Role and Importance of Experimental and Computational Fluid Dynamics Capabilities In the United...
-
Upload
victor-knight -
Category
Documents
-
view
217 -
download
0
Transcript of Role and Importance of Experimental and Computational Fluid Dynamics Capabilities In the United...
1
Role and Importance of Experimental and Computational Fluid Dynamics Capabilities In
the United States Aerospace Industry Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation Process
Working Draft by Dunn March 1, 2015
2
Content
Subject Slide # Problem 3Environment 4Vision for 2030 5Approach 6Background 7-13Progress at SciTech and Path Forward 14-17Tracking Progress 18Note on Engagement 19ReferencesBackup Slides
3
Problem
The development of new or updated aerospace products in the United States requires robust national science and technology (S&T) research that feeds a development, test, and evaluation (DT&E) process for that new product. The fundamental experimental and computational tools of both the S&T and DT&E processes are not well coordinated at a National level. This puts capabilities at risk (degraded performance or closure) and forces use of tools by researchers and developers that inadequately manage risk.
There is a need to define the integrated S&T and DT&E capabilities required to support the nation’s needs through the year 2030 and to ensure that national stakeholders and decision makers understand how this works and why it is important.
4
S&T and DT&E Tools: Environment1. Experimental ground test capabilities in the United States, in many cases still at or
among the best in the world, are at risk.2. Tightening budgets and reduced workload has driven the closure of excess capacity
and, in some cases, loss of National capability.a. Capability sustainment decisions are increasingly being made with one to two
year outlooks and often using local budgets that are static or shrinking. (It is expensive to operate and maintain large ground test facilities.)
b. Aerospace research budgets in government, industry, and academia are at risk and have significantly declined over the last 30 years.
c. Experimental workload has decreased due to government budget constraints, industry consolidation, and the changing nature of the RDT&E process utilization of computational methods.
3. NASA capabilities are being focused on NASA direct mission support; support of technologies currently aligned with primarily military application is being limited.
4. Expenses for ground testing facilities are often charged directly to customers while expenses for computational capabilities are often highly subsidized.
5. There is widespread misunderstanding regarding the ability of computational methods to predict actual aerodynamic behavior, leading to the belief that experimental capabilities are no longer needed.
5
Vision for 2030S&T and DT&E computational and experimental tools are used to design to and measure against defined requirements. Over time, many new aerospace products have become more complex, trying to address multiple needs on a single platform, often with changing requirements. DT&E life cycles have increased, often with significant defects found late, impacting time and cost.
The vision for 2030 is that:• Research has provided usable new technologies,• New or updated product requirements are stable early,• The right tools are available and used in an integrated manner to
develop and deliver a product in a timely and cost effective manner,
• Risks are identified and mitigated to acceptable levels early in the DT&E life cycle, and
• New or updated product development occurs within a total systems engineering construct.
6
ApproachAccomplish a national effort that defines the appropriate S&T and DT&E tools and processes required to support a robust (cost effective, timely, at needed quality) range of new aerospace product developments. Develop a map out to the year 2030 that defines specific actions to be taken in terms of:
• Computational fluid dynamics,• Experimental fluid dynamics, including both ground and flight
testing, • Risk management, related to both research and specific products
across the DT&E life cycle, and• Assimilation with product total systems engineering.
A wealth of information (reports, studies, papers) already exists that this effort can draw on to build an integrated vision. Utilize these sources to produce a formal document and associated briefing by the end of FY16.
7
Background
The next several slides provide background:
• Research S&T “Engine”• Product DT&E life cycle • Complementary EFD and CFD• Risk Management across the DT&E life cycle• Assimilation within the Total Product System
8
Research (S&T) Engine
Experimental Fluid Dynamics• Basic services infrastructure• Test capability infrastructure• Test techniques/capabilities• Measurement technologies• People trained & certified• Calibration and validation
Code Development• Software tools• Adaptation to purpose• Code validation• Skilled people• Compute infrastructure
Research Element: Can be aero-based or measurement/ capability/ technique – using EFD, CFD, lab or (likely) some combination. Includes researcher subject matter expertise.
Investments required to establish research capabilities
Research Element
Experimental Ground Test/ Laboratories
Computational Methods
System Integration
Prior Research
Prior Products
Experimental Ground Test/ Laboratories
Computational Methods
Prior Research
Prior ProductsScience & Technology
(S&T) Capabilities
9
Product Development (DT&E) Life Cycle
Multiple Research Elements, Systems
Research, and Prior Product
Knowledge Base
New Product
Exploration [Concept
Dev’mt and Selection
Product Devel’mt
Flight Test
Initial Production
Configure Form of Product
Integrated Req’mts
and Basic Concept
Integrated Model/
Code Devel’mt
Go/No-go Decision
Utilize EFD/CFD for Development, Test & Evaluation
Market Need
PRODUCT IDEA!Problem Cycle
Problem
Risk Management and Business Case
Develop Fix
Problem: Resulting from inadequate earlier risk management (hazard identification criticality, mitigation, and system integration)
TechnicalIntegrated performanceMarket need and forces (includes competition)
Includes economic climateRegulatory/government environmentFinancial
CapitalizationCost model, product life cycleRevenue model, life cycle
10
Experimental and Computational Tool Needs
Physics Needs
Dependencies
Experimental Capabilities
Com
puta
tiona
l Cap
abili
ties
Aero M
arke
tsan
d Miss
ions
How do we decompose this problem? Identify the required capabilities across the RDT&E life cycle for each major aero market area.
11
Experimental and Computational Development Co-dependencies (Example)Codes
Experimental
Aerodynamics Acoustics Aerothermo-dynamics
Hypersonic Air. Prop.
Materials & Structures
Measurem’t Flow Physics Flight Dynamics Crew Systems Simulators Laser/Lidar Aircraft Flight
Testing
Structures and Materials: Strong (A/E) Low Low Low Strong N/A Low N/A Low N/A Low
Finite Element Methods
Structural Dynamics
Damage Mechanics
Quantum Mechanics
Computational Chemistry
Molecular Dynamics
Physics codes: measurement science N/A N/A Low low Strong N/A Low N/A N/A N/A Low
Thermal
Ultrasonic
Optical (Gausian, Quantum Mechanics)
Electromagnetic
Radiation Transport (GRC)
Flow Physics (CFD codes): Strong Strong Strong Strong Strong (A/E) Strong N/A Low N/A N/A Strong
Navier-Stokes (multiple methods)
Acoustics (noise source/transmission)
Hyp Propulsion (CFD+Combustion)
Aeroelasticity / Aeroservoelasticity (A/E)
Aerothermodynamics
Flight Dynamics and Controls: Moderate N/A Moderate Moderate Low Low Strong Moderate Moderate N/A Strong
GN&C (System ID, Adaptive)
Flight Vehicle/Pilot simulation
CFD for Stability and Control
Aviation Operations: Low Low N/A N/A N/A N/A Strong Strong Strong Low Strong
Air Traffic System & ATM
Wake Vortex Turbulence & Weather
Flight Deck (Vision Sim, Flight Mgmt)
Multidisciplinary Codes: Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate N/A Moderate N/A N/A N/A Low
Systems Concepts
Multidisciplinary Analysis
Design Optimization
Earth’s Atmosphere & Climate Low N/A N/A N/A N/A Low N/A Low N/A Strong Strong
Radiative Transfer
Data Assimilation
Cloud Modeling
Chemistry-transport (gas & aerosol)
Atmospheric Trajectory Analysis
Source: "Integrated Strategy for LaRC Facilities and Laboratories", developed by Charles E. Harris, March 2012
Strong Moderate Low None or N/A
12
DT&E Life Cycle Risk Management
• Risk is managed over the DT&E life cycle WRT:– Complexity of what is being designed or developed– Maturity of design– Level of fidelity based on requirements definition
• If risk is poorly managed, defects migrate to later phases• Methodology to match EFD and CFD tools to risk scenarios
(Taken from Walker, et. al, 2015)
13
Total Product System Approaches
• The complexity and cost of developing, operating, and maintaining major aerospace systems is driving efforts by major producers and owners to manage products from “cradle to grave” using total system approaches; examples:– NASA’s Comprehensive Digital Transformation Plan, Strategic Space
Technology Investment Plan, and Virtual Research and Design (Digital Twin)
– USAF Digital Thread– [Industry examples . . .]
• The S&T and DT&E tools addressed in this effort typically are embedded as part of these comprehensive system life cycle management processesNEEDS W
ORK
14
Progress at SciTech and Path Forward1. The goal at SciTech was to expand the skill base to include computational
expertise, update the scope to define specific deliverables, and define detailed activities for the next six monthsa. Held two formal meetings and several planned one-on-one interactions to
develop support/advocacy and for integration with other efforts
2. Met with a combined CFD and EFD group to develop how we could work together, building on the CFD Vision 2030 reporta. Well attended and good interest in teaming; need a cross-cutting working group
3. Met for a full team meeting and mapped out plan and actions (more info on following three pages)a. EFD team to develop GT meta-analysis based on major publications assessing
the GT environment; defined specific actions to completeb. In parallel, assemble joint team to organize the approach for producing an
integrated assessment of EFD and CFD requirements across the RDT&E life cycle. Seeking funded effort.
c. AIAA cross-cutting team to develop information advocacy briefing for non-engineers based on report foundational info
15
Product 1: EFD (GT) Meta-Analysis1. Logistics
a. Writing team formed at SciTech from current working group membersb. Defined 18 reports/papers to review, including reviewers and a common
review format to support information synthesisc. Reviews planned to be complete by 31 March 2015d. A core writing team was formed to combine reviews and produce the
analysis. e. Draft document by June 1, 2015; complete for presentation at SciTech 2016
2. Form/Producta. Organize the information into a SWOT format (Strengths, Weaknesses,
Opportunities, Threats) assessment over time – project forward toward 2030.
b. Review the CFD Vision 2030 Report to map out primary needs for different product groups
c. Align the GT meta-analysis construct with the CFD Vision 2030 Report construct
d. Prepare a formal conference paper to document the findings.
16
Product 2: RDT&E EFD/CFD Vision 20301. Logistics
a. Form a core writing team and an advisory review team from multiple (related) technical communitiesi. Computational modeling/simulationii. Experimental ground testingiii. Experimental flight testingiv. Advanced measurement techniques
b. Proposing a funded effort with a National chair and significant participation from industry, academia, and government across the technical disciplines; CFD Vision 2030 report cost $350k
c. Builds on CFD Vision 2030 report, the GT meta-analysis, and other information sources. Discussions about possibly holding a workshop; TBD.i. Aligned with other efforts (i.e., DoD digital thread)
d. Define audience and expected report impact
2. Form/Producta. Start in Summer or Fall 2015; funding dependent.b. Support a panel discussion at AIAA SciTech 2015 Forum 360c. Produce a “reach for” reference report document for decision makers and
stakeholders
17
Product 3: RDT&E Information Advocacy Briefing1. Logistics
a. Build an information advocacy briefing on the technical foundation of the RDT&E EFD/CFD Vision 2030 report
b. Purpose is to educate about the importance of EFD and CFD capabilities in the new/updated product RDT&E process and the resulting aero industry role and contribution to the Nationi. Based on the expectation that most stakeholders and decision-makers don’t
understand the EFD/CFD tools required for the RDT&E processc. Communicates in forms financial and political (non-engineering) people can
understand and use – why this is important to themi. Interact with educator and political functionaries for advise, review, and input -- need
to produce in a form that will be understoodd. Produced by representatives from multiple AIAA TC’s (cannot be part of the
funded report effort)a. Utilize and support AIAA public policy function
2. Form/Producta. Product is sourced, peer-reviewed Powerpoint briefingb. Present at Aviation 2016 or SciTech 2017 Forum 360c. Disseminate for use across AIAA
18
Tracking Progress
1. This plan, including additional detail and periodic progress reports, will be posted on a website created to support this effort at: https://info.aiaa.org/tac/ASG/GTTC/Future%20of%20Ground%20Test%20Working%20Group/Forms/AllItems.aspx
2. Monthly progress phone calls will occur from March through the end of the 2015
3. Progress will be tracked by Dunn and interim work products will be posted on the website
Please direct any questions and/or comments to Dr. Steven Dunn at [email protected]
19
Note on Engaging
This could be great work and excellent reports and briefings – that nobody reads or uses.
We must define our audience – what stakeholders and decision-makers need this information to help with what they do?
Thus, we also must develop an engagement plan. Not just for the authors, major players, and “higher-ups”, but for how we can build a groundswell of support so people from all walks and stations will engage locally!
21
Aero Industry Markets
RESEARCH (Academia, Industry, Government)
FIXED WING
SPACE LAUNCH TRANSPORATION, SUBORBITAL TRANSPORTATION
MISSILES
UAVs
GEN. AVIATION
FIGHTERS, ISR, HS BOMBERS
ENTRY, DESCENT, LANDING FROM SPACE
SUBSONIC TRANSONIC SUPERSONIC HYPERSONIC0 0.7 1.2 5(Mach Number) 18+
ROTORCRAFT
Commercial Transports, Some Bombers
Annual Market* ($B)USA World
[Note: Where to include RDT&E capability investment and sustainment? Embedded or separate?]
XX.X
XX.X
X.X
XX.X
X.X
X.X
XX.X
XX.X
XX.XX.X
X.X XX.X
X.X XX.X
X.X XX.X
X.X X.X
XXX.XXXX.X
* Data Source: Teal Group/Aboulafia
22
Environment• Market (customer) needs• Safety requirements and expectations• Stovepiped national capabilities• Uncertain space strategy• Sluggish US economy• Gov’t regulation generally increasing• Uncertain gov’t economic policies
Forces• National defense and force projection needs• US and international competition• Speed to market• Minimalist budget thinking• Government vs. industry roles• Low initial cost vs. life cycle best value
Research New Product Development
US Economy
World Economy
Spin-offs (non-aero)- Technologies - New Products
Aerospace Industry Economic Engine
23
Why Is This Important?The aerospace/aeronautics industry is critical to the well-being of the United States in terms of the:• Economy
– Aviation (Civil and General)*o $1.3 trillion in total U.S. economic activityo 10.2 million direct and indirect jobso $47.2B positive trade balanceo >5% of USA GDPo >$1.5 Trillion in freight transport per year
– Aerospace Total**– $63.5B positive trade balance
• National defense– Provides for many of the strategic and tactical needs of the warfighter, including strike; air superiority;
command, control, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance; and airlift– Homeland defense and security (air and space)– Initial product/capability development before transitioning to commercial applications
• Quality of life– Aviation safety– Provides a key component to disaster recovery and law enforcement activity, as well as
humanitarian operations.– Spin-off technologies used for a variety of purposes– Earth climate investigation tools and technologies
• Exploration and learning (education and growth)– Provides inspiration for STEM education fields– Learn more, to figure out things we don't understand, and to explore the unknown * NASA ARMD Strategic Vision 2013
** Aerospace Industries Association, 2013
24
Consider . . . "As part of my participation in the military, my conviction is that even if the research and development is made for military purposes, the experience shows in civil aviation profits. So I believe that what will help in the military is not only for making war, but contributes very much to the progress of technology in general.“
Dr. Theodore Von Karmin in 1944
“Remember that the seed comes first; if you are to reap a harvest of aeronautical development, you must plant the seed called experimental research.”
Col Hap Arnold in 1937
"research is a peace-time thing and ...moves too slowly to be done after you get into trouble.“
Dr. Robert Milliken in 1934
All taken from sourced quotes in Daso, 1996.
25
Engaging . . .
“We learn by hooking into what we already know.“
“… scientists being able to explain what they do and why it is important.”
From a seminar at the Alan Alda Center for Communicating Science, at Stony Brook University, New York, 2013
26
Risk of Losing Key National EFD Capabilities Is Increasing
• Factors driving risk– Aging and inefficient physical infrastructure– Workforce demographics– Maintenance stretched across old and repurposed facilities– New/updated capability and productivity investments– Organizational stovepiping by capability owners– Funding models/methods variability/inconsistency– Cyclical and declining workloads– Tightening sustainment budgets– Understanding (lack) of role of GT in the aero RDT&E process – Short term outlooks for political cycles and business performance
• Demonstrated responses to these risks– Reduced sustainment and investment (degrades capabilities)– Reduced availability (block, sequential, spaced, limited operations)– Reduced or eliminated capabilities and/or capacities
• Facility/capability stand down or mothball• Facility/capability abandonment/closure
27
ChallengesNotional Organizational Alignment
(Each organization has a strategy and associated plans)
LaRC WFF & GFSC
ARC GRC
AFRC
Other
sNASA
AEDC
Edw
ards
AF
B
Eglin
AFB
AFTCAFRL
DARPA
MDA
Army Missiles
Rotorcraft
Armaments
Navy Missiles
Aircraft
Armaments
Others
US DoD
FAAOthers
US Government
Industry
• Multiple Markets – See chart• Many with RDT&E Capabilities
AcademiaInternational
• Fundamental Research• Military Applications• Civilian Applications
28
Economics of Ground TestingA Possible Scenario
Equation: Capability Development and Sustainment Costs versus Direct and Indirect Benefit to the US and the World
• Assume– Market economy complete product turnover over next 30 years– Average 2% annual growth across all market segments– Baseline is FY2012– Existing GT capabilities are sunk cost
• Costs– Develop and sustain capabilities– Invest in new technologies and applications (capabilities and efficiencies)
• Benefits– GT contribution to research feeds new product development– GT contribution to new product risk management [show relative to contribution at each step of
the RDT&E process]– Estimate range and dollar value of impacts
Extreme case: All EFD facilities are closed/mothballed by 2020 Likely case: EFD workload will continue to decline and capabilities and capacities will
decline by a like amount
29
Working Group Literature ReviewInitial Draft of Topic Areas
From literature and personal experience/opinion
• Build on legacy of today and yesterday; project forward– Research needs– Product development needs
• Workload projections by market, US and world– By speed range, mission (within market), new products
• Evolving roles and use of EFD and CFD • Detections of product problems, early and for remediation • Aero market spin-offs/contributions to other markets• Facility/capability risk factors: status, how being addressed, impacts• Environment factors and market forces over next years• EFD as part of the product business case• Capability investment projections • Why are facilities being/have been closed? Why is work not there? • Misconceptions in the public domain.• Risk posture/allowable risk
30
Possible Work Breakdown Structure for the Integrated CFD/EFD Role in the RDT&E Process
I. Product ProcessA. ResearchB. DevelopmentC. TestD. Evaluation
II. Market Areas, Mission Needs, Projections
III. Tools Overview A. Experimental Testing and Measurement
1. Ground Testing2. Flight Testing3. Measurement Technologies
B. Computational Modeling and Simulation
IV. Ground Test Computational DependenciesA. Computational Discipline Trajectory (CFD
Vision 2030)B. Ground Test Discipline Trajectory (Ongoing
Lit Review and Meta-Analysis)C. Overlay
D. Flight Test InterfacesE. Measurement Technologies Integration
V. Define the Path Forward: Prepare the Integrated Roadmap to 2030A. Develop an Integrated Master Schedule
1. Related (and adjustable) to needs2. Identified dependencies3. Major milestones4. Specific, actionable products5. Cost estimates where available; further study will
be required as scope and timing becomes more specific
B. Develop a work prioritization methodology that balances:1. National needs2. Technical Risk3. Business Case4. Organizational Needs
C. Develop an initial (even notional) product responsibility matrix
D. Propose how this work product will be maintained and updated