Daniella E. Raveh

DOI Number: N/A

Conference number: IFASD-2017-163

The paper presents flutter prediction and simulations that were performed with the EZNSS flow solver for the second Aeroelastic Prediction Workshop (AePW). The reference test cases for the AePW are based on two wind tunnel experiments of the Benchmark Supercritical Wing (BSCW). Two cases are addressed, at different transonic flow conditions: One case at lower Mach numbers of 0.74, 0°angle of attack (AoA), and one more physically complex case at Mach 0.85, 5° AoA. The cases were analyzed with the EZNSS code, using several computational setups and turbulence models. The simulations at Mach 0.74, 0° AoA were able to predict accurately the flutter response. A reduced-order model (ROM) for the unsteady aerodynamic forces was constructed and used to predict the flutter point. The ROM was shown to be an accurate and computationally efficient tool for flutter prediction. The higher Mach number case, at Mach 0.85, 5°AoA, which involves a strong shock, separated flow behind the shock, and some flow unsteadiness, was more challenging. In the static analysis, different turbulence models yielded different upper-surface shock positions, and none of the models was able to capture accurately the pressure recovery behind the shock. Flutter was computed via an aerodynamic ROM, and since there is no reference flutter point from wind tunnel tests, the flutter point was validated with full aeroelastic simulation.

Read the full paper here

Email
Print
LinkedIn
The paper above was part of  proceedings of a CEAS event and as such the author has signed a publication agreement to have their paper published in the repository. In the case this paper is found somewhere else CEAS always links to the other source.  CEAS takes great care in making the correct content available to the reader. If any mistakes are found  in the listings please contact us directly at papers@aerospacerepository.org and we will correct the listing promptly.  CEAS cannot be held liable either for mistakes in editorial or technical aspects, nor for omissions, nor for the correctness of the content. In particular, CEAS does not guarantee completeness or correctness of information contained in external websites which can be accessed via links from CEAS’s websites. Despite accurate research on the content of such linked external websites, CEAS cannot be held liable for their content. Only the content providers of such external sites are liable for their content. Should you notice any mistake in technical or editorial aspects of the CEAS site, please do not hesitate to inform us.