42nd AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit · 2004 · 26 citations · 13 references
EngineeringAerospace EngineeringComputational EngineeringAerodynamicsComputational Fluid DynamicsFluid DynamicsAerodynamic DesignComputational AerodynamicsMomentum TransportTransport ModelingTurbulent FlowTurbulent TransportAerodynamic Drag EffectsAerodynamic EfficiencyCfd SimulationCfd ValidationDrag Coefficient EstimationDrag PredictionReynolds Stress Transport
This paper describes and analyzes a series of nearly 90 CFD test cases performed as a contribution to the second Drag Prediction Workshop, held in association with the AIAA in June 2003. Two configurations are included: DLR-F6 wing-body and wing-body-nacelle-pylon. The ability of CFD to predict the drag, lift, and pitching moment from experiment-including the arising from the addition of the nacelle and pylon-is assessed. In general, at a fixed angle of attack CFD overpredicts lift, but predicts the delta C (sub L) reasonably well. At low lift levels (C (sub L) less than 0.3)), delta C (sub D) is 20-30 drag counts (30-45%) high. At the target lift coefficient of C(sub L) = 0.5, delta C (sub D) is overpredicted by between 11-16 counts. However, the primary contribution of this paper is mot so much the assessment of CFD against experiment, but rather a detailed assessment and analysis of CFD variation. The series of test cases are designed to determine the sensitivity/variability of CFD to a variety of factors, including grid, turbulence model, transition code, and viscous model. Using medium-level grids (6-11 million points) at the target lift coefficient, the maximum variation in drag due to different grids is 5-11 drag counts, due to code is 5-10 counts, due to turbulence model is 7-15 counts, due to transition is 10-11 counts, and due to viscous model is 4-5 counts. Other specific variations are described in the paper.
13
Two-equation eddy-viscosity turbulence models for engineering applications
Florian Menter · AIAA Journal · 1994 · 20.7K citations