Robust Algorithm Software for NACA 4-Digit Airfoil Shape Optimization Using the Adjoint Method
Source abstract
Abstract
Optimizing the aerodynamic shape of an airfoil is a critical concern in the aviation industry. The introduction of flexible airfoils has allowed the shape of the airfoil to vary, depending on the flight conditions. Therefore, in this study, we propose an algorithm that is capable of robustly optimizing the shape of the airfoil based on variable parameters of the airfoil and flight conditions. The proposed algorithm can be understood as an optimization method, which employs the adjoint method, a powerful tool for estimating the sensitivity of the model output to the input in numerous studies. From an aerodynamic perspective, the development of shape geometry is a crucial step in airfoil development. The study used NACA-4 digit airfoils as input for the initial assumption and the range of shape change. The optimal shape was found using the proposed algorithm by defining one NACA profile as the initial value and another NACA profile as the limit for the optimized shape, considering the aerodynamic coefficients and flight conditions. However, morphing airfoils have certain deformation limitations. As an innovation in the algorithm, bounds were defined for the shape change during optimization so that the result can be constructed within the capabilities of the morphing wing. These bounds can be adjusted (depending on the capabilities of the airfoils). To validate the proposed algorithm, the study compared it with a previous flow solver for the same airfoil.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Computational Fluid Dynamics and Aerodynamics · Fluid Dynamics and Turbulent Flows · Aeroelasticity and Vibration Control
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Computational Geometry Laboratory, Departamento de Engenharia Mecatrônica e de Sistemas Mecânicos, Escola Politécnica da Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo CEP 05508-030, Brazil
Funding
Petrobras/ANP/FUSP · CNPq · CAPES/PROAP
References (29)
Show source-provided references
1. Pulliam, T., Nemec, M., Holst, T., and Zingg, D. (2003, January 6–9). Comparison of evolutionary (genetic) algorithm and adjoint methods for multi-objective viscous airfoil optimizations. Proceedings of the 41st Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, Reno, NV, USA.10.2514/6.2003-298 ↗
2. Aerodynamic Shape Optimization Investigations of the Common Research Model Wing Benchmark10.2514/1.J053318 ↗
3. Tanabi, N., Barari, A., Vakilipour, S., and Tsuzuki, M.S.G. (2021, January 9–13). Inverse Designing Airfoil Aerodynamics in Compressible Flow by Target Pressure Distribution. Proceedings of the ICGG 2020-Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Geometry and Graphics, São Paulo, Brazil.10.1007/978-3-030-63403-2_28 ↗
4. Aerodynamic design via control theory10.1007/BF01061285 ↗
5. Lions, J.L. (1971). Optimal Control of Systems Governed by Partial Differential Equations, Springer.10.1007/978-3-642-65024-6 ↗
6. Mohammadi, B., and Pironneau, O. (2010). Applied Shape Optimization for Fluids, Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199546909.001.0001 ↗
7. Multi-point aerodynamic shape optimization of cars based on continuous adjoint10.1007/s00158-018-2091-3 ↗
8. Continuous adjoint approach for the Spalart-Allmaras model in aerodynamic optimization10.2514/1.J051307 ↗
9. Giles, M.B., Pierce, N.A., Giles, M., and Pierce, N. (July, January 29). Adjoint equations in CFD-Duality, boundary conditions and solution behaviour. Proceedings of the 13th Computational Fluid Dynamics Conference, Snowmass Village, CO, USA.
10. Giles, M.B., and Pierce, N.A. (1998). On the properties of solutions of the adjoint Euler equations. Numer. Methods Fluid Dyn. VI, 1–16.
11. Analytic adjoint solutions for the quasi-one-dimensional Euler equations10.1017/S0022112000002366 ↗
12. Numerical optimization design of wings by solving adjoint equations
13. Xie, L. (2002). Gradient-Based Optimum Aerodynamic Design Using Adjoint Methods, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University.
14. Shape Optimal-Design Using B-Splines10.1016/0045-7825(84)90132-4 ↗
15. The Effect of Initial Population Sampling on the Convergence of Multi-Objective Genetic Algorithms10.1007/978-3-540-85646-7_12 ↗
16. Separation control and efficiency improvement in a 2D diffuser by means of contoured cavities10.1016/j.euromechflu.2013.03.002 ↗
17. Use of multiple local recirculations to increase the efficiency in diffusers10.1016/j.euromechflu.2014.11.004 ↗
18. Telidetzki, K., Osusky, L., and Zingg, D.W. (2014, January 13–17). Application of jetstream to a suite of aerodynamic shape optimization problems. Proceedings of the 52nd Aerospace Sciences Meeting, National Harbor, MD, USA.10.2514/6.2014-0571 ↗
19. Amoignon, O., Hradil, J., and Navratil, J. (2014, January 13–17). Study of parameterizations in the project CEDESA. Proceedings of the 52nd Aerospace Sciences Meeting, National Harbor, MD, USA.10.2514/6.2014-0570 ↗
20. Carrier, G., Destarac, D., Dumont, A., Meheut, M., Salah El Din, I., Peter, J., Ben Khelil, S., Brezillon, J., and Pestana, M. (2014, January 13–17). Gradient-based aerodynamic optimization with the elsA software. Proceedings of the 52nd Aerospace Sciences Meeting, National Harbor, MD, USA.10.2514/6.2014-0568 ↗
21. A continuous adjoint formulation for the computation of topological and surface sensitivities of ducted flows10.1002/fld.1770 ↗
22. Adjoint methods for car aerodynamics
23. Multipoint and multi-objective aerodynamic shape optimization10.2514/1.10415 ↗
24. Schramm, M., Stoevesandt, B., and Peinke, J. (2016). Simulation and Optimization of an Airfoil with Leading Edge Slat, IOP Publishing.10.1088/1742-6596/753/2/022052 ↗
25. Aerodynamic shape optimization for natural laminar flow using a discrete-adjoint approach10.2514/1.J054940 ↗
26. Discrete adjoint aerodynamic shape optimization using symbolic analysis with OpenFEMflow10.1007/s00158-020-02799-7 ↗
27. A sequel to AUSM: AUSM+10.1006/jcph.1996.0256 ↗
28. A new flux splitting scheme10.1006/jcph.1993.1122 ↗
29. Roache, P.J. (1998). Verification and Validation in Computational Science and Engineering, Hermosa.