Best Practices for Aerospace

Aerodynamics
Peter Ewing
Agenda

Pre-processing

Geometry Origin/Import Geometry Prep Surface Mesh Volume Mesh

Solver Settings

Defining Flight Physics Setting Up Solvers

Post-processing
Automated Data Extraction

Plotting

Scenes

Automated Reporting
Agenda

Pre-processing

Geometry Origin/Import
STAR-CCM+ Parts
Geometries ultimately conglomerate in Parts
– Laser scans, extracted mesh topology
– External CAD modelers, e.g. CATIA, NX
– STAR-CCM+ 3D-CAD
– Mesh Operation Parts

Common Denominator: tessellated surfaces

– STL or surface meshes
• “dummy” or “flattened” surface meshes
– Discrete Mesh Operations
• Detached mesh operations are green
– 3D-CAD/CAD Parts
• Analytic representation, blue or solid grey

User should be aware of geometry quality

– Especially for “flattened” Parts!

STAR-CCM+ requires clean, closed geometry:

– To use Boolean operations
– To generate a volume mesh

Import Prep Surface Volume

CAD is Preferred

Aero surfaces & leading edges are

complex swept geometries
– These features matter!

Hierarchy of geometry fidelity :

– STAR-CCM+ 3D-CAD
– CAD-Clients

Direct Link
SolidWorks Parameter Transfer
– CAD Exchange
– X_B /X_T then STP/STEP
– DBS, STL, IGES

CAD geometry allows several

benefits over flattened parts
– Project to CAD
– CAD-based Mesh Operations
– Feature aligned meshing
STAR-CCM+ Bi-directional link
– Parametric design changes
• 3D-CAD and CAD-Clients
– Persistent Part naming
Import Prep Surface Volume
Agenda

Pre-processing

Geometry Origin/Import Geometry Prep

External Aerodynamics Geometry Preparation

Split the body into multiple Part Surfaces:

– Inflow/Outflow/Freestream definitions
– Allows tracking of physical convergence
DPW4 Geometry (upper)
– Trailing Edge for custom controls
• Rounded edges

DPW4 Geometry (lower)

3D RAE2822 Airfoil
for 2D simulation

Naming conventions enable filtering and efficient

identification, e.g.:
– 00 Inlet, 00 Outlet, 00 Freestream, etc.
– 01 Wing, 01 Body, 01 Tail, etc.
– 02 Symmetry Plane
– 03 Interface (Sliding or Overset) Filter selection box

Import Prep Surface Volume

Low-Speed Far-field Boundary Preparation
Pressure
Velocity Inlet
Atmospheric flight: Outflow
– Upstream boundary:
• Typically velocity inlet in a round/bullet shape
• Distance is 10-20 characteristic lengths
– Outflow boundary:
• Typically a outflow flat plane cut
Example bullet domain
• Distance is 20-40 characteristic lengths

Wind tunnel configurations should be matched:

– Duplicate the geometry
– Inlet distances typically set as free stream *
– Outlet distance should follow free stream distance
– Side walls typically set to symmetry *

* If inlet conditions are well measured, duplicate

Import Prep Surface Volume

Transonic Far-field Boundary Preparation
Freestream settings:
– Circular domain will use “Freestream” boundary condition
• Upstream position 20-30 characteristic length scales
• Downstream position 40-50 characteristic length scales
Freestream
Boundary

Body

Sample transonic circular domain

Wind tunnel sections can be difficult to reproduce

– Transonic wind tunnels typically have slatted configurations
– Simulations may contain shock reflections to disrupt upstream flow
– Unless specific configuration is well documented, run in Freestream
Import Prep Surface Volume
Supersonic and Hypersonic
Far-field Boundary Preparation
Upstream placed fairly close and aligned with shocks generated by
the body
– The shock should not interact with the freestream boundary

Outlet boundaries can either be Pressure Outlet or Freestream

– Hypersonic cases – Outlet can be set to “Pressure” field function to
extrapolate Pressure Outlet
Freestream

Body
Example of hypersonic domain for
Mach 12 sphere
Axis or Symmetry
Import Prep Surface Volume
Wrapping
What does it do?
– Enables fast turn-around of broken geometry
– Standard use case is for unification of assemblies of
“broken” (i.e. not clean and closed) Parts

How do I know if I should wrap?

– Inefficient control over the CAD or Parts are flattened
– Extensive* Surface Repair work is required:
• Inefficient (or no) control of CAD workflow
• Many CAD based-errors (e.g. too many pieces) to fix
efficiently in CAD
• Too many tessellation errors to efficiently fix in Surface
Repair
– Simulation fidelity is independent of intricate details
affected by Wrapper

Features worth investigating:

– Works well in the PBM structure
• Maintains Part Surface naming convention
• Operation can be “Detached” to create new Part
– Partial Wrapping
• Speeds up the wrapping process
– Project to CAD
Used by permission: Sikorsky / American Helicopter Society

Import Prep Surface Volume

STAR-CCM+ Surface Repair Comments
What does it do?
– Checks triangulations for valid clean/closed geometry
– Manipulate underlying triangulations (tessellations)
How do I know if I should Surface Repair?
– The underlying Part is not clean/closed manifold
– There is no control of the CAD to fix within CAD

If a Part Requires Repair:

– Don’t panic!
• Undo/Forward-do buttons
– Surface Repair can repair the parts:
• Up-to-date guide flags remaining fixes
• Create new Part Surfaces where needed
• Create new Part Curves where needed

Keep in Mind:
– It’s like sewing up a bundle of triangles: Connect dots, zip edges
– Goal is to create a manifold, air-tight surface

Import Prep Surface Volume

Agenda

Pre-processing

Geometry Origin/Import Geometry Prep Surface Mesh

Automated Surface Mesher Settings
Default settings

Automatic Surface Repair Model: ‘Off’

Surface Remesher Settings: Curvature=76

– Increase minimum face quality to 0.20

Surface mesher settings:

– Base Size to Characteristic Length/10, e.g.:
• Chord length/10
Chord/100
• Characteristic Body length/10
– Surface Curvature: 36 - 54
– Surface Growth Rate: 1.05 - 1.20
Growth = 1.05

Custom Surface Controls:

– Edge proximity on bodies to 3
– Lifting Surfaces:
• Basic Curvature to 76 Proximity
• Growth rate to 1.05 - 1.10
• Target Size: Chord/100
– Trailing Edges: Minimum Target Size to
¼ of t.e. thickness
NACA0010
– Inlet/Outlet/Freestream/Symmetry Boundaries:
• Target Surface Size to be at least characteristic
length Import Prep Surface Volume
Agenda

Pre-processing

Geometry Origin/Import Geometry Prep Surface Mesh Volume Mesh

Quasi-2D Core Volume Mesh Models
2D Automated Meshing (PBM):
– Requires an initial 3D body
• 2D section lies on z-axis
• Does not need to be CAD
– Applications:
• Airfoil analyses
• Test mesh settings
• Testing of physics settings
• Supersonic 2D/Axisymmetric
NLF-0416

Directed Mesher (PBM):

– Ordered style grids
– High quality grids for supersonic flows
– Best practice topology for hypersonic cases
– Requires an initial 3D CAD body
– Workflow tip:
• Split patches in the CAD-Client or in 3D-CAD
• On Geometry transfer, choose “All CAD Edges” option
• Choose to “Initialize Patches by CAD Edge”
• Allows for macro automation 2D Axisymmetric
Hypersonic bi-conic

Import Prep Surface Volume

Core Volume Mesh Models

Trimmer or Polyhedral are both acceptable

topologies
– Refinement in flow regions of interest are key to
capturing flow features in the simulation

Polyhedral mesh:
– Aerospace cases mesh in serial
– Pseudo-random orientation of faces
reduces numerical dissipation
– Smooth growth away from bodies
– Optimizer can increase mesh quality Lockheed Martin Public Release: ORL201102002

– Prefer to control mesh based solely on remeshed surface

• Volume controls to catch the hard spots

Trimmer mesh model:

– Massively parallel
– Faster, requires less memory
– Aligning the trimmer mesh model to the main flow
directions can reduce numerical dissipation
– Mesh refinement/coarsening in factors of 2
• Use of volume control to control location of transitions
Import Prep Surface Volume
Polyhedral meshing for Aerospace
Polyhedral Mesher Settings
– Growth Rate: Can be ‘off’ or ‘on’
• Reduces cell count between geometry gaps
– Optimization Cycles
• Increase Optimization cycles to 1-4
• Effective in aiding Adjoint case convergence

Polyhedral Controls
– If Volume Growth Rate ‘On’
• Volume Growth Rate to 1.2
• Maximum cell size to characteristic length Growth Rate On
Off
– Mesh Density
• Leave at defaults
– If a volume control exists in the mesh
• Volumetric Control Blending to 0.5

Import Prep Surface Volume

Trimmer Mesher Settings
Trimmer Mesh Model Settings
– Typically left at defaults
– Mesh in parallel

Typical control settings

– Volume Growth Rate
• Slow to Very Slow
– Maximum Cell Size to characteristic
length
– Maximum Core/Prism Transition Ratio
• Anywhere between 2-5

Import Prep Surface Volume

Prism Layer Mesher Model
Settings:
– Stretching function: Hyperbolic Tangent
– Stretching Mode: Wall Thickness
– Minimum Thickness Percentage: 0.01
– Layer Reduction Percentage: 0.0
• Make conformal prisms in all layers
– Near Core Layer Aspect Ratio: =<1.0
• Typically set to 1.0 or 0.75
Requires two inputs:
– Wall Thickness
– Prism Layer Total Height RAE2822 Airfoil
– Translation:
• Wall Thickness = a “low y+ mesh” or “high y+ mesh”
• Prism Layer Total Height = Boundary Layer Thickness

HLPW4

Import Prep Surface Volume

“High y+ mesh” vs. “Low y+ mesh”

High y+ mesh notes:

– Sub layer and buffer region is modelled by one grid cell
25
• Wall y+ value should be > 30 Viscous
sublayer Buffer-layer Log-layer Defect-layer

• Wall y+ value < 300.0 20

– Typically has 8-14 prism layers 15

U+
– Implicitly assumes that the boundary layer is turbulent 10
and will try to reproduce the log layer behavior
5

Low y+ mesh notes: 0

1 10 100
Y+
– Attempt to integrate/resolve entire boundary layer
• Wall y+ value should be ~< 1
– Values << 1.0 will not improve results Low y+: High y+:
• Should not be > 5.0 First grid point First grid point
– Has at least 10 prisms in y+ < 30 region
– Typically 24-32 prism layers
– Flows that are not modelled with a transition model should
not be taken as predictive transition modelling
– Explicitly model the trip on tripped boundary layers

Import Prep Surface Volume

Prism Layer Techniques for Trailing Edges
(or Hypersonic Leading Edges)

Knife-edges lead to cells with high skewness angles

– High skewness angles create numerical instabilities
– Counter is to create refinements on the edge

O-Grid, Retract

O-Grid, No Retract

Custom Surface Settings on Trailing Edges TE Custom Settings

– Create models with finite trailing edges

– Use Prism Layer Thickness Reduction
• Avoids prism layer collapse on trailing edges
• Avoids oddly shaped cells in the rear

Import Prep Surface Volume

Automated Mesh Refinement
STAR-CCM+ can perform automated mesh
refinement :
– Table based refinement
• Custom Field Function metric for refinement
Solution based refinement
• Tabulate cell size refinement metric
Initial

– JAVA macro-driven volumetric control

• Conceptually, flow field contains arbitrary
cells that contain refinement metrics
• Threshold Derived Parts are exported as STL files Remesh 1
• STL files can be wrapped to create volumetric control

– New Feature in 10.02 – Adjoint based mesh refinement

• JAVA macro can drive adjoint-based mesh refinement Remesh 2

Original Refined

Blunt Nose*; Mach 6.8; AoA 20

*Courtesy Lockheed Martin
Missiles & Fire Control

AGARD RAE 2822 Adjoint Refinement Physics Solvers

Agenda

Pre-processing

Geometry Origin/Import Geometry Prep Surface Mesh Volume Mesh

Solver Settings

Defining Flight Physics

Turbulence: RANS

RANS – Reynolds Averaged Navier Stokes HLPW4

– Most common choice for external aerodynamics
• Robust, well studied
• Steady state simulations: 2D, Axisymmetric, 3D
• Obtains the average of all resolved flow features
– Extra equations add a turbulent viscosity to the
dynamic viscosity in the Navier-Stokes Equations

– − is the turbulence model of choice

NLF-0416
• Enables use of − , − transition model
• Does not preclude the use of − and its variants
– “All y+” wall model is the preferred choice
– Boundary conditions:
• Typically left as default, but can use measured values
• Decay of inflow turbulent quantities can be mitigated
by activating the Ambient Source Term (ASM)
– Do not use with the transition model
– Solver settings:
• Not uncommon to increase Turbulent Viscosity Limiter, e.g.:
1e8 Physics Solvers
Unsteady Turbulence: URANS vs DES vs LES

URANS – Unsteady Reynolds Averaged Navier

Stokes
– Run in 2D, Axisymmetric, 3D
– Adds unsteady term to the RANS equations
– Common choice for rotor performance
• Sliding mesh setup
• About 2 degrees per time step
– If nothing dynamically changes about the geometric
configuration during the simulation, risks reverting to Rotor wake from a ROBIN body
RANS

DES –Detached Eddy Simulation

– Legitimate in 3D simulations, always unsteady
– Popular choice for performance simulations
• Not prohibitively more expensive than 3D URANS
• IDDES = Improved Delayed DES
– default mode TLG: DES Buffeting analysis
2012 STAR Global Conference Talk
– modern method
– Blend of RANS and Large Eddy Simulation
• RANS near-wall, LES everywhere else Physics Solvers
• Far less turbulent viscosity in the LES regions
Turbulence: LES and Laminar

LES – Large Eddy Simulation

– Legitimate in 3D simulations, always unsteady
– Not particularly popular choice in external aero
• More expensive than RANS and DES
– High mesh counts required near walls
– Needed to properly resolve structures of
transitioning flows
2012 STAR Korean Conference: Satish Kumar B. et al.
“Transition flow and aero-acoustic analysis of NACA0018”

Laminar
– Navier Stokes Equations solved directly
without any turbulence model
– Low-speed to supersonic simulations will
not likely use this
– Hypersonic simulations that are not
interested in boundary layer will choose
in conjunction with a high y+ (>100) mesh
ALM: Bow shocks on re-entry of the Crew Exploration Vehicle

Physics Solvers
What can you get in a 2D vs. 3D simulation?

2D Simulation Enables:
– Fast testing for unknown physics phenomena
• Shock position for grid refinement
• Solver settings
– Simulations for 3D axisymmetric shapes
– RANS/URANS turbulence modelling
• Transition location using − , − _
• Onset of trailing edge stall

3D Simulation Enables:
– RANS, URANS, DES, LES
– Complex geometry interactions
– Stall Prediction

Physics Solvers
 Unsteady Time Stepping

Key Idea: Simulating a continuously transient behavior in a discrete

fashion

U(t)

T/20 is a
Time (t) good start

2015: STAR Global : Overset with Zero Gap Demo

Physics Solvers
Agenda

Pre-processing

Geometry Origin/Import Geometry Prep Surface Mesh Volume Mesh

Solver Settings

Defining Flight Physics Setting Up Solvers

Physics Continuum Solver Choice
Low Speed: High Speed:
P weak function P strong function
of r, T of r, T

Segregated Solver Coupled Solver

– SIMPLE
– Continuity and momentum yield
a pressure-correction equation
– Mildly compressible flows, but not
appropriate for shock capturing
– Flow regimes:
• Incompressible
• Low speed
• High speed, subsonic; Mach < ~0.5
– Consider local flow Mach
numbers!
– Lower memory requirements, faster
than Coupled solver
– Continuity, momentum, energy are
solved simultaneously
– Equation of state yields pressure
– Flow regimes:
• Incompressible
• Low speed
• High speed, subsonic; Mach < ~0.5
• All other flow speeds for Mach > ~0.5
– Designed for hyperbolic nature of
equations and shocks
– Higher memory requirements
Physics Solvers
Solver Settings: Incompressible to Ma<0.5

If Using the Segregated Solver

– Simulations that use this solver should start with good initial conditions
• Constant velocity in the direction of the flow
• Smoothly ramping velocity from wall using field function
• Constant temperature set to flow conditions
• Turbulent quantities are typically default
– URFs are typically not ramped
• Rotor cases typically ramp or step RPM
– Unsteady simulation initialization
• Begin from steady state RANS solution
• Turn on Unsteady Solver

If Using the Coupled Solver

– Roe FDS
– Initial condition:
• Constant velocity in direction of flow
• Constant temperature set to flow conditions
– CFL: 20-50
– Grid Sequencing Initialization ‘On’
– Expert Driver ‘On’
Physics Solvers
Solver Settings: Transonic to Supersonic

Coupled Solver Suggested Settings:

– Transonic (0.5 < Ma < 1.0):
• Roe FDS if no local Ma > 1.0
• CFL from 5.0 to 50.0
– Supersonic (1.0 < Ma < 4.0):
• AUSM+
• CFL from 5.0 to 20.0, 20/Ma
– Grid Sequencing Initialization
• Turn on
– Expert Driver to ‘On’
– If no Expert Driver:
• Ramp CFL from 1 to 1000
• Ratio of CFL Number : Explicit relaxation factor =
3:1

Physics Solvers
Solver Settings: Hypersonic (Ma > 4)

Implicit Coupled Solver Suggested Settings:

– Typical CFL ~ 1.0-5.0
– Grid Sequencing Initialization
– Expert Driver
• Ramp CFL from 1 to 1000
– CCA Turned On
– If no Expert Driver:
• Ramp CFL from 1 to 1000 Mach 6.77 blunt cone: NASA TN-D1606

• Ratio of CFL Number : Explicit relaxation factor =

3:1

Physics Continuum Settings:

– AUSM+
– May choose gradient reconstruction
value between 1.0 and 2.0
• Sometimes an almost 2nd order will converge Mach 16 Shock-shock
Mach 11.3 Blunt Biconic
interaction on a cylinder

Physics Solvers
Grid Sequencing Initialization (GSI)
Wrapped Rocket GSI
After
Initial GSI
Condition
GSI Input:
– Physics Continuum Initial Conditions
1000 Iterations
How it Works:
– Runs the Euler equations on successively
refined series of grids, from coarse grid to
finest (real) grid

Result:
– Field starts at near-flight conditions

Recommended Settings:
– Sweeps per grid level = 200
– Tolerance = 0.005

Notes
– No reason for special velocity initial
conditions
– Develops preliminary shock locations
Physics Solvers
Continuity Convergence Accelerator
“Continuity Convergence Acceleration of
When: a Density-Based Coupled Algorithm,”
– High Mach number aerodynamic cases Caraeni et al., AIAA Fluid Dynamics
Conference, 24 - 27 June 2013, San
Diego, CA
CCA Input:
– Updated Coupled Solver flow field
With CCA
How it works:
– Solves an elliptic equation for pressure corrections
– Updates the cell pressures (w/underrelaxation)
– Corrects the face mass fluxes and cell velocities
– Updates density, total enthalpy, etc. appropriately Without CCA

Results:
– Can result in faster convergence for stiff problems
• Mixed high Mach and low Mach numbers
• Internal compressible flows
• Temperature dependent properties

Settings:
– URF typically set 0.1 - 0.3

Physics Solvers
Agenda

Pre-processing

Geometry Origin/Import Geometry Prep Surface Mesh Volume Mesh

Solver Settings

Defining Flight Physics Setting Up Solvers

Post-processing
Automated Data Extraction

Plotting

Scenes

Automated Reporting
Interpreting the Residuals
Mission statement: Simulations should be as accurate as possible.
– Residual values are a global metric of convergence

– Local convergence may get lost when only using residual values

Residuals are used as a metric to judge overall quality of the simulation

Used in both steady and unsteady simulations

Example Residual Plots:

Steady Unsteady Post

Checking Convergence with Engineering
Criteria
Both Steady and Unsteady Simulations

Create Plots of Quantitative Data

– Skin Friction Coefficient
– Mass imbalance (especially for high speed flows)
– Lift
– Drag
– Moments

Plot versus inner iteration, make sure

metrics asymptotically converge onto a
value
– For steady simulations, asymptotic behavior
– For unsteady simulations, asymptotic behavior
within the prescribed time step’s iterations

Post
Optimate & External Aero

Requires additional planning up front

– Testing CAD robustness
– Post-processing change in data sets
• Use JAVA to drive changes

Benefits:
– Automated sweeps
• 3D-CAD parameterization
• CAD-client bi-directional capability
– Fire-and-forget
– Reduces burden on heavy scripting
• Small pieces of JAVA can be inserted into process
– Rotating the coordinate systems
– Visualization of large data sets
• Post-processing is collected in single tool
• Visualize multi-variable interactions

Post
Post-Process Interactively on a Cluster
Common practice to post-/troubleshoot on special big-memory
machines
– External aerodynamics cases can be more than 20M cells
– Difficult to run multiple iterations for troubleshooting purposes
• Download, identify mesh issues, remesh, re-submit to queue,
crash, re-download, make rhetorical statement: “There’s got to be another way.”

STAR-CCM+ client-server architecture

– Data is post-processed by parallel cores
– Visualization on workstation graphics

Benefits:
– Increased framerates
– Volume rendering
– Line Integral Convolutions
28.8M cell DPW4 model on 4 nodes @ 64 cores
Client location: Los Angeles, CA
Server location: Detroit, MI
Post
Agenda

Pre-processing

Geometry Origin/Import Geometry Prep Surface Mesh Volume Mesh

Solver Settings

Defining Flight Physics Setting Up Solvers

Post-processing
Automated Data Extraction

Plotting

Scenes

Automated Reporting
Thank You

Time for any questions