The NATO STO Task Group AVT-201 on Extended Assessment of Stability and Control Prediction Methods for NATO Air Vehicles

The ability to accurately predict both static and dynamic stability characteristics of air vehicles using computational fluid dynamics (CFD) methods could revolutionize the air vehicle design process, especially for military air vehicles. A validated CFD capability would significantly reduce the number of ground tests required to verify vehicle concepts and, in general, could eliminate costly vehicle ‘repair’ campaigns required to fix performance anomalies that were not adequately predicted prior to full-scale vehicle development. This paper outlines the extended integrated experimental and numerical approach to assess the of stability and control prediction method capabilities as well as the design and estimation the control device effectiveness for highly swept low observable UCAV configurations. The aim of the AVT-201 Task Group is to provide an assessment of the CFD capabilities using model scale experiments and transferring this knowledge to real scale applications

[1]  Robert T. Biedron,et al.  Computational Methods for Stability and Control (COMSAC): The Time Has Come , 2005 .

[2]  Neal M. Chaderjian,et al.  Automation of a Navier-Stokes S&C database generation for the Harrier in ground effect , 2002 .

[3]  P. Kelly,et al.  Residual pitch oscillation (RPO) flight test and analysis on the B-2 bomber , 1998 .

[4]  Dan D. Vicroy,et al.  Development of an aerodynamic simulation model of a generic configuration for SaC analyses , 2014 .

[5]  J. R. Chambers,et al.  Accomplishments of the Abrupt-Wing-Stall Program , 2005 .

[6]  O. J. Boelens,et al.  A Reduced-Complexity Investigation of Blunt Leading-Edge Separation Motivated by UCAV Aerodynamics , 2015 .

[7]  Scott A. Morton,et al.  Comparisons of CFD Solutions of Static and Maneuvering Fighter Aircraft with Flight Test Data , 2007 .

[8]  Rudolph N. Yurkovich,et al.  Status of Unsteady Aerodynamic Prediction for Flutter of High-Performance Aircraft , 2003 .

[9]  Dan D. Vicroy,et al.  SACCON Static Wind Tunnel Tests at DNW-NWB and 14'x22' NASA LaRC , 2010 .

[10]  Sally A. Viken,et al.  Status of Computational Aerodynamic Modeling Tools for Aircraft Loss-of-Control - Invited , 2016 .

[11]  Robert M. Hall,et al.  Historical Review of Uncommanded Lateral-Directional Motions at Transonic Conditions , 2004 .

[12]  Stuart E. Rogers,et al.  Automated CFD Parameter Studies on Distributed Parallel Computers , 2003 .

[13]  Adam Jirasek,et al.  The NATO STO AVT-201 Task Group on ExtendedAssessment of Stability and Control PredictionMethods for NATO Air Vehicles: Summary, Conclusions and Lessons Learned , 2014 .

[14]  Neal M. Chaderjian,et al.  Progress Toward Generation of a Navier-Stokes Database for a Harrier in Ground Effect , 2002 .

[15]  Russell M. Cummings,et al.  An Integrated Computational/Experimental Approach to UCAV Stability & Control Estimation: Overview of NATO RTO AVT-161 , 2010 .

[16]  Dan D. Vicroy,et al.  UCAV model design and static experimental investigations to estimate control device effectiveness and S&C capabilities , 2014 .

[17]  Russell M. Cummings,et al.  Validation of Unsteady Aerodynamic Models of a Generic UCAV Using Overset Grids , 2014 .

[18]  Larry A. Meyn,et al.  Full-scale wind-tunnel studies of F/A-18 tail buffet , 1996 .