Matching Items (1)
Description
The process of designing any real world blunt leading-edge wing is tedious andinvolves hundreds, if not thousands, of design iterations to narrow down a single design.
Add in the complexities of supersonic flow and the challenge increases exponentially.
One possible, and often common, pathway for this design is to jump straight into detailed
volume grid computational fluid dynamics (CFD), in which the physics of supersonic
flow are modeled directly but at a high computational cost and thus an incredibly long
design process. Classical aerodynamics experts have published work describing a process
which can be followed which might bypass the need for detailed CFD altogether.
This work outlines how successfully a simple vortex lattice panel method CFDcode can be used in the design process for a Mach 1.3 cruise speed airline wing concept.
Specifically, the success of the wing design is measured in its ability to operate subcritically (i.e. free of shock waves) even in a free stream flow which is faster than the
speed of sound. By using a modified version of Simple Sweep Theory, design goals are
described almost entirely based on defined critical pressure coefficients and critical Mach
numbers. The marks of a well-designed wing are discussed in depth and how these traits
will naturally lend themselves to a well-suited supersonic wing.
Unfortunately, inconsistencies with the published work are revealed by detailedCFD validation runs to be extensive and large in magnitude. These inconsistencies likely
have roots in several concepts related to supersonic compressible flow which are
explored in detail. The conclusion is made that the theory referenced in this work by the
classical aerodynamicists is incorrect and/or incomplete. The true explanation for the
perplexing shock wave phenomenon observed certainly lies in some convolution of the
factors discussed in this thesis. Much work can still be performed in the way of creating
an empirical model for shock wave formation across a highly swept wing with blunt
leading-edge airfoils.
Add in the complexities of supersonic flow and the challenge increases exponentially.
One possible, and often common, pathway for this design is to jump straight into detailed
volume grid computational fluid dynamics (CFD), in which the physics of supersonic
flow are modeled directly but at a high computational cost and thus an incredibly long
design process. Classical aerodynamics experts have published work describing a process
which can be followed which might bypass the need for detailed CFD altogether.
This work outlines how successfully a simple vortex lattice panel method CFDcode can be used in the design process for a Mach 1.3 cruise speed airline wing concept.
Specifically, the success of the wing design is measured in its ability to operate subcritically (i.e. free of shock waves) even in a free stream flow which is faster than the
speed of sound. By using a modified version of Simple Sweep Theory, design goals are
described almost entirely based on defined critical pressure coefficients and critical Mach
numbers. The marks of a well-designed wing are discussed in depth and how these traits
will naturally lend themselves to a well-suited supersonic wing.
Unfortunately, inconsistencies with the published work are revealed by detailedCFD validation runs to be extensive and large in magnitude. These inconsistencies likely
have roots in several concepts related to supersonic compressible flow which are
explored in detail. The conclusion is made that the theory referenced in this work by the
classical aerodynamicists is incorrect and/or incomplete. The true explanation for the
perplexing shock wave phenomenon observed certainly lies in some convolution of the
factors discussed in this thesis. Much work can still be performed in the way of creating
an empirical model for shock wave formation across a highly swept wing with blunt
leading-edge airfoils.
ContributorsKurus, Noah John (Author) / Takahashi, Timothy (Thesis advisor) / Benson, David (Committee member) / Niemczyk, Mary (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2020