Accomplishments of the Abrupt-Wing-Stall Program

Hall, Robert M.; Woodson, Shawn H.; Chambers, J.

doi:10.2514/1.3631

Cited by 27 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Some recent examples include aircraft such as the F/A-18 and F-18E or F-22. [1][2][3][4][5][6] It is therefore of utmost importance to be able to predict S&C characteristics of the aircraft in the early stages of its development.…”

Section: Nomenclaturementioning

confidence: 99%

Improved Methodologies for Maneuver Design of Aircraft Stability and Control Simulations

Jirasek

Jeans

Martenson

et al. 2010

48th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting Including the New Horizons Forum and Aerospace Exposition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

With many modern fighter aircraft experiencing unpredicted flight dynamics during flight tests, recent research has focused on developing methodologies for incorporating computational fluid dynamics into the aircraft development process. The goal of this ap proach is to identify configurations susceptible to stability and control issues early in the design process. Previous research has primarily focused on full aircraft configurations, how ever, to increase the rate of development the current study focused on a two-dimensional NACA0012 airfoil. The two-dimensional NACA0012 airfoil has the advantage of reducing the computational cost by orders of magnitude compared to full scale aircraft simulations, while still providing complicated aerodynamics at high angles of attack. Computationally predicted lift coefficients from a number of newly developed training maneuvers were used to generate reduced order aerodynamic loads models. For evaluation, these models were compared to generated static and dynamic validation data. Methods of improving both the computational training maneuver and the reduced order modeling approach are suggested. Nomenclature

show abstract

Section: Nomenclaturementioning

confidence: 99%

Improved Methodologies for Maneuver Design of Aircraft Stability and Control Simulations

Jirasek

Jeans

Martenson

et al. 2010

48th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting Including the New Horizons Forum and Aerospace Exposition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…2D Airfoil Test Figure 2 shows the first order kernel of normal force of a NACA0012 airfoil. The kernel was extracted from the unit and double unit pulse response using equation (2). The pitch motion is realized by rotating the entire mesh around the quarter chord point.…”

Section: Cobalt Cfd Codementioning

confidence: 99%

Application of Volterra Functions to X-31 Aircraft Model Motion

Cummings

2009

27th AIAA Applied Aerodynamics Conference

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent advances towards an efficient computational method for accurately determining the stability and control characteristics of an aircraft are discussed and critiqued. The present approach with greatest promise is to reduce the number of high-fidelity CFD sim ulations by using Volterra functions Reduced Order Modeling. This type of reduced order model is a predictive model which has a unique training maneuver -a unit impulse. The advantage of such an approach is the fast prediction of the aerodynamic characteristics of an aircraft. This article presents the results of application of the Volterra functions ROM for prediction of linear movement of a 2D airfoil and of an X-31 aircraft model. The Volterra ROM predicted well normal and axial force which are linear or weakly non-linear and was in a fairly good agreement with pitching moment as long as the pitching moment predictions were weakly non-linear.

show abstract

“…Despite their greatest efforts using the best available predictive capabilities, nearly every major fighter program since 1960 has had costly nonlinear aerodynamic or fluid-structure interaction issues that were not discovered until flight testing. [1][2][3][4][5] Some examples include the F-15, 6 F/A-18, 6 F/A-18C, 7 AV-8B, 6 and the B-2 Bomber. 8 The F-15, F/A-18A, and AV-8B all exhibited significant aero-elastic flutter, 6 while the F/A-18C experienced tail buffet at high angles of attack due to leading-edge extension vortex breakdown, 7 and the B-2 Bomber experienced a residual pitch oscillation.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The NATO STO Task Group AVT-201 on ‘Extended Assessment of Stability and Control Prediction Methods for NATO Air Vehicles’

Cummings

Schütte

2014

32nd AIAA Applied Aerodynamics Conference

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The ability to accurately predict both static and dynamic stability characteristics of air vehicles using computational fluid dynamics (CFD) methods could revolutionize the air vehicle design process, especially for military air vehicles. A validated CFD capability would significantly reduce the number of ground tests required to verify vehicle concepts and, in general, could eliminate costly vehicle 'repair' campaigns required to fix performance anomalies that were not adequately predicted prior to full-scale vehicle development. This paper outlines the extended integrated experimental and numerical approach to assess the of stability and control prediction method capabilities as well as the design and estimation the control device effectiveness for highly swept low observable UCAV configurations. The aim of the AVT-201 Task Group is to provide an assessment of the CFD capabilities using model scale experiments and transferring this knowledge to real scale applications. Nomenclature  = AoA, Angle of attack [] s = Half span [m]  = AoS, Angle of side slip [] x = Chord wise coordinate [m]  = Flap deflection angle [] z = Vertical coordinate [m]  = Pitch angle [] y = Span wise coordinate [m]  = Yaw angle [] q  = Dynamic pressure coefficient [c ref ) RSM = Reynolds-Stress turb. model C my = Pitch moment coefficient (MF) [-] M y /(q   A s) A = Reference relation area [m 2 ] C mz = Yaw moment coefficient (MF) [-] M z /(q   A s) c ref = Reference length [m] c r = Root chord [m] LOB = Left Outboard Trailing Edge Flap LE = Leading Edge LIB = Left Inboard Trailing Edge Flap SLE = Sharp Leading Edge RIB = Right Inboard Trailing Edge Flap RLE = Round Leading Edge ROB = Right Outboard Trailing Edge Flap RLE-FT = Round Leading Edge -Fixed BL = Base Line (no CS deflection) Transition CS = Control Surface CAWAPI = Cranked Arrow Wing AVT = Applied Vehicle Technology Aerodynamics Project Inter.

show abstract

Accomplishments of the Abrupt-Wing-Stall Program

Cited by 27 publications

References 18 publications

Improved Methodologies for Maneuver Design of Aircraft Stability and Control Simulations

Improved Methodologies for Maneuver Design of Aircraft Stability and Control Simulations

Application of Volterra Functions to X-31 Aircraft Model Motion

The NATO STO Task Group AVT-201 on ‘Extended Assessment of Stability and Control Prediction Methods for NATO Air Vehicles’

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About