Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-30T15:58:16.956Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Progress toward CFD for full flight envelope

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 February 2016

E. N. Tinoco ,
D. R. Bogue ,
T-J. Kao ,
N. J. Yu ,
P. Li  and
D. N. Ball
E. N. Tinoco
Affiliation:
Enabling Technology and Research, Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Seattle, Washington, USA
D. R. Bogue
Affiliation:
Enabling Technology and Research, Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Seattle, Washington, USA
T-J. Kao
Affiliation:
Enabling Technology and Research, Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Seattle, Washington, USA
N. J. Yu
Affiliation:
Enabling Technology and Research, Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Seattle, Washington, USA
P. Li
Affiliation:
Enabling Technology and Research, Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Seattle, Washington, USA
D. N. Ball
Affiliation:
Enabling Technology and Research, Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Seattle, Washington, USA
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The value of computational fluid dynamics, CFD, delivered to date has mainly been related to its application to high-speed cruise design. To increase its applicability CFD must apply to the full flight envelope frequently characterised by large regions of separated flows. These flows are encountered by transport aircraft at low speed with deployed high lift devices, at their structural design loads conditions, or subjected to in-flight upsets that expose them to speed and/or angle-of-attack conditions outside the envelope of normal flight conditions to name a few. Such flows can only be characterised by the Navier-Stokes equations. This paper will report the progress toward CFD for full flight envelope. The CFD methods in use at Boeing will be described. Examples presented will address high-lift, loads and stability and control concerns including Reynolds scaling from wind tunnel to flight, vortex generator simulation, spoiler and horizontal tail effectiveness. In general, results shown are in ‘good enough’ agreement with experimental data. Deficiencies and the need for further algorithm and process improvement are noted. The need for automation to enable the large scale use of CFD will also be discussed.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Aeronautical Journal , Volume 109 , Issue 1100 , October 2005 , pp. 451 - 460
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Aeronautical Society 2005 

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

1. Rubbert, P.E. and Tinoco, E.N.. Impact of computational methods on aircraft design, August 1983, AIAA 83-2060.Google Scholar
2. Bengelink, R.L. and Rubbert, P.E.. The impact of CFD on the airplane design process: today and tomorrow, SAE Aerospace Engineering, March 1992.Google Scholar
3. Rubbert, P.E.. CFD and the changing world of airplane design, September 1994, AIAA Wright Brothers Lecture, ICAS-94-0.2.Google Scholar
4. Tinoco, E.N.. The changing role of computational fluid dynamics in aircraft development, June 1998, AIAA-98-2512.Google Scholar
5. Johnson, F.T., Tinoco, E.N. and Yu, N.J.. Thirty years of development and application of CFD at Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Seattle, June 2003, AIAA-2003-3439.Google Scholar
6. Capron, W.K. and Smit, K.L.. Advanced aerodynamic applications of an interactive geometry and visualization system, January 1991, AIAA-91-0800.Google Scholar
7. Young, D.P., Melvin, R.G., Bieterman, M.B., Johnson, F.T., Samant, S.S. and Bussoletti, J.E.. A locally refined rectangular grid finite element method: application to computational fluid dynamics and computational physics, J Comp Phys, 1991, 92, pp 1–66.Google Scholar
8. Chakravarthy, S., Palaniswamy, S., Goldberg, U., Peroomian, O., and Sekar, B.. A unified-grid approach for propulsion applications, 1998, AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference, Cleveland, July 1998.Google Scholar
9. Biedron, R.T. and Rumsey, C.L., CFL3D User’s Manual June 1998, NASA/TM-1998-208444.Google Scholar
10. Vatsa, V.N., Sanetrik, M.D. and Parlette, E.B.. Development of a flexible and efficient multigrid-based multiblock flow solver, 1993, AIAA paper 93-0699.Google Scholar
11. Yu, N.J., Su, T.Y. and Wilkinson, W.M.. Multiblock grid generation process for complex configuration analysis using Navier-Stokes codes, June 1995, AIAA-96-1995.Google Scholar
12. Rumsey, C.L. and Vatsa, V.N.. A comparison of the predictive capabilities of several turbulence models using upwind and central-difference computer codes, January 1993, AIAA-93-0192.Google Scholar
13. Spalart, P.R. and Allmaras, S.R.. A one-equation turbulence model for aerodynamic flows, 1992, AIAA paper 92-0439.Google Scholar
14. Menter, F.R.. Zonal two equation k-w turbulence models for aerodynamic flows, 1993, AIAA paper 93-2906.Google Scholar
15. Yu, N.J., Kao, T.J. and Bogue, D.R.. Computational simulations of a commercial airplane configuration with vortex generators, 2000, Aerodynamics Conference, 2000, Royal Aeronautical Society, London, UK.Google Scholar
16. Mineck, R.E.. Reynolds number effects on the performance of ailerons and spoilers, January 2001, AIAA Paper 2001-0908.Google Scholar
17. Bogue, D.R., Tran, J.T., Om, D., Rivers, S.M.B., Pendergraft, O.C. and Wahls, R.A.. Scale effect investigation on the stability and control characteristics of an advanced twinjet configuration, June 2003, AIAA-2003-3401.Google Scholar
18. Wilkinson, W.W., Lines, T.R. and Yu, N.J.. Navier-Stokes calculations for massively separated flows, June 1996, AIAA-96-2383.Google Scholar
19. Reichenbach, S.H. and Mcmasters, J.H.. A semiempirical interpolation technique for predicting full-scale flight characteristics, January 1987, AIAA Paper 87-0427.Google Scholar
20. Jesperson, D.C., Pulliam, T.H. and Buning, P.G.. Recent enhancements to OVERFLOW, January 1997, AIAA paper 97-0644.Google Scholar
21. Rogers, S.E. et al. Computation of viscous flow for a Boeing 777 aircraft in landing configuration, June 2000, AIAA paper 2000-4221.Google Scholar