Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-xbtfd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T07:59:34.422Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Fast and accurate quasi-3D aerodynamic methods for aircraft conceptual design studies

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 December 2020

O. Şugar-Gabor Open the ORCID record for O. Şugar-Gabor [Opens in a new window]  and
A. Koreanschi
O. Şugar-Gabor*
Affiliation:
Aeronautical and Mechanical Engineering University of SalfordM5 4WTSalfordUK
A. Koreanschi
Affiliation:
Aeronautical and Mechanical Engineering University of SalfordM5 4WTSalfordUK
*
[email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In this paper, recent developments in quasi-3D aerodynamic methods are presented. At their core, these methods are based on the lifting-line theory and vortex lattice method, but with a relaxed set of hypotheses, while also considering the effect of viscosity (to a certain degree) by introducing a strong non-linear coupling with two-dimensional viscous aerofoil aerodynamics. These methods can provide more accurate results compared with their inviscid classical counterparts and have an extended range of applicability with respect to the lifting surface geometry. Verification results are presented for both steady-state and unsteady flows, as well as case studies related to their integration into aerodynamic shape optimisation tools. The good accuracy achieved using relatively low computational time makes such quasi-3D methods a solid choice for conducting conceptual-level design and optimisation of lifting surfaces.

Keywords

Quasi-3D aerodynamicsNonlinear lifting-line methodNonlinear vortex lattice methodMethods for conceptual-level wing design and optimisation
Type
Research Article
Information
The Aeronautical Journal , Volume 125 , Issue 1286 , April 2021 , pp. 593 - 617
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Royal Aeronautical Society

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Phillips, W.F. and Snyder, D.O. Modern adaptation of Prandtl’s classic lifting-line theory. J. Aircr., 2000, 37, (4), pp 662–670.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spall, R.E., Phillips, W.F. and Pincock, B.B. Numerical analysis of multiple, thin-sail geometries based on Prandtl’s lifting-line theory. Comput. Fluids, 2013, 82, pp 29–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gallay, S. and Laurendeau, E. Nonlinear generalized lifting-line coupling algorithms for pre/post-stall flows. AIAA J., 2015, 53, (7), pp 1784–1792.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gallay, S. and Laurendeau, E. Preliminary-design aerodynamic model for complex configurations using lifting-line coupling algorithm. J. Aircr., 2016, 53, (4), pp 1145–1159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Phlips, P.J., East, R.A. and Pratt, N.H. An unsteady lifting line theory of flapping wings with application to the forward flight of birds. J. Fluid Mech., 1981, 112, pp 97–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cline, S. and Crawford, C. Comparison of potential flow wake models for horizontal-axis wind turbine rotors. 48th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting Including the New Horizons Forum and Aerospace Exposition, 4–7 January 2010, Orlando, Florida, USA.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McWilliam, M.K. and Crawford, C. Finite element based lagrangian vortex dynamics model for wind turbine aerodynamics. J. Phys. Conf. Ser., 2014, 524, pp 012127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fluck, M. Accelerating Unsteady Wind Turbine Aerodynamics: A Stochastic Lagrangian Vortex Model, PhD thesis, University of Victoria, 2014.Google Scholar
Sugar Gabor, O., Koreanschi, A. and Botez, R.M. Analysis of UAS-S4 Éhecatl aerodynamic performance improvement using several configurations of a morphing wing technology. Aeronaut. J., 2016, 120, (1231), pp 1337–1364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sugar Gabor, O., Koreanschi, A. and Botez, R.M. Numerical study of UAS-S4 Éhecatl aerodynamic performance improvement obtained with the use of a morphing wing approach. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics AIAA 33rd Applied Aerodynamics Conference, 22–26 June 2015, Houston, Texas, USA.Google Scholar
Saffman, P. Vortex Dynamics, Cambridge University Press, 1992. Cambridge, UK.Google Scholar
Neely, R.H., Bollech, T.V., Westrick, G.C. and Graham, R.R. Experimental and Calculated Characteristics of Several NACA 44-Series Wings with Aspect Ratios of 8, 10 and 12 and Taper Ratios of 2.5 and 3.5. NACA Technical Note no. 1270, Langley Memorial Aeronautical Laboratory, 1947.Google Scholar
Drela, M. XFOIL: An Analysis and Design System for Low Reynolds Number Airfoils. In: Low Reynolds Number Aerodynamics. Springer, 1989.Google Scholar
Cahill, J.F. and Gottlieb, S.M. Low-Speed Aerodynamic Characteristics of a Series of Swept Wings Having NACA 65A006 Airfoil Sections. NACA Research Memorandum L50F16, Langley Memorial Aeronautical Laboratory, 1950.Google Scholar
Loftin, L.K. Theoretical and Experimental Data for a Number of NACA 6A-Series Airfoil Sections. NACA Technical Report no. 903, Langley Memorial Aeronautical Laboratory, 1947.Google Scholar
Hedman, S.G. Vortex Lattice Method for Calculation of Quasi Steady State Loadings on Thin Elastic Wings in Subsonic Flow, Aeronautical Research Institute of Sweden, 1966. Stockholm, Sweden.Google Scholar
Katz, J. and Plotkin, A. Low Speed Aerodynamics: From Wing Theory to Panel Methods, McGraw-Hill Inc., 1991, New York.Google Scholar
Murua, J., Palacios, R. and Graham, J.M.R. Applications of the unsteady vortex-lattice method in aircraft elasticity and flight dynamics. Prog. Aerosp. Sci., 2012, 55, pp 46–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leifsson, L., Slawomir, K. and Bekasiewicz, A. Fast low-fidelity wing aerodynamics model for surrogate-based shape optimization. Procedia Comput. Sci., 2014, 29, pp 811–820.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, D.D., Ajaj, R.M., Isikveren, A.T. and Friswell, M.I. Multi-objective optimization for the multiphase design of active polymorphic wings. J. Aircr., 2012, 49, (5), pp 1153–1160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tianyuan, H. and Xiongqing, Y. Aerodynamic/stealthy/structural multidisciplinary design optimization of unmanned combat air vehicle. Chin. J. Aeronaut., 2009, 22, pp 380–386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peifeng, L., Zhang, B., Yingchun, C., Changsheng, Y. and Yu, L. Aerodynamic design methodology for blended wing body transport. Chin. J. Aeronaut., 2012, 24, pp 508–516.Google Scholar
Sugar Gabor, O., Koreanschi, A. and Botez, R.M. A new non-linear vortex lattice method: applications to wing aerodynamic optimizations. Chin. J. Aeronaut., 2016, 29, (5), pp 1178–1195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sugar Gabor, O., Koreanschi, A., Botez, R.M., Mamou, M. and Mebarki, Y. Analysis of the Aerodynamic Performance of a Morphing Wing-Tip Demonstrator Using a Novel Nonlinear Vortex Lattice Method. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics AIAA 34th Applied Aerodynamics Conference, 13-17 June 2016, Washington DC, USA.Google Scholar
Mariens, J., Elham, A. and van Tooren, M.J.L. Quasi-three-dimensional aerodynamic solver for multidisciplinary design optimization of lifting surfaces. J. Aircr., 2014, 51, (2), pp 547–558.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schneider, W.C. A Comparison of the Spanwise Loading Calculated by Various Methods with Experimental Loadings Obtained on a 45° Sweptback Wing of Aspect Ration 8, at a Reynolds Number of 4 million. NACA Report no. 1208, Langley Memorial Aeronautical Laboratory, 1951.Google Scholar
Sugar Gabor, O., Simon, A., Koreanschi, A. and Botez, R.M. Numerical Optimization of the S4 Éhecatl UAS Airfoil Using a Morphing Wing Approach. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics AIAA 32nd Applied Aerodynamics Conference, 16-20 June 2014, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.Google Scholar
Piegl, L. and Tiller, W. The NURBS Book, 2nd ed. Springer-Verlag, 1997. Berlin, Germany.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fabiano, E., Mishra, A., Mavriplis, D. and Mani, K. Time-Dependent Aero-Acoustic Adjoint-Based Shape Optimization of Helicopter Rotors in Forward Flight. 57th AIAA/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics, and Materials Conference, AIAA Paper 2016-1910, 2016.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blacha, T., Gregersen, M.M., Islam, M. and Bensler, H. Application of the Adjoint Method for Vehicle Aerodynamic Optimization, SAE 2016 World Congress and Exhibition, SAE Technical Paper 2016-01-1615, 2016.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kenway, G.K.W and Martins, J.R.R.A. Multipoint high-fidelity aerostructural optimization of a transport aircraft configuration. J. Aircr., 2014, 51, (1), pp 144–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reuther, J., Alonso, J.J., Rimlinger, M.J. and Jameson, A. Aerodynamic shape optimization of supersonic aircraft configurations via an adjoint formulation on distributed memory parallel computers. Comput. Fluids, 1999, 28, (4), pp 675–700.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Funke, S.W., Farrell, P.E. and Piggott, M.D. Tidal turbine array optimisation using the adjoint approach. Renew. Energy, 2015, 63, pp 658–673.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ragab, S.A. Shape optimization of surface ships in potential flow using an adjoint formulation. AIAA J., 2004, 42, (2), pp 296–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sugar Gabor, O. Discrete adjoint-based simultaneous analysis and design method for conceptual aerodynamic applications. INCAS Bull., 2017, 9, (3), pp 133–147.Google Scholar
Cacuci, D.G. Sensitivity and Uncertainty Analysis, Volume I: Theory, CRC Press, 2003, Boca Raton, Florida, USA.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Byrd, R.H., Gilbert, J.C. and Nocedal, J.A. Trust region method based on interior point techniques for nonlinear programming. Math. Program., 2000, 89, (1), pp 149–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gomes, A.A. and Suleman, A. Aero-structural design optimization of a morphing wingtip. J. Intell. Mater. Syst. Struct., 2011, 22, (10), pp 1113–1124.Google Scholar
Smith, D.D., Ajaj, R.M., Isikveren, A.T. and Friswell, M.I. Multi-objective optimization for the multiphase design of active polymorphing wings. J. Aircr., 2012, 49, (4), pp 1153–1160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sugar Gabor, O. A general numerical unsteady nonlinear lifting line model for engineering aerodynamics studies. Aeronaut. J., 2018, 122, (1254), pp 1199–1228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sugar Gabor, O. Nonlinear lifting-line model using a vector formulation of the unsteady Kutta-Joukowski theorem. INCAS Bull., 2019, 11, (1), pp 189–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ho, S., Nassef, H., Pornsinsirirak, N., Tai, Y.C. and Ho, C.M. Unsteady aerodynamics and flow control for flapping wing flyers. Prog. Aerosp. Sci., 2003, 39, pp 635–681.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fritz, T.E. and Long, L.N. Object-oriented unsteady Vortex Lattice method for flapping flight. J. Aircr., 2004, 41, (6), pp 1275–1290.Google Scholar
Chreim, J.R., Esteves, F.R., Pimenta, M.M., Assi, G.R., Dantas, J.L.D. and Kogishi, A.M. Validation of a Novel Lifting-Line Method for Propeller Design and Analysis. Proceedings of the 14th Practical Design of Ships and Other Floating Structures-PRADS, 2019.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dos Santos, C.R. and Marques, F.D. Lift prediction including stall, using vortex lattice method with Kirchhoff-Based correction. J. Aircr., 2018, 55, (2), 887–891.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gamble, L.L., Pankonien, A.M. and Inman, D.J. Stall recovery of a morphing wing via extended nonlinear lifting-line theory. AIAA J., 2017, 55, (9), pp 2956–2963.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goitia, H. and Llamas, R. Nonlinear Vortex Lattice Method for Stall Prediction. MATEC Web of Conferences, Vol. 304, 2019.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jo, Y., Jardin, T., Gojon, R., Jacob, M.C. and Moschetta, J.M. Prediction of Noise from Low Reynolds Number Rotors with Different Number of Blades using a Non-Linear Vortex Lattice Method. In 25th AIAA/CEAS Aeroacoustics Conference (Aeroacoustics 2019), 20-23 May 2019, Delft, Netherlands.Google Scholar
Kim, H., Lee, S. and Lee, S. Numerical analysis on the aerodynamics of HAWTs using nonlinear vortex strength correction. Curr. Appl. Phy., 2010, 10, pp 311–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, T. and Park, S.O. Improved iteration algorithm for nonlinear vortex lattice method. J. Aircr., 2009, 46, (6), pp 2174–2176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, H. and Lee, D.J. Numerical investigation of the aerodynamics and wake structures of horizontal axis wind turbines by using nonlinear vortex lattice method. Renew. Energy, 2019, 132, pp 1121–1133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Owens, D. Weissinger’s Model of the Nonlinear Lifting-Line Method for Aircraft Design. 36th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, 1998, AIAA Paper 98-0597.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Garrel, A. Development of a Wind Turbine Aerodynamics Simulation Module. ECN-C-03-079 Report, 2003.Google Scholar
Vernengo, G., Bonfiglio, L. and Brizzolara, S. Supercavitating three-dimensional hydrofoil analysis by viscous lifting-line approach. AIAA J., 2017, 55, (12), pp 4127–4141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parenteau, M., Sermeus, K., and Laurendeau, E. VLM Coupled with 2.5 D RANS Sectional Data for High-Lift Design. In Proceedings of the 2018 AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting, 2018.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paul, R.C. and Gopalarathnam, A. Iteration schemes for rapid post-stall aerodynamic prediction of wings using a decambering approach. Int. J. Numer. Methods Fluids, 2014, 76, (4), pp 199–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jameson, A. Time Dependent Calculations Using Multigrid, with Application to Unsteady Flows Past Airfoils and Wings. In: 10th AIAA Computational Fluid Dynamics Conference, June 1991, AIAA Paper 91-1596.CrossRefGoogle Scholar