![Page 1: Fixing Poor Control Surface Performance on a Transonic Missile – A Case Study of Combining Cost-effective Wind Tunnel Testing and CFD Analysis CP Crosby](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062304/56649e535503460f94b49750/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Fixing Poor Control Surface Performance on a Transonic Missile – A Case Study of Combining Cost-effective
Wind Tunnel Testing and CFD Analysis
CP Crosby and SG Gobey
Aerodynamics Department
Kentron
South Africa
![Page 2: Fixing Poor Control Surface Performance on a Transonic Missile – A Case Study of Combining Cost-effective Wind Tunnel Testing and CFD Analysis CP Crosby](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062304/56649e535503460f94b49750/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Methods for Aerodynamic Design
• “Classical” exact analytical• Semi-empirical database methods• Computational Fluid Dynamics• Wind-tunnel testing
Discrete methods with clearly defined boundaries?
![Page 3: Fixing Poor Control Surface Performance on a Transonic Missile – A Case Study of Combining Cost-effective Wind Tunnel Testing and CFD Analysis CP Crosby](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062304/56649e535503460f94b49750/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Combining CFD and Experiments
• “Conventional” view: use wind-tunnel to validate CFD, then use calibrated CFD to perform further studies
• Very slow, very expensive, very narrow view• Why do CFD when good tunnel results already exist?
![Page 4: Fixing Poor Control Surface Performance on a Transonic Missile – A Case Study of Combining Cost-effective Wind Tunnel Testing and CFD Analysis CP Crosby](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062304/56649e535503460f94b49750/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
What Is “Quality”?
• CFD good practice stipulates measures to be taken to ensure good quality CFD
• Good quality CFD is very expensive. Is it always necessary?
• Does good quality CFD necessarily ensure good quality design?
• Quality vs. quantity trade-off, which will give better final design?
• Performance and quality of design is a more meaningful metric than quality of CFD analyses
![Page 5: Fixing Poor Control Surface Performance on a Transonic Missile – A Case Study of Combining Cost-effective Wind Tunnel Testing and CFD Analysis CP Crosby](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062304/56649e535503460f94b49750/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
A Real Life Design Problem• Transonic (mostly subsonic) missile with canard control• User requirements:
– Very high manoeuvrability– Strict packaging dimensions– Low hinge moments
![Page 6: Fixing Poor Control Surface Performance on a Transonic Missile – A Case Study of Combining Cost-effective Wind Tunnel Testing and CFD Analysis CP Crosby](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062304/56649e535503460f94b49750/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Problem: Insufficient Elevator Power
• WT test in concept phase, 1:13 scale model in blow-down wind-tunnel, insufficient elevator effectiveness
• No CFD capability available, revise design empirically• Performance improved, but still unsatisfactory• Probable cause:
– Low Reynolds number– Poor profile accuracy
![Page 7: Fixing Poor Control Surface Performance on a Transonic Missile – A Case Study of Combining Cost-effective Wind Tunnel Testing and CFD Analysis CP Crosby](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062304/56649e535503460f94b49750/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Problem: Design Flaw, Not Testing ArtifactHighly detailed test of 30% model in transonic tunnel
![Page 8: Fixing Poor Control Surface Performance on a Transonic Missile – A Case Study of Combining Cost-effective Wind Tunnel Testing and CFD Analysis CP Crosby](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062304/56649e535503460f94b49750/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Understanding The FlowRelatively “crude” simplified CFD-Fastran model, only 190 000 cells
![Page 9: Fixing Poor Control Surface Performance on a Transonic Missile – A Case Study of Combining Cost-effective Wind Tunnel Testing and CFD Analysis CP Crosby](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062304/56649e535503460f94b49750/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Baseline CFD Confirms ProblemEven much simplified CFD captures poor performance
![Page 10: Fixing Poor Control Surface Performance on a Transonic Missile – A Case Study of Combining Cost-effective Wind Tunnel Testing and CFD Analysis CP Crosby](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062304/56649e535503460f94b49750/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
CFD Aids Understanding of Flow Problems• Premature flow separation due to incidence and deflection• Nose upwash aggravates separation• Interference due to close spacing
![Page 11: Fixing Poor Control Surface Performance on a Transonic Missile – A Case Study of Combining Cost-effective Wind Tunnel Testing and CFD Analysis CP Crosby](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062304/56649e535503460f94b49750/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Fixing the Problem
• Thanks to improved understanding, mostly from qualitative inspection of CFD flow fields, design is easy to improve
• Design tweaked to get better looking picture• Increase control surface leading edge sweep angle• LE sweep reduces adverse interference on fixed canard• Increased gap also reduces interference• Boundary layer fence on fixed canard helps
![Page 12: Fixing Poor Control Surface Performance on a Transonic Missile – A Case Study of Combining Cost-effective Wind Tunnel Testing and CFD Analysis CP Crosby](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062304/56649e535503460f94b49750/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Much Prettier CFD Pictures After Mods
![Page 13: Fixing Poor Control Surface Performance on a Transonic Missile – A Case Study of Combining Cost-effective Wind Tunnel Testing and CFD Analysis CP Crosby](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062304/56649e535503460f94b49750/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Much Prettier CFD Pictures After Mods
![Page 14: Fixing Poor Control Surface Performance on a Transonic Missile – A Case Study of Combining Cost-effective Wind Tunnel Testing and CFD Analysis CP Crosby](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062304/56649e535503460f94b49750/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
But Pretty Picture Also Gives Better Forces
![Page 15: Fixing Poor Control Surface Performance on a Transonic Missile – A Case Study of Combining Cost-effective Wind Tunnel Testing and CFD Analysis CP Crosby](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062304/56649e535503460f94b49750/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Confirm With “Crude” Low-speed WT Test• Big chances taken with simplified CFD• Need to confirm independently• CFD suggests non-subtle flow, try cheap WT test• WT approximations suggested by CFD:
– Low Mach-number (cheaper tunnel)– Simplified aerofoils– “Coke tin & aluminium tape” model modifications
• Simplified CFD and WT test only practical because of:– Cross-confirmation – Confirmation from later detailed test, which acts as a “Safety Net”
• Simplified test indicates BL fence was a bad idea, CFD confirms this
![Page 16: Fixing Poor Control Surface Performance on a Transonic Missile – A Case Study of Combining Cost-effective Wind Tunnel Testing and CFD Analysis CP Crosby](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062304/56649e535503460f94b49750/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Low Mach Number Can Be OKCheck validity with CFD before WT testing
![Page 17: Fixing Poor Control Surface Performance on a Transonic Missile – A Case Study of Combining Cost-effective Wind Tunnel Testing and CFD Analysis CP Crosby](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062304/56649e535503460f94b49750/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Simplified Aerofoils OK at Low ARCheck validity with CFD before WT testing
![Page 18: Fixing Poor Control Surface Performance on a Transonic Missile – A Case Study of Combining Cost-effective Wind Tunnel Testing and CFD Analysis CP Crosby](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062304/56649e535503460f94b49750/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Low Speed Test Confirms Improvement
![Page 19: Fixing Poor Control Surface Performance on a Transonic Missile – A Case Study of Combining Cost-effective Wind Tunnel Testing and CFD Analysis CP Crosby](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062304/56649e535503460f94b49750/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Detailed Transonic WT Test Gives Further Confirmation of Improvement
![Page 20: Fixing Poor Control Surface Performance on a Transonic Missile – A Case Study of Combining Cost-effective Wind Tunnel Testing and CFD Analysis CP Crosby](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062304/56649e535503460f94b49750/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Conclusions• Rough WT testing can mislead, use CFD to check• Rough CFD can capture most important characteristics of a
complex flow field – this may be sufficient• Qualitative CFD is very valuable for understanding complex
flows, very good for improving designs• Characterisation WT test makes a good quality “safety net”,
allows earlier CFD and WT testing to take short-cuts• Increased quality risk may be more acceptable if CFD and
experimental work is integrated• Aerodynamic designer, WT test engineer and CFD
practitioner need to work ver closely together• CFD can lead down blind alleys, even rough WT testing can
rectify this• Only quality of the final design matters