Experimental Investigation of the Low-Speed Aerodynamic Characteristics of a 5.8-Percent Scale Hybrid Wing Body Configuration

Gatlin, Gregory M.; Vicroy, Dan D.; Carter, Melissa B.

doi:10.2514/6.2012-2669

Cited by 32 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Three wind tunnel tests were conducted in the NASA Langley 14-by 22-Foot Subsonic Tunnel on the 5.8-percent scale model shown in figure 3. The first test focused on measuring the basic low-speed aerodynamics 9 while the second was an acoustics test. [10][11][12] The third test focused on characterizing the nacelle inlet flow conditions through particle image velocimetry (PIV) measurements.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Low-speed Aerodynamic Investigations of a Hybrid Wing Body Configuration

Vicroy

Gatlin

Jenkins

et al. 2014

32nd AIAA Applied Aerodynamics Conference

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Two low-speed static wind tunnel tests and a water tunnel static and dynamic forcedmotion test have been conducted on a hybrid wing-body (HWB) twinjet configuration. These tests, in addition to computational fluid dynamics (CFD) analysis, have provided a comprehensive dataset of the low-speed aerodynamic characteristics of this nonproprietary configuration. In addition to force and moment measurements, the tests included surface pressures, flow visualization, and off-body particle image velocimetry measurements. This paper will summarize the results of these tests and highlight the data that is available for code comparison or additional analysis. Nomenclatureattack, deg. β = sideslip angle, deg. η = fraction of semi-span LaRC = Langley Research Center LE = leading edge RHRC = Rolling Hills Research Corporation WICS = Wall Interference Correction System

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Low-speed Aerodynamic Investigations of a Hybrid Wing Body Configuration

Vicroy

Gatlin

Jenkins

et al. 2014

32nd AIAA Applied Aerodynamics Conference

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…2 serve to provide directional stability control as well as a positive pitching moment for takeoff when the center elevon is deflected up. 10 Further details of the aeroperformance design and of the measured data of the low-speed aerodynamic directional stability characteristics can be found in References 7 and 10, respectively.…”

Section: A Aircraft Description and Performancementioning

confidence: 99%

“…The Boeing Company started with the Cambridge-MIT Institute Silent Aircraft Initiative SAX-40 3 configuration and developed a cargo freighter to represent the initial operational aircraft capability in the 2020 time frame. 7 From that design (known as the N2A-EXTE) a full span, 5.8-percent scale-model was provided to NASA to perform both aerodynamic 10 and aeroacoustic 11,12 testing. The key objectives of those tests were to characterize the low speed aerodynamics and noise of the design, and provide data for use in assessing certification noise metrics with respect to the NASA noise goals.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Noise Scaling and Community Noise Metrics for the Hybrid Wing Body Aircraft

Burley

Brooks

Hutcheson

et al. 2014

20th AIAA/CEAS Aeroacoustics Conference

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An aircraft system noise assessment was performed for the hybrid wing body aircraft concept, known as the N2A-EXTE. This assessment is a result of an effort by NASA to explore a realistic HWB design that has the potential to substantially reduce noise and fuel burn. Under contract to NASA, Boeing designed the aircraft using practical aircraft design principles with incorporation of noise technologies projected to be available in the 2020 timeframe. NASA tested a 5.8% scale-model of the design in the NASA Langley 14-by 22-Foot Subsonic Tunnel to provide source noise directivity and installation effects for aircraft engine and airframe configurations. Analysis permitted direct scaling of the model-scale jet, airframe, and engine shielding effect measurements to full-scale. Use of these in combination with ANOPP predictions enabled computations of the cumulative (CUM) noise margins relative to FAA Stage 4 limits. The CUM margins were computed for a baseline N2A-EXTE configuration and for configurations with added noise reduction strategies. The strategies include reduced approach speed, over-the-rotor liner and soft-vane fan technologies, vertical tail placement and orientation, and modified landing gear designs with fairings. Combining the inherent HWB engine shielding by the airframe with added noise technologies, the cumulative noise was assessed at 38.7 dB below FAA Stage 4 certification level, just 3.3 dB short of the NASA N+2 goal of 42 dB. This new result shows that the NASA N+2 goal is approachable and that significant reduction in overall aircraft noise is possible through configurations with noise reduction technologies and operational changes. Nomenclature ANOPP = NASA's aircraft noise prediction program 1 ANOPP2 = NASA's aircraft noise prediction program2, a multi-fidelity framework AOA = angle of attack, degrees AP = approach flight condition BENS = broadband engine noise simulators BPR = engine bypass ratio CB = cutback flight conditionThis material is declared a work of the U.S. Government and is not subject to copyright protection in the United States. AIAA Aviation 2 CJES = compact jet engine simulators CUM = cumulative noise (summation of takeoff, cutback and approach EPNL), EPNdB D = fan nozzle exit diameter, ft. dB = decibel EPNL = effective perceived noise level, dB, also referred to as EPNdB FLOPS = flight optimization system 2 f = frequency HWB = hybrid wing body LE = leading edge L/D = lift/drag M = Mach number PNL = perceived noise level, dB PNLT = tone-corrected perceived noise level, dB R = distance from source to observer SF = model-scale/full-scale = 0.058 SFC = specific fuel consumption SL = sideline (full-throttle flight condition) certification point SPL = sound pressure level X = axial coordinate, ft. Greek φ = azimuthal directivity angle, degrees θ = polar directivity angle, degrees Subscript fs = full-scale ms = model-scale nb = narrowband

show abstract

“…The analysis provides estimates of these coefficients, their standard errors, and the coefficient of determination, R 2 . For the model with linear aerodynamics and 0 A = 0, the aerodynamic in-phase and out-of-phase components can be expressed in terms of the coefficients 1 A and 1 B . For the roll oscillation case the expressions are…”

Section: A Harmonic Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Hybrid Wing Body Model Identification Using Forced-Oscillation Water Tunnel Data

Murphy

Vicroy

Kramer

et al. 2014

AIAA Atmospheric Flight Mechanics Conference

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Static and dynamic testing of the NASA 0.7 percent scale Hybrid Wing Body (HWB) configuration was conducted in the Rolling Hills Research Corporation water tunnel to investigate aerodynamic behavior over a large range of angle-of-attack and to develop models that can predict aircraft response in nonlinear unsteady flight regimes. This paper reports primarily on the longitudinal axis results. Flow visualization tests were also performed. These tests provide additional static data and new dynamic data that complement tests conducted at NASA Langley 14-by 22-Foot Subsonic Tunnel. HWB was developed to support the NASA Environmentally Responsible Aviation Project goals of lower noise, emissions, and fuel burn. This study also supports the NASA Aviation Safety Program efforts to model and control advanced transport configurations in loss-of-control conditions. SubscriptsA = amplitude a = aero forces and moments: N, Y, l, m, or n E = measured value Superscripts ^ = estimated value ~ = mean value A j , B j = Fourier coefficients a, b 1 = deficiency function parameters b = wing span, ft C N , C Y = normal and side force coefficients C l , C n = rolling and yawing-moment coefficients C m = pitching-moment coefficients c = mean aerodynamic chord, ft a F α , a F β = deficiency functions f = frequency, Hz k = reduced f, / bf V π , or / cf V π m = no. of harmonics in Fourier expansion N = number of data points p, q, r = roll, pitch, and yaw rates, rad/sec R 2 = coefficient of determination S = reference area, ft 2 T = dimensional time constant, sec t = time, sec V = velocity, fps α = angle-of-attack, rad or deg α 0 = initial angle-of-attack in forced oscillation experiments, rad or deg β = sideslip angle, rad or deg η = state variable σ = standard error τ = dummy integration variable τ 1 = non-dimensional time constant, 1 1 2V b b       ω = angular frequency, rad/sec a C γ = in-phase coefficients, γ = α or β a C ζ = out-of-phase coefficients, ζ = p, q, or r , E r SS SS = residual and total sum of squares American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics 1 Downloaded by NANYANG TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY on October 1, 2015 | http://arc.aiaa.org |

show abstract

Experimental Investigation of the Low-Speed Aerodynamic Characteristics of a 5.8-Percent Scale Hybrid Wing Body Configuration

Cited by 32 publications

References 8 publications

Low-speed Aerodynamic Investigations of a Hybrid Wing Body Configuration

Low-speed Aerodynamic Investigations of a Hybrid Wing Body Configuration

Noise Scaling and Community Noise Metrics for the Hybrid Wing Body Aircraft

Hybrid Wing Body Model Identification Using Forced-Oscillation Water Tunnel Data

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About