In this paper, the problem of acceptable accuracy of a rocket’s aerodynamic characteristics obtained from CFD (computational fluid dynamics) analysis for defining its aerodynamic characteristics is considered from the point of view of exterior ballistics, particularly by the estimation of the rocket’s simulated flight range change caused by CFD errors. The results obtained in this paper allow stating the requirement on acceptable accuracy of defining the aerodynamic characteristics for developing new rockets through CFD analysis based on several examples, which can be propagated to other cases of rocket design and development. Using this study as a method, the CFD engineers who work on rocket design and development can estimate the accepted accuracy margin of their CFD analysis and research solutions to get reliable results for the expected flight characteristics of the rocket.
HemschMJ. Tactical missile aerodynamics: general topics. Reston, VA: American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 1992, p. 731.
2.
HemschMJMendenhallM. Tactical missile aerodynamics: prediction methodology. Reston, VA: American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 1992, p. 766.
3.
PetrovKP. Aerodynamics of rockets. Moscow: Mashinostroenie, 1977, p. 136.
4.
PetrovKP. Aerodynamics of aircraft components. Moscow: Mashinostroenie, 1985, p. 272.
5.
KrasnovNF. Aerodynamics. P. II. methods of aerodynamic calculations. Minsk: Vysshaya Shkola, 1980, p. 416.
6.
KrasnovNF. Fundamentals of aerodynamic calculations. Aerodynamics of bodies of revolution, carrying and control surfaces. aerodynamics of aircraft. Minsk: Vysshaya Shkola, 1981, p. 496.
7.
GrigoryevVGFilippovVB. Synthesis of the optimal pattern and evaluation of the combat capabilities of an air-to-air guided missile (ed. IYKazakov). Moscow: Zhukovsky Air Force Engineering Academy, 1986, p. 99.
8.
EltajADaragSA. Aerodynamic coefficients investigation of GRAD Rocket using computational fluid dynamics. J Eng Comput Sci2021; 22: 9–18.
9.
TunNLThuriMLiZ. Aerodynamic coefficients prediction for 122 mm rocket by using computational fluid dynamics. IOP Conf Ser: Mater Sci Eng2020; 816: 012010.
10.
PostnikovAGChuykoVS. Methods for solving applied problems of exterior ballistics. Moscow: Zhukovsky Air Force Engineering Academy, 1979, p. 162.
11.
MihailescuCRadulescuMAComanF. The analysis of dispersion for trajectories of fire-extinguishing rocket. InRecent Advances in Fluid Mechanics and Heat & Mass Transfer. In: Proceedings of the 9th IASME/WSEAS International Conference on Fluid Mechanics & Aerodynamics (FMA 11), Florence, Italy, 2011, pp. 23–25.
12.
TrzunZVrdoljakMCajnerH. The effect of manufacturing quality on rocket precision. Aerospace2021; 8: 160.
13.
SarkisyanRS (ed.). Aerial unguided means of destruction. Moscow: Zhukovsky Air Force Engineering Academy, 1980, p. 368.
14.
DahlkeCWBatiukG. HYDRA 70 MK66 aerodynamics and roll analysis. US Army Missile Command, Technical report RD-SS: 90-6, 23July1990. Fort Belvoir, VA: Defense Technical Information Center.
15.
SychevAIMartisrosyanVGPereskokovVA. 80-mm aerial unguided rockets. Moscow: Moscow Aviation Institute, 2019, p. 76.
16.
LiuCZhouGShyyW, et al. Limitation principle for computational fluid dynamics. Shock Waves2019; 29: 1083–1102.
17.
KarniadakisGBeskokAAluruN. Microflows and nanoflows: fundamentals and simulation. London: Springer, 2005, p. 818.
18.
ZiaraniASAguileraRAlbertXC. Permeability of tight sand and shale formations: a dual mechanism approach for micro and nanodarcy reservoirs. In: SPE Canada unconventional resources conference, Virtual, 28 September–2 October 2020, pp. 1–37. Richardson, TX: OnePetro Physical.
19.
CusslerEL. Diffusion: mass transfer in fluid systems. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009, p. 647.
20.
FerzigerJHPericMStreetRL. Computational methods for fluid dynamics. London: Springer, 2020, p. 606.
21.
HinchEJ. Think before you compute: a prelude to computational fluid dynamics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2020, p. 243.
22.
ChungTJ. Computational fluid dynamics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010, p. 1058.
23.
JayantiS. Computational fluid dynamics for engineers and scientists. London: Springer, 2018, p. 411.
24.
YangZSchenkelM. Assessment of closed-wall wind tunnel blockage using CFD. SAE Technical paper 2004-01-0672, 8March2004. Warrendale, PA: SAE International.
25.
MuradNNaserJAlamF, et al. Simulation of vehicle A-pillar aerodynamics using various turbulence models. SAE Technical paper 2004-01-0231, 8March2004. Warrendale, PA: SAE International.
SobachkinADumnovG. Numerical basis of CAD-embedded CFD (NAFEMS World Congress 2013). Waltham, MA: SolidWorks, 2014, pp. 1–20.
28.
SadrehaghighiI. Error & uncertainty quantification within CFD. Annapolis, MD: Verification and Validation, 2023, p. 114.
29.
PhillipsTS. Residual-based discretization error estimation for computational fluid dynamics. PhD Thesis, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA, 2014.
30.
JasakH. Error analysis and estimation for the finite volume method with applications to fluid flows. PhD Thesis, Imperial College London, London, 1996.
31.
TysonWC. On numerical error estimation for the finite-volume method with an application to computational fluid dynamics. PhD Thesis, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA, 2018.
