SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “aero-structural simulation”

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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

7 records

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

DOE OSTI2026

Efficient derivative computation for unsteady fatigue-constrained nonlinear aero-structural wind turbine blade optimization

Gradient-based optimization offers significant efficiency advantages for wind turbine blade design, but its application has often been limited by the cost and accuracy of finite-difference derivative calculations, especially when fatigue constraints are considered. In this work, we systematically compare and evaluate four differentiation techniques, namely algorithmic differentiation, implicit differentiation, sparsity exploitation, and parallelization, to determine their effectiveness in computing accurate gradients through time-domain aero-structural simulations. By integrating these techniques with unsteady nonlinear aerodynamic and structural models, we develop software designed for accurate gradient computation. We show that combining these techniques addresses memory and runtime challenges associated with long simulations required by design load cases. Specifically, the most effective combination reduces derivative computation wall time by over an order of magnitude compared to finite differencing while maintaining superior accuracy. We demonstrate this approach in a proof-of-concept aero-structural optimization of a wind turbine blade that improves the cost of energy by 12.78 %. This comparative study establishes a viable approach for fatigue-aware blade design that balances computational efficiency with modeling accuracy.

17 WIND ENERGY↗

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 NTRSDate not supplied

Multi-point Jig Twist Optimization of Mach 0.745 Transonic Truss-Braced Wing Aircraft and High-Fidelity CFD Validation

This paper presents a multi-point jig twist optimization study of the Mach 0.745 Transonic Truss-Braced Wing (TTBW) aircraft using an in-house developed aero-structural analysis solver VSPAERO coupled to BEAM3D. A vortex-lattice model of the TTBW model is developed, and a transonic small disturbance /integral boundary layer correction method is implemented in the VSPAERO model to account for transonic and viscous flow effects. A correction method for the wing-strut interference aerodynamics is developed and applied to the VSPAERO solver. Also, a structural dynamic finite-element model of the TTBW aircraft is developed. This finite-element model includes the geometric nonlinear effect due to the tension in the struts which causes a deflection-dependent nonlinear stiffness. The VSPAERO model is coupled to the corresponding finite-element model to provide a rapid aero-structural analysis. The VSPAERO model has been validated against wind tunnel test data and FUN3D CFD simulation data. Three different flight conditions corresponding to Mach 0.745 at 40,000 ft are selected for the TTBW aircraft jig twist optimization to reduce the drag coefficients at the design and off-design cruise lift coefficients. The preliminary optimization results show that the TTBW aircraft with the optimized jig twist achieves a drag reduction of about 9 counts, 7 counts, and8 counts corresponding to the lift coefficients 0.68, 0.73, and 0.78, respectively. A high-fidelity CFD solver FUN3D is used to validate the jig twist optimization.

Multi-point↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Aeroelastic Modeling and CFD Simulation of Wind-Tunnel Scale Aspect Ratio 13.5 Common Research Model

This paper presents an aeroelastic modeling and simulation study of an aspect ratio 13.5 wind-tunnel scale Common Research Model (CRM) with distributed flaps. A vortex-lattice VSPAERO model of the CRM model is developed. A transonic small disturbance/integral boundary layer correction method is implemented in the VSPAERO model to account for the transonic and viscous flow effects. The structural deformation of the CRM model is calculated using a NASTRAN equivalent beam model. The VSPAERO model is coupled to the NASTRAN equivalent beam model to provide a rapid aero-structural analysis. A validation of the VSPAERO aeroelastic model is conducted by comparing the results to FUN3D CFD aeroelastic simulation results. An aerodynamic database is generated using the developed VSPAERO aeroelastic model for the real-time drag optimization and maneuver load alleviation study of the wind-tunnel scale CRM model.

Aeroelastic Modeling↗

NASA NTRS2010

Aero-Structural Assessment of an Inflatable Aerodynamic Decelerator

NASA is conducting an Entry, Descent and Landing Systems Analysis (EDL-SA) Study to determine the key technology development projects that should be undertaken for enabling the landing of large payloads on Mars for both human and robotic missions. Inflatable Aerodynamic Decelerators (IADs) are one of the candidate technologies. A variety of EDL architectures are under consideration. The current effort is conducted for development and simulations of computational framework for inflatable structures.

Sheta, Essam F.↗

NASA NTRS1999

Aero-Structural Optimization of HSCT Configurations in Transonic and Supersonic Flow

This document outlines the progress made under NASA Cooperative Research Agreement NCC2- 5226 for the period 10/01/97-09/30/98. The work statement originally proposed was meant to extend over the period of two complete years of which only one was funded. Consequently, only a portion of the goals were achieved. Similar work will continue in our group under different sponsorship and will be available in the form of conference and journal publications. The following sections summarize the technical accomplishments obtained during the last year. Details of these accomplishments can be found in the accompanying paper that was presented at the AIAA 37th Aerospace Sciences and Exhibit Meeting which was held in Reno, NV in January of this year. The original proposal outlined a research program meant to lay down the foundation for the development of high-fidelity, fully-coupled aerodynamic/structural optimization methods applicable to a variety of aerospace applications including the design optimization of High Speed Civil Transport (HSCT) configurations. The necessary research and development work was divided into two main efforts which addressed the necessities of the long term goal. Initially, our experience in the simulation of unsteady aeroelastic flows was directly applied to existing aerodynamic optimization techniques in order to provide insight into the effects of aeroelastic deformations on the performance of aircraft which have been designed based on purely aerodynamic cost functions. The intention was to follow up this work with a detailed investigation into the basic research work that has to be completed for the development of an optimization framework which efficiently allows the truly coupled design of aero-structural systems. This follow-up effort was not funded. The outcome of our efforts during the past year was the development of a coupled aero-structural analysis and design environment that was applied to the design of a complete aircraft configuration.

Alonso, Juan J.↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Aeroelastic Analysis of Mach 0.8 Transonic Truss-Braced Wing Aircraft

This paper presents an aeroelastic analysis of the Mach 0.8 Transonic Truss-Braced Wing(TTBW) aircraft jig shape using an in-house developed tool based on VSPAERO. A vortex-lattice model of the Mach 0.8 TTBW model is developed, and a transonic and viscous flow correction method is implemented to account for transonic and viscous flow effects. A correction method for the wing-strut interference aerodynamics is developed and applied to the VSPAERO solver. The Galerkin method is used to calculate the geometry deformation under aerodynamic force. The aero-structural analysis solver VSPAERO coupled to the mode shapes computed by NASTRAN using the Galerkin method provides a rapid aircraft aero-structual analysis. A high-fidelity CFD solver FUN3D is used to verify the results. The aeroelastic simulation results show that the aeroelastic lift coefficient is reduced about0.05∼0.07, drag polar is not affected by aeroelasticity, and the pitching moment is reduced about 30% at Mach0.8 and altitude 40,000 ft.

TTBW Aeroelastic↗