Proposed Draft Ground Safety Requirements for COPV and Composite Pressure Structures (CPS) for Inclusion in AIAA S-081 and AIAA S-089
No abstract available
Hamilton, Joseph B.↗
SEARCH · Search NASA
Results for “AIAA”
Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.
Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.
Organization's Orderly Interest Exploration: Inception, Development and Insights of AIAA's Topics Database
Since 2003, AIAA's Computer Systems and Software Systems Technical Committees (TCs) have developed a database that aids technical committee management to map technical topics to their members. This Topics/Interest (T/I) database grew out of a collection of charts and spreadsheets maintained by the TCs. Since its inception, the tool has evolved into a multi-dimensional database whose dimensions include the importance, interest and expertise of TC members and whether or not a member and/or a TC is actively involved with the topic. In 2005, the database was expanded to include the TCs in AIAA s Information Systems Group and then expanded further to include all AIAA TCs. It was field tested at an AIAA Technical Activities Committee (TAC) Workshop in early 2006 through live access by over 80 users. Through the use of the topics database, TC and program committee (PC) members can accomplish relevant tasks such as: to identify topic experts (for Aerospace America articles or external contacts), to determine the interest of its members, to identify overlapping topics between diverse TCs and PCs, to guide new member drives and to reveal emerging topics. This paper will describe the origins, inception, initial development, field test and current version of the tool as well as elucidate the benefits and insights gained by using the database to aid the management of various TC functions. Suggestions will be provided to guide future development of the database for the purpose of providing dynamics and system level benefits to AIAA that currently do not exist in any technical organization.
Marshall, Jospeh R.↗
Summary of the 1st AIAA Geometry and Mesh Generation Workshop (GMGW-1) and Future Plans
The 1st AIAA Geometry and Mesh Generation Workshop (GMGW-1) was held in conjunction with the AIAA Aviation Forum and Exposition 2017 and in collaboration with the 3rd AIAA Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) High Lift Prediction Workshop (HiLiftPW-3). As the first AIAA workshop on these topics, GMGW-1's broad objectives were to assess the current state-of-the art in geometry preprocessing and mesh generation technology as well as software as applied to aircraft and spacecraft systems. The workshop was intended to identify and develop understanding of areas of needed improvement in terms of performance, accuracy, and applicability. It was also to provide a foundation for documenting best practices for geometry preprocessing and mesh generation. The genesis of GMGW-1 is found in the indictments levied against geometry preprocessing and mesh generation - not undeservedly - by the NASA CFD Vision 2030 Study. In order to create a reference against which future progress in geometry preprocessing and mesh generation can be measured, the organizers of GMGW-1, with the assistance of the organizers of HiLiftPW- 3, focused GMGW-1 on generation of meshes of the NASA High Lift Common Research Model (HL-CRM). Some of the generated meshes were provided for use by the participants in HiLiftPW-3. All meshes and the processes by which they were generated were analyzed by GMGW-1 as a first assessment of state of the art practices. The results of GMGW-1 added quantitative detail to known problem areas including geometry modeling, data interoperability, and amount of human intervention. They do provide a clear path toward a vision of geometry preprocessing and mesh generation in the year 2030. The next milepost along this path will be a second workshop.
Chawner, John R.↗
Statistical Analysis of the AIAA Drag Prediction Workshop CFD Solutions
The first AIAA Drag Prediction Workshop (DPW), held in June 2001, evaluated the results from an extensive N-version test of a collection of Reynolds-Averaged Navier-Stokes CFD codes. The code-to-code scatter was more than an order of magnitude larger than desired for design and experimental validation of cruise conditions for a subsonic transport configuration. The second AIAA Drag Prediction Workshop, held in June 2003, emphasized the determination of installed pylon-nacelle drag increments and grid refinement studies. The code-to-code scatter was significantly reduced compared to the first DPW, but still larger than desired. However, grid refinement studies showed no significant improvement in code-to-code scatter with increasing grid refinement. The third AIAA Drag Prediction Workshop, held in June 2006, focused on the determination of installed side-of-body fairing drag increments and grid refinement studies for clean attached flow on wing alone configurations and for separated flow on the DLR-F6 subsonic transport model. This report compares the transonic cruise prediction results of the second and third workshops using statistical analysis.
Joseph H Morrison↗
Statistical Analysis of CFD Solutions from the Third AIAA Drag Prediction Workshop
The first AIAA Drag Prediction Workshop, held in June 2001, evaluated the results from an extensive N-version test of a collection of Reynolds-Averaged Navier-Stokes CFD codes. The code-to-code scatter was more than an order of magnitude larger than desired for design and experimental validation of cruise conditions for a subsonic transport configuration. The second AIAA Drag Prediction Workshop, held in June 2003, emphasized the determination of installed pylon-nacelle drag increments and grid refinement studies. The code-to-code scatter was significantly reduced compared to the first DPW, but still larger than desired. However, grid refinement studies showed no significant improvement in code-to-code scatter with increasing grid refinement. The third Drag Prediction Workshop focused on the determination of installed side-of-body fairing drag increments and grid refinement studies for clean attached flow on wing alone configurations and for separated flow on the DLR-F6 subsonic transport model. This work evaluated the effect of grid refinement on the code-to-code scatter for the clean attached flow test cases and the separated flow test cases.
Statistical analysis↗
Assessment of the Draft AIAA S-119 Flight Dynamic Model Exchange Standard
An assessment of a draft AIAA standard for flight dynamics model exchange, ANSI/AIAA S-119-2011, was conducted on behalf of NASA by a team from the NASA Engineering and Safety Center. The assessment included adding the capability of importing standard models into real-time simulation facilities at several NASA Centers as well as into analysis simulation tools. All participants were successful at importing two example models into their respective simulation frameworks by using existing software libraries or by writing new import tools. Deficiencies in the libraries and format documentation were identified and fixed; suggestions for improvements to the standard were provided to the AIAA. An innovative tool to generate C code directly from such a model was developed. Performance of the software libraries compared favorably with compiled code. As a result of this assessment, several NASA Centers can now import standard models directly into their simulations. NASA is considering adopting the now-published S-119 standard as an internal recommended practice.
Jackson, E. Bruce↗
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↗
Summary and Statistical Analysis of the First AIAA Sonic Boom Prediction Workshop
A summary is provided for the First AIAA Sonic Boom Workshop held 11 January 2014 in conjunction with AIAA SciTech 2014. Near-field pressure signatures extracted from computational fluid dynamics solutions are gathered from nineteen participants representing three countries for the two required cases, an axisymmetric body and simple delta wing body. Structured multiblock, unstructured mixed-element, unstructured tetrahedral, overset, and Cartesian cut-cell methods are used by the participants. Participants provided signatures computed on participant generated and solution adapted grids. Signatures are also provided for a series of uniformly refined workshop provided grids. These submissions are propagated to the ground and loudness measures are computed. This allows the grid convergence of a loudness measure and a validation metric (dfference norm between computed and wind tunnel measured near-field signatures) to be studied for the first time. Statistical analysis is also presented for these measures. An optional configuration includes fuselage, wing, tail, flow-through nacelles, and blade sting. This full configuration exhibits more variation in eleven submissions than the sixty submissions provided for each required case. Recommendations are provided for potential improvements to the analysis methods and a possible subsequent workshop.
Park, Michael A.↗
Application of Exactly Linearized Error Transport Equations to AIAA CFD Prediction Workshops
The computational fluid dynamics (CFD) prediction workshops sponsored by the AIAA have created invaluable opportunities in which to discuss the predictive capabilities of CFD in areas in which it has struggled, e.g., cruise drag, high-lift, and sonic boom pre diction. While there are many factors that contribute to disagreement between simulated and experimental results, such as modeling or discretization error, quantifying the errors contained in a simulation is important for those who make decisions based on the computational results. The linearized error transport equations (ETE) combined with a truncation error estimate is a method to quantify one source of errors. The ETE are implemented with a complex-step method to provide an exact linearization with minimal source code modifications to CFD and multidisciplinary analysis methods. The equivalency of adjoint and linearized ETE functional error correction is demonstrated. Uniformly refined grids from a series of AIAA prediction workshops demonstrate the utility of ETE for multidisciplinary analysis with a connection between estimated discretization error and (resolved or under-resolved) flow features.
Derlaga, Joseph M.↗
Statistical Analysis of CFD Solutions from the 6th AIAA CFD Drag Prediction Workshop
A graphical framework is used for statistical analysis of the results from an extensive N-version test of a collection of Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes computational fluid dynamics codes. The solutions were obtained by code developers and users from North America, Europe, Asia, and South America using both common and custom grid sequences as well as multiple turbulence models for the June 2016 6th AIAA CFD Drag Prediction Workshop sponsored by the AIAA Applied Aerodynamics Technical Committee. The aerodynamic configuration for this workshop was the Common Research Model subsonic transport wing-body previously used for both the 4th and 5th Drag Prediction Workshops. This work continues the statistical analysis begun in the earlier workshops and compares the results from the grid convergence study of the most recent workshop with previous workshops.
Statistical analysis↗
Summary of Propagation Cases of the Second AIAA Sonic Boom Prediction Workshop
A summary is provided for the propagation portion of the second AIAA Sonic Boom Workshop held January 8, 2017 in conjunction with the AIAA SciTech 2017 conference. Near-field pressure waveforms for two cases were supplied and ground signatures at multiple azimuthal angles as well as their corresponding loudness metrics were requested from 10 participants, representing 3 countries. Each case had some required runs, as well as some optional runs. The required cases included atmospheric profiles with measured data including winds, using Radiosonde balloon data at multiple geographically spread locations, while the optional cases included temperature and pressure profiles from the US Standard atmosphere. The humidity profiles provided for the optional cases were taken from ANSI guidance, as the authors were unaware of an accepted standard at the time the cases were released to the participants. Participants provided ground signatures along with the requested data, including some loudness metrics using their best practices, which included lossy as well as lossless schemes. All the participants' submissions, for each case, are compared and discussed. Noise or loudness measures are calculated and detailed comparisons and statistical analyses are performed and presented. It has been observed that the variation in the loudness measures and spread between participants' submissions increased as the computation proceeded from under-track locations towards the lateral cut-off. Lessons learned during this workshop are discussed and recommendations are made for potential improvements and possible subsequent workshops as we collectively attempt to refine our analysis methods.
Rallabhandi, Sriram↗
Nearfield Summary and Statistical Analysis of the Second AIAA Sonic Boom Prediction Workshop
A summary is provided for the Second AIAA Sonic Boom Workshop held 8-9 January 2017 in conjunction with AIAA SciTech 2017. The workshop used three required models of increasing complexity: an axisymmetric body, a wing body, and a complete configuration with flow-through nacelle. An optional complete configuration with propulsion boundary conditions is also provided. These models are designed with similar nearfield signatures to isolate geometry and shock/expansion interaction effects. Eleven international participant groups submitted nearfield signatures with forces, pitching moment, and iterative convergence norms. Statistics and grid convergence of these nearfield signatures are presented. These submissions are propagated to the ground, and noise levels are computed. This allows the grid convergence and the statistical distribution of a noise level to be computed. While progress is documented since the first workshop, improvement to the analysis methods for a possible subsequent workshop are provided. The complete configuration with flow-through nacelle showed the most dramatic improvement between the two workshops. The current workshop cases are more relevant to vehicles with lower loudness and have the potential for lower annoyance than the first workshop cases. The models for this workshop with quieter ground noise levels than the first workshop exposed weaknesses in analysis, particularly in convective discretization.
Park, Michael A.↗
Summary of Propagation Cases of the Second AIAA Sonic Boom Prediction Workshop
A summary is provided for the propagation portion of the second AIAA Sonic Boom Workshop held January 8, 2017 in conjunction with the AIAA SciTech 2017 conference. Near-field pressure waveforms for two cases were supplied and ground signatures at multiple azimuthal angles as well as their corresponding loudness metrics were requested from 10 participants, representing 3 countries. Each case had some required, as well as some optional runs. The required cases included atmospheric profiles with measured data including winds, using Radiosonde balloon data at multiple geographically spread locations. The humidity profiles provided for the optional cases were taken from ANSI guidance, as the authors were unaware of an accepted standard at the time the cases were released to the participants. Participants provided ground signatures along with the requested data, including some loudness metrics using their best practices, which included lossy as well as lossless atmospheric propagation schemes. All the participants’ submissions, for each case, are compared and discussed. Noise or loudness measures are calculated and detailed comparisons and statistical analyses are performed and presented. It has been observed that the variation in the loudness measures and spread between participants’ submissions increased as the computation proceeded from under-track locations towards the lateral cut-off. Lessons learned during this workshop are discussed and recommendations are made for potential improvements and possible subsequent workshops as we collectively attempt to refine our analysis methods.
Rallabhandi, Sriram↗
Nearfield Summary and Statistical Analysis of the Second AIAA Sonic Boom PredictionWorkshop
A summary is provided for the Second AIAA Sonic Boom Workshop held 8–9 January 2017 in conjunction with AIAA SciTech 2017. The workshop used three required models of increasing complexity: an axisymmetric body, a wing body, and a complete configuration with flow-through nacelle. An optional complete configuration with propulsion boundary conditions is also provided. These models are designed with similar nearfield signatures to isolate geometry and shock/expansion interaction e ects. Eleven international participant groups submitted nearfield signatures with forces, pitching moment, and iterative convergence norms. Statistics and grid convergence of these nearfield signatures are presented. These submissions are propagated to the ground, and noise levels are computed. This allows the grid convergence and the statistical distribution of a noise level to be computed. While progress is documented since the first workshop, improvement to the analysis methods for a possible subsequent workshop are provided. The complete configuration with flow-through nacelle showed the most dramatic improvement between the two workshops. The current workshop cases are more relevant to vehicles with lower loudness and have the potential for lower annoyance than the first workshop cases. The models for this workshop with quieter ground noise levels than the first workshop exposed weaknesses in analysis, particularly in convective discretization.
Park, Michael A.↗
Near Field Summary and Analysis of the Third AIAA Sonic Boom Workshop Shock-Plume Interaction Case
The Third AIAA Sonic Boom Prediction Workshop was held during January 2020, on the weekend prior to the AIAA SciTech conference. The workshop had 23 participants whom represented 6 different counties and 18 unique organizations that included government, industry and academia. The workshop was attend by over 50 individuals. The motivation for the workshop stems from the goal of obtaining supersonic commercial overland flight. In order to replace the current prohibition, with a certification standard, an international effort is required to quantify the accuracy and reliability of prediction methods. The workshops also identify deficiencies in existing methods where further research should be focused. The workshop consisted of two days with the first day focused on nearfield CFD and the second day on propagation techniques. The nearfield CFD study included two configurations known as the biconvex and the C608. This paper provided a summary and comparison of the results for the shock-plume interaction case, also known as the biconvex case. Overall agreement between the participants was very good with the largest standard deviations due to a slight shift of the shock location, not the predicted strength of the shocks.
Melissa Carter↗
Summary of Propagation Cases of the Third AIAA Sonic Boom Prediction Workshop
A summary is provided for the propagation portion of the Third AIAA Sonic Boom Prediction Workshop held January 5, 2020 in conjunction with the AIAA SciTech 2020 conference. Near-field pressure waveforms for two cases were supplied at multiple azimuthal angles. Ground signatures across the breadth of the sonic boom primary carpet and their corresponding loudness metrics were requested. Each case had some required, as well as some optional, runs. The required cases included atmospheric profiles with measured data including winds. Optional cases included a level-acceleration sonic boom focusing case as well as prediction under standard atmospheric conditions. Participants provided ground signatures along with several loudness metrics using their best sonic boom prediction practices. All the participants' submissions are compared and discussed for each case. Noise or loudness measures are calculated and detailed comparisons and statistical analyses are performed and presented. Compared to previous workshops, the selected cases in the current workshop have much lower boom loudness levels. As was observed in the past workshops, the variation in the loudness measures and spread between participants' submissions increased as the computation proceeded from under-track locations towards the lateral cut-off. Lessons learned during this workshop are discussed and recommendations are made for potential improvements and possible subsequent workshops as we collectively attempt to refine our analysis methods.
SBPW3↗
1st AIAA CFD Transition Modeling and Prediction Workshop: OVERFLOW Results for the SST and Langtry-Menter Models
This paper reports the results of CFD simulations of the test cases for the AIAA 1stCFDTransition Modeling and Prediction Workshop held at the AIAA Scitech Forum on 21-22January, 2021 using the NASA solver OVERFLOW. The Langtry-Menter transition model was used in combination with the Shear Stress Transport (SST) turbulence model. The testcases include the ERCOFTAC zero-pressure-gradient flat plate cases T3A and T3B with by-pass transition, the natural laminar flow NLF(1)-0416 airfoil, the DLR inclined 6:1 prolate spheroid, and the NASA Common Research Model with wing design optimized for natural laminar flow transition (CRM-NLF). OVERFLOW load and transition predictions obtained using best practices are compared with experiments and prior simulations. Additional results are provided for modified turbulence model boundary specifications to improve alignment to reference data and assess model sensitivity.
ARMD↗
FUN3D Mesh Adaptation Simulations of 4th AIAA High-Lift Prediction Workshop Case 1a
Special sessions of the High Lift Prediction/Geometry & Mesh Generation Workshop. Will be written and presented at AIAA Aviation 2022. Describes in detail FUN3D Mesh adaptation simulation results for the 4th AIAA High-Lift Prediction Workshop. RANS (Stabilized Finite Element SA-neg) results for Case 1a are presented.
4th High-Lift Prediction Workshop Case 1a↗