uCRM: undeflected Common Research Model
Description
The zip files below contain the aerodynamics and structural geometries, meshes, and other data files for two open models for high-fidelity wing aerostructural studies. uCRM-9: A flexible version of NASA’s Common Research Model configuration (https://commonresearchmodel.larc.nasa.gov/) uCRM-13.5: A higher aspect ratio version for very flexible wing design studies A full explanation of how these models were developed can be found in reference [1]. If you use the model, please cite the paper. The goal of these models is to provide a common benchmark for aerostructural analysis and design optimization of transonic flexible wing aircraft. These models were already used in various studies [2-5]. The methods used in these optimizations were originally described in reference [6]. The flight conditions are actual flight conditions and not the CRM wind tunnel conditions, so the Reynolds number differs. The conditions are: M = 0.85 CL = 0.5 Altitude = 37,000 ft uCRM-9: Re = 43,130,072 (Re length 7.01 m) uCRM-13.5: Re = 35,524,500 (Re length 5.77m) The files include: Geometry files for the wing-body-tail configuration of each aircraft (IGES/TIN) Aerodynamic mesh files for the wing-body-tail configuration of each aircraft, both in multi-block and overset format (CGNS) Structural mesh files for the aluminum wingbox structure including material properties based on a smeared stiffness blade-stiffened panel approach, external control surface and engine masses, and aerodynamic loads for the nominal cruise (BDF) Reference solutions using the MACH framework and NASTRAN All units are in SI (kg/m/s) References: 1. Brooks TR, Kenway GKW, Martins JRRA. Benchmark Aerostructural Models for the Study of Transonic Aircraft Wings. AIAA Journal. 2018 ;56(7):2840-–2855. 2. Kenway GKW, Martins JRRA. Multipoint High-fidelity Aerostructural Optimization of a Transport Aircraft Configuration. Journal of Aircraft. 2014 ;51(1):144–160. 3. Burdette DA, Martins JRRA. Design of a Transonic Wing with an Adaptive Morphing Trailing Edge via Aerostructural Optimization. Aerospace Science and Technology. 2018 ;81:192–203. 4. Burdette DA, Martins JRRA. Impact of Morphing Trailing Edge on Mission Performance for the Common Research Model. Journal of Aircraft. 2019 ;56:369–384. 5. Brooks TR, Martins JRRA, Kennedy GJ. High-fidelity Aerostructural Optimization of Tow-steered Composite Wings. Journal of Fluids and Structures. 2019 . 6. Kenway GKW, Kennedy GJ, Martins JRRA. Scalable parallel approach for high-fidelity steady-state aeroelastic analysis and adjoint derivative computations. AIAA Journal. 2014 ;52(5):935–951.