Numerical simulation of CRM-WBPN wind tunnel test model

被引：0
|
作者：
Meng D. [1 ]
Li W. [1 ]
Wang Y. [1 ]
Sun Y. [2 ]
机构：
[1] Computational Aerodynamics Institute, China Aerodynamics Research and Development Center, Mianyang
[2] State Key Laboratory of Aerodynamics, China Aerodynamics Research and Development Center, Mianyang
来源：
Hangkong Xuebao/Acta Aeronautica et Astronautica Sinica | 2019年 / 40卷 / 02期
关键词：
Aerodynamic characteristics; CRM model; Drag increment; Flow simulation; RANS equations;
D O I：
10.7527/S1000-6893.2018.22402
中图分类号：
学科分类号：
摘要：
Based on the Reynolds-Averaged Navier-Stokes(RANS) equations and the structured grid (point to point) technology, the effects of support system on the aerodynamic characteristics of CRM Wing/Body/Pylon/Nacelle (CRM-WBPN) configuration are studied by using TRIP 3.0 (Trisonic Platform version 3.0). A grid family, which includes a tiny, coarse, medium, and fine grid, is constructed, and grid convergence study is presented. The effect of support system on the drag increment between CRM-WBPN and CRM-WB model is discussed on lift coefficient 0.50. The influence of support system on the aerodynamic characteristics of CRM-WBPN is provided at different angles of attack. Compared with the experimental data from the NASA Langley National Transonic Facility (NTF) and the numerical results of the CRM-WB model, the present numerical results show that the support system has mild effect on the drag increment between WBPN and WB. The inclusion of support system into the computation model decreases the lift coefficient and drag coefficient, and increases the pitching moment coefficient. The numerical results of WBPNS model more closely match with the experimental results. © 2019, Press of Chinese Journal of Aeronautics. All right reserved.
引用
收藏
相关论文
共 22 条
  • [1] Levy D.W., Vassberg J.C., Wahls R.A., Et al., Summary of data from the first AIAA CFD drag prediction workshop, Journal of Aircraft, 40, 5, pp. 875-882, (2003)
  • [2] Laflin K.R., Vassberg J.C., Wahls R.A., Et al., Summary of data from the second AIAA CFD drag prediction workshop, Journal of Aircraft, 42, 5, pp. 1165-1178, (2005)
  • [3] Vassberg J.C., Tinoco E.N., Mani M., Et al., Abridged summary of the third AIAA CFD drag prediction workshop, Journal of Aircraft, 45, 3, pp. 781-798, (2008)
  • [4] Vassberg J.C., Tinoco E.N., Mani M., Et al., Summary of the fourth AIAA computational fluid dynamics drag prediction workshop, Journal of Aircraft, 51, 4, pp. 1070-1089, (2014)
  • [5] Levy D.W., Laflin K.R., Tinoco E.N., Et al., Summary of data from the fifth computational fluid dynamics drag prediction workshop, Journal of Aircraft, 51, 4, pp. 1194-1213, (2014)
  • [6] Tinoco E.N., Brodersen O.P., Keye S., Et al., Summary data from the sixth AIAA CFD drag prediction workshop: CRM cases, Journal of Aircraft, 4, pp. 1-28, (2017)
  • [7] Wang Y.T., An overview of DPWⅣ-DPWⅣ numerical simulation technology, Acta Aeronautica et Astronautica Sinica, 39, 4, (2018)
  • [8] Vassberg J.C., Dehaan M.A., Rivers S.M., Et al., Development of a common research model for applied CFD validation studies: AIAA-2008-6919, (2008)
  • [9] Rivers M.B., Dittbemer A., Experimental investigation of the NASA common research model: AIAA-2010-4218, (2010)
  • [10] Rivers M.B., Dittbemer A., Experimental investigation of the NASA common research model in the NASA Langley transonic facility and NASA Ames 11-ft transonic wind tunnel: AIAA-2011-1126, (2011)
123