[en] Static aeroelastic deformations are nowadays considered as early as in the preliminary aircraft design stage, where low-fidelity linear aerodynamic modeling is favored because of its low computational cost. However, transonic flows are essentially nonlinear. The present work aims at assessing the impact of the aerodynamic level of fidelity used in preliminary aircraft design. Several fluid models ranging from the linear potential to the Navier–Stokes formulations were used to solve transonic flows for steady rigid aerodynamic and static aeroelastic computations on two benchmark wings: the Onera M6 and a generic airliner wing. The lift and moment loading distributions, as well as the bending and twisting deformations predicted by the different models, were examined, along with the computational costs of the various solutions. The results illustrate that a nonlinear method is required to reliably perform steady aerodynamic computations on rigid wings. For such computations, the best tradeoff between accuracy and computational cost is achieved by the full potential formulation. On the other hand, static aeroelastic computations are usually performed on optimized wings for which transonic effects are weak. In such cases, linear potential methods were found to yield sufficiently reliable results. If the linear method of choice is the doublet lattice approach, it must be corrected using a nonlinear solution.
Research Center/Unit :
A&M - Aérospatiale et Mécanique - ULiège
Disciplines :
Aerospace & aeronautics engineering
Author, co-author :
Crovato, Adrien ; Université de Liège - ULiège > Département d'aérospatiale et mécanique > Laboratoire de structures et systèmes spatiaux
Almeida, Hugo; Embraer S.A.
Vio, Gareth; University of Sydney
Silva, Gustavo; Deutsche Zentrum für Luft-und Raumfahrt
Flightpath 2050 Europe's Vision for Aviation. 2019. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/transport/sites/ transport/files/modes/air/doc/flightpath2050.pdf (accessed on 20 December 2019).
Bhateley, I.; Cox, R. Application of Computational Methods to Transonic Wing Design; In Progress in Astronautics and Aeronautics; Chapter 8; American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics: Reston, VA, USA, 1981; Volume 81, pp. 405-431.
Verhoff, A.; O'Neil, P. Extension of FLO Codes to Transonic Flow Prediction for Fighter Configurations; In Progress in Astronautics and Aeronautics; Chapter 11; American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics: Reston, VA, USA, 1981; Volume 81, pp. 467-487.
Rubbert, P.; Saaris, G. Review and evaluation of a three-dimensional lifting potential flow analysis method for arbitrary configurations. In Proceedings of the 10th AIAA Aerospace Science Meeting, San Diego, CA, USA, 17-19 January 1972.
Flores, J.; Barton, J.; Holst, T.; Pulliam, T. Comparison of the Full-Potential and Euler Formulations for Computing Transonic Airfoil Flows; Technical Report; NASA: Washington, DC, USA, 1984.
Klopfer, G.H.; Nixon, D. Nonisentropic potential formulation for transonic flows. AIAA J. 1984, 22, 770-776.
Le Balleur, J. Strong matching methods for Computing Transonic Viscous Flow including Wakes and Seprations-Lifting airfoils. La Rech. Aerosp. 1981, 3, 161-185.
Melnik, R.; Chow, R.; Mead, H.; Jameson, A. A Multigrid Method for the Computation of Viscid/Inviscid Interaction on Airfoils; Technical Report; Grumman Aerospace Corporation: Bethpage, NY, USA, 1983.
Van Muijden, J.; Broekhuizen, A.; van derWees, A.; van der Vooren, J. Flow analysis and drag prediction for transonic transport wing/body configurations using a viscous-inviscid interaction type method. In Proceedings of the 19th ICAS Congress, Anaheim, CA, USA, 18-23 September 1994.
Holst, T. Transonic flow computations using nonlinear potential methods. Prog. Aerosp. Sci. 2000, 36, 1-61.
Drela, M.; Giles, M.; Thompkins, W. Newton Solution of Coupled Euler and Boundary-Layer Equations. In Numerical and Physical Aspects of Aerodynamic Flows; Chapter 7; Spinger: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 1986; Volume 3, pp. 143-154.
Potsdam, M. An Unstructured Mesh Euler and Interactive Boundary Layer Method for Complex Configurations. In Proceedings of the 12th Applied Aerodynamic Conference, Colorado Springs, CO, USA, 20-23 June 1994.
Aftosmis, M.; Berger, M.; Alonso, J. Applications of a Cartesian Mesh Boundary-Layer Approach for Complex Configurations. In Proceedings of the 44th AIAA Aerospace Science Meeting and Exhibit, Reno, NV, USA, 9-12 January 2006.
Jameson, A. The Evolution of Computational Methods in Aerodynamics. J. Appl. Mech. 1983, 50, 1052-1070.
Johnson, F.; Tinoco, E.; Yu, N. Thirty Years of development and applications of CFD at Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Seattle. Comput. Fluids 2005, 34, 1115-1151.
Jovanov, K.; De Breuker, R. Accelerated convergence of high-fidelity aeroelasticity using low-fidelity aerodynamics. In Proceedings of the 16th International Forum on Aeroelasticity and Structural Dynamics, St. Petersburg, Russia, 28 June-2 July 2015.
Kenway, G.; Martins, J. Multipoint High-fidelity Aerostructural Optimization of a Transport Aircraft Configuration. J. Aircr. 2014, 51, 144-160.
Brooks, T.; Kenway, G.; Martins, J. Benchmark Aerostructural Models for the Study of Transonic Aircraft Wings. AIAA J. 2018, 56, 2840-2855.
Heeg, J.; Chwalowski, P.; Schuster, D. Overview and lessons learned from the Aeroelastic Prediction Workshop. In Proceedings of the 54th AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics and Materials Conference, Boston, MA, USA, 8-11 April 2013.
Schuster, D.; Heeg, J.; Wieseman, C.; Chwalowski, P. Analysis of Test Case Computations and Experiments for the Aeroelastic Prediction Workshop. In Proceedings of the 51st AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting, Grapevine, TX, USA, 7-10 January 2013.
Romanelli, G.; Castellani, M.; Mantegazza, P.; Ricci, S. Coupled CSD/CFD non-linear aeroelastic trim of free-flying flexible aircraft. In Proceedings of the 53rd AIAA/SME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics and Materials Conference, Honolulu, HI, USA, 23-26 April 2012.
Acar, P.; Nikbay, M. Steady and Unsteady Aeroelastic Computations of HIRENASD Wing for Low and High Reynolds Numbers. In Proceedings of the 54th AIAA/SME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics and Materials Conference, Boston, MA, USA, 8-11 April 2013.
Edwards, J.; Malone, J. Current status of computational methods for transonic unsteady aerodynamics and aeroelastic applications. Comput. Syst. Eng. 1992, 3, 545-569.
Schuster, D.; Liu, D.; Huttshell, L. Computational Aeroelasticity: Success, Progress, Challenge. J. Aircr. 2003, 40, 843-856.
Schmitt, V.; Charpin, F. Pressure distributions on the ONERA-M6-wing at transonic Mach numbers. In Experimental Data Base for Computer Program Assessment; Report of the Fluid Dynamics Panel Working Group 04, AGARD AR 138 Office National d'Etudes et de Recherches Aerospatiales 92320: Chatillon, France, 1979; Volume 4.
Spalart, P.; Allmaras, S. A one equation turbulence model for aerodynamic Flows. AIAA J. 1992, 94, 439.
Palacios, F.; Colonno, M.; Aranake, A.; Campos, A.; Copeland, S.; Economon, T.; Lonkar, A.; Lukaczyk, T.; Taylor, T.; Alonso, J. Stanford University Unstructured (SU2): An open-source integrated computational environment for multi-physics simulation and design. AIAA J. 2013.
Economon, T.; Palacios, F.; Copeland, S.; Lukaczyk, T.; Alonso, J. Stanford University Unstructured (SU2): An open-source suite for multi-physics simulation and design. AIAA J. 2016.
Stanford University Unstructured (SU2). 2019. Available online: https://su2code.github.io/ (accessed on 20 December 2019).
Neel, R. Advances in Computational Fluid Dynamics: Turbulent Separated Flows and Transonic Potential Flows. Ph.D. Thesis, Virginia Polytechnic Institute, Blacksburg, VA, USA, 1995.
Lieg, R. A Full Potential Solver for Lifting Flows on Unstructured Tetrahedral Meshes. Master's Thesis, Concordia University, Montreal, QC, Canada, 2005.
Lyu, F.; Xiao, T.; Yu, X. A Fast and Automatic Full Potential Finite Volume Solver on Cartesian Grids for Unconventional Configurations. Chin. J. Aeronaut. 2017, 30, 951-963.
Nishida, B. Fully Simultaneous Coupling of the Full Potential Equation and the Integral Boundary Layer Equations in Three Dimensions. Ph.D. Thesis, Massachussets Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA, 1996.
Galbraith, M.; Allmaras, S.; Haimes, R. Full Potential Revisited: A Medium Fidelty Aerodynamic Analysis Tool. In Proceedings of the 55th AIAA SciTech 2017 & Aerospace Sciences Meeting, Grapevine, TX, USA, 9-13 January 2017.
Crovato, A.; Boman, R.; Guner, H.; Terrapon, V.; Dimitriadis, G.; Almeida, H.; Prado, A.; Breviglieri, C.; Cabral, P.; Silva, G. A Full Potential Static Aeroelastic Solver for Preliminary Aircraft Design. In Proceedings of the 18th International Forum on Aeroelasticity and Structural Dynamics, Savannah, GA, USA, 9-13 June 2019.
Johnson, F.T.; Samant, S.S.; Bieterman, M.; Melvin, R.; Young, D.; Bussoletti, J.; Hilmes, C. Tranair: A Full-Potential, Solution-Adaptative, Rectangular Grid-Code for Predicting Subsonic, Transonic, and Supersonic Flows About Arbitrary Configurations; Technical Report; NASA: Washington, DC, USA, 1992.
Bieterman, M.; Melvin, R.; Johnson, F.; Bussoletti, J.; Young, D.; Huffman, W.; Hilmes, C.; Drela, M. Boundary Layer Coupling in a General Configuration Full Potential Code; Technical Report; The Boeing Company: Seattle, WA, USA, 1994.
Waves. 2019. Available online: https://gitlab.uliege.be/am-dept/waves (accessed on 20 December 2019).
Calmar Research. 2019. Available online: http://www.calmarresearch.com/NF/home.htm (accessed on 20 December 2019).
Bank, R.; Rose, D. Global Approximate Newton Method. Numer. Math. 1981, 27, 179-295.
Drela, M. Two-Dimensional Transonic Aerodynamic Design and Analysis Using The Euler Equations. Ph.D. Thesis, Massachussets Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA, 1985.
Mughal, B.; Drela, M. A calculation method for the three-dimensonal boundary-layer equations in integral form. In Proceedings of the 31st AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting, Reno, NV, USA, 1-14 January 1993.
Geuzaine, C.; Remacle, J.F. Gmsh: A three-dimensional Finite element mesh generator with built-in pre- and post-processing facilities. Int. J. Numer. Methods Eng. 2009, 79, 1309-1331.
Gmsh: A Three-Dimensional Finite ElementMesh Generator with Built-In Pre- and Post-Processing Facilities. 2019. Available online: http://gmsh.info (accessed on 20 December 2019).
Sun, W.; Yuan, Y. Optimization Theory and Methods-Nonlinear Programming; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2006.
Carmichael, R.; Erickson, L. Panair: A higher order panel method for predicting subsonic or supersonic linear potential Flows about arbitrary configurations. AIAA J. 1981, 7, 1255.
Panair. 2019. Available online: https://pdas.com/panair.html (accessed on 20 December 2019).
Albano, E.; Rodden, W. A Doublet-Lattice Method for calulation lift distributions on oscillating surfaces in subsonic Flows. AIAA J. 1969, 7, 279-285.
NASTRAN. 2019. Available online: https://mscsoftware.com/products/msc-nastran (accessed on 20 December 2019).
Reschke, C.; Kier, T. An Integrated Model for Aeroelastic Simulation of large Flexible Aircraft Using MSC. NASTRAN; Technical Report; DLR German Aerospace Center-Institute of Robotics and Mechatronics: Wessling, Germany, 2004.
Modali: A Modal Solver for FSI Computations; 2019.
MATLAB. 2019. Available online: https://www.mathworks.com/products/matlab.html (accessed on 20 December 2019).
Thomas, D.; Variyar, A.; Boman, R.; Economon, T.; Alonso, J.; Dimitriadis, G.; Terrapon, V. Staggered strong coupling Between existing Fluid and solid solvers through a python interface for Fluid-structure interaction problems. In Proceedings of the VII International Conference on Computational Methods for Coupled Problems in Science and Engineering, Rhodes Island, Greece, 12-14 June 2017; pp. 645-660.
Thomas, D.; Cerquaglia, M.; Boman, R.; Economon, T.; Alonso, J.; Dimitriadis, G.; Terrapon, V. CUPyDO: An integrated Python environment for coupled Fluid-structure problems. Adv. Eng. Softw. 2019, 128, 69-85.
Cerquaglia, M.; Thomas, D.; Boman, R.; Terrapon, V.; Ponthot, J.P. A fully partitioned Lagrangian framework for FSI problems characterized by free surfaces, large solid deformations and displacements, and strong added-mass effects. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 2019, in press.
ANSYS ICEM CFD. 2019. Available online: https://www.ansys.com/products/Fluids (accessed on 20 December 2019).
