Search NASA⌕ Search

Engineering topics

Milholen, W. E.

Publications and source records attributed to Milholen, W. E..

Overview of CFD Validation Experiments for Circulation Control Applications at NASA

Circulation control is a viable active flow control approach that can be used to meet the NASA Subsonic Fixed Wing project s Cruise Efficient Short Take Off and Landing goals. Currently, circulation control systems are primarily designed using empirical methods. However, large uncertainty in our ability to predict circulation control performance has led to the development of advanced CFD methods. This paper provides an overview of a systematic approach to developing CFD tools for basic and advanced circulation control applications. This four-step approach includes "Unit", "Benchmar", "Subsystem", and "Complete System" experiments. The paper emphasizes the ongoing and planned 2-D and 3-D physics orientated experiments with corresponding CFD efforts. Sample data are used to highlight the challenges involved in conducting circulation control computations and experiments.

Jones, G. S.↗

Transonic Drag Prediction on a DLR-F6 Transport Configuration Using Unstructured Grid Solvers

A second international AIAA Drag Prediction Workshop (DPW-II) was organized and held in Orlando Florida on June 21-22, 2003. The primary purpose was to inves- tigate the code-to-code uncertainty. address the sensitivity of the drag prediction to grid size and quantify the uncertainty in predicting nacelle/pylon drag increments at a transonic cruise condition. This paper presents an in-depth analysis of the DPW-II computational results from three state-of-the-art unstructured grid Navier-Stokes flow solvers exercised on similar families of tetrahedral grids. The flow solvers are USM3D - a tetrahedral cell-centered upwind solver. FUN3D - a tetrahedral node-centered upwind solver, and NSU3D - a general element node-centered central-differenced solver. For the wingbody, the total drag predicted for a constant-lift transonic cruise condition showed a decrease in code-to-code variation with grid refinement as expected. For the same flight condition, the wing/body/nacelle/pylon total drag and the nacelle/pylon drag increment predicted showed an increase in code-to-code variation with grid refinement. Although the range in total drag for the wingbody fine grids was only 5 counts, a code-to-code comparison of surface pressures and surface restricted streamlines indicated that the three solvers were not all converging to the same flow solutions- different shock locations and separation patterns were evident. Similarly, the wing/body/nacelle/pylon solutions did not appear to be converging to the same flow solutions. Overall, grid refinement did not consistently improve the correlation with experimental data for either the wingbody or the wing/body/nacelle pylon configuration. Although the absolute values of total drag predicted by two of the solvers for the medium and fine grids did not compare well with the experiment, the incremental drag predictions were within plus or minus 3 counts of the experimental data. The correlation with experimental incremental drag was not significantly changed by specifying transition. Although the sources of code-to-code variation in force and moment predictions for the three unstructured grid codes have not yet been identified, the current study reinforces the necessity of applying multiple codes to the same application to assess uncertainty.

Lee-Rausch, E. M.↗