Aerodynamic Simulation using STAR-CCM+ Viscous CFD Code Validation 19 March 2013 CD-adapco STAR-CCM+ Code Validation Efforts Kenneth E. Xiques CRM Solutions 4092 Memorial Pkwy SW, Suite 200 Huntsville, AL 35803
Objectives Validate/Verify and Apply Cart3D, Loci/CHEM and STAR-CCM+ CFD codes Loci/CHEM is a research code developed by Mississippi State STAR-CCM+ is a Commercial code developed by CD-adapco Cart3D is a Cartesian Euler code developed by Nasa Ames Test geometry repair and grid generation capabilities Test range and power of Physics models Viscous modeling, Turbulence Models, Non-Newtonian Fluids Moving bodies (6 dof) Propulsion, Chemically Reacting Flows, Real Gas Determine level of required expertise for productivity Ease of use and practicality Test efficiency and accuracy in prediction of aerodynamics for complex geometries
Primary Questions Is prediction of aerodynamics over complex missile geometries using RANS CFD codes possible and practical in a production environment? What are the computational resource and manpower requirements to perform such analyses? Can Viscous CFD be performed efficiently and accurately within current resource constraints without relying on CFD specialists? Can STAR-CCM+ attack a broader range of problems than available with current in-house software? Would such analyses enhance the range and accuracy of CFD data produced at CRM for current customers?
Analysis Criteria Perform analysis in most general form without refinement based on CFD experience How much expertise does it require Determine the relative robustness and accuracy that can be achieved with relatively simple, canned approaches Establish standard practices and procedures for problem types Limit time, computer resources and expertise required to go from CAD to database delivery of analysis within the required accuracy constraints.
CRM Linux Cluster 600 Intel Cores, 7TB Disk Space, Redhat RHEL O/S 130 Dell 1955 Blades 2 Intel dual core Xeon processors 4 cores per blade 16 GB memory per blade 10 Dell M600 blades 2 Intel quad core Xeon processors 8 cores per blade 16 GB memory per blade 7 TB disk space in Raid 5-0 2 x Dell PowerVault MD1000 Diskless configuration 3 x Dell 1950 file servers RedHat Enterprise Linux
Metis Geometry
Metis Computational Grid Plane Section
METIS Grid Mid-Body Plane Section
METIS Tail Grid
METIS Surface Mesh
METIS Surface Mesh - Feature Curves
METIS(d0) Mach Contours M=0.7, 0 deg aoa (Rho, KOM)
Gear Mach Contours with Mesh M=0.26, 0 deg aoa (Rho, KOM)
Gear Mach Contours M=0.26, 0 deg aoa (RHO,Lam)
Gear Mach Contours with Mesh (body) M=0.26, 0 deg aoa (Rho, Lam)
Scud B Jet Vane Effectiveness study
SCUD B Missile Geometry
SCUD B Missile Jet Vanes Geometry
Scud Run Matrix
SCUD B Surface Mesh
SCUD B Surface Mesh (nozzle)
SCUD B Surface Mesh (tail)
SCUD B Mach Contours M=3 STAR-CCM+
SCUD B Mach Contours M=3
SCUD B Mach Contours M=3 45 deg. plane
SCUD B Gauge Press (clipped) M=3 STAR-CCM+
A53D02 Missile Geometry
Nose Surface Mesh
Tail Surface Mesh
Fin Surface Mesh
Nose Grid
Tail Grid
Mach Contours Mach 0.9
Temp Contours Mach 0.9
Mach Contours - Mach 3
Temp Contours - Mach 3
Mach Contours - Mach 10
CFD Code Comparison for Drag
Finner Geometry
Nose Mesh
Tail Grid
Forebody Grid
Mach Contours Mach 0.9
Mach Contours Mach 0.9
Temp Contours Mach 0.9
Mach Contours Mach 2.03
Drag Coefficient Finner CFD Drag Data 1.4 1.2 1 0.8 Star_Total 0.6 Star_BSE Star_Shear 0.4 LC_Total 0.2 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Mach
Finner Experimental Drag Data
FM3 Geometry
FM3 Computational Grid
FM3 Surface Grid Nose
FM3 Surface Grid Canard
FM3 Surface Grid Slot
FM3 Surface Grid Tail
FM3 Surface Grid Tail
FM3(d0) Mach Contours with Mesh M=2.0, 0 deg aoa (Rho, KOM)
FM3(d0) Temp Contours M=1.6, 0 deg aoa (Rho, KOM)
FM3(d15) Mach 1.6 Contours 3 deg aoa (Rho, KOM)
Drag Coefficient FM3(d0) CFD Drag Data 1.4 1.2 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 POLYS TETS LC SHEAR P SHEAR T 0.2 0 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 Mach
Drag Coefficient FM3(d15) CFD Drag Data 1.4 1.2 1 0.8 0.6 POLYS TETS LC SHEAR P SHEAR T 0.4 0.2 0 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 Mach
Conclusions STAR-CCM+ code is superior for CAD geometry repair, surface remeshing and initiating analysis (all codes tested were robust and accurate) The more difficult the geometry the greater the time advantage Can be mastered quickly by non-expert Grids can be used to feed other codes Requires sizable computational resources for most problems of interest Seamless switch to different Physics models and BC s Roe s scheme is unstable for Mach > 3 flows but very accurate for Mach < 3 AUSM+ scheme is very stable, robust and accurate Needs automated solution adaptation capability Superior solution monitoring and data reduction capabilities Important Physics models still under development
Future STAR-CCM+ Work Continue drag study Complete Missile run matrices using STAR-CCM+ Use Solution Adaptation Compare with available data Perform Moving body analyses for V/V work (Finner and Manpad) Compare with Available data Perform Heat Transfer Analyses (Blunt Body and Base Heating) Compare to Holden Data Perform Jet Interaction Problem (Binary Gas) Perform Jet Interaction Problem (Reacting Gas) Perform Store Separation Analysis (6-DOF) Acoustics Bombay Cavity (Acoustics, Store Separation, Fluid Structure) Landing Gear (fixed and Moving Body) Cavity Launch (Acoustics, Ventilation)