Page 31 - Computational Fluid Dynamics for Engineers
P. 31

16                                                          1.  Introduction






















         (a)                                     (b)
         Fig.  1.17.  (a)  Regional  jet  cruise  configuration  panelling,  (b)  Predicted  maximum  lift
         with  and  without  roughness,  comparison  with  experimental  data.


         inverse  mode,  is  coupled  to  the  panel  method.  Michel's  formula  (Chapter  8)
         is  used  for  transition  prediction  and  the  Cebeci-Smith  model  is  used  for  tur-
         bulence  modeling  with  roughness  effects.  The  equivalent  sand  grain  roughness
         (k s/c)  is the  input  characterization  parameter  for  the  code.
            The  method  is  illustrated  in  Fig.  1.18,  using  a  model  of  the  M100  ONERA
         wing/body  test  article  [10]. In  this  application,  the  VSAERO  panel  method  of
         Analytical  Methods  Inc.  [9]  is  used.  An  initial  VSAERO  analysis  is  first  con-
         ducted  to determine the  critical spanwise  location  where the maximum  pressure
         difference  occurs. Based  on the  local chord  Reynolds number  at that  critical  sec-
         tion,  a two-dimensional  (2D)  analysis  is conducted  to determine the  incremental
         effects  of roughness  on maximum  lift.  The  figure  shows the  2D  lift  curves  calcu-
         lated  with  and  without  contamination.  This  increment  is applied  to the  original
         limit  AC P  curve  and  compared  with  the  original  spanwise  distributions  of  AC p
         to determine the new maximum  lift  point  with contamination.  Figure  1.18  shows
         the  limit  AC P  curves  with  and  without  roughness  as  well  as  the  spanwise  dis-
         tributions  of  AC P  as  calculated  using  VSAERO  for  several  angles  of  attack.
         Finally,  Fig.  1.18  shows  the  predicted  maximum  lift  for  the  configuration  with
         and  without  roughness.  The  methodology  was  validated  using  the  results  of
         the  wind  tunnel  tests  carried  out  on  a  1/3  scale  model  of  a  regional  jet.  Tests
         were conducted  at  Mach  0.15 and  mean  chord  Reynolds  number  of  2.72  million,
         for  various  levels  of  wing  contamination.  Figure  1.17b  shows  the  comparison
         of  predicted  and  experimentally  measured  maximum  lift  coefficients  with  and
         without  contamination  for  the  cruise  configuration.  The  relative  loss  in  lift  due
         to  contamination  compares  well  with  experiment,  although  the  absolute  levels
         are  slightly  over-predicted  in  this  case.
            Although  Navier-Stokes  solvers  are  now  routinely  used  to  analyse  full  air-
         craft  configurations  in  cruise  conditions,  prediction  of  aircraft  high-lift  perfor-
   26   27   28   29   30   31   32   33   34   35   36