The accuracy and efficiency of two types of subiterations in both explicit and implicit Navier-Stokes codes are explored for unsteady laminar circular-cylinder flow and unsteady turbulent flow over an 18-percent-thick circular-arc (biconvex) airfoil. Grid and time-step studies are used to assess the numerical accuracy of the methods. Nonsubiterative time-stepping schemes and schemes with physical time subiterations are subject to time-step limitations in practice that are removed by pseudo time subiterations. Computations for the circular-arc airfoil indicate that a one-equation turbulence model predicts the unsteady separated flow better than an algebraic turbulence model; also, the hysteresis with Mach number of the self-excited unsteadiness due to shock and boundary-layer separation is well predicted.ations to advance the equations of motion in a time-accurate manner. Two approaches to performing sub-code CFL3D % are both used in conjunction with subiter-*Senior Member AIAA. ?Associate Fellow AIAA.

The flow over two different multi-element airfoil configurations is computed using linear eddy viscosity turbulence models and a nonlinear explicit algebraic stress model. A subset of recently-measured transition locations using hot film on a McDonnell Douglas configuration is presented, and the effect of transition location on the computed solutions is explored. Deficiencies in wake profile computations are found to be attributable in large part to poor boundary layer prediction on the generating element, and not necessarily inadequate turbulence modeling in the wake. Using measured transition locations for the main element improves the prediction of its boundary layer thickness, skin friction, and wake profile shape. However, using measured transition locations on the slat still yields poor slat wake predictions. The computation of the slat flow field represents a key roadblock to successful predictions of multi-element flows. In general, the nonlinear explicit algebraic stress turbulence model gives very similar results to the linear eddy viscosity models.

Abstract

ABSTRACT

No abstract