Engineering topics
Publications and source records attributed to Luckring, James M..
In the present paper the main results of the new experiments from VFE-2 are summarized. These include some force and moment results, surface and off-body measurements, as well as steady and fluctuating quantities. Some critical remarks are added, and an outlook for future investigations is given.
The Virtual Laboratory (VL) was to be an integral part of the database service that NASA provided to the international community, and for a brief period the VL was fully operational in the CAWAPI facet of the AVT-113 task group. This chapter details how one can construct a VL and also some of the lessons learned along the way that required changes to be made. The VL was to support both the CAWAPI and VFE-2 facets but due to the lack of funding and sufficient Information Technology (IT) support people with the right skills, the VFE-2 facet only reached the advanced planning stage with little software in place. However, both efforts point out the value of a VL in a task group like AVT-113 and illustrate that there needs to be a budgeted item for the IT effort to bring the VL to full operational status in each application.
A review is presented of the initial experimental results and analysis that formed the basis the Vortex Flow Experiment 2 (VFE-2). The focus of this work was to distinguish the basic effects of Reynolds number, Mach number, angle of attack, and leading edge bluntness on separation-induced leading-edge vortex flows that are common to slender wings. Primary analysis is focused on detailed static surface pressure distributions, and the results demonstrate significant effects regarding the onset and progression of leading-edge vortex separation.
After the Columbia Accident Investigation Board (CAIB) report. the NASA Administrator at that time chartered an executive team (known as the Diaz Team) to identify the CAIB report elements with Agency-wide applicability, and to develop corrective measures to address each element. This report documents the chronological development and release of an Agency-wide Standard for Models and Simulations (M&S) (NASA Standard 7009) in response to Action #4 from the report, "A Renewed Commitment to Excellence: An Assessment of the NASA Agency-wide Applicability of the Columbia Accident Investigation Board Report, January 30, 2004".
Following the Columbia Accident Investigation Board report, the NASA Administrator chartered an executive team (known as the Diaz Team) to identify those CAIB report elements with NASA-wide applicability and to develop corrective measures to address each element. One such measure was the development of a standard for the development, documentation, and operation of models and simulations. This report describes the philosophy and requirements overview of the resulting NASA Standard for Models and Simulations.
A scale is presented to evaluate the rigor of modeling and simulation (M&S) practices for the purpose of supporting a credibility assessment of the M&S results. The scale distinguishes required and achieved levels of rigor for a set of M&S elements that contribute to credibility including both technical and process measures. The work has its origins in an interest within NASA to include a Credibility Assessment Scale in development of a NASA standard for models and simulations.
Software that is used for aerospace flight control and to display information to pilots and crew is expected to be correct and credible at all times. This type of software is typically developed under strict management processes, which are intended to reduce defects in the software product. However, modeling and simulation (M&S) software may exhibit varying degrees of correctness and credibility, depending on a large and complex set of factors. These factors include its intended use, the known physics and numerical approximations within the M&S, and the referent data set against which the M&S correctness is compared. The correctness and credibility of an M&S effort is closely correlated to the uncertainty management (UM) practices that are applied to the M&S effort. This paper describes an uncertainty structure matrix for M&S, which provides a set of objective descriptions for the possible states of UM practices within a given M&S effort. The columns in the uncertainty structure matrix contain UM elements or practices that are common across most M&S efforts, and the rows describe the potential levels of achievement in each of the elements. A practitioner can quickly look at the matrix to determine where an M&S effort falls based on a common set of UM practices that are described in absolute terms that can be applied to virtually any M&S effort. The matrix can also be used to plan those steps and resources that would be needed to improve the UM practices for a given M&S effort.
A review is presented of the initial experimental results and analysis that formed the basis the Vortex Flow Experiment 2 (VFE-2). The focus of this work was to distinguish the basic effects of Reynolds number, Mach number, angle of attack, and leading edge bluntness on separation-induced leading-edge vortex flows that are common to slender wings. Primary analysis is focused on detailed static surface pressure distributions, and the results demonstrate significant effects regarding the onset and progression of leading-edge vortex separation.
In the present paper the main results of the new experiments from Vortex Flow Experiment (VFE-2) are summarized. These include some force and moment results, surface and off-body measurements, as well as steady and fluctuating quantities. Some critical remarks are added, and an outlook for future investigations is given.
The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) recently issued an interim version of the Standard for Models and Simulations (M&S Standard) [1]. The action to develop the M&S Standard was identified in an internal assessment [2] of agency-wide changes needed in the wake of the Columbia Accident [3]. The primary goal of this standard is to ensure that the credibility of M&S results is properly conveyed to those making decisions affecting human safety or mission success criteria. The secondary goal is to assure that the credibility of the results from models and simulations meets the project requirements (for credibility). This presentation explains the motivation and key aspects of the M&S Standard, with a special focus on the requirements for verification, validation and uncertainty quantification. Some pilot applications of this standard to computational fluid dynamics applications will be provided as illustrations. The authors of this paper are the members of the team that developed the initial three drafts of the standard, the last of which benefited from extensive comments from most of the NASA Centers. The current version (number 4) incorporates modifications made by a team representing 9 of the 10 NASA Centers. A permanent version of the M&S Standard is expected by December 2007. The scope of the M&S Standard is confined to those uses of M&S that support program and project decisions that may affect human safety or mission success criteria. Such decisions occur, in decreasing order of importance, in the operations, the test & evaluation, and the design & analysis phases. Requirements are placed on (1) program and project management, (2) models, (3) simulations and analyses, (4) verification, validation and uncertainty quantification (VV&UQ), (5) recommended practices, (6) training, (7) credibility assessment, and (8) reporting results to decision makers. A key component of (7) and (8) is the use of a Credibility Assessment Scale, some of the details of which were developed in consultation with William Oberkampf, David Peercy and Timothy Trocano of Sandia National Laboratories. The focus of most of the requirements, including those for VV&UQ, is on the documentation of what was done and the reporting, using the Credibility Assessment Scale, of the level of rigor that was followed. The aspects of one option for the Credibilty Assessment Scale are (1) code verification, (2) solution verification, (3) validation, (4) predictive capability, (5) technical review, (6) process control, and (7) operator and analyst qualification.
Our choice of title may seem strange but we mean each word. In this talk, we are not going to be concerned with computations made "after the fact", i.e. those for which data are available and which are being conducted for explanation and insight. Here we are interested in preventing S&C design problems by finding them through computation before data are available. For such a computation to have any credibility with those who absorb the risk, it is necessary to quantitatively PREDICT the quality of the computational results.
An overview of Reynolds number, compressibility, and leading edge bluntness effects is presented for a 65 degree delta wing. The results of this study address both attached and vortex-flow aerodynamics and are based upon a unique data set obtained in the NASA-Langley National Transonic Facility (NTF) for i) Reynolds numbers ranging from conventional wind-tunnel to flight values, ii) Mach numbers ranging from subsonic to transonic speeds, and iii) leading-edge bluntness values that span practical slender wing applications. The data were obtained so as to isolate the subject effects and they present many challenges for Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) studies.
Turbulent Navier-Stokes computational results are presented for an advanced diamond wing semispan model at low-speed, high-lift conditions. The numerical results are obtained in support of a wind-tunnel test that was conducted in the National Transonic Facility at the NASA Langley Research Center. The model incorporated a generic fuselage and was mounted on the tunnel sidewall using a constant-width non-metric standoff. The computations were performed at to a nominal approach and landing flow conditions.The computed high-lift flow characteristics for the model in both the tunnel and in free-air environment are presented. The computed wing pressure distributions agreed well with the measured data and they both indicated a small effect due to the tunnel wall interference effects. However, the wall interference effects were found to be relatively more pronounced in the measured and the computed lift, drag and pitching moment. Although the magnitudes of the computed forces and moment were slightly off compared to the measured data, the increments due the wall interference effects were predicted reasonably well. The numerical results are also presented on the combined effects of the tunnel sidewall boundary layer and the standoff geometry on the fuselage forebody pressure distributions and the resulting impact on the configuration longitudinal aerodynamic characteristics.
This report consists of a survey of the state of the art in uncertainty-based design together with recommendations for a Base research activity in this area for the NASA Langley Research Center. This report identifies the needs and opportunities for computational and experimental methods that provide accurate, efficient solutions to nondeterministic multidisciplinary aerospace vehicle design problems. Barriers to the adoption of uncertainty-based design methods are identified. and the benefits of the use of such methods are explained. Particular research needs are listed.
In May of 2001 the Research and Technology Organization (RTO) sponsored a symposium on Vortex Flow and High Angle of Attack aerodynamics. Forty-six papers, organized into nine sessions, addressed computational and experimental studies of vortex flows pertinent to both aircraft and maritime applications. The studies also ranged from fundamental fluids investigations to flight test results. Selected highlights are included in this paper to provide a perspective toward the scope of the full symposium.
An experimental wind tunnel test of a 65 deg delta wing model with interchangeable leading edges was conducted in the Langley National Transonic Facility (NTF). The objective was to investigate the effects of Reynolds and Mach numbers on slender-wing leading-edge vortex flows with four values of wing leading-edge bluntness. Experimentally obtained pressure data are presented without analysis in tabulated and graphical formats across a Reynolds number range of 6 x 10(exp 6) to 120 x 10(exp 6) at a Mach number of 0.85 and across a Mach number range of 0.4 to 0.9 at Reynolds numbers of 6 x 10(exp 6), 60 x 10(exp 6), and 120 x 10(exp 6). Normal-force and pitching-moment coefficient plots for these Reynolds number and Mach number ranges are also presented.
An experimental wind tunnel test of a 65 deg delta wing model with interchangeable leading edges was conducted in the Langley National Transonic Facility (NTF). The objective was to investigate the effects of Reynolds and Mach numbers on slender-wing leading-edge vortex flows with four values of wing leading-edge bluntness. Experimentally obtained pressure data are presented without analysis in tabulated and graphical formats across a Reynolds number range of 6 x 10(exp 6) to 120 x 10(exp 6) at a Mach number of 0.85 and across a Mach number range of 0.4 to 0.9 at Reynolds numbers of 6 x 10(exp 6) and 60 x 10(exp 6). Normal-force and pitching-moment coefficient plots for these Reynolds number and Mach number ranges are also presented.
An experimental wind tunnel test of a 65 deg delta wing model with interchangeable leading edges was conducted in the Langley National Transonic Facility (NTF). The objective was to investigate the effects of Reynolds and Mach numbers on slender-wing leading-edge vortex flows with four values of wing leading-edge bluntness. Experimentally obtained pressure data are presented without analysis in tabulated and graphical formats across a Reynolds number range of 6 x 10(exp 6) to 36 x 10(exp 6) at a Mach number of 0.85 and across a Mach number range of 0.4 to 0.9 at a Reynolds number of 6 x 10(exp 6). Normal-force and pitching-moment coefficient plots for these Reynolds number and Mach number ranges are also presented.