23rd AIAA Applied Aerodynamics Conference 2005
DOI: 10.2514/6.2005-4842
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Application of Parallel Adjoint-Based Error Estimation and Anisotropic Grid Adaptation for Three-Dimensional Aerospace Configurations

Abstract: I. AbstractThis paper demonstrates the extension of error estimation and adaptation methods to parallel computations enabling larger, more realistic aerospace applications and the quantification of discretization errors for complex 3-D solutions. Results were shown for an inviscid sonic-boom prediction about a double-cone configuration and a wing/body segmented leading edge (SLE) configuration where the output function of the adjoint was pressure integrated over a part of the cylinder in the near field. After … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
36
0

Year Published

2006
2006
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
5
4

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 48 publications
(39 citation statements)
references
References 52 publications
3
36
0
Order By: Relevance
“…It remains very surprising and unexpected that there could be such a large difference between two solutions computed on such fine grids (72M versus 65M pts) especially in light of the apparent grid convergence path determined by the original family of grids. It is worth noting that these trends (lower lift and drag) are observed as well for the subsonic (Mach=0.3) case, and have been reproduced using the FUN3D unstructured mesh flow solver by Lee-Rausch et al, 36 verifying that these results are not simply the product of anomalous flow solver behavior. Figure 20 illustrates details of the mesh topology in the blunt wing trailing edge region, where spanwise stretching for the 72 million point mesh is evident, while isotropic resolution is observed for the 65 million point mesh.…”
Section: Grid Qualitysupporting
confidence: 50%
“…It remains very surprising and unexpected that there could be such a large difference between two solutions computed on such fine grids (72M versus 65M pts) especially in light of the apparent grid convergence path determined by the original family of grids. It is worth noting that these trends (lower lift and drag) are observed as well for the subsonic (Mach=0.3) case, and have been reproduced using the FUN3D unstructured mesh flow solver by Lee-Rausch et al, 36 verifying that these results are not simply the product of anomalous flow solver behavior. Figure 20 illustrates details of the mesh topology in the blunt wing trailing edge region, where spanwise stretching for the 72 million point mesh is evident, while isotropic resolution is observed for the 65 million point mesh.…”
Section: Grid Qualitysupporting
confidence: 50%
“…The adaptive FUN3D framework has been applied to sonic-boom problems [24,25]. These include a generic wing-body configuration designed for "low boom" and multiple cone-cylinder configurations.…”
Section: A Backgroundmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The adaptation mechanics are executed in the same domain decomposed parallel environment as the flow solver. Details of the metric formulation, adaptation mechanics, and parallel execution scheme are available in Park 22 and Lee-Rausch et al 5 Producing and modifying highly anisotropic grids suitable for simulating high Reynolds number turbulent flows is an extremely challenging task, especially near curved solid wall boundaries. This study avoids the issue of adapting high aspect ratio elements on curved boundaries by utilizing a hybrid approach which freezes the near-wall grid and adapts elements outside this zone.…”
Section: Fun3d Solver and Grid Adaption Softwarementioning
confidence: 99%
“…The output error functional utilizes the dual or adjoint to account for the influence that solution error has on the output of interest. The 2D adjoint and output error methods of Venditti and Darmofal 3,4 have been extended to the 3D unstructured NavierStokes code FUN3D 5 This method shows promise in application to inviscid, laminar and turbulent flow problems and has been shown to give excellent results while reducing unnecessary grid count. [5][6][7][8] The adjoint based method has a solid mathematical foundation while the method based on flow gradients does not.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%