DPW-4 Results For NSU3D on LaRC Grids

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

Aerodynamic Characteristics of Airfoils and wings

Advertisements

Adjoint-based Unsteady Airfoil Design Optimization with Application to Dynamic Stall Karthik Mani Brian Lockwood Dimitri Mavriplis University of Wyoming.

A Discrete Adjoint-Based Approach for Optimization Problems on 3D Unstructured Meshes Dimitri J. Mavriplis Department of Mechanical Engineering University.

University of Southampton Southampton, UK

High Resolution Aerospace Applications using the NASA Columbia Supercomputer Dimitri J. Mavriplis University of Wyoming Michael J. Aftosmis NASA Ames Research.

Adaptation Workshop > Folie 1 > TAU Adaptation on EC145 > Britta Schöning TAU Adaptation for EC145 Helicopter Fuselage Britta Schöning DLR –

Unstructured Mesh Discretizations and Solvers for Computational Aerodynamics Dimitri J. Mavriplis University of Wyoming.

Results from the 3 rd Drag Prediction Workshop using the NSU3D Unstructured Mesh Solver Dimitri J. Mavriplis University of Wyoming.

Pharos University ME 352 Fluid Mechanics II

AE 1350 Lecture Notes #8. We have looked at.. Airfoil Nomenclature Lift and Drag forces Lift, Drag and Pressure Coefficients The Three Sources of Drag:

Flow Over Immersed Bodies

Steady Aeroelastic Computations to Predict the Flying Shape of Sails Sriram Antony Jameson Dept. of Aeronautics and Astronautics Stanford University First.

Lesson 13 Airfoils Part II

Numerical study of the blade cooling effect generated by multiple jets issuing at different angles and speed into a compressible horizontal cross flow.

Applications of Adjoint Methods for Aerodynamic Shape Optimization Arron Melvin Adviser: Luigi Martinelli Princeton University FAA/NASA Joint University.

1 CFD Analysis Process. 2 1.Formulate the Flow Problem 2.Model the Geometry 3.Model the Flow (Computational) Domain 4.Generate the Grid 5.Specify the.

Cornell University, September 17,2002 Ithaca New York, USA The Development of Unstructured Grid Methods For Computational Aerodynamics Dimitri J. Mavriplis.

School of Aeronautical Engineering, Queen’s University Belfast Turbulent Wind Flow over a High Speed Train R K Cooper School of Aeronautical Engineering.

Some Long Term Experiences in HPC Programming for Computational Fluid Dynamics Problems Dimitri Mavriplis University of Wyoming.

Comparison of Numerical Predictions and Wind Tunnel Results for a Pitching Uninhabited Combat Air Vehicle Russell M. Cummings, Scott A. Morton, and Stefan.

Tandem Cylinder Simulations using the Method of Your Choice Some Body Affiliated Somewhere .

Computational Aerodynamics Using Unstructured Meshes

Introduction Aerodynamic Performance Analysis of A Non Planar C Wing using Experimental and Numerical Tools Mano Prakash R., Manoj Kumar B., Lakshmi Narayanan.

Aerodynamic Shape Optimization of Laminar Wings A. Hanifi 1,2, O. Amoignon 1 & J. Pralits 1 1 Swedish Defence Research Agency, FOI 2 Linné Flow Centre,

Grid Quality and Resolution Issues from the Drag Prediction Workshop Series The DPW Committee Dimitri Mavriplis : University of Wyoming USA J. Vassberg,

CENTRAL AEROHYDRODYNAMIC INSTITUTE named after Prof. N.E. Zhukovsky (TsAGI) Multigrid accelerated numerical methods based on implicit scheme for moving.

Revisiting the Least-Squares Procedure for Gradient Reconstruction on Unstructured Meshes Dimitri J. Mavriplis National Institute of Aerospace Hampton,

ParCFD Parallel computation of pollutant dispersion in industrial sites Julien Montagnier Marc Buffat David Guibert.

High-Order Spatial and Temporal Methods for Simulation and Sensitivity Analysis of High-Speed Flows PI Dimitri J. Mavriplis University of Wyoming Co-PI.

CFD Lab - Department of Engineering - University of Liverpool Ken Badcock & Mark Woodgate Department of Engineering University of Liverpool Liverpool L69.

Aerospace Modeling Tutorial Lecture 2 – Basic Aerodynamics

2D Airfoil Aerodynamics

Grid Resolution Study of a Drag Prediction Workshop Configuration using the NSU3D Unstructured Mesh Solver Dimitri J. Mavriplis Department of Mechanical.

College of Engineering and Natural Sciences Mechanical Engineering Department 1 Project Number : PS 7.1 Rotorcraft Fuselage Drag Study using OVERFLOW-D2.

Compressor Cascade Pressure Rise Prediction

ICEM CFD Meshes for Drag Prediction Workshop

CFD Study of the Development of Vortices on a Ring Wing

DES Workshop, St. Petersburg, July 2./ DES at DLR Experience gained and Problems found K. Weinman, D.Schwamborn.

DLR Institute of Aerodynamics and Flow Technology 1 Simulation of Missiles with Grid Fins using an Unstructured Navier-Stokes solver coupled to a Semi-Experimental.

AIAA th AIAA/ISSMO Symposium on MAO, 09/05/2002, Atlanta, GA 0 AIAA OBSERVATIONS ON CFD SIMULATION UNCERTAINTIES Serhat Hosder, Bernard.

By Arseniy Kotov CAL POLY San Luis Obispo, Aerospace Engineering Intern at Applied Modeling & Simulation Branch Mentors: Susan Cliff, Emre Sozer, Jeff.

Interesting papers on SIGGRAPH 2005 Korea University Computer Graphics Lab. Jin-Kyung Hong.

AERODYNAMIC OPTIMIZATION OF REAR AND FRONT FLAPS ON A CAR UNIVERSITY OF GENOVA – POLYTECHNIC SCHOOL ADVANCED FLUID DYNAMICS COURSE 2015/2016 Student: Giannoni.

Review of Airfoil Aerodynamics

Objective Introduce Reynolds Navier Stokes Equations (RANS)

INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY GANDHINAGAR

A V&V Overview of the 31st Symposium on Naval Hydrodynamics

The concept of the airfoil (wing section)

Review NACA0012 2D Airfoil Model Autodesk® Simulation CFD™

Drag Prediction Using NSU3D (Unstructured Multigrid NS Solver)

Aerodynamic Forces Lift and Drag Aerospace Engineering

Partnerwise presentation

Computational Challenges (MC1) High-Lift Common Research Model

Convergence in Computational Science

Objective Review Reynolds Navier Stokes Equations (RANS)

Good Practice in CFD Dr Neil Bressloff 13th & 14th October 2005

Efficient Parallel Simulation of Fluid Dynamics on Cartesian Grids

jh NAJ Daisuke Sasaki (Kanazawa Institute of Technology)

Aerodynamic Forces Lift and Drag Aerospace Engineering

AIAA OBSERVATIONS ON CFD SIMULATION UNCERTAINITIES

AIAA OBSERVATIONS ON CFD SIMULATION UNCERTAINTIES

Dimitri J. Mavriplis ICASE NASA Langley Research Center

Convergence in Numerical Science

AIAA OBSERVATIONS ON CFD SIMULATION UNCERTAINTIES

Accurate Flow Prediction for Store Separation from Internal Bay M

Objective Reynolds Navier Stokes Equations (RANS) Numerical methods.

Steady-State Aerodynamics Codes for HAWTs

Accurate Flow Prediction for Store Separation from Internal Bay M

Presentation transcript:

DPW-4 Results For NSU3D on LaRC Grids 4th CFD Drag Prediction Workshop San Antonio, Texas – June 2009 DPW-4 Results For NSU3D on LaRC Grids Dimitri Mavriplis University of Wyoming Mike Long Scientific Simulations, LLC

NSU3D Description Vertex-based discretization Unstructured Reynolds Averaged Navier-Stokes solver Vertex-based discretization Mixed elements (prisms in boundary layer) Edge data structure Matrix artificial dissipation Option for upwind scheme with gradient reconstruction No cross derivative viscous terms Thin layer in all 3 directions Option for full Navier-Stokes terms Turbulence Models Spalart-Allmaras (original published form) k-omega Interactive Boundary Layer (IBL)

Solution Strategy Jacobi/Line Preconditioning Line solves in boundary layer regions • Relieves aspect ratio stiffness • Agglomeration Multigrid Fast grid independent convergence rates • Parallel implementation MPI/OpenMP hybrid model DPW runs all MPI only on: UWYO Cluster (Dual Core Opteron) NASA Columbia (Itanium 2) NASA Pleiades (Quad Core Xeon)

Grid Generation • All Runs based on NASA Langley supplied VGRIDns unstructured grids • Tetrahedra cells in the boundary layer merged into prismatic elements • Grid sizes up to 36M pts, 122M elements after merging

Typical Resource Requirements • NASA Pleiades Supercomputer SGI ICE with 51,200 Intel Harpertown Xeon Cores Medium (10Mpts) grids used 64 cpus • 800 multigrid cycles (most cases converged <500) ~1.7 hours for final solution ~60GB memory allocated Fine Grid (36M pts) used 128 cpus • 800 multigrid cycles (CL driver converged <700) ~3.7 hours for final solution ~160GB memory allocated

Typical Residual and Force History (Case 1 - Medium Grid, CL Driver)

Typical Residual and Force History (Case 2 Medium Grid)

Typical Case with Unsteady Flow (AOA = 4°, Mach ≥ 0.85)

Case 1a: Grid Convergence Study Mach = 0.85, CL = 0.500 (±0.001) Tail Incidence angle= 0° Coarse, Medium, Fine, Extra-Fine Grids (Extra-Fine grid not completed) Chord Reynolds Number: Re = 5e+6

Sensitivity of Drag Coefficient to Grid Size CL = 0. 5, Mach = 0 Sensitivity of Drag Coefficient to Grid Size CL = 0.5, Mach = 0.85, Tail 0°

Sensitivity of Pitching Moment Coefficient to Grid Size CL = 0 Sensitivity of Pitching Moment Coefficient to Grid Size CL = 0.5, Mach = 0.85, Tail 0°

Wing Surface Pressure Grid Convergence CL = 0.5, Mach = 0.85, Tail 0° Inboard Section (Y=232.444) Outboard Section (Y=978.148)

Wing Surface Friction Grid Convergence CL = 0.5, Mach = 0.85, Tail 0° Inboard Section (Y=232.444) Outboard Section (Y=978.148)

No Side of Body Separation Seen Surface streamlines via Line Integral Convolution (Paraview) Case 1.1 (Medium Mesh, CL=0.5, M=0.85)

Case 1b: Downwash Study Mach = 0.85–Drag Polars for alpha = 0.0°, 1.0°, 1.5°, 2.0°, 2.5°, 3.0°, 4.0° Tail Incidence angles iH = -2°, 0°, +2°, and Tail off Medium grid Chord Reynolds Number: Re=5M Trimmed Drag Polar (CG at reference center) derived from polars at iH= -2°, 0°, +2° Delta Drag Polar of tail off vs. tail on (i.e. WB vs. WBH trimmed)

Case 2 – Mach Sweep Study Drag Polars at: - Drag Rise curves at CL = 0.400, 0.450, 0.500 (±0.001) - Untrimmed, Tail Incidence angle, iH = 0° - Medium grid - Chord Reynolds Number 5x106 based on cREF = 275.80 in - Reference Temperature = 100°F

Case 2 - Drag Rise at Fixed CL (LaRC Medium Grid Tail 0°)

Case 2 - Drag Polars (LaRC Medium Grid Tail 0°)

Surface Pressure and Friction Coefficients (LaRC Medium Grid, M = 0 Surface Pressure and Friction Coefficients (LaRC Medium Grid, M = 0.87, AOA = 4.0°)

Surface Flow Patterns (LaRC Medium Grid, M = 0.87, AOA = 4.0°)

Surface Flow Patterns (LaRC Medium Grid, M = 0.87, AOA = 4.0°)

Surface Flow Patterns (LaRC Medium Grid, M = 0.87, AOA = 4.0°)

Case 3 – Reynolds Number Effect (LaRC Med Grid, CL=0. 5, M=0 Case 3 – Reynolds Number Effect (LaRC Med Grid, CL=0.5, M=0.85, AOA=0, Tail=0°) Reynolds Number ALPHA CL_TOT CD_TOT CD_PR CD_SF CM_TOT 5 Million 2.330 0.4999 0.02730 0.01501 0.01230 -0.03061 20 Million 2.141 0.5000 0.02423 0.01384 0.01039 -0.03649 Delta -0.18857 0.0001 0.00307 0.00117 0.00190 0.00588 % -8.09% 0.01% -11.25% -7.79% -15.48% 19.20%

Conclusions All required cases converged with SA turbulence model and low dissipation Grid convergence is apparent for medium and fine grids Optional case 2 completed with good convergence except for extremes Optional extra-fine mesh presented some challenges Optional case 3 was run on the same mesh for both Reynolds Numbers Separation only seen at high AOA and high Mach