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 7x106 to 208x106 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 40x106 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 2x106 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.

[1]  Neal T. Frink,et al.  Assessment of the Unstructured Grid Software TetrUSS for Drag Prediction of the DLR-F4 Configuration , 2002 .

[2]  Michael J. Hemsch,et al.  Statistical Analysis of CFD Solutions from the Drag Prediction Workshop , 2002 .

[3]  Mark Rakowitz,et al.  Structured and Unstructured Computations on the DLR-F4 Wing-Body Configuration , 2002 .

[4]  Edward N. Tinoco,et al.  Reynolds-Averaged Navier–Stokes Technology for Transonic Drag Prediction: A Boeing Perspective , 2014 .

[5]  Stefan Keye,et al.  Development of Deformed CAD Geometries of NASA's Common Research Model for the 6th AIAA CFD Drag Prediction Workshop , 2016 .

[6]  Atsushi Hashimoto,et al.  Drag Prediction on NASA Common Research Model Using Automatic Hexahedra Grid-Generation Method , 2014 .

[7]  John C. Vassberg,et al.  OVERFLOW Drag Prediction for the DLR-F6 Transport Configuration: A DPW-II Case Study , 2004 .

[8]  David Hue,et al.  Computational Drag and Moment Prediction of the DPW4 configuration using the elsA software , 2010 .

[9]  Dimitri J. Mavriplis,et al.  Third Drag Prediction Workshop Results Using the NSU3D Unstructured Mesh Solver , 2008 .

[10]  Edward N. Tinoco,et al.  Abridged Summary of the Third AIAA Computational Fluid Dynamics Drag Prediction Workshop , 2008 .

[11]  Edward N. Tinoco,et al.  Data Summary from Second AIAA Computational Fluid Dynamics Drag Prediction Workshop , 2003 .

[12]  John C. Vassberg,et al.  Development of a Common Research Model for Applied CFD Validation Studies , 2008 .

[13]  John C. Vassberg,et al.  Drag Prediction for the DLR-F6 Wing/Body and DPW Wing using CFL3D and OVERFLOW Overset Mesh , 2007 .

[14]  Eiji Shima,et al.  CFD Sensitivity of Drag Prediction on DLR-F6 Configuration by Structured Method and Unstructured Method , 2004 .

[15]  Kelly R. Laflin,et al.  CFL3D, FUN3d, and NSU3D Contributions to the Fifth Drag Prediction Workshop , 2013 .

[16]  Edward Tinoco,et al.  Drag Prediction with the Zeus/CFL3D System (Invited) , 2004 .

[17]  John C. Vassberg,et al.  Drag Prediction for the Common Research Model Using CFL3D and OVERFLOW , 2014 .

[18]  Fengwei Li,et al.  Validation of A Multigrid-Based Navier-Stokes Solver for Transonic Flows , 2010 .

[19]  Edward N. Tinoco,et al.  Grid Quality and Resolution Issues from the Drag Prediction Workshop Series , 2008 .

[20]  Todd R. Michal,et al.  Anisotropic Mesh Adaptation Through Edge Primitive Operations , 2012 .

[21]  David Hue,et al.  Experimental Investigations on the Common Research Model at ONERA-S1MA - Comparison with DPW Numerical Results , 2017 .

[22]  Ryan S. Glasby,et al.  Introduction to COFFE: The Next-Generation HPCMP CREATE-AV CFD Solver , 2016 .

[23]  Ehab Fares,et al.  Validation of a Transonic Lattice-Boltzmann Method on the NASA Common Research Model , 2016 .

[24]  Edward N. Tinoco,et al.  Summary of Data from the Sixth AIAA CFD Drag Prediction Workshop: Case 1 Code Verification. , 2017, Journal of aircraft.

[25]  Joseph H. Morrison,et al.  Statistical Analysis of CFD Solutions from 2nd Drag Prediction Workshop (Invited) , 2004 .

[26]  Edward N. Tinoco,et al.  Summary of Data from the Second AIAA CFD Drag Prediction Workshop (Invited) , 2004 .

[27]  Melissa B. Rivers,et al.  Experimental Investigations of the NASA Common Research Model (Invited) , 2010 .

[28]  John C. Vassberg,et al.  Analysis of the Common Research Model Using Structured and Unstructured Meshes , 2014 .

[29]  Melissa B. Rivers,et al.  Experimental Investigation of the NASA Common Research Model , 2014 .

[30]  Joseph H. Morrison,et al.  Study of CFD Variation on Transport Configurations from the Second Drag-Prediction Workshop , 2004 .

[31]  Edward N. Tinoco,et al.  Inclusion of Aeroelastic Twist into the CFD Analysis of the Twin-Engine NASA Common Research Model , 2014 .

[32]  Joseph H. Morrison Statistical Analysis of CFD Solutions from the Fourth AIAA Drag Prediction Workshop , 2010 .

[33]  Joseph H. Morrison,et al.  Statistical Analysis of CFD Solutions from the Third AIAA Drag Prediction Workshop (Invited) , 2007 .

[34]  Olaf Brodersen,et al.  Airbus, ONERA, and DLR Results from the Second AIAA Drag Prediction Workshop , 2005 .

[35]  Joseph H. Morrison,et al.  Statistical Analysis of CFD Solutions from the Sixth AIAA Drag Prediction Workshop , 2017 .

[36]  John C. Vassberg,et al.  Drag Prediction for the NASA CRM Wing-Body-Tail Using CFL3D and OVERFLOW on an Overset Mesh , 2010 .

[37]  Simone Crippa Application of Novel Hybrid Mesh Generation Methodologies for Improved Unstructured CFD Simulations , 2010 .

[38]  Andrew Jackson,et al.  Anisotropic Hybrid Mesh Generation for Industrial RANS Applications , 2006 .

[39]  Seigo Koga,et al.  Transonic Wind Tunnel Test of the NASA CRM: Volume 1 , 2014 .

[40]  Edward N. Tinoco,et al.  Summary of the Fourth AIAA CFD Drag Prediction Workshop , 2010 .

[41]  John C. Vassberg,et al.  Drag Prediction for the DLR-F4 Wing/Body using OVERFLOW and CFL3D on an Overset Mesh , 2002 .

[42]  Stefan Keye,et al.  Summary of Data from the Sixth AIAA CFD Drag Prediction Workshop: Case 5 (Coupled Aero-Structural Simulation) , 2017 .

[43]  David Hue,et al.  Fifth Drag Prediction Workshop: Computational Fluid Dynamics Studies Carried Out at ONERA , 2014 .

[44]  Edward N. Tinoco,et al.  Structured and Unstructured Navier-Stokes Solvers for the Third Drag Prediction Workshop , 2008 .

[45]  Edward N. Tinoco,et al.  Structured and Unstructured Solvers for the 3rd CFD Drag Prediction Workshop (Invited) , 2007 .

[46]  John C. Vassberg,et al.  Summary of Data from the First AIAA CFD Drag Prediction Workshop , 2002 .

[47]  John C. Vassberg,et al.  A Unified Baseline Grid about the Common Research Model Wing-Body for the Fifth AIAA CFD Drag Prediction Workshop , 2011 .

[48]  Scott A. Morton,et al.  Aircraft Drag Prediction Using Cobalt , 2004 .

[49]  Neal Pfeiffer,et al.  Reflections on the Second Drag Prediction Workshop , 2004 .

[50]  Kazuomi Yamamoto,et al.  Comparison Study of Drag Prediction by Structured and Unstructured Mesh Method , 2008 .

[51]  Dana P. Hammond,et al.  Application of the FUN3D Unstructured-Grid Navier-Stokes Solver to the 4th AIAA Drag Prediction Workshop Cases , 2010 .

[52]  Jochen Raddatz,et al.  DLR Results from the Third AIAA CFD Drag Prediction Workshop (Invited) , 2007 .

[53]  Yoonsik Kim,et al.  Drag Prediction of DLR-F6 Using the Turbulent Navier-Stokes Calculations with Multigrid , 2004 .

[54]  Joseph H. Morrison,et al.  Statistical Analysis of the Fifth Drag Prediction Workshop Computational Fluid Dynamics Solutions , 2014 .

[55]  Georg May,et al.  Drag prediction of the DLR-F6 configuration , 2004 .

[56]  Craig A. Hunter,et al.  Support System Effects on the NASA Common Research Model , 2012 .

[57]  Shia-Hui Peng,et al.  Drag Prediction for the DLR-F6 Wing-Body Configuration Using the Edge Solver , 2007 .

[58]  Thomas H. Pulliam,et al.  Near-Body Grid Adaption for Overset Grids , 2016 .

[59]  Olaf Brodersen,et al.  Investigation of Aeroelastic Effects on the NASA Common Research Model , 2014 .

[60]  Melissa B. Rivers,et al.  Experimental Investigations of the NASA Common Research Model in the NASA Langley National Transonic Facility and NASA Ames 11-Ft Transonic Wind Tunnel (Invited) , 2011 .

[61]  Florian R. Menter,et al.  Drag Prediction of Engine-Airframe Interference Effects with CFX-5 , 2004 .

[62]  Kazuomi Yamamoto,et al.  Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency Studies for the Fifth AIAA Drag Prediction Workshop , 2014 .

[63]  Dimitri J. Mavriplis,et al.  NSU3D Results for the Fourth AIAA Drag Prediction Workshop , 2010 .

[64]  Edward N. Tinoco,et al.  RANS Technology for Transonic Drag Prediction; A Boeing Perspective of the 4th Drag Prediction Workshop , 2010 .

[65]  Atsushi Hashimoto,et al.  Validation of Fully Automatic Grid Generation Method on Aircraft Drag Prediction , 2010 .

[66]  Venkat Venkatakrishnan,et al.  Higher Order Schemes for the Compressible Navier-Stokes Equations , 2003 .

[67]  David Hue,et al.  Fifth Drag Prediction Workshop: ONERA Investigations with Experimental Wing Twist and Laminarity , 2014 .

[68]  Dimitri J. Mavriplis,et al.  Transonic drag prediction using an unstructured multigrid solver , 2002 .

[69]  John C. Vassberg,et al.  CFL3D/OVERFLOW Results for DLR-F6 Wing/Body and Drag Prediction Workshop Wing , 2008 .

[70]  Olaf Brodersen,et al.  DLR Results from the Fourth AIAA CFD Drag Prediction Workshop , 2010 .

[71]  Melissa B. Rivers,et al.  Further Investigation of the Support System Effects and Wing Twist on the NASA Common Research Model , 2012 .

[72]  David W. Levy,et al.  Comparison of Viscous Grid Layer Growth Rate of Unstructured Grids on CFD Drag Prediction Workshop Results , 2010 .

[73]  Olaf Brodersen,et al.  Turbulence Model Study for the Flow Around the NASA Common Research Model , 2014 .

[74]  Edward N. Tinoco,et al.  Summary of Data from the Fifth Computational Fluid Dynamics Drag Prediction Workshop , 2014 .

[75]  Jan B. Vos,et al.  DPW4 Results Using Different Grids Including Near-Field/Far-Field Drag Analysis , 2010 .

[76]  Kazuomi Yamamoto,et al.  Comparison Study of Drag Prediction for the 4th CFD Drag Prediction Workshop using Structured and Unstructured Mesh Methods , 2010 .

[77]  Mark A. DeHaan,et al.  A Wing-Body Fairing Design for the DLR-F6 Model: A DPW-III Case Study , 2005 .

[78]  Shia-Hui Peng,et al.  Computations from the Fourth Drag Prediction Workshop Using the Edge Solver , 2010 .

[79]  Dana P. Hammond,et al.  Application of the FUN3D Solver to the 4th AIAA Drag Prediction Workshop , 2014 .

[80]  Krzysztof J. Fidkowski,et al.  Drag Prediction Using Adaptive Discontinuous Finite Elements , 2013 .

[81]  Jochen Raddatz,et al.  DLR Results from the Third AIAA Computational Fluid Dynamics Drag Prediction Workshop , 2014 .

[82]  Dimitri J. Mavriplis,et al.  Results from the 3rd Drag Prediction Workshop Using the NSU3D Unstructured Mesh Solver , 2007 .