1 Multi-point Wing Planform Optimization via Control Theory Kasidit Leoviriyakit and Antony Jameson Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics Stanford.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Aerodynamic Characteristics of Airfoils and wings
Advertisements

Christopher Batty and Robert Bridson University of British Columbia
A Discrete Adjoint-Based Approach for Optimization Problems on 3D Unstructured Meshes Dimitri J. Mavriplis Department of Mechanical Engineering University.
Multidisciplinary Design Optimization of Low-Airframe-Noise Transport Aircraft 44 th AIAA Aerospace Science Meeting and Exhibit, Reno January 9, 2006 Leifur.
Michael DeRosa Master of Engineering Final Project Exploration of Airfoil Sections to Determine the Optimal Airfoil for Remote Controlled Pylon Racing.
The Stall, Airfoil development, &Wing Lift and Span Effects
Presented by Dan Shafer James Pembridge Mike Reilly
MAE 3241: AERODYNAMICS AND FLIGHT MECHANICS
Lecture 5 Shaft power cycles Aircraft engine performance
Performance Prediction and Design Optimization
MAE 1202: AEROSPACE PRACTICUM Lecture 12: Swept Wings and Course Recap April 22, 2013 Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering Department Florida Institute.
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:
U5AEA15 AIRCRAFT STRUCTURES-II PREPARED BY Mr.S.Karthikeyan DEPARTMENT OF AERONAUTICALENGINEERING ASSISTANT PROFESSOR.
Aerodynamic Shape Optimization in the Conceptual and Preliminary Design Stages Arron Melvin Adviser: Luigi Martinelli Princeton University FAA/NASA Joint.
AME 441: Conceptual Design Presentation
Copyright 2004, K. Leoviriyakit and A. Jameson Challenges and Complexity of Aerodynamic Wing Design Kasidit Leoviriyakit and Antony Jameson Stanford University.
Steady Aeroelastic Computations to Predict the Flying Shape of Sails Sriram Antony Jameson Dept. of Aeronautics and Astronautics Stanford University First.
1 Effects of Inflow Forcing on Jet Noise Using Large Eddy Simulation P. Lew, A. Uzun, G. A. Blaisdell & A. S. Lyrintzis School of Aeronautics & Astronautics.
Efficient Estimation of Emission Probabilities in profile HMM By Virpi Ahola et al Reviewed By Alok Datar.
Wing Planform Optimization via an Adjoint Method
Analysis of Winglets for Low Reynolds UAV Flight Regimes Aaron C. Pigott Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University.
Review Chapter 12. Fundamental Flight Maneuvers Straight and Level Turns Climbs Descents.
Introduction to Aeronautical Engineering
Applications of Adjoint Methods for Aerodynamic Shape Optimization Arron Melvin Adviser: Luigi Martinelli Princeton University FAA/NASA Joint University.
Basic Aerodynamic Theory and Drag
Module 5.2 Wind Turbine Design (Continued)
Michael DeRosa Master of Engineering Final Project
Aerodynamic Forces Lift and Drag Aerospace Engineering
SOLUTION FOR THE BOUNDARY LAYER ON A FLAT PLATE
Power Generation from Renewable Energy Sources
Wing Embedded Engines For Large Blended Wing Body Aircraft
Elements of Airplane Performance
AIAA th AIAA/ISSMO Symposium on MAO, 09/05/2002, Atlanta, GA 0 AIAA OBSERVATIONS ON CFD SIMULATION UNCERTAINITIES Serhat Hosder,
Efficient Genetic Algorithm for Aerodynamic Design of Business Jet Aircraft B.Epstein # and S.Peigin * # Academic College of Tel-Aviv-Yaffo * Israel Aircraft.
Introduction Aerodynamic Performance Analysis of A Non Planar C Wing using Experimental and Numerical Tools Mano Prakash R., Manoj Kumar B., Lakshmi Narayanan.
Recent and Future Research for Bird-like Flapping MAVs of NPU Prof. B.F.Song Aeronautics School of Northwestern Polytechnical University.
MAE 3241: AERODYNAMICS AND FLIGHT MECHANICS
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,
Aero Engineering 315 Lesson 20 Supersonic Flow Part II.
P M V Subbarao Professor Mechanical Engineering Department I I T Delhi
Basic aerodynamics relationships
Introduction to Fluid Mechanics
Supersonic Inlets - Oblique Shocks -1 School of Aerospace Engineering Copyright © 2001 by Jerry M. Seitzman. All rights reserved. AE3450 Supersonic (Engine)
2D Airfoil Aerodynamics
Power Generation from Renewable Energy Sources Fall 2012 Instructor: Xiaodong Chu : Office Tel.:
1 MAE 3241: AERODYNAMICS AND FLIGHT MECHANICS Finite Wings: General Lift Distribution Summary April 18, 2011 Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering Department.
1 Lecture 4: Aerodynamics Eric Loth For AE 440 A/C Lecture Sept 2009.
REVOLUTIONARY AERODYNAMICS The Sinha- Deturbulator Sumon K. Sinha, Ph.D., P.E, SINHATECH, 3607 Lyles Drive Oxford, Mississippi
Chalmers University of Technology Elementary axial turbine theory –Velocity triangles –Degree of reaction –Blade loading coefficient, flow coefficient.
Compressible Frictional Flow Past Wings P M V Subbarao Professor Mechanical Engineering Department I I T Delhi A Small and Significant Region of Curse.
Theory of Flight All are demonstrated by the flight of the bird!
CFD Study of the Development of Vortices on a Ring Wing
1 Chapter 6 Elements of Airplane Performance Prof. Galal Bahgat Salem Aerospace Dept. Cairo University.
Design & Aerodynamics of Inlets & Nozzles P M V Subbarao Professor Mechanical Engineering Department Understanding of Real Flow Through Passive Devices…….
Aerodynamic Design of a Light Aircraft
Background Aerospace engineer (MIT, Lockheed-Martin, consultant)
MAE 3241: AERODYNAMICS AND FLIGHT MECHANICS
Airfoil Any surface that provides aerodynamic force through interaction with moving air Aerodynamic force (lift) Moving air Airfoil.
Aerodynamic Forces Lift and Drag Aerospace Engineering
Fluid Mechanics & Hydraulics
Gas Dynamics for Design of Intakes
Matching of Propulsion Systems for an Aircraft
Subject Name: AIRCRAFT PROPULSION Subject Code: 10AE55
Civil jet aircraft performance
AE 440 Performance Discipline Lecture 9
AIRFRAME NOISE MODELING APPROPRIATE FOR MULTIDISCIPLINARY DESIGN AND OPTIMIZATION AIAA Serhat Hosder, Joseph A. Schetz, Bernard Grossman and.
The application of an atmospheric boundary layer to evaluate truck aerodynamics in CFD “A solution for a real-world engineering problem” Ir. Niek van.
Aerodynamic Forces Lift and Drag Aerospace Engineering
Airfoils and Simulation
Introduction to Aeronautical Engineering
Presentation transcript:

1 Multi-point Wing Planform Optimization via Control Theory Kasidit Leoviriyakit and Antony Jameson Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics Stanford University, Stanford CA 43 rd Aerospace Science Meeting and Exhibit January 10-13, 2005 Reno Nevada

2 Typical Drag Break Down of an Aircraft ItemCDCD Cumulative C D Wing Pressure120 counts (15 shock, 105 induced) Wing friction45165 Fuselage50215 Tail20235 Nacelles20255 Other15270 ___ Total270 Mach.85 and C L.52 Induced Drag is the largest component

3 Cost Function Simplified Planform Model Wing planform modification can yield larger improvements BUT affects structural weight. Can be thought of as constraints

4 Choice of Weighting Constants Minimizing using Maximizing Range

5 Structural Model for the Wing Assume rigid wing (No dynamic interaction between Aero and Structure) Use fully-stressed wing box to estimate the structural weight Weight is calculated based on material of the skin

6 “Trend” for Planform Modification Increase L/D without any penalty on structural weight by Stretching span to reduce vortex drag Decreasing sweep and thickening wing-section to reduce structural wing weight Modifying the airfoil section to minimize shock Boeing 747 -Planform Optimization Baseline Suggested

7 Redesign of Section and Planform using a Single-point Optimization CLCL C D counts C W counts Boeing (102.4 pressure, 34.6 viscous) 498 (80,480 lbs) Redesigned (78.3 pressure, 38.4 viscous) 464 (75,000 lbs) Baseline Redesign Flight Condition (cruise): Mach.85 CL.45

8 The Need of Multi-Point Design Undesired characteristics Designed Point

9 Cost Function for a Multi-point Design Gradients

10 Multi-point Design Process

11 Review of Single-Point design using an Adjoint method Using 4224 mesh points on the wing as design variables Boeing 747 Plus 6 planform variables -Sweep -Span -Chord at 3span –stations -Thickness ratio Design Variables

12 Optimization and Design using Sensitivities Calculated by the Finite Difference Method f(x)

13 Disadvantage of the Finite Difference Method The need for a number of flow calculations proportional to the number of design variables Using 4224 mesh points on the wing as design variables Boeing flow calculations ~ 30 minutes each (RANS) Too Expensive Plus 6 planform variables

14 Application of Control Theory (Adjoint) Drag Minimization Optimal Control of Flow Equations subject to Shape(wing) Variations GOAL : Drastic Reduction of the Computational Costs (for example C D at fixed C L ) (RANS in our case)

design variables Application of Control Theory One Flow Solution + One Adjoint Solution

16 Sobolev Gradient Continuous descent path Key issue for successful implementation of the Continuous adjoint method.

17 Design using the Navier-Stokes Equations See paper for more detail

18 Test Case Use multi-point design to alleviate the undesired characteristics arising form the single-point design result. Minimizing at multiple flight conditions; I = C D +  C W at fixed C L (C D and C W are normalized by fixed reference area)  is chosen also to maximizing the Breguet range equation Optimization: SYN107 Finite Volume, RANS, SLIP Schemes, Residual Averaging, Local Time Stepping Scheme, Full Multi-grid

19 Single-point Redesign using at Cruise condition

20 Isolated Shock Free Theorem Mach.84 Mach.85 Mach.90 “Shock Free solution is an isolated point, away from the point shocks will develop” Morawetz 1956

21 Design Approach If the shock is not too strong, section modification alone can alleviate the undesired characteristics. But if the shock is too strong, both section and planform will need to be redesigned.

22 3-Point Design for Sections alone (Planform fixed) ConditionMach  /3

23 Successive 2-Point Design for Sections (Planform fixed) ConditionMach  /2 M DD is dramatically improved

24 Lift-to-Drag Ratio of the Final Design

25 C p at Mach 0.78, 0.79, …, 0.92 Shock free solution no longer exists. But overall performance is significantly improved.

26 Conclusion Single-point design can produce a shock free solution, but performance at off-design conditions may be degraded. Multi-point design can improve overall performance, but improvement is not as large as that could be obtained by a single optimization, which usually results in a shock free flow. Shock free solution no longer exists. However, the overall performance, as measured by characteristics such as the drag rise Mach number, is clearly superior.

27 Acknowledgement This work has benefited greatly from the support of Air Force Office of Science Research under grant No. AF F Downloadable Publications