DES for UCAV Weapon Bay Flow

  • S. J. Lawson
  • G. N. Barakos
Conference paper
Part of the Notes on Numerical Fluid Mechanics and Multidisciplinary Design book series (NNFM, volume 111)


This paper demonstrates the Detached–Eddy Simulation approach for the computation of flows around uninhabited combat air vehicles. This new family of aircraft may feature weapon bays to enhance stealth characteristics and improve aerodynamic performance. However, during operation with the bay open, a highly energetic flow-field develops that can dramatically change the aerodynamics of the aircraft. For this reason detailed CFD analyses are needed to provide insight in the change of loads encountered when weapon bays are exposed. In contrast to previous studies where idealised, isolated cavities are used as model problems, a realistic aircraft geometry is used in this work.


Large Eddy Simulation Pitching Moment Cavity Flow Detach Eddy Simulation Cavity Configuration 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Barakos, G.N., Lawson, S.J., Steijl, R., Nayyar, P.: Numerical Simulations of High–Speed Turbulent Cavity Flows. Flow Turbulence and Combustion 83(4), 569–585 (2009), doi:10.1007/s10494-009-9207-1zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bruce, R., Mundell, A.: Low Speed Wind Tunnel Tests on the 1303 UCAV Concept. Technical report QinetiQ/FST/TR025502/1.0. QinetiQ, Farnborough, UK (2003)Google Scholar
  3. Cummings, R., Morton, S., Siegel, S.: Numerical Prediction and Wind-Tunnel Experiment for a Pitching Unmanned Combat Air Vehicle. Aerospace Science and Technology 12, 355–364 (2008), doi:10.1016/j.ast.2007.08.007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Hunt, J., Wray, A., Moin, P.: Eddies, Streams and Convergence Zones in Turbulent Flows. In: Proceedings of the Summer Program N89-24555. Center for Turbulence Research, pp. 193–207 (1988)Google Scholar
  5. Kegerise, M., Spina, E., Garg, S., Cattafesta III, L.: Mode-Switching and Nonlinear Effects in Compressible Flow Over a Cavity. Physics of Fluids 16(3), 678–686 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Krishnamurty, K.: Acoustic Radiation from Two-Dimensional Rectangular Cutouts in Aerodynamic Surfaces. Technical Note 3487. National Advisor Committee for Aeronautics (1955)Google Scholar
  7. Larchevêque, L., Sagaut, P., Lê, T.-H., Comte, P.: Large-Eddy Simulation of a Compressible Flow in a Three-Dimensional Open Cavity at High Reynolds Number. J. Fluid Mechanics 516, 265–301 (2004)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Lawson, S.J., Barakos, G.N.: Assessment of Passive Flow Control Devices for Transonic Cavity Flows Using Detached-Eddy Simulation. J. Aircraft 46(3), 1–2 (2009), doi:10.2514/1.39894CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Menter, F.: Zonal Two Equation k–ω Turbulence Models for Aerodynamic Flows. In: 24th Fluid Dynamics Conference, Orlando, FL, July 6-9, AIAA Paper 93-2906 (1993)Google Scholar
  10. Nayyar, P., Barakos, G.N., Badcock, K.J.: Numerical Study of Transonic Cavity Flows using Large-Eddy and Detached-Eddy Simulation. The Aeronautical Journal 111(1117), 153–164 (2007)Google Scholar
  11. Roshko, A.: Some Measurements of Flow in a Rectangular Cut-Out. NACA Technical report 3488. California Institute of Technology (1955)Google Scholar
  12. Rossiter, J.: Wind Tunnel Experiments on the Flow Over Rectangular Cavities at Subsonic and Transonic Speeds. Technical Report 64037. Royal Aircraft Establishment (1964)Google Scholar
  13. Shaw, L., Clark, R., Talmadge, D.: F-111 Generic Weapons Bay Acoustic Environment. J. Aircraft 25(2), 147–153 (1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Shipman, J., Arunajatesan, S., Cavallo, P., Birkbeck, R., Sinha, N., Ukeiliey, L., Alvi, F.: Flow Control for Enhanced Store Separation. In: 45th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, Reno, NV, January 8-11 (2007)Google Scholar
  15. Spalart, P., Allmaras, S.: A One-Equation Turbulence Model for Aerodynamic Flows. La Recherche Aerospatiale 1, 5–21 (1994); Also AIAA paper 92-0439Google Scholar
  16. Spalart, P., Jou, W.-H., Strelets, M., Allmaras, S.: Comments on the Feasibility of LES for Wings, and on a Hybrid RANS/LES Approach. In: Advances in DNS/LES, 1st AFOSR International Conference on DNS/LES, Columbus, OH, August 4-8 (1997)Google Scholar
  17. Ukeiley, L., Sheehan, M., Coiffet, F., Alvi, F., Arunajatesan, S., Jansen, B.: Control of Pressure Loads in Complex Cavity Configurations. In: 45th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, Reno, NV, January 8-11 (2007)Google Scholar
  18. Wong, M., McKenzie, G., Ol, M., Petterson, K., Zhang, S.: Joint TTCP CFD Studies into the 1303 UCAV Performance: First Year Results. In: 24th AIAA Applied Aerodynamic Conference, San Francisco, CA, June 5-8 (2006), AIAA paper 2006-2984Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • S. J. Lawson
    • 1
  • G. N. Barakos
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of EngineeringUniversity of LiverpoolLiverpoolUnited Kingdom

Personalised recommendations