Assessment of Near-Field Sonic Boom Simulation Tools

A recent study for the Supersonics Project, within the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, has been conducted to assess current in-house capabilities for the prediction of near-field sonic boom. Such capabilities are required to simulate the highly nonlinear flow near an aircraft, wherein a sonic-boom signature is generated. There are many available computational fluid dynamics codes that could be used to provide the near-field flow for a sonic boom calculation. However, such codes have typically been developed for applications involving aerodynamic configuration, for which an efficiently generated computational mesh is usually not optimum for a sonic boom prediction. Preliminary guidelines are suggested to characterize a state-of-the-art sonic boom prediction methodology. The available simulation tools that are best suited to incorporate into that methodology are identified; preliminary test cases are presented in support of the selection. During this phase of process definition and tool selection, parallel research was conducted in an attempt to establish criteria that link the properties of a computational mesh to the accuracy of a sonic boom prediction. Such properties include sufficient grid density near shocks and within the zone of influence, which are achieved by adaptation and mesh refinement strategies. Prediction accuracy is validated by comparison with wind tunnel data.

[1]  L. B. Jones.  Lower Bounds for Sonic Bangs , 1961, The Journal of the Royal Aeronautical Society.

[2]  Robert J. Mack,et al.  A wind-tunnel investigation of the effect of body shape on sonic-boom pressure distributions , 1965 .

[3]  Michael J. Aftosmis,et al.  Adjoint Error Estimation and Adaptive Refinement for Embedded-Boundary Cartesian Meshes , 2007 .

[4]  Michael Andrew Park,et al.  Adjoint-Based, Three-Dimensional Error Prediction and Grid Adaptation , 2004 .

[5]  Peter G. Coen,et al.  Origins and Overview of the Shaped Sonic Boom Demonstration Program , 2005 .

[6]  Kenneth J. Plotkin,et al.  PCBoom3 Sonic Boom Prediction Model - Version 1.0c , 1996 .

[7]  D. Darmofal,et al.  An implicit, exact dual adjoint solution method for turbulent flows on unstructured grids , 2004 .

[8]  S. Cheung,et al.  Application of computational fluid dynamics to sonic boom near- and mid-field prediction , 1992 .

[9]  C. L. Thomas.  Extrapolation of sonic boom pressure signatures by the waveform parameter method , 1972 .

[10]  David L. Darmofal,et al.  Output-Adaptive Tetrahedral Cut-Cell Validation for Sonic Boom Prediction , 2008 .

[11]  A. Jameson,et al.  Improvements to the aircraft Euler method , 1987 .

[12]  A. R. George,et al.  Sonic Boom Minimization Including Both Front and Rear Shocks , 1971 .

[13]  Robert J. Mack,et al.  Determination of Extrapolation Distance With Pressure Signatures Measured at Two to Twenty Span Lengths From Two Low-Boom Models , 2006 .

[14]  W. K. Anderson,et al.  Recent improvements in aerodynamic design optimization on unstructured meshes , 2001 .

[15]  A Jameson,et al.  CALCULATION OF IN VISCID TRANSONIC FLOW OVER A COMPLETE AIRCRAFT , 1986 .

[16]  Peter A. Gnoffo,et al.  Computational Aerothermodynamic Simulation Issues on Unstructured Grids , 2004 .

[17]  Elizabeth M. Lee-Rausch,et al.  Application of Parallel Adjoint-Based Error Estimation and Anisotropic Grid Adaptation for Three-Dimensional Aerospace Configurations , 2005 .

[18]  Scott D. Thomas,et al.  Improvements to the Unstructured Mesh Generator MESH3D , 1999 .

[19]  David L. Darmofal,et al.  Shock Capturing with Higher-Order, PDE-Based Artificial Viscosity , 2007 .

[20]  H. E. Kulsrud,et al.  SONIC BOOM PROPAGATION IN A STRATIFIED ATMOSPHERE, WITH COMPUTER PROGRAM. , 1969 .

[21]  James E. Murray,et al.  Ground Data Collection of Shaped Sonic Boom Experiment Aircraft Pressure Signatures , 2005 .

[22]  C. M. Darden,et al.  Euler code prediction of near-field to midfield sonic boom pressure signatures , 1993 .

[23]  A. R. George,et al.  Lower Bounds for Sonic Booms in the Midfield , 1969 .

[24]  Scott D. Thomas,et al.  Euler/experiment correlations of sonic boom pressure signatures , 1991 .

[25]  James E. Murray,et al.  Airborne Shaped Sonic Boom Demonstration Pressure Measurements with Computational Fluid Dynamics Comparisons , 2005 .

[26]  R. J. Mack,et al.  Determination of Extrapolation Distance with Measured Pressure Signatures from Two Low-Boom Models , 2004 .

[27]  M. Nemec,et al.  Aerodynamic Shape Optimization Using a Cartesian Adjoint Method and CAD Geometry , 2006 .

[28]  D. Venditti,et al.  Anisotropic grid adaptation for functional outputs: application to two-dimensional viscous flows , 2003 .

[29]  F. Edward McLean,et al.  Design Methods for Minimization of Sonic‐Boom Pressure‐Field Disturbances , 1965 .

[30]  J. P. Mendoza,et al.  Further studies of the extrapolation of near field overpressure data , 1971 .

[31]  Susan E. Cliff.  Computational/experimental analysis of three low sonic boom configurations with design modifications , 1992 .

[32]  Eric J. Nielsen,et al.  Validation of 3D Adjoint Based Error Estimation and Mesh Adaptation for Sonic Boom Prediction , 2006 .

[33]  M. Giles,et al.  Algorithm Developments for Discrete Adjoint Methods , 2003 .

[34]  M. Berger,et al.  Robust and efficient Cartesian mesh generation for component-based geometry , 1998 .

[35]  G. Whitham.  The flow pattern of a supersonic projectile , 1952 .

[36]  Michael Andrew Park,et al.  Anisotropic output-based adaptation with tetrahedral cut cells for compressible flows , 2008 .

[37]  Michael A. Park,et al.  Three-Dimensional Turbulent RANS Adjoint-Based Error Correction , 2003 .

[38]  Antony Jameson,et al.  Euler calculations for a complete aircraft , 1986 .

[39]  D. Venditti,et al.  Grid adaptation for functional outputs: application to two-dimensional inviscid flows , 2002 .