Rapid Parameterization Schemes for Aircraft Shape Optimization

Li, Wu

doi:10.2514/6.2012-964

Cited by 4 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…One important geometry constraint for a demonstrator concept (i.e., the fuselage and wing volume constraint for landing gear) is not considered in this study. Vehicle Sketch Pad (OpenVSP) 43 is used to generate the initial geometry concepts and a shape morphing tool PROTEUS 44 is used for design changes in CFDbased shape optimization. Analytical methods in FLOPS 42 are used to estimate CG of the notional concept in this paper.…”

Section: Figure 1 Openvsp Model For a V-tail Supersonic Low-boom Demmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The wing and tail camber surfaces were remodeled as parametric geometry shapes with 9 and 5 design variables, respectively, using the shape morphing tool PROTEUS. 44 To match the mixed-fidelity equivalent area to the target, a numerical optimization was performed using 14 design variables and CFD surface pressure solutions.. The matching result is shown in Fig.…”

Section: Matching Trim-feasible Low-boom Targetmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Feasibility of Supersonic Aircraft Concepts for Low-Boom and Flight Trim Constraints

2015

33rd AIAA Applied Aerodynamics Conference

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper documents a process for analyzing whether a particular supersonic aircraft configuration layout and a given cruise condition are feasible to achieve a trimmed lowboom design. This process was motivated by the need to know whether a particular configuration at a given cruise condition could be reshaped to satisfy both low-boom and flight trim constraints. Without such a process, much effort could be wasted on shaping a configuration layout at a cruise condition that could never satisfy both low-boom and flight trim constraints simultaneously. The process helps to exclude infeasible configuration layouts with minimum effort and allows a designer to develop trimmed low-boom concepts more effectively. A notional low-boom supersonic demonstrator concept is used to illustrate the analysis/design process.

show abstract

Section: Figure 1 Openvsp Model For a V-tail Supersonic Low-boom Demmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Matching Trim-feasible Low-boom Targetmentioning

confidence: 99%

Feasibility of Supersonic Aircraft Concepts for Low-Boom and Flight Trim Constraints

2015

33rd AIAA Applied Aerodynamics Conference

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The focus of the paper is the group of tools at the top of Fig. 1 labeled SUPIN2HRM, BOSS [4], PROTEUS [5], and AST [6], as well as their applications. These tools have been developed to enhance the geometry modeling capability of VSP for design and analysis of low-boom and low-drag supersonic aircraft concepts.…”

Section: Geometry Modeling Processmentioning

confidence: 99%

Advanced Usage of Vehicle Sketch Pad for CFD-Based Conceptual Design

Ordaz

2013

51st AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting Including the New Horizons Forum and Aerospace Exposition

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Conceptual design is the most fluid phase of aircraft design. It is important to be able to perform large scale design space exploration of candidate concepts that can achieve the design intent to avoid more costly configuration changes in later stages of design. This also means that conceptual design is highly dependent on the disciplinary analysis tools to capture the underlying physics accurately. The required level of analysis fidelity can vary greatly depending on the application. Vehicle Sketch Pad (VSP) allows the designer to easily construct aircraft concepts and make changes as the design matures. More recent development efforts have enabled VSP to bridge the gap to high-fidelity analysis disciplines such as computational fluid dynamics and structural modeling for finite element analysis. This paper focuses on the current state-of-the-art geometry modeling for the automated process of analysis and design of low-boom supersonic concepts using VSP and several capability-enhancing design tools. = reversed equivalent area γ = ratio of specific heat P = dimensional pressure P * = non-dimensional pressure P ∞ = free-stream pressure X e = equivalent length Nomenclature

show abstract

“…Lastly, the spanwise location (var8) of the midspan airfoil section was allowed to vary. A rapid shape parameterization tool called Proteus [20] was used to implement this parametric scheme. The initial design variables that correspond to baselines #1 and #2, as well as the design variable ranges, are given in the appendix in tables A-1 and A-2, respectively.…”

Section: Formulation Of the Optimization Problemmentioning

confidence: 99%

Adaptive Aft Signature Shaping of a Low-Boom Supersonic Aircraft Using Off-Body Pressures

Ordaz

2012

50th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting Including the New Horizons Forum and Aerospace Exposition

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The design and optimization of a low-boom supersonic aircraft using the state-of-theart off-body aerodynamics and sonic boom analysis has long been a challenging problem. The focus of this paper is to demonstrate an effective geometry parameterization scheme and a numerical optimization approach for the aft shaping of a low-boom supersonic aircraft using off-body pressure calculations. A gradient-based numerical optimization algorithm that models the objective and constraints as response surface equations is used to drive the aft ground signature toward a ramp shape. The design objective is the minimization of the variation between the ground signature and the target signature subject to several geometric and signature constraints. The target signature is computed by using a least-squares regression of the aft portion of the ground signature. The parameterization and the deformation of the geometry is performed with a NASA inhouse shaping tool. The optimization algorithm uses the shaping tool to drive the geometric deformation of a horizontal tail with a parameterization scheme that consists of seven camber design variables and an additional design variable that describes the spanwise location of the midspan section. The demonstration cases show that numerical optimization using the state-of-the-art off-body aerodynamic calculations is not only feasible and repeatable but also allows the exploration of complex design spaces for which a knowledge-based design method becomes less effective. Nomenclature Acronyms BOSS= boom optimization using smoothest shape (a computer code for low-boom design) CFD = computational fluid dynamics DFO = derivative-free optimization DOE = design of experiments GBO = gradient-based optimization PLdB = perceived loudness in decibels psf = pounds per square foot Symbols C L = coefficient of lift dp/p = near-field pressure waveform X e = equivalent length

show abstract

Rapid Parameterization Schemes for Aircraft Shape Optimization

Cited by 4 publications

References 12 publications

Feasibility of Supersonic Aircraft Concepts for Low-Boom and Flight Trim Constraints

Feasibility of Supersonic Aircraft Concepts for Low-Boom and Flight Trim Constraints

Advanced Usage of Vehicle Sketch Pad for CFD-Based Conceptual Design

Adaptive Aft Signature Shaping of a Low-Boom Supersonic Aircraft Using Off-Body Pressures

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About