Re-engineering the design process through computation

Transcription

1 Copyright 1997, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc. AIAA Meeting Papers on Disc, January 1997 A , F , AIAA Paper Re-engineering the design process through computation Antony Jameson Princeton Univ., NJ AIAA, Aerospace Sciences Meeting & Exhibit, 35th, Reno, NV, Jan. 6-9, 1997 This paper reviews the use of computational flow simulation for aircraft design. While computational simulation has already yielded great benefits, its impact continues to be restricted by computational and human costs. The requirements of the design process are examined in detail. In current practice there are bottlenecks in geometry modelling, data handling, and mesh generation. To exploit computational simulation more effectively there is also a need to combine it with automatic optimization procedures. A case study is presented of a recent industrial experience with optimization. Finally it is suggested that developments in information technology now offer the opportunity to produce an integrated numerical design environment and to re-engineer the design process. (Author) Page 1

2 Re-Engineering the Design Process through Computation Department Antony Jameson' Princeton University

3 Chapman, Mark,

4 Conceptual Design Defines Mission Preliminary sizing Weight, performance I Preliminary Design I Final Design Figure 1:

5 Conceptual Design CAD Definition Cantral Database ; Mesh Generation Detailed Final Design CFD Analysis Visualization I Release to Manufacturing Performance Evaluation Multi-Disciplinary Evaluation Propulsion Noise Stability Control Loads Structures Fabrication find Tunnel l- Testing I*- Model Fabrication Figure

6 This avoids the need for shot peaning which might otherwise be required to force curvature in both the span wise and chord wise directions. From the complexity of these trade-offs it can be seen that a crucial requirement for aerodynamic analysis is to make trustworthy predictions with fast enough turn around

7 Figure Inviscid, frrotational Linear \

8 TURBULENCE MODELLING

9 require months

10

11 calculate the sensitivity of the pressure at a fixed location, because there

12 Drag creep.

13 proved worthwhile to introduce terms measuring the pressure gradient into

14 higher lift. Finally, Figure 14 indicates that the pressure distribution at the buffet point is acceptable. Provided that the high speed pitch-up associated with the high sweepback angle

15

16 aeroelastic effects, such

17 [12]

18 [36] S.S. Samant, J.E. Bussoletti, FT. Johnson, R.H. Burkhart, B.L. Everson, R.G. Melvin, D.P. Young, L.L. Erickson,

19 Initial Wing. Figure 9a: M=0.83,<7i=.5506 ) Cd= Q=2.317 Cp on Upper Surface. \ \ \ \\\\ Redisigned wing. C p

20 Initial Wing. Figure 8a: M=.83, (=.5498,O.0196, a= C p on Upper Surface. Redisigned wing. C p

21 COMPARISON OF CHORDWISE PRESSURE DISTRIBUTIONS MPX5X WING-BODY REN= , MACH= SYMBOL SOURCE ALPHA CL CD SVNI07PDKSIGN40 MH Figure 10: Pressure distribution of the MPX5X at its design point. COMPARISON OF CHORDWISE PRESSURE DISTRIBUTIONS MPX5X WING-BODY REN

22 COMPARISON

23 M ! X/C; COMPARISON OF CHORDWISE PRESSURE DISTRIBUTIONS MPX5X WING-BODY REN = , MACH = SYMBOL SOURCE MPX5X DESIGN 41)... MPX5X DKSTGN 40 MPXSX DESIGN

24 Figure 16: MPX3R wing-body-nacelle- winglet combination at Mach.85, CL =.6. View from below. 23

25 Figure 17: MPX3R wing-body-nacelle- winglet combination at Mach.85, CL -.6. View from above. 24