Applications of a Cartesian Mesh Boundary-Layer Approach for Complex Configurations

This paper examines the performance of a coupled Euler boundary-layer approach in simulating viscous flows around a variety of aerospace configurations. The method combines an established multilevel Cartesian-mesh Euler solver with a transpiration boundary condition to account for the boundary-layer displacement thickness. This boundary condition is set via a strip-wise solution of the 2D boundary-layer equations which uses the inviscid solution as a driver. The implementation uses local flow topology to establish attachment and separation and an elliptic solve on the surface triangulation to couple surface transpiration velocities back to the inviscid solver. While interacting boundary-layer (IBL) approaches are not necessarily new, the current approach is strongly focused on complex configurations and the implementation includes some novel techniques for coping with geometric complexity, markedly improving its utility, and removing the need for additional viscous corrections. The use of IBL solvers is well established for transport aircraft configurations, and the current work examines the success of the technique for such cases and explores its utility outside this class of problems. The investigations demonstrate the technique’s performance with both single-point and parametric studies on 2D supercritical airfoils, isolated wings, finned-missiles, and full-aircraft configurations. Results on the NACA RM-10 showed good agreement over a range of transonic and supersonic Mach numbers. Simulations on the DLR F-4 wing-body yielded aerodynamic force coefficients that agreed well with established results from the 1st AIAA Drag Prediction Workshop over a range of conditions. The discussion of these numerical results highlights regions of continued research.

[1]  Michael J. Aftosmis,et al.  Robust and efficient Cartesian mesh generation for component-based geometry , 1997 .

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

[3]  Steven M. Klausmeyer,et al.  Data summary from the first AIAA Computational Fluid Dynamics Drag Prediction Workshop , 2003 .

[4]  Scott M. Murman,et al.  Numerical simulation of rolling-airframes using a multi-level cartesian method , 2002 .

[5]  M. Giles,et al.  ISES - A two-dimensional viscous aerodynamic design and analysis code , 1987 .

[6]  Yousef Saad,et al.  Iterative methods for sparse linear systems , 2003 .

[7]  William I. Scallion,et al.  CFD Approaches for Simulation of Wing-Body Stage Separation , 2004 .

[8]  Albert J Evans.  The zero-lift drag of a slender body of revolution (NACA RM-10 research model) as determined from tests in several wind tunnels and in flight at supersonic speeds , 1953 .

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

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

[11]  David J. Peake,et al.  Topology of Three-Dimensional Separated Flows , 1982 .

[12]  M. Giles,et al.  Two-Dimensional Transonic Aerodynamic Design Method , 1987 .

[13]  Srinath V. Ekkad,et al.  Modeling and Computation of Boundary-Layer Flows , 1998 .

[14]  Stuart E. Rogers,et al.  Automated CFD Database Generation for a 2nd Generation Glide-Back-Booster , 2003 .

[15]  T. Cebeci,et al.  Analysis of wings with flow separation , 1989 .

[16]  J. Steger,et al.  Recent improvements in efficiency, accuracy, and convergence for implicit approximate factorization algorithms. [computational fluid dynamics , 1985 .

[17]  Gediminas Adomavicius,et al.  A Parallel Multilevel Method for Adaptively Refined Cartesian Grids with Embedded Boundaries , 2000 .

[18]  Scott M. Murman,et al.  Numerical Simulation of Rolling Airframes Using a Multilevel Cartesian Method , 2004 .

[19]  M. Lighthill.  On displacement thickness , 1958, Journal of Fluid Mechanics.

[20]  Viktoria Schmitt,et al.  Pressure distributions on the ONERA M6 wing at transonic Mach numbers , 1979 .

[21]  T. Pulliam.  Efficient solution methods for the Navier-Stokes equations , 1986 .

[22]  Mc Nally.  FORTRAN program for calculating compressible laminar and turbulent boundary layers in arbitrary pressure gradients , 1970 .

[23]  Mark Potsdam.  An unstructured mesh Euler and interactive boundary layer method for complex configurations , 1994 .

[24]  Joseph H. Morrison,et al.  CFD Sensitivity Analysis of a Drag Prediction Workshop Wing/Body Transport Configuration , 2003 .

[25]  Dimitri J. Mavriplis,et al.  Grid Resolution Study of a Drag Prediction Workshop Configuration Using the NSU3D Unstructured Mesh Solver , 2005 .

[26]  Scott M. Murman,et al.  Automated Parameter Studies Using a Cartesian Method , 2004 .

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

[28]  W. Press,et al.  Numerical Recipes: The Art of Scientific Computing , 1987 .

[29]  P. G. Buning,et al.  Graphics and flow visualization in computational fluid dynamics , 1985 .

[30]  Michael J. Aftosmis,et al.  Multilevel Error Estimation and Adaptive h-Refinement for Cartesian Meshes with Embedded Boundaries , 2002 .

[31]  Raymond M. Hicks,et al.  AERODYNAMIC SHAPE OPTIMIZATION USING UNSTRUCTURED GRID METHODS , 2002 .