Carlos Sebastia Saez, Mirko Hornung

DOI Number: N/A

Conference number: IFASD-2024-024

The goal of this investigation is to reduce uncertainties in the aerodynamic behavior of a modern NLF airfoil due to flap oscillations and correct the pressure distributions predicted
by lower-fidelity methods. Wind tunnel experiments at low turbulence intensities and CFD simulations with the Gamma transition model have been conducted to investigate the impact of an unsteady transition on the pressure distribution. The results are compared to Doublet Lattice Method (DLM) predictions and are used to correct the DLM pressure distribution. The chosen correction method is based on a post-multiplication of the aerodynamic influence coefficient matrix by a correction matrix, formulated so that the pressure loads predicted by DLM are equal to the ones of the higher fidelity method. The pressure distributions obtained experimentally and with CFD show good agreement with
each other. The pressure magnitude predicted by DLM shows the most significant deviations near the leading edge and the hinge line, demonstrating the need to correct the DLM results. The corrected DLM results show the same behavior as the higher fidelity method. The impact on the flutter results is analyzed by means of the generalized aerodynamic forces, which show higher aerodynamic stiffness and damping compared to the uncorrected DLM.

Read the full paper here

In Categories: 1. IFASD 2024, 1.Events, Steady/Unsteady Aerodynamics
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.