration under study. The wing-body families are comprised of a coarse, medium, and fine grid, while the wing-alone families also include an extra-fine mesh. These mesh sequences are utilized to help determine how the provided flow solutions fair with respect to asymptotic grid convergence, and are used to estimate an absolute drag of each configuration.

Vassberg, John C.↗