You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Loads and deformations are currently matched using case-sensitive UIDs. For instance, if an aeroelastic model of an aircraft has three components, say a "Wing", "VerticalTail" and "HorizonalTail", all three components must exist in the loads fields database and in the deformation field data base.
Potential problem [1]: The structure model may refer to the vertical tail assembly with UID "VerticalTail", but the CFD tool may refer to the same component with UID "vertical_tail". The effect is that loads and deformations cannot be matched properly.
Potential problem [2]: The structure model could contain structural components (e.g. fuselage or engines) for which there are no corresponding load fields. The fuselage or engine deformation fields should be ignored by the CFD tool. (Problem could potentially exist vice versa).
Potential problem [3]: The CFD tool might model a left and a right wing as two separate components, but the structure tool models both wing as one single component*. E.g. the CFD tools has UIDs "main_wing_left" and "main_wing_right" but the structure tool has a single full-span wing with UID "Wing".
Potential solution(s)
(a) [1, 2, 3] The AeroFrame settings file could contain a table to match UIDs from CFD and structure to handle special cases. For instance, to deal with problems described in [1], [2] or [3], the settings file might looks something like this:
Loads and deformations are currently matched using case-sensitive UIDs. For instance, if an aeroelastic model of an aircraft has three components, say a
"Wing"
,"VerticalTail"
and"HorizonalTail"
, all three components must exist in the loads fields database and in the deformation field data base.Potential problem [1]: The structure model may refer to the vertical tail assembly with UID
"VerticalTail"
, but the CFD tool may refer to the same component with UID"vertical_tail"
. The effect is that loads and deformations cannot be matched properly.Potential problem [2]: The structure model could contain structural components (e.g. fuselage or engines) for which there are no corresponding load fields. The fuselage or engine deformation fields should be ignored by the CFD tool. (Problem could potentially exist vice versa).
Potential problem [3]: The CFD tool might model a left and a right wing as two separate components, but the structure tool models both wing as one single component*. E.g. the CFD tools has UIDs
"main_wing_left"
and"main_wing_right"
but the structure tool has a single full-span wing with UID"Wing"
.Potential solution(s)
(a) [1, 2, 3] The
AeroFrame
settings file could contain a table to match UIDs from CFD and structure to handle special cases. For instance, to deal with problems described in [1], [2] or [3], the settings file might looks something like this:To deal with problem 2, some kind merging of load and/or deformation fields must be implemented.
(b) Relax the UID naming system (could cause other problems).
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: