An Advanced Extensible Parametric Geometry Engine For .
An Advanced Extensible ParametricGeometry Engine for Multi-Fidelityand Multi-Physics Analysis inConceptual DesignRob McDonaldNASA AmesJuly 23, 2016
Team MembersCal Poly Rob McDonaldDavid MarshallAlex GaryPat MeyersJoel BelbenMitch LaneBrandon ClarkJ.R. GloudemansPhoenix Integration Andy KoYue HanHongman KimMike HaismaPeter MenegayScott Ragon2
Motivation2.2 Robust Aircraft Conceptual Design Geometric ModelingObjectiveThe objective of this topic is to enhance the ability to employ higher-order, physics-based analysis during conceptual design through robust, easy to create geometrymodels. The research goal is to automate the rigorous steps required for intelligent conversion of a conceptual level parametric geometry model into the detailedrepresentation necessary for higher-order analysis. Conceptual design is the starting point for a new engine or aircraft development. A successful design is highlydependent on accurate geometric representations, since they are used throughout the computational engineering process. Over the past several decadescomputational capability has drastically improved as has the understanding of human-computer interfaces. These advances have enabled less experienced users toperform far more sophisticated tasks without the requirement of extensive training time. More accurate geometry representations will advance the state-of-art inconceptual design by enabling more routine use of higher-order analysis tools.2.2 Robust Aircraft Conceptual Design Geometric ModelingObjectiveThe objective of this topic is to enhance the ability to employ higher-order, physics-basedApproachanalysis during conceptual design through robust, easy to create geometry models. TheA key need of conceptual design is the ability to quickly articulate ideas and engineering concepts into a digital 3-D database. While this can be accomplished throughbuildinga CAD (computeraidedof the geometry,be valuablestepsto have theability to parameterizethe geometry’s characteristics.Parametricresearchgoalisdesign)to modelautomatetheit wouldrigorousrequiredfor intelligentconversionof aoverlays to CAD programs can be performed, but there can be negative implications to this approach. For instance, it requires users to obtain often expensiveconceptuallevelparametricgeometrymodelthe detailednecessarysoftware,and there can beinherentlimitations with a givenCAD package.Therefore,intoa prerequisiteof any valuablerepresentationconceptual design geometrysolution is that it forbeparametric-input based and use aircraft design terminology to communicate effectively with the user (e.g., span, aspect ratio, chord). Currently, there are no acceptedhigher-orderanalysis.Conceptualdesignthe Therestartinga newengineor aircraftstandardsfor parametric-basedgeometry representationsto facilitatesharing ofisgeometry.is a needpointto createfora generalizedstandardfor parametricgeometryand an approach to transfer geometry models in that standard to CADbased models. These new approaches to streamline the conversion of conceptual geometry toA ofsuccessfulisnot highlydependentonconceptualaccuratethe development.geometry representation needsmore detailed analysis,designhowever, shoulddiminish the abilityto rapidly explore thedesign spacegeometricusing aparametricgeometrytool.representations, since they are used throughout the computational engineering process.NASA has made prior investments in the development of a parametric geometry tool for conceptual design [i.e., Vehicle Sketch Pad (VSP)]. There is a need,Overthe yhashowever,to createcouplingbetweendecadeshigher-order engineeringanalysis codes andgeometry toolshaslike VSP.The developed improvedgeometry methodsasshouldbe theflexible in nature and must be compatible with, and support, NASA’s existing ModelCenter-based systems analysis and conceptual design process. An overview of theunderstanding of human-computer interfaces. These advances have enabled lesstools used in a ModelCenter environment is available in the “Other Documents” section at: experiencedusers to perform far more sophisticated tasks without the requirement ofExpectedOutcomeTheextensivenew capability shallprovide parametric-basedgeometrymodeling andgeometryanalysis methodologiesthat enable conceptualwilldesignersto accomplishanalysesin atrainingtime. r, easier manner. In addition, the geometric representation will enable transferring of key geometry for use with higher-order aerodynamics, structural, massart inpropulsion,conceptualdesignby enablingmoretools.routineof higher-orderanalysisproperties,control, aeroelastic,aeroacoustic,and aeropropulsiveHowever,usedevelopingan export capability/linkageto another tools.tool is not sufficient.The goal is to embed in the tools the rigorous steps required for intelligent conversion of the geometric database into the necessary information for the higher-orderanalysis. This typically involves modification of the geometry through meshing to meet specific needs. Currently these intermediate steps are very time consuming –and transitioning between tools loses necessary parametric definitions that could provide valuable sensitivity analyses. Being able to accomplish these steps in moreintelligent ways, with less labor would provide timely access to more sophisticated tools. Such capability is not merely about attaching geometry interfaces to the mostpowerful CFD (computational fluid dynamics) or FEA (finite element analysis) tools– it is about bringing all levels of analysis capability to the designer in an easier andmore rapid fashion, with less data loss from geometric translations.3
Project TimelineNRA SubmittedAward NotificationOriginal Period ofStart of WorkAugmentation 1NCE 1Augmentation 2NCE 21.9.2First Open Source Release2.1.02.2.0Final v2 Release 2.3.0First Public Alpha 3.9.0Inaugural WorkshopOpenVSP Workshop 2OpenVSP Workshop v3OpenVSP Workshop EastOpenVSP Workshop4
Redesign & RefactorOpenVSP 3.X 1992 to OpenVSP 2.XGeometryGeometryGUIComplexRequests &DataSubscribeto MessagePassing3DGraphicsGUI 3DGraphics‘Headless’ batch/script mode‘Headless’ API accessHPC Installation5
Yr 5 Augmentation Task ListCST/Kulfan airfoilsFlat Blunt Airfoil TE modelingFlat Blunt TE meshNegative volumesVSPAERO & CBAERO IntegrationOpenVSP Training & PromotionRounded Blunt Airfoil LE &TE modelingCFDMesh Symmetry Plane ImprovementsTessellation spacingSimplified Fuse SkinningActuator diskPropeller componentEnd CapsFit Model Save/RestoreFit Model MergeParameter Drag-N-DropImprove Search UWProjected Areas6
Yr 5 Augmentation Task ListCST/Kulfan airfoilsFlat Blunt Airfoil TE modelingFlat Blunt TE meshNegative volumesVSPAERO & CBAERO IntegrationOpenVSP Training & PromotionRounded Blunt Airfoil LE &TE modelingCFDMesh Symmetry Plane ImprovementsTessellation spacingSimplified Fuse SkinningActuator diskPropeller componentEnd CapsFit Model Save/RestoreFit Model MergeParameter Drag-N-DropImprove Search UWProjected Areasv3.4.0 on 11/18/15v3.2.0 on 7/24/15v3.2.0 on 7/24/15v3.2.0 on 7/24/15v3.1.0 on 4/29 & v3.2.0 on 7/24/15OpenVSP Workshop August 2015 & 2016v3.6.0 on 5/6/16v3.2.0 on 7/24/15v3.5.1 on 1/23/16v3.2.3 on 9/20/15v3.2.0 on 7/24/15v3.8.1 on 8/1/16v3.6.0 on 5/6/16v3.2.0 on 7/24/15v3.2.0 on 7/24/15v3.2.0 on 7/24/15v3.2.3 on 9/20/15v3.6.1 on 5/29/167
17:0017:3018:0018:30Welcome & OverviewIntro to OpenVSPBasic modelingTour of main componentsBreakCal Poly NRA Final ReviewXSecs in detailUSAF SBIR ReportLunchNASA SBIR ReportAttach, symmetry, sets, subsurfacesSkinning explainedBreakAdvanced Wing ModelingConformal ComponentsSaved Parameter SettingsModeling DemoModeling Demo8/24WednesdayRob McDonaldBrandon LitherlandBrandon LitherlandBrandon LitherlandAutomated FEMStructural Modeling and OpenVSPTOW Steered Wing Structure DesignOpenVSP Inertia CalculationBreakRob McDonaldRapidFEM & PBWeightBrandon Litherland VSPAERO BackgroundBen SchiltgenVSPAERO GUI VLM BasicsNick BrakeRob McDonaldRob McDonaldRob McDonaldJ.R. GloudemansBryan SchmidtRob McDonaldRob McDonaldLunchVSPAERO GUI VLM AdvancedVSPAERO GUI Panel MethodVSPAERO Test and VerificationBreakVSPAERO Next StepsVSPAERO SUGAR braced wing aeroAdvanced Parameter LinkingLeveraging DegenGeomCustom Components8/25ThursdayWu LiTrevor LaughlinMike HensenMark McMillinTyler WinterDave KinneyNick BrakeNick BrakeNick BrakeDave KinneyDave KinneyDoug WellsRob McDonaldErik OlsonRob McDonaldWave DragDrag buildupAerodatabases with GoCart & Cart3DAerodatabases with GoCart & Cart3DBreakProjected AreaNDARC IntegrationAircraft design frameworkLunchCompGeom and Meshing tutorialFlightstreamFlightstreamBreakDesign vars & xddm, API, ScriptingAutomationFit Model PresentationFit Model InteractiveFeedback sessionRob/MichaelBryan SchmidtAerionAerionRob McDonaldTravis PerryAlessandro SilvaRob McDonaldRoy HartfieldRoy HartfieldRob McDonaldRob McDonaldRob McDonaldRob McDonaldBBQ social8
Major NRA 0016:3017:0017:3018:0018:30Welcome & OverviewIntro to OpenVSPBasic modelingTour of main componentsBreakCal Poly NRA Final ReviewXSecs in detailUSAF SBIR ReviewLunchNASA SBIR ReportAttach, symmetry, sets, subsurfacesSkinning explainedBreakAdvanced Wing ModelingConformal ComponentsSaved Parameter SettingsModeling DemoModeling Demo8/24WednesdayRob McDonaldBrandon LitherlandBrandon LitherlandBrandon LitherlandAutomated FEMStructural Modeling and OpenVSPTOW Steered Wing Structure DesignOpenVSP Inertia CalculationBreakRob McDonaldRapidFEM & PBWeightBrandon Litherland VSPAERO BackgroundBen SchiltgenVSPAERO GUI VLM BasicsNick BrakeRob McDonaldRob McDonaldRob McDonaldJ.R. GloudemansBryan SchmidtRob McDonaldRob McDonaldLunchVSPAERO GUI VLM AdvancedVSPAERO GUI Panel MethodVSPAERO Test and VerificationBreakVSPAERO Next StepsVSPAERO SUGAR braced wing aeroAdvanced Parameter LinkingLeveraging DegenGeomCustom Components8/25ThursdayWu LiTrevor LaughlinMike HensenMark McMillinTyler WinterDave KinneyNick BrakeNick BrakeNick BrakeDave KinneyDave KinneyDoug WellsRob McDonaldErik OlsonRob McDonaldWave DragDrag buildupAerodatabases with GoCart & Cart3DAerodatabases with GoCart & Cart3DBreakProjected AreaNDARC IntegrationAircraft design frameworkLunchCompGeom and Meshing tutorialFlightstreamFlightstreamBreakDesign vars & xddm, API, ScriptingAutomationFit Model PresentationFit Model InteractiveFeedback sessionRob/MichaelBryan SchmidtAerionAerionRob McDonaldTravis PerryAlessandro SilvaRob McDonaldRoy HartfieldRoy HartfieldRob McDonaldRob McDonaldRob McDonaldRob McDonaldBBQ social9
Publications & MS ThesesMS Theses CompletedBelben, Joel. Reduced Fidelity Geometry for Conceptual Design in VSP. MS Thesis, California Polytechnic StateUniversity, San Luis Obispo, CA, April 2013.Papers PresentedMcDonald, R., “Advanced Modeling in OpenVSP:, AIAA Aviation AIAA-2016-3282.McDonald, R., Gloudemans, J.R., “User Defined Components in the OpenVSP Parametric Geometry Tool”, AIAAAviation, AIAA-2015-2547.Gary, A., McDonald, R., “Parametric Identification of Surface Regions in OpenVSP for Improved Engineering Analysis”,53rd AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting, AIAA 2015-1016.McDonald, R., “Interactive Reconstruction of 3D Models in the OpenVSP Parametric Geometry Tool”, 53rd AIAAAerospace Sciences Meeting, AIAA 2015-1014.Gary, A., McDonald, R., “Aerodynamic Shape Optimization of Propulsion Airframe Integration While Matching LiftDistribution”, 52nd AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting, AIAA-2014-0533Marshall, D., “Creating Exact Bezier Representations of CST Shapes”, 21st AIAA Computational Fluid DynamicsConference, AIAA-2013-3077.Belben, J., McDonald, R., “Enabling Rapid Conceptual Design Using Geometry-Based Multi-Fidelity Models in VSP”,51st AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting, AIAA 2013-0328.ASM Oral PresentationsGary, A., McDonald, R., “Demonstration of OpenVSP Community Website”, 51st AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting,2013.McDonald, R., “Curvature Based Surface Meshing in VSP and Validation of VSP Geometry Representation for CFD”,51st AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting, 2013.McDonald, R., “Geometry Requirements for High-Fidelity CAE”, 50th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting, 2012.McDonald, R., “VSP Directions; Advancing Vehicle Sketch Pad Multi-Fidelity and Multi-Physics Analysis in ConceptualDesign.” 50th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting, 2012.10
Propeller Component11
Prop DesignDiameterNumber of BladesRotate & ReverseBeta 75% ControlActivity FactorFolding ControlRoot/Tip Cap TreatmentTessellation Clustering12
Chord DistributionHamilton Standard, ‘Advanced General Aviation Propeller Study’, 1971, NASA CR 114289.13
Chord Distribution14
Chord Curve EditorCurve SelectorCurve Type& ConvertInteractive PlotTangency ControlPosition ControlSplit Curve(Add Control Point)Delete Control Point(Pick)Control Points15
Chord DistributionHamilton Standard, ‘Advanced General Aviation Propeller Study’, 1971, NASA CR 114289.16
Twist DistributionHamilton Standard, ‘Advanced General Aviation Propeller Study’, 1971, NASA CR 114289.17
Twist Distribution18
Twist DistributionHamilton Standard, ‘Advanced General Aviation Propeller Study’, 1971, NASA CR 114289.19
Blade Element Import/Export.BEM Propeller.!Num Sections: 12!Num Blade: 3!Diameter: 30.00000000!Beta 3/4 (deg): 20.00000000!Feather (deg): 0.00000000!Center: 0.00000000, 0.00000000, 0.00000000!Normal: -1.00000000, 0.00000000, 0.00000000!!Radius/R, Chord/R, Twist (deg), Rake/R, Skew/R!0.20000000, 0.08000000, 46.75000000, 0.00000000,0.27272727, 0.11601803, 42.31743050, 0.00000000,0.34545455, 0.14698723, 38.15773854, 0.00000000,0.41818182, 0.17182569, 34.27092412, 0.00000000,0.49090909, 0.18945154, 30.65698723, 0.00000000,0.56363636, 0.19878287, 27.31592787, 0.00000000,0.63636364, 0.20000000, 24.24774606, 0.00000000,0.70909091, 0.20000000, 21.45244177, 0.00000000,0.78181818, 0.20000000, 18.93001503, 0.00000000,0.85454545, 0.20000000, 16.68046582, 0.00000000,0.92727273, 0.20000000, 14.70379414, 0.00000000,1.00000000, 0.13000000, 13.00000000, .00000000!0.00000000!0.00000000!0.00000000!20
Demo/PracticeRob McDonaldQuestions?21
powerful CFD (computational fluid dynamics) or FEA (finite element analysis) tools– it is about bringing all levels of analysis capability to the designer in an easier and more rapid fashion, with less data loss from geometric translations. 2.2 Robust Aircraft Concep
Surface is partitioned into parametric patches: Watt Figure 6.25 Same ideas as parametric splines! Parametric Patches Each patch is defined by blending control points Same ideas as parametric curves! FvDFH Figure 11.44 Parametric Patches Point Q(u,v) on the patch is the tensor product of parametric curves defined by the control points
parametric models of the system in terms of their input- output transformational properties. Furthermore, the non-parametric model may suggest specific modifications in the structure of the respective parametric model. This combined utility of parametric and non-parametric modeling methods is presented in the companion paper (part II).
Learning Goals Parametric Surfaces Tangent Planes Surface Area Review Parametric Curves and Parametric Surfaces Parametric Curve A parametric curve in R3 is given by r(t) x(t)i y(t)j z(t)k where a t b There is one parameter, because a curve is a one-dimensional object There are three component functions, because the curve lives in three .
that the parametric methods are superior to the semi-parametric approaches. In particular, the likelihood and Two-Step estimators are preferred as they are found to be more robust and consistent for practical application. Keywords Extreme rainfall·Extreme value index·Semi-parametric and parametric estimators·Generalized Pareto Distribution
parametric and non-parametric EWS suggest that monetary expansions, which may reflect rapid increases in credit growth, are expected to increase crisis incidence. Finally, government instability plays is significant in the parametric EWS, but does not play an important role not in the non-parametric EWS.
Introduction to Creo Parametric 3.0 Advanced Modeling using Creo Parametric 3.0 Advanced Assembly Design using Creo Parametric 3.0 Introduction to Creo Simulate 3.0 Detailing using Creo Parametric 3.0 Surfacing using Creo Parametric 3.0 Sheetmetal using Creo
that have the same x-y graph but different parametric equations are examined. The idea that the vertical line test does not apply to parametric graphs is again stressed. Lesson 4: Parametric Problems Students are asked to apply the parametric function to problems involving projectile motion.
2.1 XML (Extensible Markup Language) 13 2.2 XSD (XML Schema Definition) 18 2.3 MathML (Mathematical Markup Language) 23 2.4 SPS (StyleVision Power Stylesheet) 25 2.5 XSL (Extensible Style Language) 27 2.6 XSLT (Extensible Style Language Transformations) 31 2.7 XSL:FO (Extensible Style Language: Formatting Objects) 32 2.8 XPath (XML Path Language) 33 3 Estudi de l'estàndard XML DocBook 37 3.1 .
