{"id":19658,"date":"2025-05-13T10:16:49","date_gmt":"2025-05-13T10:16:49","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/aerospacerepository.org\/?p=19658"},"modified":"2025-09-10T10:21:34","modified_gmt":"2025-09-10T10:21:34","slug":"transonic-limit-cycle-oscillations-of-the-benchmark-supercritical-wing","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/aerospacerepository.org\/index.php\/2025\/05\/13\/transonic-limit-cycle-oscillations-of-the-benchmark-supercritical-wing\/","title":{"rendered":"Transonic limit cycle oscillations of the benchmark supercritical wing"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p><strong>Bret Stanford, Pawel Chwalowski, Kevin Jacobson<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>DOI Number: https:\/\/doi.org\/10.82439\/ceas-ifasd-2024-020<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Conference number: IFASD-2024-020<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>This paper considers transonic flutter mechanisms of the Benchmark Supercritical Wing, a model under study in the Aeroelastic Prediction Workshop series. Flutter boundaries are mapped out across an angle-of-attack sweep at Mach 0.8, utilizing both time-domain and linearized frequency-domain solvers, manual meshes and adapted meshes, and various governing equations. With increased angle-of-attack, linearized and finite amplitude flutter predictions exhibit differences above 3\u25e6 as the flow begins to separate; the latter predictions are found to be driven by subcritical limit cycle oscillations whose strength increases with angle-of-attack. Moderate perturbation values provide a stability boundary at 5\u25e6 that matches the experimental data, but it is not clear how the experimental perturbation, from one test condition to the next, can be reasonably characterized.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/aerospacerepository.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/05\/20.pdf\">Read the full paper here<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p><b>Bret Stanford, Pawel Chwalowski, Kevin Jacobson<\/b><\/p>\n<p>DOI Number: https:\/\/doi.org\/10.82439\/ceas-ifasd-2024-020<\/p>\n<p>Conference number: IFASD-2024-020<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[993,3028,3022],"tags":[975,2097,2118],"class_list":["post-19658","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-events","category-computational-aeroelasticity-1-ifasd-2024","category-ifasd-2024","tag-flutter","tag-limit-cycle-oscillations","tag-transonic-flow-2","category-993","category-3028","category-3022","description-off"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/aerospacerepository.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/19658","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/aerospacerepository.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/aerospacerepository.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/aerospacerepository.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/aerospacerepository.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=19658"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/aerospacerepository.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/19658\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":20401,"href":"https:\/\/aerospacerepository.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/19658\/revisions\/20401"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/aerospacerepository.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=19658"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/aerospacerepository.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=19658"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/aerospacerepository.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=19658"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}