Optimization of the three-segment aerofoil arrangement based on wind tunnel tests and numerical analysis

Abstract

This paper presents the optimization of multi-element aerofoil for the LAR-3 Puffin -- STOL light transport aircraft concept proposal. Based on the geometry and aerodynamic characteristics of the well-known and proven in flight three-segment NACA 63A416 aerofoil, the authors explore the possibility of enhancing its high-lift performance by the movement of slot and flap position in extended (deployed) aerodynamic configuration. In order to determine the optimum positions of aerofoil segments (elements), a multi-step optimization approach was developed. It combines computational fluid dynamics simulations that were used for design space screening and preliminary optimization together with low-turbulence wind tunnel tests which yielded certain results. To decrease the numerical cost of the computer simulation campaign, Design of experiment methods (optimal space-filling design among others) were employed instead of exhausting full factorial (parametric) design. Response surface models of major aerodynamic coefficients (lift, drag, pitching moment) at predicted maximum lift coefficient (C_{L max}) point allowed to narrow down search space and identify several candidates for optimal configuration to be checked experimentally. Wind tunnel tests campaign confirmed the major trends observed in computational fluid dynamics derived response surface contour plots. For the optimum aerodynamic configuration, chosen experimental C_{L max} is over 3.9, which is a 10% increase over the baseline (initial slat and flap positions) case. In parallel, the maximum lift-to-drag ratio gain at that point was almost 19%. The research outlined in this paper was conducted on behalf of the aircraft production company and its results will be applied in a newly designed transport aircraft.

Keywords

Aerodynamics multi-element aerofoil wind tunnel computational fluid dynamics optimization response surface methodology design of experiment high lift

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Smith

AMO

. High lift aerodynamics. J Aircraft 1975; 12: 501–530.

Page

. The Handley Page Wing. Aeronaut J 1921; 25: 263–289.

Fowler

. Variable lift. Western Flying. November 1931, pp.31-33.

Garner PL, Meredith PT and Stoner RC. Areas for Future CFD Development as Illustrated by Transport Aircraft Applications. In: 10th Computational Fluid Dynamics Conference, Honolulu, HI, USA, 24--26 June 1991, paper no. AIAA 91-1527-CP, pp. 10--20. Reston, VA: AIAA.

Rudolph PKC. High-lift systems on commercial subsonic airliners. Report CR 4746, NASA Ames Research Center, USA, September 1996.

Van Dam

. The aerodynamic design of multi-element high-lift systems for transport airplanes. Prog Aerosp Sci 2002; 38: 101–144.

Rumsey

Ying

. Prediction of high lift: review of present CFD capability. Prog Aerosp Sci 2002; 38: 145–180.

Klausmeyer SM and Lin JC. Comparative results from a CFD challenge over a 2D three-element high-lift airfoil. Report TM 112858, NASA Langley Research Center, USA, May 1997.

Besnard E, Schmitz A, Boscher E, et al. Two-dimensional aircraft high lift system design and optimization. In: 36th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, Reno, NV, USA, 12--15 January 1998, paper no. AIAA 98-0123, pp. 1--10. Reston, VA: AIAA.

10.

Wild J. Validation of Numerical Optimization of High-Lift Multi-Element Airfoils Based on Navier-Stokes-Equations. In: 20th AIAA Applied Aerodynamics Conference, St. Louis, MO, USA, 24--26 June 2002, paper no. AIAA 2002-2939, pp. 1--7. Reston, VA: AIAA.

11.

Murayama M, Yamamoto K and Kobayashi K. Validation of Flows on High-Lift Configurations by Structured- and Unstructured- Mesh Method. In: 43rd AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, Reno, NV, USA, 10--13 January 2005, paper no. AIAA 2005-1226, pp. 1--18. Reston, VA: AIAA.

12.

Coiro

Nicolosi

Grasso

. Design and testing of multi-element airfoil for short-takeoff-and-landing ultralight aircraft. J Aircraft 2009; 46: 1795–1807.

13.

Benini

Ponza

Massaro

. High-lift multi-element airfoil shape and setting optimization using multi-objective evolutionary algorithms. J Aircraft 2011; 48: 683–696.

14.

Wild

Brezillon

Amoignon

, et al. Advanced design by numerical methods and wind-tunnel verification within European high-lift program. J Aircraft 2009; 46: 526–541.

15.

Valarezo WO, Dominik CJ, McGhee RJ, et al. Multi-Element Airfoil Optimization for Maximum Lift at High Reynolds Numbers. In: 9th AIAA Applied Aerodynamics Conference, Baltimore, MD, USA, 23--25 September 1991, paper no. AIAA 91-3332, pp. 969--976. Reston, VA: AIAA.

16.

Lin JC and Dominik CJ. Optimization of An Advanced Design Three-Element Airfoil at High Reynolds Number. In: 13th AIAA Applied Aerodynamics Conference, San Diego, CA, USA, 19--22 June 1995, paper no. AIAA 95-1858, pp. 1--11. Reston, VA: AIAA.

17.

Hahn AS. A Conceptual Design of a Short Takeoff and Landing Regional Jet Airliner. In: 48th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting Including the New Horizons Forum and Aerospace Exposition, Orlando, FL, USA, 4--7 January 2010, paper no. AIAA 2010-1011, pp. 1--9. Reston, VA: AIAA.

18.

Johnston

. Computational fluid dynamics analysis of multi-element, high-lift aerofoil sections at transonic manoeuvre conditions. Proc IMechE Part G: J Aerospace Engineering 2011; 226: 912–929.

19.

Iannelli P, Wild J, Minervino M, et al. Analysis and Application of Suitable CFD-Based Optimization Strategies for High-Lift System Design. In: European Congress on Computational Methods in Applied Sciences and Engineering (ECCOMAS 2012), Vienna, Austria, 10--14 September 2012, paper no. 2012-2235, pp. 1--20. Vienna: University of Vienna.

20.

Gubanova MA, Bragin NN, Perchenkov ES, et al. High-Lift System Design By Numerical Methods and Wind Tunnel Verification. In: 29th Congress of the International Council of the Aeronautical Sciences, St. Petersburg, Russia, 7--12 September 2014, paper no. 2014-0094, pp. 1--10. Bonn: ICAS.

21.

Tyan M, Park J, Kim S, et al. Design Optimization of Subsonic Airfoil and Slotted Flap Shape Using Multi-Fidelity Aerodynamic Analysis. In: 21st AIAA Computational Fluid Dynamics Conference, San Diego, CA, USA, 24--27 June 2013, paper no. AIAA 2013-2704, pp. 1--13. Reston, VA: AIAA.

22.

Hicks RM, Murman EM and Vanderplaats GN. An assessment of airfoil design by numerical optimization. Report TM X-3092, NASA Ames Research Center, USA, July 1974.

23.

Martinelli

Jameson

. Computational aerodynamics: solvers and shape optimization. J Heat Trans-T ASME 2012; 135: 11002-1–011002-9.

24.

Leifsson L and Koziel S. Simulation-driven aerodynamic design using variable-fidelity models. 1st ed. London: Imperial College Press, 2015, p. 444.

25.

Eyi S, Chand KK, Lee KD, et al. Multi-element high-lift design using the Navier-Stokes equations. In: 27th AIAA Fluid Dynamics Conference, New Orleans, LA, USA, 17--20 June 1996, paper no. AIAA 96-1943, pp. 1--11. Reston, VA: AIAA.

26.

Kim

Alonso

Jameson

. Multi-element high-lift configuration design optimization using viscous continuous adjoint method. J Aircraft 2004; 41: 1082–1097.

27.

Nakayama H, Kim HJ, Matsushima K, et al. Aerodynamic Optimization of Multi-Element Airfoil. In: 44th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, Reno, NV, USA, 9--12 January 2006, paper no. AIAA 2006-1051, pp. 1--15. Reston, VA: AIAA.

28.

Pehlivanoglu

. Efficient accelerators for PSO in an inverse design of multi-element airfoils. Aerosp Sci Technol 2019; 91: 110–121.

29.

Bai B, Li X and Chen H. Aerodynamic and Aeroacoustics Optimization Design of Multi-Element Airfoil by a Genetic Algorithm. In: 25th AIAA/CEAS Aeroacoustics Conference, Delft, Netherlands, 20--23 May 2019, paper no. AIAA 2019-2762, pp. 1--14. Reston, VA: AIAA.

30.

Montgomery

. Design and analysis of experiments, 8th ed. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 2008, pp. 752–752.

31.

Grasso F. Multi-objective numerical optimization applied to aircraft design. PhD Thesis, University of Naples Federico II, Italy, 2008.

32.

Jiao

. Parameter optimization research on lift-enhancing of multielement airfoil using air-blowing. Procedia Eng 2015; 99: 73–81.

33.

Kanazaki M, Tanaka K, Jeong S, et al. Multi-objective Aerodynamic Optimization of Elements’ Setting for High-lift Airfoil Using Kriging Model. In: 44th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, Reno, NV, USA, 9--12 January 2006, paper no. AIAA 2006-1471, pp. 1--11. Reston, VA: AIAA.

34.

Manshadi

Jamalinasab

. Optimizing a two-element wing model with morphing flap by means of the response surface method. Iran J Sci Technol Trans Mech Eng 2017; 41: 343–352.

35.

Demange J, Savill AM and Kipouros T. Multifidelity Optimization for High-Lift Airfoils. In: 54th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting, San Diego, CA, USA, 4--8 January 2016, paper no. AIAA 2016-0557, pp. 1--13. Reston, VA: AIAA.

36.

Goraj

Frydrychewicz

Ransom

ECP

, et al. Aerodynamic, dynamic and conceptual design of a fire-fighting aircraft. Proc IMechE Part G: J Aerospace Engineering 2001; 215: 125–146.

37.

Goetzendorf-Grabowski

Mieloszyk

. Common computational model for coupling panel method with finite element method. Aircr Eng Aerosp Tec 2017; 89: 654–662.

38.

Kubryński K. Wing-Winglet Design Methodology for Low Speed Applications. In: 41st AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, Reno, NV, USA, 6--9 January 2003, paper no. AIAA 2003-0215, pp. 1--9. Reston, VA: AIAA.

39.

Kubryński K. Design of a Flapped Laminar Airfoil for High Performance Sailplane. In: 30th AIAA Applied Aerodynamics Conference, New Orleans, LA, USA, 25-28 June 2012, paper no. AIAA 2012-2662, pp.1-20.

40.

Figat

Goetzendorf-Grabowski

Goraj

. Aerodynamic calculation of unmanned aircraft. Aircr Eng Aerosp Tec 2005; 77: 467–474.

41.

Górniak

Goraj

Olszański

. Research and selection of MALE wing profile. Aircr Eng Aerosp Tec 2019; 91: 264–271.

42.

Grendysa

. Multidisciplinary wing design of a light long endurance UAV. Aircr Eng Aerosp Tec 2019; 91: 905–914.

43.

Jóźwiak R and Kubryński K. New Slat Concept for Flow Control over Airfoil. In: 45th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, Reno, NV, USA, 8-11 January 2007, paper no. AIAA 2007-1468, pp.1-11.

44.

Kubryński

. Application of the panel method to subsonic aerodynamic design. Inverse Prob Eng 1997; 5: 87–112.

45.

Mieloszyk

. Practical problems of numerical optimization in aerospace sciences. Aircr Eng Aerosp Tec 2017; 89: 570–578.

46.

Dathe I and Deleo M. Hydrodynamic Characteristics of Seaplanes as Affected by Hull Shape Parameters. In: Advanced Marine Vehicles Conference, Arlington, VA, USA, 5--7 June 1989, paper no. AIAA 89-1540-CP, pp. 275--284. Reston, VA: AIAA.

47.

Yuhui

Yufei

. Optimization and analysis of a blown flap based on a multielement airfoil. J Aircraft 2020; 57: 62–75.

48.

Flaig A and Hilbig R. High-lift design for large civil aircraft. In: AGARD (eds) AGARD CP-515 high-lift system aerodynamics. 1st ed. Neuilly-sur-Seine: NATO, 1993, pp.33-1--33-31.

49.

Kubryński K, Jóźwiak R and Mazurkiewicz Ł. Low turbulence wind tunnel modernization and flow analysis. In: Sibilski K (ed) Mechanics in aviation ML-XVI Vol. I. 1st ed. Warsaw: PTMTS, 2014, pp.97--107. (in Polish).

50.

AGARDograph 336. Wind tunnel wall corrections, 1st ed. Neuilly-Sur-Seine: NATO, 1998, pp. 552–552.

51.

Drela M. Newton Solution of Coupled Viscous/Inviscid Multielement Airfoil Flows. In: AIAA 21st Fluid Dynamics, Plasma Dynamics and Lasers Conference, Seattle, WA, USA, 18--20 June 1990, paper no. AIAA 90-1470, pp. 1--11. Reston, VA: AIAA.

52.

Drela M. Design and optimization method for multi-element airfoils. In: AIAA Aerospace Design Conference, Irvine, CA, USA, 16--19 February 1993, paper no. AIAA-93-0969, pp. 1--11. Reston, VA: AIAA.

53.

ANSYS Inc., ANSYS Fluent Theory Guide, v. 18.2, August 2017.

54.

Spalart PR and Allmaras SR. A one-equation turbulence model for aerodynamic flows. In: 30th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, Reno, NV, USA, 6--9 January 1992, paper no. AIAA 92-0439, pp. 1--22. Reston, VA: AIAA.

55.

Shih

Liou

Shabbir

, et al. A new k-ε Eddy viscosity model for high reynolds Number turbulent flows. Comput Fluids 1995; 24: 227–238.

56.

Menter

. Two-equation eddy-viscosity turbulence models for engineering applications. AIAA J 1994; 32: 1598–1605.

57.

Walters

Cokljat

. A three-equation eddy-viscosity model for Reynolds-averaged Navier--Stokes simulations of transitional flow. J Fluids Eng 2008; 130: 121401-1–121401-14.

58.

Menter

Langtry

Likki

, et al. A correlation-based transition model using local variables-Part I: model formulation. J Turbomach 2006; 128: 413–422.

59.

Kilgore RA, Goodyer MJ, Adcock JB, et al. The cryogenic wind-tunnel concept for high Reynolds number testing. Report TN D-7762, NASA Langley Research Center, USA, November 1974.

60.

Johnson

Moore

Ylvisaker

. Minimax and maximin distance designs. J Stat Plan Inference 1990; 26: 131–148.

61.

Forrester AIJ, Sóbester A and Keane AJ. Engineering design via surrogate modelling. 1st ed. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons, 2008, p.228.

62.

Narsipur S, Pomeroy BW and Selig MS. CFD Analysis of Multielement Airfoils for Wind Turbines. In: 30th AIAA Applied Aerodynamics Conference, New Orleans, LA, USA, 25--28 June 2012, paper no. AIAA 2012-2781, pp. 1--18. Reston, VA: AIAA.

63.

Celik

Ghia

Roache

, et al. Procedure for estimation and reporting of uncertainty due to discretization in CFD applications. J Fluids Eng 2008; 130: 078001-1–078001-4.