Upload File

nasa trap wing model overflow analysis · cfd high lift prediction workshop nasa trap wing model...

  • Home
  • Documents
  • NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis · CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis Anthony J. Sclafani, Jeffrey P. Slotnick, John C. Vassberg The Boeing
40
CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis Anthony J. Sclafani, Jeffrey P. Slotnick, John C. Vassberg The Boeing Company Boeing Research & Technology Huntington Beach, California, USA 1 st AIAA CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop Chicago, Illinois 26-27 June 2010

Upload: doxuyen

Post on 29-Apr-2018

220 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

Report

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis · CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis Anthony J. Sclafani, Jeffrey P. Slotnick, John C. Vassberg The Boeing

CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop

NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis

Anthony J. Sclafani, Jeffrey P. Slotnick, John C. Vassberg

The Boeing CompanyBoeing Research & Technology

Huntington Beach, California, USA

1st AIAA CFD High Lift Prediction WorkshopChicago, Illinois26-27 June 2010

Page 2: NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis · CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis Anthony J. Sclafani, Jeffrey P. Slotnick, John C. Vassberg The Boeing

AIAA HiLiftPW-1 Chicago, IL June 2010 Slide 2 of 40

CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop

Flow Solver / Computing PlatformGrid InformationConvergence Histories and ResidualsResults• Test Case 1: Grid Convergence Study• Test Case 2: Flap Deflection Prediction Study• Test Case 3: Slat and Flap Support Effects Study

ConclusionsFuture Work

NASA Trap Wing“Config 1”

NASA Trap Wing OVERFLOW AnalysisOutline

Page 3: NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis · CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis Anthony J. Sclafani, Jeffrey P. Slotnick, John C. Vassberg The Boeing

AIAA HiLiftPW-1 Chicago, IL June 2010 Slide 3 of 40

CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop

NASA Trap Wing OVERFLOW AnalysisFlow Solver and Computing Platform

OVERFLOW MPI version 2.1ad – Default Setup for High Lift StudiesRoe upwind differencingSpalart-Allmaras (SA) turbulence model – version “fv3”full Navier-Stokeslow-Mach preconditioningsteady stateall cases run from scratch (i.e., freestream initial condition)

Parallel Processing on a PC ClusterLinux 64bit operating system with 1968 CPUs on 578 nodes

• 120 2.6GHz Opteron dual core nodes with 8GB of RAM• 80 3.0GHz Xeon dual dual-core nodes with 12GB of RAM• 112 2.2GHz Opteron dual quad-core nodes with 16GB of RAM

Config 1 medium grid (25 million points) run on 24 processors• 18.7 seconds per iteration• Full convergence reached after 5000 iterations• Roughly 26 hours of wall clock time needed per case

Page 4: NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis · CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis Anthony J. Sclafani, Jeffrey P. Slotnick, John C. Vassberg The Boeing

AIAA HiLiftPW-1 Chicago, IL June 2010 Slide 4 of 40

CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop

Structured Overset Grid Systems34 zones for Bracket-Off (28 surface abutting)62 zones for Bracket-On (56 surface abutting)

0.23

0.52

1.17

2.07

1/N2/3 x 105

1.124.44.00009 in83,302,438Fine

6

3

2

ConstantCells

.29

.66

.87

y+

.00006 in

.00013 in

.00017 in

1st Cell Size

1.08281,560,012Extra-Fine

1.1824,965,818Medium

1.2510,653,004Coarse

GrowthRatePointsGrid

Config 1 and Config 8 (body-slat-wing-flap)

NASA Trap Wing OVERFLOW AnalysisGrid Information for “Str-Overset-A-v3”

0.67

1/N2/3 x 105

3

ConstantCells

.66

y+

.00013 in

1st Cell Size

1.1858,175,676Medium

GrowthRatePointsGrid

Config 1 (body-slat-wing-flap-brackets)

Page 5: NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis · CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis Anthony J. Sclafani, Jeffrey P. Slotnick, John C. Vassberg The Boeing

AIAA HiLiftPW-1 Chicago, IL June 2010 Slide 5 of 40

CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop

NASA Trap Wing OVERFLOW AnalysisConvergence Histories – Lift

Page 6: NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis · CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis Anthony J. Sclafani, Jeffrey P. Slotnick, John C. Vassberg The Boeing

AIAA HiLiftPW-1 Chicago, IL June 2010 Slide 6 of 40

CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop

NASA Trap Wing OVERFLOW AnalysisConvergence Histories – Drag

Page 7: NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis · CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis Anthony J. Sclafani, Jeffrey P. Slotnick, John C. Vassberg The Boeing

AIAA HiLiftPW-1 Chicago, IL June 2010 Slide 7 of 40

CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop

NASA Trap Wing OVERFLOW AnalysisConvergence Histories – Pitching Moment

Page 8: NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis · CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis Anthony J. Sclafani, Jeffrey P. Slotnick, John C. Vassberg The Boeing

AIAA HiLiftPW-1 Chicago, IL June 2010 Slide 8 of 40

CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop

NASA Trap Wing OVERFLOW AnalysisConvergence Histories – Comparison Tables

ΔCMΔCDΔCLα

.10.04.0134o

.19.07.0328o

.03.03.0221o

.06.05.0313o

ΔCMΔCDΔCLgrid

1.331.451.01extra-fine

.16.13.06fine

.06.05.03medium

.02.03.01coarse

Medium Grid α = 13o

Config 1 Force and Moment Plus/Minus “Error Band”

Given as Percent Total

Page 9: NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis · CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis Anthony J. Sclafani, Jeffrey P. Slotnick, John C. Vassberg The Boeing

AIAA HiLiftPW-1 Chicago, IL June 2010 Slide 9 of 40

CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop

NASA Trap Wing OVERFLOW AnalysisConfig 1 Residuals

Slat/Flap Brackets OffFully Turbulent, Free AirRN = 4.3 mil, Mach = 0.2α = 13o

Higher alpha solutions have similar residuals

Medium Grid Fine Grid Extra-Fine Grid

Page 10: NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis · CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis Anthony J. Sclafani, Jeffrey P. Slotnick, John C. Vassberg The Boeing

AIAA HiLiftPW-1 Chicago, IL June 2010 Slide 10 of 40

CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop

NASA Trap Wing OVERFLOW AnalysisConfig 1 Turbulence Model Residuals

Slat/Flap Brackets OffFully Turbulent, Free AirRN = 4.3 mil, Mach = 0.2α = 13o

Medium Grid Fine Grid Extra-Fine Grid

Page 11: NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis · CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis Anthony J. Sclafani, Jeffrey P. Slotnick, John C. Vassberg The Boeing

AIAA HiLiftPW-1 Chicago, IL June 2010 Slide 11 of 40

CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop

NASA Trap Wing OVERFLOW AnalysisJust a Reminder …

When comparing CFD with wind tunnel data, remember the following.

• Brackets

• Transition

• Walls

• Aeroelastics

Page 12: NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis · CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis Anthony J. Sclafani, Jeffrey P. Slotnick, John C. Vassberg The Boeing

AIAA HiLiftPW-1 Chicago, IL June 2010 Slide 12 of 40

CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop

NASA Trap Wing OVERFLOW AnalysisResults

Test Case 1

Grid Convergence Study

Page 13: NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis · CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis Anthony J. Sclafani, Jeffrey P. Slotnick, John C. Vassberg The Boeing

AIAA HiLiftPW-1 Chicago, IL June 2010 Slide 13 of 40

CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop

Test Case 1 – Grid Convergence StudyConfig 1: Total Lift at α = 13o

coarse medium fine

extra-fine

Extra-fine grid solution represents a severe break in the grid convergence plot.

• Extent of inboard flap separation may be related.

Extrapolating from medium and fine grid CLs gives 2.023 at the continuum, ~1% less than experiment.Flap TE separation is reduced with grid refinement.

CL drops by .06 (~3%) going from fine to extra-fine grid

Page 14: NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis · CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis Anthony J. Sclafani, Jeffrey P. Slotnick, John C. Vassberg The Boeing

AIAA HiLiftPW-1 Chicago, IL June 2010 Slide 14 of 40

CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop

Test Case 1 – Grid Convergence StudyConfig 1 and Config 8: Total Lift at α = 13o

Config 1 (Slat 30, Flap 25) Extra-Fine Grid Solution

Config 8 (Slat 30, Flap 20) Extra-Fine Grid Solution

Config 8 extra-fine grid solution shows a similar break in lift but the inboard flap separation is relatively small.The drop in lift at α = 13o going from the fine grid to the extra-fine grid does not appear to be driven by inboard flap separation.

Page 15: NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis · CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis Anthony J. Sclafani, Jeffrey P. Slotnick, John C. Vassberg The Boeing

AIAA HiLiftPW-1 Chicago, IL June 2010 Slide 15 of 40

CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop

Test Case 1 – Grid Convergence StudySection Cl Comparison at α = 13o

The extra-fine grid solution has reduced loading across the entire semi-span for all three elements.

Config 1 Config 8

Page 16: NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis · CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis Anthony J. Sclafani, Jeffrey P. Slotnick, John C. Vassberg The Boeing

AIAA HiLiftPW-1 Chicago, IL June 2010 Slide 16 of 40

CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop

Test Case 1 – Grid Convergence StudyConfig 1: Total Lift at α = 28o

coarse medium fine

extra-fine

Extra-fine grid solution represents an extremely large break in the grid convergence plot.

• Surface streamlines show main wing flow separation (early stall).

The coarse, medium, and fine grid CL agrees very well with test data.

CL drops by .72 (~25%) going from fine to extra-fine grid

Page 17: NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis · CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis Anthony J. Sclafani, Jeffrey P. Slotnick, John C. Vassberg The Boeing

AIAA HiLiftPW-1 Chicago, IL June 2010 Slide 17 of 40

CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop

Test Case 1 – Grid Convergence StudyConfig 1 Lift Curve Comparison – Grid Effect

Extra-fine grid data may represent a second solution at the two alphas analyzed.

• Currently running α = 13o further

• Will try restarting to get to 28o

Page 18: NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis · CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis Anthony J. Sclafani, Jeffrey P. Slotnick, John C. Vassberg The Boeing

AIAA HiLiftPW-1 Chicago, IL June 2010 Slide 18 of 40

CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop

Test Case 1 – Grid Convergence StudyConfig 1: Total Drag & Pitching Moment

Drag

Coarse, medium, and fine grid drag levels agree reasonably well with experiment.

• At 13o, grid-converged drag is under-predicted by about 45 counts (~1.3%).

• At 28o, grid-converged drag is under-predicted by about 50 counts (~0.8%).

The extra-fine grid data breaks away from the linear trend indicating asymptotic grid convergence is not achieved.

50 counts 200 counts

Pitching Moment

Coarse, medium, and fine grid pitching moment data is not linear at 13o.

The extra-fine grid pitch break is nose-up for both alphas.

• At 13o, nose-up break most likely driven by reduced CL.

• At 28o, nose-up break caused by outboard wing separation.

Page 19: NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis · CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis Anthony J. Sclafani, Jeffrey P. Slotnick, John C. Vassberg The Boeing

AIAA HiLiftPW-1 Chicago, IL June 2010 Slide 19 of 40

CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop

Test Case 1 – Grid Convergence StudyConfig 1: Pressure Comparison at α = 13o, η = .17

Page 20: NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis · CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis Anthony J. Sclafani, Jeffrey P. Slotnick, John C. Vassberg The Boeing

AIAA HiLiftPW-1 Chicago, IL June 2010 Slide 20 of 40

CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop

Test Case 1 – Grid Convergence StudyConfig 1: Pressure Comparison at α = 13o, η = .65

Page 21: NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis · CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis Anthony J. Sclafani, Jeffrey P. Slotnick, John C. Vassberg The Boeing

AIAA HiLiftPW-1 Chicago, IL June 2010 Slide 21 of 40

CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop

Test Case 1 – Grid Convergence StudyConfig 1: Pressure Comparison at α = 13o, η = .95

Page 22: NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis · CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis Anthony J. Sclafani, Jeffrey P. Slotnick, John C. Vassberg The Boeing

AIAA HiLiftPW-1 Chicago, IL June 2010 Slide 22 of 40

CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop

Test Case 1 – Grid Convergence StudyConfig 1: Pressure Comparison at α = 13o, η = .98

Page 23: NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis · CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis Anthony J. Sclafani, Jeffrey P. Slotnick, John C. Vassberg The Boeing

AIAA HiLiftPW-1 Chicago, IL June 2010 Slide 23 of 40

CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop

Test Case 1 – Grid Convergence StudyConfig 1: Pressure Comparison at Flap Forward Span

Page 24: NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis · CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis Anthony J. Sclafani, Jeffrey P. Slotnick, John C. Vassberg The Boeing

AIAA HiLiftPW-1 Chicago, IL June 2010 Slide 24 of 40

CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop

Test Case 1 – Grid Convergence StudyConfig 1: Pressure Comparison at Flap Aft Span

Page 25: NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis · CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis Anthony J. Sclafani, Jeffrey P. Slotnick, John C. Vassberg The Boeing

AIAA HiLiftPW-1 Chicago, IL June 2010 Slide 25 of 40

CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop

NASA Trap Wing OVERFLOW AnalysisSkin Friction for Config 8, α = 13o

Fine Grid

Extra-Fine Grid

Page 26: NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis · CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis Anthony J. Sclafani, Jeffrey P. Slotnick, John C. Vassberg The Boeing

AIAA HiLiftPW-1 Chicago, IL June 2010 Slide 26 of 40

CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop

NASA Trap Wing OVERFLOW AnalysisResults

Test Case 2

Flap Deflection Prediction Study

Page 27: NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis · CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis Anthony J. Sclafani, Jeffrey P. Slotnick, John C. Vassberg The Boeing

AIAA HiLiftPW-1 Chicago, IL June 2010 Slide 27 of 40

CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop

Test Case 2 – Flap Deflection Prediction StudyLift Comparison

low by ~.02

high by ~.04

C1 LaRC

αstall = 33o

CLmax = 3.00

C1 OVERFLOW

αstall = 35o to 36o

CLmax = 3.06

Page 28: NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis · CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis Anthony J. Sclafani, Jeffrey P. Slotnick, John C. Vassberg The Boeing

AIAA HiLiftPW-1 Chicago, IL June 2010 Slide 28 of 40

CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop

Test Case 2 – Flap Deflection Prediction StudyDrag Comparison: CL vs CD and CL vs CD-CL

2/πAR

“Idealized” Drag Polar

By removing idealized induced drag, a more detailed polar comparison can be made.

LaRC data show cross-over CL to be at 1.5, above which Config 8 has higher drag

OVERFLOW CL cross-over is at 2.4

Larger difference seen in Config 8 polar

Page 29: NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis · CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis Anthony J. Sclafani, Jeffrey P. Slotnick, John C. Vassberg The Boeing

AIAA HiLiftPW-1 Chicago, IL June 2010 Slide 29 of 40

CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop

Test Case 2 – Flap Deflection Prediction StudyDrag Comparison: CD vs α

low by ~.0002

high by ~.02

Page 30: NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis · CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis Anthony J. Sclafani, Jeffrey P. Slotnick, John C. Vassberg The Boeing

AIAA HiLiftPW-1 Chicago, IL June 2010 Slide 30 of 40

CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop

Test Case 2 – Flap Deflection Prediction StudyPitching Moment Comparison: CL vs CM

Page 31: NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis · CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis Anthony J. Sclafani, Jeffrey P. Slotnick, John C. Vassberg The Boeing

AIAA HiLiftPW-1 Chicago, IL June 2010 Slide 31 of 40

CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop

Test Case 2 – Flap Deflection Prediction StudyPitching Moment Comparison: CM vs α

low by ~.005

high by ~.02

Page 32: NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis · CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis Anthony J. Sclafani, Jeffrey P. Slotnick, John C. Vassberg The Boeing

AIAA HiLiftPW-1 Chicago, IL June 2010 Slide 32 of 40

CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop

Test Case 2 – Flap Deflection Prediction StudyMinimum Pressure Comparison: Config 1

Using J. P. Mayer’s 0.7 vacuum (M2∞ Cp = -1) presented by A.M.O. Smith*

Slat suction pressure reaches 0.7 vacuum (Cp = -25) at 36o < α < 37o

• Critical semi-span station is η = 0.8

Stall appears to be driven by the slat slat stalls first followed by wing

*Smith, A. M. O., “High Lift Aerodynamics”, 37th Wright Borthers Lecture, Vol. 12 No. 6, JOA, June 1975

Page 33: NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis · CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis Anthony J. Sclafani, Jeffrey P. Slotnick, John C. Vassberg The Boeing

AIAA HiLiftPW-1 Chicago, IL June 2010 Slide 33 of 40

CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop

NASA Trap Wing OVERFLOW AnalysisResults

Test Case 3

Slat and Flap Support Effects Study

Page 34: NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis · CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis Anthony J. Sclafani, Jeffrey P. Slotnick, John C. Vassberg The Boeing

AIAA HiLiftPW-1 Chicago, IL June 2010 Slide 34 of 40

CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop

Test Case 3 – Support Effects StudyConfig 1 Bracket Grids*

Medium Grid Sizes• Bracket-off = 25.0 million

• Bracket-off with refined c-mesh grids = 47.0 million

• Bracket-on with refined c-mesh grids = 58.2 million

4 Flap Brackets 6 Slat Brackets

* Bracket grids built by Leonel Serrano and Neal Harrison

Page 35: NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis · CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis Anthony J. Sclafani, Jeffrey P. Slotnick, John C. Vassberg The Boeing

AIAA HiLiftPW-1 Chicago, IL June 2010 Slide 35 of 40

CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop

Test Case 3 – Support Effects StudyLift Comparison

Brackets reduce CL by ~.02 at 13o and 21o

CL reduction grows to ~.08 at 28o

By 32o, bracket-on configuration is stalled

Page 36: NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis · CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis Anthony J. Sclafani, Jeffrey P. Slotnick, John C. Vassberg The Boeing

AIAA HiLiftPW-1 Chicago, IL June 2010 Slide 36 of 40

CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop

Test Case 3 – Support Effects StudyDrag and Pitching Moment Comparison

Brackets increase drag by 50 to 200 counts depending on CL

Brackets drive pitching moment less negative (nose-up)

Page 37: NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis · CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis Anthony J. Sclafani, Jeffrey P. Slotnick, John C. Vassberg The Boeing

AIAA HiLiftPW-1 Chicago, IL June 2010 Slide 37 of 40

CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop

Test Case 3 – Support Effects StudySkin Friction and Surface Streamline Comparison

Page 38: NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis · CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis Anthony J. Sclafani, Jeffrey P. Slotnick, John C. Vassberg The Boeing

AIAA HiLiftPW-1 Chicago, IL June 2010 Slide 38 of 40

CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop

Test Case 3 – Support Effects StudyPressure Comparison at α = 28o, η = 50%

Page 39: NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis · CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis Anthony J. Sclafani, Jeffrey P. Slotnick, John C. Vassberg The Boeing

AIAA HiLiftPW-1 Chicago, IL June 2010 Slide 39 of 40

CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop

NASA Trap Wing OVERFLOW AnalysisConclusions

Test Case 1 – Grid Convergence Study

The extra-fine grid produces solutions that appear to be in a different family than the coarse, medium, and fine grid.

• hysteresis may be the cause … additional runs are being made

The coarse, medium, and fine grid CL results are close to linear when plotted against 1/N-2/3 and agree reasonably well with test data.

In general, pressures are in good agreement with test data.• wing and flap pressures at the tip are the exception

• flap trailing-edge pressures predicted best by extra-fine grid

Test Case 2 – Flap Deflection Prediction Study

Config 1 lift, drag, and pitching moment agree well with test data through stall.• CLmax is over-predicted by 2%

More discrepancy seen in the Config 8 force and moment data comparison.

Test Case 3 – Slat and Flap Support Effects Study

Bracket-on results move away from test data indicating the bracket-off data is not as good as it appears.

As with the extra-fine grid solutions, adding the supports leads to early stall.

Page 40: NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis · CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop NASA Trap Wing Model OVERFLOW Analysis Anthony J. Sclafani, Jeffrey P. Slotnick, John C. Vassberg The Boeing

AIAA HiLiftPW-1 Chicago, IL June 2010 Slide 40 of 40

CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop

NASA Trap Wing OVERFLOW AnalysisFuture Work

• Hysteresis, extra-fine grid solutions

• Brackets

• Laminar flow

• Off-body grid refinement at tip

• SA with Rotational and Curvature Correction (SARC)


OVERFLOW CHARTS

Overflow - staffordbc.gov.uk

Stack Overflow

Overflow 4

AIAA 2012-2844 Computational Studies of the NASA High ...Background 1st AIAA CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop in 2010 NASA Trap wing: Full-span slat & flap, simplified wing tip Summary

Overflow Designs

Combined Sewer Overflow and Sanitary Sewer Overflow Monitoring

STUDY OF VORTEX TRAP ON LOW ASPECT RATIO WING WITH NACA ... · STUDY OF VORTEX TRAP ON LOW ASPECT RATIO WING WITH NACA 0015 CROSS SECTION ... Gambit software used for generating mesh

Numerical Simulation of High Lift Trap Wing using …mdx2.plm.automation.siemens.com/sites/default/files/...Numerical Simulation of High Lift Trap Wing using STAR-CCM+ Prashanth Shankara

Stereoscopic Overflow

Numerical Simulation of High Lift Trap Wing using STAR-CCM+ · Numerical Simulation of High Lift Trap Wing using STAR-CCM+ Prashanth Shankara 1. and Deryl Snyder. 2. CD-adapco, Melville,

[ Overflow ]

Buffer Overflow

Instructor: Khaled Diab › sp20 › lectures › ... · •overflow function return address •overflow function base pointer •Overflow (dynamically allocated) memory region on

FTA-2i, Aspirator with Trap Flask · 2 days ago · Trap flask 2 l, polypropylene (autoclavable) Liquid level sensor type invasive Overflow protection motor stops, light and sound

4. OVERFLOW-D-Mode Operation Without Grid Movement · 4. OVERFLOW-D-Mode Operation Without Grid Movement Two features distinguish “OVERFLOW-D-mode” from a traditional OVERFLOW

Mechanical Pump & Pump/Trap · 2020. 6. 16. · ⑤ Steam trap ¡The vent pipe and overflow pipe should discharge to a safe place. ¡Please read the instruction manual to ensure safe

Stack Overflow - It's all about performance / Marco Cecconi (Stack Overflow)

Grease Trap 101 Providing more than just tap water.a food service establishment service line. An overflow from a grease trap in the park-ing lot of a food service establishment. Excessive

Overflow Handling

Experiencing Overflow

Overflow Box 1074/2 High Tech Aquarium Ecology · 1 x1074.8888 03/2018 Overflow Box 1074/2 Wall Overflow 1076/2 Central Overflow High Tech Aquarium Ecology 1077 Gebrauchsanleitung

Overflow. Part 4 Overflowing Joy Overflow – perisseia “Superabundance”

Overflow. Part 3 Overflowing Gratitude Overflow – perisseia “Superabundance”

GATE Overflow

Buffer Overflow

Overflow 2011

U.S. Patent Numbers 5,069,042 5,522,229 Mini Waterless In ...The EZ-Trap condensate trap or overflow switch purchased by you is unconditionally warrantied to be free from defects in

LEVEL CONTROLS PRODUCT SPEC...Overflow can occur if the water entering the tank exceeds its capacity. The 313 Overflow Trap relieves the overflow through its internal single seated

 · Web viewBOU (Buffer Overflow Utility) Testing for Heap Overflow Conditions: heap.exe Steps for Testing for Stack Overflow in OllyDbg Debugger Testing for Stack Overflow in OllyDbg

E Overflow

313 OVERFLOW TRAP LEVEL CONTROLS 313 IOM...1) Remove line pressure and isolate overflow trap. (It is recommended that you have an Inspection Kit on hand before beginning the procedure.)

NUMERICAL SIMULATION OF NASA WING-TRAP … · element wing with flap and slat deployed 30° and 25° ... • OS is ROCKS Cluster V5.4 with Linux CentOS. • Typical wall clock per

CFD computations for NASA TRAP WING using the code HiFUN · IntroductionTypical gridsResults: Case 1{Grid convergenceConclusions CFD computations for NASA TRAP WING using the code

Community Overflow