RANS Simulations of the High Lift Common Research Model with Open-Source Code SU2

  • A. Matiz-ChicacausaEmail author
  • J. Escobar
  • D. Velasco
  • N. Rojas
  • C. Sedano


High-lift devices have been used in aviation for several decades as an effective solution to keep takeoff and landing speeds within an acceptable range, while increasing wing loading for faster and more efficient cruising. Accurate prediction of performance of such devices is essential not only for design requirements but also for providing reliable operational speeds to crews and automatic flight systems. In this regard, the chapter presents numerical solutions and analysis of the flow around the so-called High Lift Common Research Model (HL-CRM) as a contribution to the Third High Lift Prediction Workshop. Stanford’s University CFD code SU2 was used to compute a set of solutions on two grids of the family B3 provided by the organizing committee, at \(8^\circ \) and \(16^\circ \) of angle of attack, and Reynolds number of \(3.26\times 10^6\). Results showed good agreement in aerodynamic coefficients when compared to solutions submitted by participants of the workshop. The main features of the flow over the lifting surfaces and in the wake of the wing were also observed and discussed based on theory and results published by other authors.



The authors want to recognize Sabalcore Computing Inc. for providing valuable support and computational resources for running the highly demanding simulations required for the success of the project. The authors also want to acknowledge the IT staff of Universidad de San Buenaventura and Universidad de Los Andes for providing technical support to the HPC systems used for the simulations. The results presented in this chapter are a product of the project CBI E01-001 co-founded by the Faculty of Engineering at Universidad de San Buenaventura and the Department of Mechanical Engineering at Universidad de Los Andes.


  1. 1.
    Runsey, C., Slotnik, J.: In: Overview and Summary of the Second AIAAA high Lift Prediction WorkshopGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Rudnik, R., Huber, K., Melber-Wilkending, S.: EUROLIFT Test Description for the 2nd High Lift PredictionGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Lacy, D., Sclafani, A.: Development of the High Lift Common Research Model (HL-CRM): A representative high lift configuration for transonic transport. In: AIAA SciTech Forum, 54th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting, San Diego (2016)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    van Dam, C.: The aerodynamic design of multi-element high-lift systems for transport airplanes. Prog. Aerosp. Sci. 101–144 (2002)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Meredith, P.: Viscous phenomena affecting high-lift systems and suggestions for future CFD development. High-lift Syst. Aerodyn. (1993)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Smith, A.M.O.: High-lift aerodynamics. J. Aircr. 12, 501–530 (1975)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kharea, A., Baiga, R., Ranjana, R., Shaha, S., Pavithrana, S., Nikama, K., Moitrab, A.: Computational simulation of flow over a high-lift trapezoidal wing. ICEAE (2009)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Becker, K., Vassber, J.: Numerical aerodynamics in transport aircraft design. In: Note on Numeric Fluid Mechanics, pp. 209–220. Springer, Berlin (2009)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Mathias, D., Cummings, R.: Navier-stokes analysis of the flow about a flap edge. J. Aircr. 833–838 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Rogers, S., Roth, K., Nsh, S.: CFD validation of high-lift flows with significant wind-tunnel effects. In: Applied Aerodynamics Conference, Denver. (2000)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Chaffin, M., Pirzadeh, S.: Unstructured Navier-stokes high-lift computations on a trapezoidal wing. In: 23rd AIAA Applied Aerodynamics Conference, Toronto (2005)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Rumsey, C., Yingb, S.X.: Prediction of high lift: review of present CFD capability. Prog. Aerosp. Sci. 145–180 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Rumsey, C.: High lift prediction workshop. In: Third High Lift Prediction Workshop (2017)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Economon, T., Palacios, F., Copeland, S., Lukaczyk, W., Alonso J.: An open-source suite for multiphysics simulation and design. In: 51st AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting, Grapevine (2013)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Molina, E., Spode, C., Manosalvas-Kjono, D.E., Nimmagadda, S., Economon, T., Alonso, J., Righi, M.: Hybrid RANS/LES calculations in SU2. In: 23rd AIAA Computational Fluid Dynamics Conference (2017)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Economon, T., Mudigere, D., Bansal, G., Heinecke, A., Palacios, F., Park, J., Smelyanskiy, M., Alonso, J., Dubey, P.: Performance optimization for scalable implicit RANS calculations with SU2. Comput. Fluids 146–158 (2016)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Roe, P.L.: Approximate Riemann solvers, parameter vector, and difference schemes. J. Comput. Phys. 357–372 (1981)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Turkel, E., Vatsa, V.N., Radespiel, R.: Preconditioning Methods for Low-Speed flows (1996)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Spalart. P.R., Allmaras, S.R.: A one equation turbulence model for aerodynamic flows. In: 30th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit (1992)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Vassber, J.C., DeHaan, M.A., Rivers, S.M., Wahls, R.A.: Development of a common research model for applied CFD validation studies. In: AIAA Applied Aerodynamics Conference, Honolulu, Hawaii (2008)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Taylor, N., Jones, B., Gammon, M.: 1st AIAA Geometry and Mesh Generation Workshop; GMGW-1 Presentations, 4 June 2017. Retrieved from consulted on July 11, 2017
  22. 22.
    Sclafani, T., Slotnik, J., Chaffin, M., Feinmann, J., Melber, S.: HiliftPW-3 Case 1 Results Summary, Summary Case 1 2 copy (2017)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Diskin, B., Thomas, J., Rumsey, C., Schwoeppe, A.: Grid Convergence for Turbulent Flows (Invited). In: 53rd AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (2015)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Park, M.A., Lee-Raush, E.M., Rumsey, C.L.: In: FUN3D and CFL3D Computations for the First High Lift Prediction Workshop. 49th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting, 4–7 Jan, pp. 24, Orlando, FL (2011)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Nichols, R.: Algorithm and turbulence model requirements for simulating vortical flows. In: 46th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (2008)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • A. Matiz-Chicacausa
    • 1
    Email author
  • J. Escobar
    • 1
  • D. Velasco
    • 2
  • N. Rojas
    • 2
  • C. Sedano
    • 2
  1. 1.Universidad de San BuenaventuraBogotáColombia
  2. 2.Universidad de Los AndesBogotáColombia

Personalised recommendations