Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T17:13:48.191Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Dual-solver hybrid computational approaches for design and analysis of vertical lift vehicles

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 December 2021

M.J. Smith Open the ORCID record for M.J. Smith [Opens in a new window]  and
A. Moushegian
M.J. Smith*
Affiliation:
Georgia Institute of Technology, School of Aerospace Engineering, Atlanta, GA, USA
A. Moushegian
Affiliation:
Georgia Institute of Technology, School of Aerospace Engineering, Atlanta, GA, USA
*
E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The cost of Reynolds-Averaged Navier-Stokes simulations can be restrictive to implement in aeromechanics design and analysis of vertical lift configurations given the cost to resolve the flow on a mesh sufficient to provide accurate aerodynamic and structural loads. Dual-solver hybrid methods have been developed that resolve the configuration and the near field with the Reynolds-Averaged Navier-Stokes solvers, while the wake is resolved with vorticity-preserving methods that are more cost-effective. These dual-solver approaches can be integrated into an organisation’s workflow to bridge the gap between lower-fidelity methods and the expensive Reynolds-Averaged Navier-Stokes when there are complex physics present. This paper provides an overview of different dual-solver hybrid methods, coupling approaches, and future efforts to expand their capabilities in the areas of novel configurations and operations in constrained and turbulent environments.

Keywords

Vertical Liftrotorcrafturban air mobiltyCFDhybriddesignLattice BoltzmanPotential WakeVelocity-Vorticity TransportViscous Velocity Particle Method
Type
Survey Paper
Information
The Aeronautical Journal , Volume 126 , Special Issue 1295: This special issue marks the 125th anniversary of The Aeronautical Journal , January 2022 , pp. 187 - 208
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2021. 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

Pritchard, J.A. and Findlay, D. “Dynamic Interface Virtual Environment Overview,” Proceedings of the AIAA Aviation 2021 Forum, No. AIAA–2021–2484, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics Inc., Virtual Event, 2–6 August 2021.Google Scholar
Smith, Z.F. “Baseline for Virtual Dynamic Interface,” Proceedings of the AIAA Aviation 2021 Forum, No. AIAA–2021–2484, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics Inc., Virtual Event, 2–6 August 2021.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jain, R.K. and Potsdam, M.A. “Hover Predictions on the Sikorsky S-76 Rotor using Helios,” Proceedings of the 52nd Aerospace Sciences Meeting, No. AIAA–2014–0207, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics Inc., National Harbor, MD, 13–17 January 2014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wissink, A.M., Kamkar, S., Pulliam, T.H., Sitaraman, J. and Sankaran, V. “Cartesian Adaptive Mesh Refinement for Rotorcraft Wake Resolution,” Proceedings of the 28th AIAA Applied Aerodynamics Conference, No. AIAA–2010–4554, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics Inc., Chicago, IL, 28 June 2010.Google Scholar
Lynch, C.E. and Smith, M.J. “Extension and Exploration of a Hybrid Turbulence Model on Unstructured Grids,” AIAA J, 2011, 49, (11), pp 2585–2591.Google Scholar
Hodara, J., Lind, A., Jones, A. and Smith, M.J. “Collaborative Investigation of the Aerodynamic Behavior of Airfoils in Reverse Flow,” J Am Helicopter Soc, 2016, 61, (2), pp 032001.Google Scholar
Crozon, C., Steijl, R. and Barakos, G. “Coupled Flight Dynamics and CFD – Demonstration for Helicopters in Shipborne Environment,” Aeronaut J, 2018, 122, (1247), pp 42–82.Google Scholar
Koning, W., Acree, C. and Rajagopalan, G. “Using RotCFD to Predict Isolated XV-15 Rotor Performance,” Proceedings of the AHS Technical Meeting on Aeromechanics Design for Vertical Lift, American Helicopter Society Inc., San Francisco, CA, 20–22 January 2016.Google Scholar
Quackenbush, T., Whitehouse, G. and Danilov, P. “Download and Rotor Installed Performance In Hover and Low Advance Ratio Flight,” Proceedings of the AIAA Scitech 2020 Forum, No. AIAA–2020–0772, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics Inc., Orlando, FL, 6–10 January 2020.Google Scholar
Bir, G.S. “Structural Dynamics Verification of Rotorcraft Comprehensive Analysis System (RCAS),” Tech. Rep. NREL/TP-500-35328, NREL, February 2005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, W. CAMRAD II, Volume VII: Rotorcraft Training, Johnson Aeronautics, Palo Alto, CA, 1992, http://johnson- aeronautics.com/documents/CAMRADIIvolumeVII.pdf Google Scholar
Bauchau, O.A. Dymore User’s Manual, University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland, 2006, http://www.dymoresolutions.com/UsersManual.html Google Scholar
van der Wall, B.G., Lim, J.W., Smith, M.J., Jung, S., Bailly, J., Baeder, J. and Boyd, D.D. Jr. “The HART II International Workshop: An Assessment of the State of the Art in Comprehensive Code Prediction,” CEAS Aeronaut J, 2013, 4, (3), pp 223–252.Google Scholar
Smith, M.J., Lim, J.W., van der Wall, B.G., Baeder, J., Biedron, R.T., Boyd, D.D. Jr., Jayaraman, B., Jung, S. and Min, B.-Y. “The HART II International Workshop: An Assessment of the State-of-the-Art in CFD/CSD Prediction,” CEAS Aeronaut J, 2013, 4, (4), pp 345–372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Collins, K.B. A Multi-Fidelity Framework for Physics Based Rotor Blade Simulation and Optimization, PhD thesis, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, Georgia, November 2008, https://smartech.gatech.edu/handle/1853/26481 Google Scholar
Thomas, S., Anathan, S. and Baeder, J.D. “Wake-Coupling CFD-CSD Analysis of Helicopter Rotors in Steady and Maneuvering Flight Conditions,” Proceedings of the AHS Aeromechanics Specialists Conference 2010, American Helicopter Society Inc., San Francisco, CA, 20–22 January 2010.Google Scholar
Makinen, S.M., Reed, E. and Egolf, A.T. “Vibratory Load Correlation for the UH-60A Rotor in a High Thrust Forward Flight Condition,” Proceedings of the American Helicopter Society 64th Annual Forum, American Helicopter Society Inc., Montreal, Quebec, 1 May 2008.Google Scholar
Wissink, A.M., Jude, D., Jayaraman, B., Roget, B., Lakshminarayan, V.K., Sitaraman, J., Bauer, A.C., Forsythe, J.R. and Trigg, R.D. “New Capabilities in CREATE-AV Helios Version 11,” Proceedings of the AIAA Scitech 2021 Forum, No. AIAA–2021–0235, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics Inc., Virtual Event, 11–15 January. 2021.Google Scholar
Wissink, A.M., Potsdam, M., Sankaran, V., Sitaraman, J. and Mavriplis, D. “A Dual-Mesh Unstructured Adaptive Cartesian Computational Fluid Dynamics Approach for Hover Prediction,” J Am Helicopter Soc, 2016, 61, (1), pp 1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moushegian, A., Smith, M.J., Whitehouse, G. and Wachspress, D. “Implementation of a Hybrid Near-Body Solver for Rotorcraft Simulations in HPCMP CREATE-AV HELIOS,” Proceedings of the AIAA Scitech 2021 Forum, No. AIAA-2021-1077, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics Inc., Virtual Event, 11–21 January 2021.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Potsdam, M. “Dynamic Rotorcraft Applications Using Overset Grids,” Proceedings of the 31st European Rotorcraft Forum, No. 112, Council of European Aerospace Societies, Florence, Italy, 13–15 September 2005.Google Scholar
Benoit, B., Dequin, A.-M., Kampa, K., Von Grünhagen, W., Basset, P.-M. and Gimonet, B. “HOST, a General Helicopter Simulation Tool for Germany and France,” Proceedings of the American Helicopter Society 56th Annual Forum, American Helicopter Society Inc., Virginia Beach, VA, 2–4 May 2000.Google Scholar
Tan, J.F., Sun, Y.M., Zhou, T.Y., Barakos, G.N. and Green, R.B. “Simulation of the Aerodynamic Interaction Between Rotor and Ground Obstacle Using Vortex Method,” CEAS Aeronaut J, 2019, 10, (3), pp 733–753.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leishman, J.G. Principles of Helicopter Aerodynamics; 2nd Edition, Cambridge University Press, 2015, New York, NY.Google Scholar
Chaffin, M.S. and Berry, J.D. “Helicopter Fuselage Aerodynamics Under a Rotor by Navier-Stokes Simulation,” J Am Helicopter Soc, 1997, 42, (3), pp 235–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forsythe, J.R., Lynch, E., Polsky, S. and Spalart, P. “Coupled Flight Simulator and CFD Calculations of Ship Airwake using Kestrel,” Proceedings of the 53rd AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting, No. AIAA–2015–0556, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics Inc., Kissimmee, FL, 5–9 January 2015.Google Scholar
Oruc, I., Horn, J., Polsky, S., Shipman, J. and Erwin, J. “Coupled Flight Dynamics and CFD Simulations of the Helicopter/Ship Dynamic Interface,” Proceedings of the American Helicopter Society 71st Annual Forum, No. 71-2015-283, American Helicopter Society Inc., Virginia Beach, VA, 5–7 May 2015.Google Scholar
O’Brien, D.M. Jr and Smith, M.J. “Understanding the Physical Implications of Approximate Rotor Methods Using an Unstructured CFD Method,” Proceedings of the 31st European Rotorcraft Forum, Florence, Italy, 13–15 September 2005.Google Scholar
O’Brien, D.M. Analysis of Computational Modeling Techniques for Complete Rotorcraft Configurations, PhD thesis, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, Georgia, 11 April 2006, https://smartech.gatech.edu/handle/1853/10535 Google Scholar
Lynch, C.E., Prosser, D.T. and Smith, M.J. “An Efficient Actuating Blade Model for Unsteady Wind Turbine Wake Simulations,” Comput Fluids, 2014, 92, (1), pp 136–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomas, S. A GPU-Accelerated, Hybrid FVM-RANS Methodology for Modeling Rotorcraft Brownout, PhD thesis, University of Maryland, College Park, College Park, MD, Jan. 2013, https://drum.lib.umd.edu/handle/1903/14832 Google Scholar
Quon, E., Smith, M.J., Whitehouse, G.W. and Wachspress, D.A. “Unsteady Reynolds-Averaged Navier-Stokes-Based Hybrid Methodologies for Rotor-Fuselage Interaction,” J Aircr, 2012, 49, (3), pp 961–965.Google Scholar
Wilbur, I., Moushegian, A., Smith, M.J. and Whitehouse, G. “UH-60A Rotor Analysis with an Accurate Dual-Formulation Hybrid Aeroelastic Methodology,” J Aircr, 2020, 57, (1), pp 113–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boschitsch, A.H., Usab, W.J. and Epstein, R.J. “Fast Lifting Panel Method,” Proceedings of the AIAA 14th Computational Fluid Dynamics Conference, No. AIAA–1999–3376, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics Inc., Norfolk, VA, 28 June – 1 July 1999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kempka, S.N., Strickland, J.H., Glass, M.W., Peery, J.S. and Ingber, S.M. “Velocity Boundary Conditions for Vorticity Formulations of the Incompressible Navier-Stokes Equations,” Tech. Rep. SAND94-1735, Sandia National Laboratories, April 1995.Google Scholar
Brown, R.E. and Line, A.J. “Efficient High-Resolution Wake Modeling Using the Vorticity Transport Equation,” AIAA J, 2005, 43, (7), pp 1434–1443.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whitehouse, G.R. “Investigation of Hybrid Grid–Based Computational Fluid Dynamics Methods for Rotorcraft Flow Analysis,” J Am Helicopter Soc, 2011, 56, (3), pp 1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whitehouse, G.R. and Boschitsch, A.H. “Innovative Grid-Based Vorticity–Velocity Solver for Analysis of Vorticity-Dominated Flows,” AIAA J, 2015, 53, (6), pp 1655–1669.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whitehouse, G.R., Silbaugh, B.S. and Boschitsch, A.H. “Improving the Performance and Flexibility of Grid-Based Vorticity-Velocity Solvers for General Rotorcraft Flow Analysis,” Proceedings of the American Helicopter Society 71st Annual Forum, American Helicopter Society Inc., Virginia Beach, VA, 5–7 May 2015.Google Scholar
Smith, M., Quon, E., Cross, P., Rosenfeld, N. and Whitehouse, G. “Investigation of Ship Airwakes Using a Hybrid Computational Methodology,” Proceedings of the American Helicopter Society 70th Annual Forum, American Helicopter Society Inc., 20–22 May 2014.Google Scholar
Cottet, G.-H. and Koumoutsakos, P.D. Vortex Methods: Theory and Practice, 2nd edition, Cambridge University Press, 2000, Cambridge, UK.Google Scholar
He, C. and Zhao, J. “Modeling Rotor Wake Dynamics with Viscous Vortex Particle Method,” AIAA J, 2009, 47, (4), pp 902–915.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anusonti-Inthra, P. “Developments and Validations of Fully Coupled CFD and Particle Vortex Transport Method for High-Fidelity Wake Modeling in Fixed and Rotary Wing Applications,” Tech. Rep. NASA/CR-2010-216696, NASA, May 2010.Google Scholar
Zhao, J. and He, C. “A Hybrid Solver with Combined CFD and Viscous Vortex Particle Method,” Proceedings of the American Helicopter Society 67th Annual Forum, No. 67-2011-000280, American Helicopter Society Inc., Virginia Beach, VA, 3–5 May 2011.Google Scholar
Rajmohan, N., Zhao, J. and He, C. “A Coupled Vortex Particle/CFD Methodology for Studying Coaxial Rotor Configurations,” Proceedings of the Fifth Decennial AHS Aeromechanics Specialists Conference, American Helicopter Society Inc., San Francisco, CA, 22–24 January 2014.Google Scholar
Jasak, H., Jemcov, A. and Tukovic, Z. “OpenFOAM: A C++ Library for Complex Physics Simulations,” Proceedings of the International Workshop on Coupled Methods in Numerical Dynamics, Croatian Ministry of Science, Education and Sport, University of Zagreb, Croatian Academy of Engineering, Dubrovnik, Croatia, 19–21 September 2007.Google Scholar
Bludau, J., Rauleder, J., Friedmann, L. and Hajek, M. “Real-Time Simulation of Dynamic Inflow Using Rotorcraft Flight Dynamics Coupled With a Lattice-Boltzmann Based Fluid Simulation,” Proceedings of the 55th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting, No. AIAA–2017–0050, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics Inc., 9–13 January 2017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horvat, B., Hajek, M. and Rauleder, J. “Analysing Rotorcraft Vortex Encounter Methods with a Lattice-Boltzmann Method Based GPU Framework,” Proceedings of the AIAA Scitech 2020 Forum, No. AIAA–2020–0539, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics Inc., Orlando, FL, 6–10 January 2020.Google Scholar
Lintermann, A. and Schröder, W. “Lattice–Boltzmann Simulations for Complex Geometries on High-Performance Computers,” CEAS Aeronaut J, 2020, 11, (1), pp 745–766.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frapolli, N., Chikatamarla, S.S. and Karlin, I.V. “Entropic Lattice Boltzmann Model for Gas Dynamics: Theory, Boundary Conditions, and Implementation,” Phys Rev E, 2016, 93, (6), pp 063302.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bludau, J., Hajek, M. and Rauleder, J. “Solving the Ship-Rotorcraft Dynamic Interface Problem Using Lattice-Boltzmann Aerodynamics Two-Way Coupled with Blade Element Based Flight Dynamics,” Proceedings of the 77th Vertical Flight Society Annual Forum, May 2021.Google Scholar
Horvat, B., Hajek, M. and Rauleder, J. “Computational Flight Path Analysis of a Helicopter in an Offshore Wind Farm using a Lattice-Boltzmann Method,” AIAA-2021-1827, 59th Scitech Forum, January 2021.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jacobson, K. and Smith, M.J. “Performance and Physics of a S-76 Rotor in Hover With Non-Contiguous Hybrid Methodologies,” Proceedings of the 54th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting, No. AIAA-2016-0302, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics Inc., San Diego, CA, 4–8 January 2016.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moushegian, A.M., Smith, M.J., Whitehouse, G.R. and Wachspress, D.A. “Accurate and Flexible Formulation of a Dual-Solver Hybrid CFD Framework,” Proceedings of the 47th European Rotorcraft Forum, No. 88, Council of European Aerospace Societies, Virtual Event, 7–9 September 2021.Google Scholar
Spalart, P., Strelets, M. and Allmaras, S. “Comments on the Feasibiilty of LES for Wings, and on a Hybrid RANS/LES Approach,” Advances in DNS/LES: Proceedings of the First AFOSR International Conference on DNS/LES, edited by C. Liu and Z. Liu, Greyden Press, Columbus, OH, 1997.Google Scholar
Liggett, N. and Smith, M.J. “Cavity Flow Assessment Using Advanced Turbulence Methods,” J Aircr, 2011, 48, (1), pp 141–156. Doi: 10.2514/1.C031019.Google Scholar
Shelton, A.B., Braman, K., Smith, M.J. and Menon, S. “Improved Turbulence Modeling for Rotorcraft,” Proceedings of the American Helicopter Society 62nd Annual Forum, American Helicopter Society Inc., Phoenix, Arizona, 9–11 May 2006.Google Scholar
Johnson, W. and Silva, C. “NASA Concept Vehicles and the Engineering of Advanced Air Mobility Aircraft,” Aeronaut J, 2022, 125, (1), pp. (Not yet published).Google Scholar
Moushegian, A., Smith, M.J., Whitehouse, G. and Wachspress, D. “Hover Performance in Ground Effect Using a Dual-Solver Computational Methodology,” Proceedings of the Vertical Flight Society 77th Annual Forum, Vertical Flight Society Inc, Virtual Event, 10–14 May 2021.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Silva, M.J. and Barber, J.K. “Truth Data for DIVE V& V,” Proceedings of the AIAA Aviation 2021 Forum, No. AIAA–2021–2482, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics Inc., Virtual Event, 2–6 August 2021.Google Scholar
Kalra, T.S. CFD Modeling and Analysis of Rotor Wake in Hover Interacting with a Ground Plane, PhD thesis, University of Maryland, College Park, College Park, MD, January 2014, https://drum.lib.umd.edu/handle/1903/16086 Google Scholar
Lee, R.G. and Zan, S.J. “Wind Tunnel Testing of a Helicopter Fuselage and Rotor in a Ship Airwake,” J Am Helicopter Soc, 2005, 50, (4), pp 326–337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar