Wing Design by Aerodynamic and Aeroelastic Shape Optimisation

Aerodynamic shape optimisation technology is presented, comprising an efficient variable fidelity shape parameterisation method, an efficient andhigh quality mesh deformation scheme, and a parallel optimisation algorithm. The objective of the research presented here is the comparison of truly three-dimensional optimisations of aircraft wings in both aerodynamic and aeroelastic environments. The novel shape parameterisation technique allows various fidelities of design parameters, ranging from detailed surface changes to novel truly three-dimensional planform adjustments. An efficient interpolation scheme, using radial basis functions, transfers domain element movements into direct deformations of the design surface and corresponding CFD mesh, thus allowing total independence from the grid generation package and type (structured or unstructured). Optimisation is independent from the CFD flow solver by obtaining sensitivity information for an advanced parallel gradient-based optimiser by finite-differences. This ‘wrap-around’ optimisation technique is applied to a modern large transport aircraft wing in the cruise flight condition for minimum drag with stringent constraints in lift, volume, and two root moments. The objective of all optimisations is aerodynamic, however the static aeroelastic deflection provided by an aeroelastic solver will give that particular optimisation increased accuracy and real world relevance. The result of a constrained inviscid aerodynamic optimisation is presented and has a significant reduction in drag when compared to the initial wing with no violation of any constraints. The shape parameterisation method demonstrates that only a low number of design variables are necessary to achieve innovative planform and surface geometries with dramatically improved performance. Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) methods are now commonplace in aerospace industries, and at the forefront of analysis capabilities, providing a fast and effective method of predicting a design’s aerodynamic performance. However, with ever increasing complexity of designs, engineers can often struggle to interpret the intricacies of the CFD results sufficiently to be able to manually alter the geometry to improve performance. Hence, there has been an increase in demand for intelligent and automatic shape optimisation schemes. This requires combining geometry control methods with numerical optimisation algorithms, to provide a mechanism to mathematically seek improved and optimum designs, using CFD as the analysis tool. Optimisation requires consideration of three issues, each of which have numerous solutions: shape parameterisation including CFD surface and volume mesh deformation, computation of design variable derivatives, and effective use of these derivatives to improve design. Geometry parameterisation is critical for effective shape optimisation. This is the method of representing the design surface, and defines the degrees of freedom in which the geometry can be altered and, ideally, this should be linked with an effective method of deforming the CFD surface and volume mesh in a corresponding fashion. Parameterising complex shapes is a problem that remains a serious obstacle to both manual and automatic CFD-based optimisation. A wide variety of shape control and morphing methods have been developed, but many do not allow sufficiently

[1]  B. Leer,et al.  Flux-vector splitting for the Euler equations , 1997 .

[2]  Christian B Allen,et al.  An unsteady multiblock multigrid scheme for lifting forward flight rotor simulation , 2004 .

[3]  Antony Jameson,et al.  Aerodynamic design via control theory , 1988, J. Sci. Comput..

[4]  Alan Watt,et al.  Advanced animation and rendering techniques , 1992 .

[5]  John E. Bussoletti,et al.  "Fundamental" Parameteric Geometry Representations for Aircraft Component Shapes , 2006 .

[6]  Holger Wendland,et al.  Scattered Data Approximation: Conditionally positive definite functions , 2004 .

[7]  A. Jameson Time dependent calculations using multigrid, with applications to unsteady flows past airfoils and wings , 1991 .

[8]  Christian B Allen,et al.  Convergence of steady and unsteady formulations for inviscid hovering rotor solutions , 2003 .

[9]  Juan J. Alonso,et al.  Fully-implicit time-marching aeroelastic solutions , 1994 .

[10]  Garret N. Vanderplaats,et al.  Numerical Optimization Techniques for Engineering Design: With Applications , 1984 .

[11]  M. F. Rubinstein,et al.  Automated Structural Synthesis Using a Reduced Number of Design Coordinates , 1973 .

[12]  Malcolm I. G. Bloor,et al.  Efficient parametrization of generic aircraft geometry , 1995 .

[13]  Christian B Allen,et al.  CFD‐based optimization of aerofoils using radial basis functions for domain element parameterization and mesh deformation , 2008 .

[14]  V. Braibant,et al.  Shape optimal design using B-splines , 1984 .

[15]  André L. Tits,et al.  On combining feasibility, descent and superlinear convergence in inequality constrained optimization , 1993, Math. Program..

[16]  Christian B Allen,et al.  Parallel simulation of unsteady hovering rotor wakes , 2006 .

[17]  Jamshid A. Samareh,et al.  Status and Future of Geometry Modeling and Grid Generation for Design and Optimization , 1999 .

[18]  Christian B Allen,et al.  Multigrid convergence of inviscid fixed‐ and rotary‐wing flows , 2002 .

[19]  C. Allen,et al.  Unified fluid–structure interpolation and mesh motion using radial basis functions , 2008 .

[20]  Armando Vavalle,et al.  Spanwise Lift Distribution for Blended Wing Body Aircraft. , 2005 .

[21]  Martin D. Buhmann,et al.  Radial Basis Functions , 2021, Encyclopedia of Mathematical Geosciences.

[22]  Christian B Allen,et al.  Unified Approach to CFD-CSD Interpolation and Mesh Motion using Radial Basis Functions , 2007 .

[23]  A. Tits,et al.  Nonmonotone line search for minimax problems , 1993 .

[24]  E. Robert,et al.  Rapid Airplane Parametric Input Design (RAPID) , 1995 .

[25]  Christian B Allen,et al.  Parallel universal approach to mesh motion and application to rotors in forward flight , 2007 .

[26]  Thomas Rendall,et al.  Development of Generic CFD-Based Aerodynamic Optimisation Tools for Helicopter Rotor Blades , 2007 .

[27]  Perry A. Newman,et al.  Simultaneous Aerodynamic Analysis and Design Optimization (SAADO) for a 3-D Flexible Wing , 2001 .

[28]  B. Kulfan A Universal Parametric Geometry Representation Method - "CST" , 2007 .

[29]  A. Tits,et al.  User's Guide for FSQP Version 2.0 A Fortran Code for Solving Optimization Problems, Possibly Minimax, with General Inequality Constraints and Linear Equality Constraints, Generating Feasible Iterates , 1990 .

[30]  Antony Jameson,et al.  Multi-point Aero-Structural Optimization of Wings Including Planform Variations , 2007 .

[31]  J. Samareh Survey of Shape Parameterization Techniques for High-Fidelity Multidisciplinary Shape Optimization , 2001 .

[32]  Christian B Allen,et al.  Towards automatic structured multiblock mesh generation using improved transfinite interpolation , 2008 .

[33]  Ijaz H. Parpia,et al.  van Leer flux vector splitting in moving coordinates , 1988 .

[34]  Ning Qin,et al.  AERODYNAMIC STUDIES FOR BLENDED WING BODY AIRCRAFT , 2002 .

[35]  A. Le Moigne,et al.  Parallel adjoint-based optimisation of a blended wing body aircraft with shock control bumps , 2007, The Aeronautical Journal (1968).