Search NASA⌕ Search

Engineering topics

Morrison, Joseph H.

Publications and source records attributed to Morrison, Joseph H..

At least 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
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 NTRS2016

Goals and Status of the NASA Juncture Flow Experiment

The NASA Juncture Flow experiment is a new effort whose focus is attaining validation data in the juncture region of a wing-body configuration. The experiment is designed specifically for the purpose of CFD validation. Current turbulence models routinely employed by Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes CFD are inconsistent in their prediction of corner flow separation in aircraft juncture regions, so experimental data in the near-wall region of such a configuration will be useful both for assessment as well as for turbulence model improvement. This paper summarizes the Juncture Flow effort to date, including preliminary risk-reduction experiments already conducted and planned future experiments. The requirements and challenges associated with conducting a quality validation test are discussed.

Rumsey, Christopher L.↗
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 NTRS2013

NASA Standard for Models and Simulations: Philosophy and Requirements Overview

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.

Blattnig, Steve R.↗
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 NTRS2010

CFD Assessment of Aerodynamic Degradation of a Subsonic Transport Due to Airframe Damage

A computational study is presented to assess the utility of two NASA unstructured Navier-Stokes flow solvers for capturing the degradation in static stability and aerodynamic performance of a NASA General Transport Model (GTM) due to airframe damage. The approach is to correlate computational results with a substantial subset of experimental data for the GTM undergoing progressive losses to the wing, vertical tail, and horizontal tail components. The ultimate goal is to advance the probability of inserting computational data into the creation of advanced flight simulation models of damaged subsonic aircraft in order to improve pilot training. Results presented in this paper demonstrate good correlations with slope-derived quantities, such as pitch static margin and static directional stability, and incremental rolling moment due to wing damage. This study further demonstrates that high fidelity Navier-Stokes flow solvers could augment flight simulation models with additional aerodynamic data for various airframe damage scenarios.

Frink, Neal T.↗
NASA NTRS2009

NASA Standard for Models and Simulations: Philosophy and Requirements Overview

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.

Blattnig, St3eve R.↗
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

Towards a Credibility Assessment of 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.

Blattnig, Steve R.↗
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

Drag Prediction for the DLR-F6 Wing/Body and DPW Wing using CFL3D and OVERFLOW Overset Mesh

A series of overset grids was generated in response to the 3rd AIAA CFD Drag Prediction Workshop (DPW-III) which preceded the 25th Applied Aerodynamics Conference in June 2006. DPW-III focused on accurate drag prediction for wing/body and wing-alone configurations. The grid series built for each configuration consists of a coarse, medium, fine, and extra-fine mesh. The medium mesh is first constructed using the current state of best practices for overset grid generation. The medium mesh is then coarsened and enhanced by applying a factor of 1.5 to each (I,J,K) dimension. The resulting set of parametrically equivalent grids increase in size by a factor of roughly 3.5 from one level to the next denser level. CFD simulations were performed on the overset grids using two different RANS flow solvers: CFL3D and OVERFLOW. The results were post-processed using Richardson extrapolation to approximate grid converged values of lift, drag, pitching moment, and angle-of-attack at the design condition. This technique appears to work well if the solution does not contain large regions of separated flow (similar to that seen n the DLR-F6 results) and appropriate grid densities are selected. The extra-fine grid data helped to establish asymptotic grid convergence for both the OVERFLOW FX2B wing/body results and the OVERFLOW DPW-W1/W2 wing-alone results. More CFL3D data is needed to establish grid convergence trends. The medium grid was utilized beyond the grid convergence study by running each configuration at several angles-of-attack so drag polars and lift/pitching moment curves could be evaluated. The alpha sweep results are used to compare data across configurations as well as across flow solvers. With the exception of the wing/body drag polar, the two codes compare well qualitatively showing consistent incremental trends and similar wing pressure comparisons.

Sclanfani, Anthony 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.↗
NASA NTRS2007

The Roles of Verification, Validation and Uncertainty Quantification in the NASA Standard for Models and Simulations

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.

Zang, Thomas A.↗
NASA NTRS2004

Quantitative Prediction of Computational Quality (so the S and C Folks will Accept it)

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.

Hemsch, Michael J.↗
NASA NTRS2004

A Best Practices System to Enhance CFD Use in Stability and Control Applications

Successful use of CFD to provide aerodynamics for stability and control (S&C) applications will require that the traditional time and costs associated with CFD be reduced and that the errors and uncertainties currently associated with CFD be better understood. CFD will be required to work under a wide range of flow conditions and provide fast and reliable aerodynamics if it is to contribute to this next generation of S&C analyses. CFD solutions have errors and uncertainties due to poorly converged solutions, solution anomalies caused by grids, turbulence models, and parameter selection, and other manifold reasons. In addition to the above problems, there will be a requirement for communications between the CFD expert and the S&C expert and possibly experts from other related disciplines. The CFD expert may not understand the technical problems associated with S&C, and it is almost certain the converse is true.

Morrison, Joseph H.↗
NASA NTRS2003

CFD Variability for a Civil Transport Aircraft Near Buffet-Onset Conditions

A CFD sensitivity analysis is conducted for an aircraft at several conditions, including flow with substantial separation (buffet onset). The sensitivity is studied using two different Navier-Stokes computer codes, three different turbulence models, and two different grid treatments of the wing trailing edge. This effort is a follow-on to an earlier study of CFD variation over a different aircraft in buffet onset conditions. Similar to the earlier study, the turbulence model is found to have the largest effect, with a variation of 3.8% in lift at the buffet onset angle of attack. Drag and moment variation are 2.9% and 23.6%, respectively. The variations due to code and trailing edge cap grid are smaller than that due to turbulence model. Overall, the combined approximate error band in CFD due to code, turbulence model, and trailing edge treatment at the buffet onset angle of attack are: 4% in lift, 3% in drag, and 31% in moment. The CFD results show similar trends to flight test data, but also exhibit a lift curve break not seen in the data.

Rumsey, Christopher L.↗
NASA NTRS2003

Best Practices for Reduction of Uncertainty in CFD Results

This paper describes a proposed best-practices system that will present expert knowledge in the use of CFD. The best-practices system will include specific guidelines to assist the user in problem definition, input preparation, grid generation, code selection, parameter specification, and results interpretation. The goal of the system is to assist all CFD users in obtaining high quality CFD solutions with reduced uncertainty and at lower cost for a wide range of flow problems. The best-practices system will be implemented as a software product which includes an expert system made up of knowledge databases of expert information with specific guidelines for individual codes and algorithms. The process of acquiring expert knowledge is discussed, and help from the CFD community is solicited. Benefits and challenges associated with this project are examined.

Mendenhall, Michael R.↗