Multi-fidelity modeling framework for nonlinear unsteady aerodynamics of airfoils

Abstract Aerodynamic data can be obtained from different sources, which vary in fidelity, availability and cost. As the fidelity of data increases, the cost of data acquisition usually becomes higher. Therefore, to obtain accurate unsteady aerodynamic model with very low cost and the desired level of accuracy, this paper proposes an unsteady multi-fidelity aerodynamic modeling framework. The approach integrates ideas from data fusion, multi-fidelity modeling, nonlinear system identification and machine learning. Data fusion reduces the total cost of data generation for model construction, while multi-fidelity modeling with a nonlinear autoregressive with exogenous input (NARX) description provides a general framework for unsteady aerodynamics. The correction term from the low-fidelity model to the high-fidelity result is then identified by a machine learning approach, i.e., a multi-kernel neural network. To validate the proposed method, unsteady aerodynamics of a NACA0012 airfoil pitching at Mach number 0.8 is modeled. The high-fidelity data is obtained from a Navier–Stokes-equation-based solver, while the low-fidelity solution is taken from an Euler-equation-based flow solver. The main difference between two types of data is that the high-fidelity solution takes into account the viscous effect, while the low-fidelity solution is based the invisicid flow assumption. Besides, to mimic the practical situation where high-fidelity data are limited in amount and diversity due to high cost (e.g., the experimental condition), only three high-fidelity unsteady aerodynamic solutions from harmonic motion are available. After performing a multi-fidelity analysis on a typical harmonic motion, the model is applied to the prediction of aerodynamic loads from either new harmonic motions or random motions. The multi-fidelity model shows a good agreement with the high-fidelity solution, indicating that by using only a few high-fidelity data and a low-fidelity model, high-fidelity results can be accurately reproduced. Furthermore, the model convergence with respect to increasing training data, and the comparison with a single high-fidelity reduced-order model (ROM) are also studied. The proposed approach becomes more accurate as the number of high-fidelity samples increases, and outperforms a single aerodynamic ROM in most of test cases. Compared with ROM method, additional computational cost for the proposed approach is small, therefore the total time cost of model training is still low.

[1]  Heng Xiao,et al.  Physics-Informed Machine Learning for Predictive Turbulence Modeling: Using Data to Improve RANS Modeled Reynolds Stresses , 2016 .

[2]  Zhijun Yang,et al.  Nonlinear Reduced-Order Models for Transonic Aeroelastic and Aeroservoelastic Problems , 2018, AIAA Journal.

[3]  Weiwei Zhang,et al.  Layered reduced-order models for nonlinear aerodynamics and aeroelasticity , 2017 .

[4]  Weiwei Zhang,et al.  An improved criterion to select dominant modes from dynamic mode decomposition , 2017 .

[5]  Joseba Murua,et al.  Applications of the unsteady vortex-lattice method in aircraft aeroelasticity and flight dynamics , 2012 .

[6]  Patrick C. Murphy,et al.  Nonlinear Unsteady Aerodynamic Modeling Using Wind-Tunnel and Computational Data , 2017 .

[7]  Slawomir Koziel,et al.  Multi-fidelity design optimization of transonic airfoils using physics-based surrogate modeling and shape-preserving response prediction , 2010, J. Comput. Sci..

[8]  Daniella E. Raveh,et al.  Reduced-Order Models for Nonlinear Unsteady Aerodynamics , 2001 .

[9]  Weiwei Zhang,et al.  Reduced-Order Modeling for Nonlinear Aeroelasticity with Varying Mach Numbers , 2018, Journal of Aerospace Engineering.

[10]  Weiwei Zhang,et al.  Nonlinear Aerodynamic Reduced-Order Model for Limit-Cycle Oscillation and Flutter , 2016 .

[11]  W. Rodden,et al.  A doublet-lattice method for calculating lift distributions on oscillating surfaces in subsonic flows. , 1969 .

[12]  K. Morgan,et al.  Reduced order modelling for unsteady fluid flow using proper orthogonal decomposition and radial basis functions , 2013 .

[13]  Bryan Glaz,et al.  Reduced-Order Nonlinear Unsteady Aerodynamic Modeling Using a Surrogate-Based Recurrence Framework , 2010 .

[14]  P. Holmes,et al.  The Proper Orthogonal Decomposition in the Analysis of Turbulent Flows , 1993 .

[15]  Ionel M. Navon Data Assimilation for Numerical Weather Prediction: A Review , 2009 .

[16]  Jan S. Hesthaven,et al.  Non-intrusive reduced order modeling of nonlinear problems using neural networks , 2018, J. Comput. Phys..

[17]  Tyson L. Hedrick,et al.  A multi-fidelity modelling approach for evaluation and optimization of wing stroke aerodynamics in flapping flight , 2013, Journal of Fluid Mechanics.

[18]  Minglang Yin,et al.  Novel Wiener models with a time-delayed nonlinear block and their identification , 2016 .

[19]  Weiwei Zhang,et al.  An approach to enhance the generalization capability of nonlinear aerodynamic reduced-order models , 2016 .

[20]  Weiwei Zhang,et al.  Multi-kernel neural networks for nonlinear unsteady aerodynamic reduced-order modeling , 2017 .

[21]  Andy J. Keane,et al.  Wing Optimization Using Design of Experiment, Response Surface, and Data Fusion Methods , 2003 .

[22]  Stefan Görtz,et al.  Alternative Cokriging Method for Variable-Fidelity Surrogate Modeling , 2012 .

[23]  Yueming Li,et al.  An efficient implementation of aeroelastic tailoring based on efficient computational fluid dynamics-based reduced order model , 2019, Journal of Fluids and Structures.

[24]  Weiwei Zhang,et al.  The interaction between flutter and buffet in transonic flow , 2015 .

[25]  Mehdi Ghoreyshi,et al.  Accelerating the Numerical Generation of Aerodynamic Models for Flight Simulation , 2009 .

[26]  T. Theodorsen General Theory of Aerodynamic Instability and the Mechanism of Flutter , 1934 .

[27]  Sheng Chen,et al.  Non-linear systems identification using radial basis functions , 1990 .

[28]  C. Ellington The Aerodynamics of Hovering Insect Flight. I. The Quasi-Steady Analysis , 1984 .

[29]  D. Myers Matrix formulation of co-kriging , 1982 .

[30]  P. Moin,et al.  DIRECT NUMERICAL SIMULATION: A Tool in Turbulence Research , 1998 .

[31]  J. G. Leishman,et al.  A Semi-Empirical Model for Dynamic Stall , 1989 .

[32]  Weiwei Zhang,et al.  A hybrid reduced-order framework for complex aeroelastic simulations , 2019, Aerospace Science and Technology.

[33]  A. Mannarino,et al.  Nonlinear aeroelastic reduced order modeling by recurrent neural networks , 2014 .

[34]  Herbert Wagner Über die Entstehung des dynamischen Auftriebes von Tragflügeln , 1925 .

[35]  A. Jirásek,et al.  Reduced order unsteady aerodynamic modeling for stability and control analysis using computational fluid dynamics , 2014 .

[36]  Christopher J. Ruscher,et al.  APPLICATION OF DATA FUSION TO FLUID DYNAMIC DATA , 2014 .

[37]  Petre Stoica,et al.  Decentralized Control , 2018, The Control Systems Handbook.

[38]  Michael Mifsud Reduced-order modelling for high-speed aerial weapon aerodynamics , 2008 .

[39]  H. Bijl,et al.  Mesh deformation based on radial basis function interpolation , 2007 .

[40]  Weiwei Zhang,et al.  A high-order finite volume method on unstructured grids using RBF reconstruction , 2016, Comput. Math. Appl..

[41]  P. Spalart Detached-Eddy Simulation , 2009 .

[42]  B. R. Noack,et al.  Closed-Loop Turbulence Control: Progress and Challenges , 2015 .

[43]  Weiwei Zhang,et al.  Reduced-order thrust modeling for an efficiently flapping airfoil using system identification method , 2017 .

[44]  Li Wei,et al.  Adaptive Radial-Basis-Function-Based Multifidelity Metamodeling for Expensive Black-Box Problems , 2017 .

[45]  Geoffrey T. Parks,et al.  Multi-fidelity non-intrusive polynomial chaos based on regression , 2016 .

[46]  Soledad Le Clainche,et al.  A reduced-order model for compressible flows with buffeting condition using higher order dynamic mode decomposition with a mode selection criterion , 2018 .

[47]  Alan N. Steinberg,et al.  Revisions to the JDL data fusion model , 1999, Defense, Security, and Sensing.

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

[49]  Earl H. Dowell,et al.  Modeling of Fluid-Structure Interaction , 2001 .

[50]  Christian Breitsamter,et al.  Neurofuzzy-Model-Based Unsteady Aerodynamic Computations Across Varying Freestream Conditions , 2016 .

[51]  Heng Xiao,et al.  Quantifying and reducing model-form uncertainties in Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes simulations: A data-driven, physics-informed Bayesian approach , 2015, J. Comput. Phys..

[52]  Hua Li,et al.  Sensor and CFD data fusion for airflow field estimation , 2016 .

[53]  Weiwei Zhang,et al.  Mechanism of frequency lock-in in transonic buffeting flow , 2017, Journal of Fluid Mechanics.

[54]  I. Mezić,et al.  Spectral analysis of nonlinear flows , 2009, Journal of Fluid Mechanics.

[55]  O. Nelles Nonlinear System Identification: From Classical Approaches to Neural Networks and Fuzzy Models , 2000 .

[56]  Andrew Arena,et al.  Accelerating computational fluid dynamics based aeroelastic predictions using system identification , 2001 .

[57]  M. Lesieur,et al.  New Trends in Large-Eddy Simulations of Turbulence , 1996 .

[58]  P Perdikaris,et al.  Multi-fidelity modelling via recursive co-kriging and Gaussian–Markov random fields , 2015, Proceedings of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences.

[59]  Liviu Librescu,et al.  Nonlinear Open-/Closed-Loop Aeroelastic Analysis of Airfoils via Volterra Series , 2004 .

[60]  David G. MacManus,et al.  A variable‐fidelity aerodynamic model using proper orthogonal decomposition , 2016 .

[61]  Benjamin Peherstorfer,et al.  Survey of multifidelity methods in uncertainty propagation, inference, and optimization , 2018, SIAM Rev..

[62]  Clarence W. Rowley,et al.  Data fusion via intrinsic dynamic variables: An application of data-driven Koopman spectral analysis , 2014, 1411.5424.

[63]  B. R. Noack,et al.  A hierarchy of low-dimensional models for the transient and post-transient cylinder wake , 2003, Journal of Fluid Mechanics.

[64]  Weiwei Zhang,et al.  Efficient Method for Limit Cycle Flutter Analysis Based on Nonlinear Aerodynamic Reduced-Order Models , 2012 .

[65]  P. Beran,et al.  Reduced-order modeling: new approaches for computational physics , 2004 .

[66]  Karthik Duraisamy,et al.  A paradigm for data-driven predictive modeling using field inversion and machine learning , 2016, J. Comput. Phys..

[67]  Gilead Tadmor,et al.  Reduced-Order Modelling for Flow Control , 2013 .

[68]  Weiwei Zhang,et al.  Mechanism of frequency lock-in in vortex-induced vibrations at low Reynolds numbers , 2015, Journal of Fluid Mechanics.

[69]  H. Akaike A new look at the statistical model identification , 1974 .

[70]  Charles G. Speziale,et al.  ANALYTICAL METHODS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF REYNOLDS-STRESS CLOSURES IN TURBULENCE , 1990 .

[71]  Weiwei Zhang,et al.  Active control of transonic buffet flow , 2017, Journal of Fluid Mechanics.

[72]  P. Schmid,et al.  Dynamic mode decomposition of numerical and experimental data , 2008, Journal of Fluid Mechanics.

[73]  Ken Badcock,et al.  On the generation of flight dynamics aerodynamic tables by computational fluid dynamics , 2011 .

[74]  A. O'Hagan,et al.  Predicting the output from a complex computer code when fast approximations are available , 2000 .

[75]  Karen Willcox,et al.  Provably Convergent Multifidelity Optimization Algorithm Not Requiring High-Fidelity Derivatives , 2012 .

[76]  Richard P. Dwight,et al.  Uncertainty quantification for a sailing yacht hull, using multi-fidelity kriging , 2015 .

[77]  James D. Baeder,et al.  Multi-Fidelity Coupled Trim Analysis of a Flapping-Wing Micro Air Vehicle Flight , 2017 .

[78]  P. Spalart A One-Equation Turbulence Model for Aerodynamic Flows , 1992 .

[79]  Tiangang Cui,et al.  Multifidelity importance sampling , 2016 .

[80]  Lucien Wald,et al.  Some terms of reference in data fusion , 1999, IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote. Sens..