Status and Future Challenges of CFD in a Coupled Simulation Environment for Aircraft Design
Conference paper
Summary
The state of the art of Computational Fluid Dynamics and the axis of improvements are described. The issue of flutter prediction is addressed first: the use of linearized Euler solvers for transonic flutter is explained. Recent advances in optimum aerodynamic shape design are presented next, the results demonstrate the applicability of optimization based on the Euler equations and open the way to multidisciplinary optimum design. Finally, the use of Large Eddy Simulation for accurate turbulent flow simulation is illustrated.
Keywords
Large Eddy Simulation Reynolds Average Navier Stoke Multidisciplinary Optimum Design Aircraft Design Flutter Speed
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
- [1]F. Chalot, M. Mallet and M. Ravachol, “A Comprehensive Finite Element Navier — Stokes Solver for Low and High-Speed Aircraft Design”. AIAA 94–0814.Google Scholar
- [2]F. Chalot, B. Marquez,.M. Ravachol, F. Ducros, F. Nicoud, Th. Poinsot, “A consistent Finite Element Approach to Large Eddy Simulation”, 29th Fluid Dynamics conference, AIAA 98–2652.Google Scholar
- [3]F. Chalot, Q. V. Dinh, M. Mallet, M. Ravachol, G. Rogé, Ph. Rostand, B. Stoufflet, “CFD for aircraft design: recent developments and applications”, 4th ECCOMAS Computational Fluid Dynamics Conference, Wiley (1998).Google Scholar
- [4]F. Chalot, B. Marquez,.M. Ravachol, F. Ducros, T. Poinsot, “Large Eddy Simulation of a Compressible Mixing Layer: Study of the mixing enhancement”, 14th CFD conference, AIAA 99–3358.Google Scholar
- [5]E. David, “Modélisation de écoulements compressibles et hypersoniques: une approche instationnaire”, Ph.D thesis, INPG, 1994.Google Scholar
- [6]Q.V. Dinh, G. Rogé, C. Sevin and B. Stoufflet, “Shape optimization in Computational Fluid Dynamics”, European Journal of Finite Elements, Vol 5, 1996, pp 569–594.MATHGoogle Scholar
- [7]Th. Fanion, Ph. D. Thesis, “Etude de la simulation numérique des phéno mènes d’aéroélasticité dynamique. Application au problème du flottement des avions”. University of Paris Dauphine, 2001.Google Scholar
- [8]C. Farhat and M. Lesoinne, “On the accuracy, stability and performance of the solution of three-dimensional nonlinear transcient aeroelastic problems by partitioned procedures”. AIAA 96–1388.Google Scholar
- [9]“Grand Challenges: high performance computing and communications. The FY 1992 US research and development program”. Report by the committee on Sciences. Office of Science and Technology Policy.Google Scholar
- [10]T.J.R. Hughes et al., “A New Finite Element Formulation For Computa tional Fluid Dynamics”, Comp. Meth. in Applied Mech. and Eng., NorthHolland, 1986.Google Scholar
- [11]A. Jameson, “Aerodynamic Design via Control Theory”, Journal of Scientific Computing, 3:233–260, 1988.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- [12]S. Lemaire and N. Heron, “An overview of Aeroacoustics at Dassault Aviation”, Proceeding of the Swing workshop. DLR.Google Scholar
- [13]B. Mantel, J. Periaux, M. Sefrioui, B. Stoufflet, J.A. Desideri, S. Lanteri and N. Marco, “Evolutionary Computational Methods for Complex Design in Aerodynamics”. AIAA 98–0222.Google Scholar
- [14]O. Pironneau, “Optimal Shape Design for Elliptic Systems”, Springer — Verlag, New-York, 1984.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- [15]M. Ravachol, “Turbulence modeling”. Computational Science for the 21 th century, Wiley, 1997, pp. 380–391.Google Scholar
Copyright information
© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2003