Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

High stresses in the forward analysis. #3

Open
1 of 2 tasks
bburke38 opened this issue May 16, 2022 · 4 comments
Open
1 of 2 tasks

High stresses in the forward analysis. #3

bburke38 opened this issue May 16, 2022 · 4 comments

Comments

@bburke38
Copy link
Contributor

Issue Type

  • Bug
  • Enhancement

Description

Producing high stresses in the trailing edge of the rib (due to the sharp corner present). @sean-engelstad tried chopping off the ends of the ribs in the .csm file, but then the structural mesh generation fails; tried unioning a wire object to close the edges on the surface of the OML.

Example

nacaWing

@sean-engelstad
Copy link
Collaborator

Was running a structural optimization with the diamondWing case where the stresses were pretty tame and changing with thickness, except the

membraneIssue

@sean-engelstad
Copy link
Collaborator

Ran the forward analysis for Sam's biconvex wing case and get 2/3 similar results and then one really bad result. Had stress about 28 times larger than the other one.
samsWing_forward
samsWing_forward2
samsWing_forward3

Also the temperatures went up a lot for the case with really high stress, 7x higher. The cl and cd values were really consistent and also very close to the actual result from test data, cl=0.192 and cd=0.029 from my data. The issue is the structure solution because we terrible structure mesh (no points in the internal structure except for rib and spar crossings). Need to send this to ESP/CAPS.
nacaWing_points

@bburke38
Copy link
Contributor Author

What were the differences between the different cases for the biconvex wing? Did they have different flow conditions?

@sean-engelstad
Copy link
Collaborator

What were the differences between the different cases for the biconvex wing? Did they have different flow conditions?

The exact same inputs were used for each run case one after the other. So this should not happen. The cl and cd values were the same basically so the fun3d solution was basically the same. But the structural solution is not robust because we have terrible stringy elements in the internal structure. I'm contacing ESP/CAPS shortly to discuss improving the meshing capability.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants