..

NASA Contractor Report 2962

A GeometryPackage for
Generation of InputData
for a Three-Dimensional
Potential-Flow Program

N. Douglas Halseyand John L. Hess

CONTRACT NAS1-14402
J U N E 1978
 TECH LIBRARY KAFB, NU

NASA Contractor Report 2962

A GeometryPackage for
Generation of Input Data
for aThree-Dimensional
Potential-Flow Program

N. Douglas Halsey and John L. Hess

McDonneZZ DongZas Corporation
Long Beach, California

Prepared for
Langley Research Center
under Contract NAS 1- 14402

National Aeronautics
and SpaceAdministration
Scientific and Technical
Information Office

1978
 .

.1 0 TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 .0 TableofContents .......................... iii
2 .0 Index of Figures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . V

3.0 Sumnary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
4.0 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
5.0 Symbols . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
6.0 Nomenclature and Arrangement of Input Points . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
7.0 Paneling of
Isolated Components . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
7.1 General Features of the Paneling Method . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
7.2 Distribution of Points Along N-lines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
7.2.1
Input
Distribution.Unaltered .............. 17
7.2.2InputDistribution. Augmented i n Number . . . . . . . . . 18
7.2.3
ConstantIncrementsin Arc Length . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
7.2.4 Cosine Spacing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
7.2.5
Curvature-Dependent Distribution . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
7.2.6
User-Specified Distribution ............... 24
7.3
Distribution
of
N-lines .................... 24
7.3.1 The Planar-Section Mode . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
7.3.2 The Arc-Length Mode . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
8.0 Calculation
of
Intersection Curves ................. 32
8.1 General Features ofthe Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
8 . 2 Restrictions and Limitations o f the Method . . . . . . . . . . . 32
8.3Details o f the Method of Solution ............... 33
8.3.1 The I n i t i a l Search f o r "LineSegmentsand Surface
Elements Containing Intersection Points ......... 34
8.3.2 The FinalSearch f o r "line Segmentsand Surface
Elements ContainingIntersectionPoints and the
Approximate Determination o f the IntersectionPoints .. 35
8.3.3Derivation of a Mathematical Representation of the
Surfaceof an Element .................. 37
8.3.4 Computation of More Precise Values o f the Coordinates
of the Intersection Points ............... 42
8.3.5
Test Cases f o r the Intersection Method . . . . . . . . . 43
9.0 Final Repaneling of Components . ................... 47
9.1 General Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
9.2 Intersecting Components . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
9.3 Nonl iftingIntersected Components . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
9.4 L i f t i n g Intersected Components . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54

iii

I .
10.0Conclusions .............................. 61
.
11 0 References .............................. 62

iv
 2.0 INDEX OF FIGURES
1. Typical element distribution for a trapezoidal wing .......... 3
2. Typical element distribution for a wing-fuselage case . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Surface elements used by NLR, Amsterdam, for an external store
configuration (1780 elements) ..................... 4
4. Definition of frequently used terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
5. Illustration of numerical differentiation procedure . . . . . . . . . . 15
6. Comparison of curve-fit methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
7. Method of distributing points on an N-line - input distribution,
augmented . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
. . . . .
8. Point distribution on a supercritical wing section - input distribution,
augmented . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
. .
9. Point distribution on a cylindrical fuselage section - constant
increments in arc-length .. . . ...
. . . ... . . . . . . . . . . 20
10. Method o f distributing points on an N-line - cosine distribution . . . 21
11. Point distribution on a supercritical wing section - cosine
distribution .... ..... . .
. . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
12. Point distribution on a supercritical wing section - curvature-
. . . ..
dependent distribution . . . . . .... . . . . . . . . . . 24
13. Point distribution on a section of a nonlifting component -
curvature-dependent distribution ... ...... .. . . . . . . . . 24
14. Redistribution o f elements on a trapezoidal wing (cosine spacing
chordwise, constant increments spanwise, planar-section mode) . . . . . 28
15. Redistribution of elements on a supercritical wing (cosine spacing
chordwise , constant increments spanwi se, planar-section mode ,
mu1 tisection component option) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
. . .
16. Redistribution of elements on a fuselage (constant increments around
circumference and in axial direction, planar-section mode, multi-
secti on-component option) ... ... ...
.. . . . . . . . . 30
. . . .
17. Comparison of planar-section and arc-length modes of distributing
N-1 ines - strut on a thick wing . . . . . . . . . .’. . . . . . 31
. . . .
18. Intersection method test case - fntersection of two circular
cylinders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
. . . .
V
19. Intersection method test case -intersection of two spheres . . . . . . 45
20. Intersection method test case - intersection of two ellipsoids . . . . 45
21. Illustration of intersection method - thick wing intersecting a
circular cylinder. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 46
22. Final repaneling o f intersecting components -wing-fuselage case . . . 49
23. Final repaneling of intersecting components - wing-fuselage-tip-tank
case . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50

24. Final repaneling of nonlifting intersection components -wing-fuselage

case (zero-incidencewing, N-lines through every point on intersection
curve) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .55

25. Final repaneling of nonlifting intersected components - wing-fuselage

case (wing with10" incidence, N-lines through every point on inter-
section curve) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55

26. Final repaneling of nonlifting intersected components -wing-fuselage

case (zero-incidence wing, N-lines through every other point on
intersectioncurve) ......................... 56
27. Final repaneling of lifting intersected components -wing-pylon case. . 57
28. Final repaneling of lifting intersected components -wing-pylon case
(sparse element distribution on pylon) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
29. Final repaneling of lifting intersected components - wing-pylon case
(more points on pylon than surrounding region onwing) . . . . . . . . 59
30. Final element distribution on a wing-fuselage-pylon case . . . . . . . 60

vi
 3.0 SUMMARY

The preparationofgeometricdata f o r i n p u t t o three-dimensionalpotential-

flow programs i s a very tedious, time-consuming (and therefore expensive) task.
T h i s report describes a geometry package t h a t automates and simplifies this
task to a large degree. Inputto the computer program f o r the geometry pack-
age consists of a very sparse set of coordinate data, often w i t h an orderof
magnitude fewer pointsthan required f o r the actualpotential-flowcalculations.
Isolated components, such as wings, fuselages, etc. are paneled automatically,
using oneof several possible element distribution algori thms . Curves of inter-
section between components are calculated, u s i n g a hybrid curve-fit/rurface-fit
approach. Finally,intersecting components arerepaneled so thatadjacent
elements on either side of the intersection curves line up i n a satisfactory
manner forthepotential-flowcalculations. The geometry package has been
incorporated into the NASA Langley version of the 3-D l i f t i n g potential-flow
programand i t i s possible to r u n many casescompletely (from i n p u t , through
the geometry package, and through the flow calculations) without interruption.
Use of this geometry package can significantly reduce the time and expense
involved i n making three-dimensionalpotential-flowcalculations.
 4.0 INTRODUCTION

W i t h theadvent of modern high-speed computers,theaerodynamicist

gained the ability t o study the effects of configuration changes i n great
detail. Whereas before he m i g h t havebeen able t o estimatetheeffects of
changes i n such grossgeometricparameters as sweep and aspect r a t i o on the
t o t a l l i f t of an isolated wing, he now can accurately calculate the effects
of changes of quite small details of the shape of very complex configurations
(wing-fuselage-nacelle-pyloncases, for example) on n o t only l i f t b u t also on
spanwise and chordwise load distributions, local pressures, flow angles,etc.
This g a i n i n computational a b i l i t y has made thepreparation of i n p u t d a t a for
describingconfiguration geometry a very tedious, time-consuming task. General
three-dimensional potential-flow programs, such asthe Hess program,
(references 1 and 2 ) requirethe geometry t o be i n p u t a s thecoordinates of
sets of points, which are grouped t o form quadrilateral surface elements.
Many more elements are generally required t o o b t a i n accurate flow solutions
than the number required for adequate pictorialrepresentation. For example,
thesimpletrapezoidal wing of figure 1 , which can be represented f a i r l y
accurately by twenty or so elements,requires on theorder of two hundred
elements t o obtain a reasonable flow solution. More complex configurations,
such asthewing-fuselagecase of figure 2 , m i g h t use nearly a thousand. A
case which was recently run by personnel of NLR, Amsterdam, using 1780
elements t o represent an external-store configuration is shown i n figure 3
(reference 3 ) .

There i s a clear need t o automateas much as possible the preparation of

the i n p u t coordinates, both i n order t o reduce the number o f pointsinput t o
the programs and inorder t o relax some o f the restrictions on how thepoints
mustbe distributed. The main d i f f i c u l t y i n doing t h i s i s t h a t thereare so
many l o g i c a l l y differentcases t o consider. For example, a wing has different
spacingrequirements t h a n a fuselage; a fuselage has differentrequirements
t h a n a nacelle,or a pylon, etc. Moreover, bodies o f similar type may require
different numbers and distributions of points due t o theproximity of other
bodies. I f there are intersections between bodies,additionalrequirements
are imposed on the p o i n t distributions. A geometry package must be very
2
 Figure 1 . Typical element distribution for a trapezoidal wing.

Figure 2. Typicalelement distributionfor a wing-fuselage case.

3
,Figure 3. Surfaceelements usedby NLR, Amsterdam, f o r an e x t e r n a ls t o r e
c o n f i g u r a t i o n (1780 elements).

very flexible to apply to so many d i f f e r e n t cases, b u t i t should not be so

f l e x i b l e t h a t i t becomescumbersome t o use.

This report describes a geometrypackagedeveloped f o r use w i t h t h e

p o t e n t i a l - f l o w program o f r e f e r e n c e s 1 and 2 and f o r e x t e n s i o n s o f t h e method
which may replace i t i nt h ef u t u r e .S i n c et h er e q u i r e m e n t s o f f u t u r ep r o -
grams a r e m o s t l y s p e c u l a t i v e a t t h e p r e s e n t , c o m p a t i b i l i t y w i t h t h e p r e s e n t
program i s emphasized.

The geometry package hasbeen incorporatedintothe NASA-Langley version

of t h ep o t e n t i a l - f l o w program. This programaccepts inputeitherinthe
4 (withminormodifications)or
o r i g i n a li n p u tf o r m a td e s c r i b e di nr e f e r e n c e
i nt h ef o r m a to ft h e programdescribed i n reference 5. With a small amount
ofadditionalinputtocontrolthe geometry package, it i s p o s s i b l e t o r u n
anumber o f f r e q u e n t l y o c c u r r i n g C ~ J ~completely
S without human i n t e r v e n t i o n .
For example, i s o l a t e d wings or bodies may be i n p u t t o t h e program w i t h a
minimumnumber o f p o i n t s and t h e geometry package w i
l augment and r e d i s t r i b u t e
thepointstothe numberand d i s t r i b u t i o n s p e c i f i e d bytheuser. These
coordinates can then be punched on cards f o r use w i t h a u t o m a t i c p l o t t i n g
programs t o i n s p e c t t h e r e s u l t s b e f o r e p r o c e e d i n g , o r t h e p o t e n t i a l - f l o w

_ I
program can proceed immediately to analyze theflow. Options are provided to
allow theuser to tailor the distributions to needs the of his particular
problem, so it should also be possible to run cases having multiple non-
intersecting wings orbodies with no human intervention. More difficult
cases, involving intersecting components, can also be treated by the geometry
package. Some of the simpler cases involving only two components, such as a
wing/fuselage case, can also be run completely without intervention, but more
complex cases almost certainly should be checked before proceeding with the
flow calculation. Some cases cannot be completely handled by the geometry
package, but in these cases, use of the geometry package to augment the point
distributions and to calculate intersection curves still results in a
significant reduction in the effort required to prepare the coordinate data.
A n outline of the majorfeatures of the geometrypackage is given below.
o Significant reduction in effort required to input a case to the
potential -flow program.
o Two separate modes of program input available.
o Complete compatibility with the potential-flow program -allowing many
cases to be run completely without interruptionbetween the geometry
package calculations and the potential-flow calculations,
o Paneling of isolated components
o Allows very sparse input coordinate data.
o Provides output coordinate data suitable for potential-flow
analysis.
o Uses independent cubic curve-fits for interpolation in two
directions on surfaces (N-lines and "lines).
o Provides six options for the point distributions on N-lines
and four options on "lines.
o Allows all N-lines on a component to lie in parallel planes,
if desired.
o Calculation of intersection curves
o Requires a distinction between intersecting and intersected
components.

5
 o Intersecting components represented by their "lines only.
o Intersected components represented by three-dimensional surface
fits.
o Intersection curves defined by arrays of intersection points
between the "lines of the intersecting components and the fitted
surfaces of theintersected components.
o Repaneling of intersecting and intersected components
o Intersection curve made an N-line of the intersecting component.
d Other N-lines on intersecting component shifted to restore a
smooth distribution.
o Extra strip inside intersected component automatically generated,
if desired.
o Intersected components repaneled to insure that elements on
adjacent components line up along the intersection curves.
o Simpler repaneling options also provided.

The remainder of this report documentsthe theory and operation of the

geometry package. Section 6 defines the geometric terms used i n the later
sections and discusses the basic philosophy o f the geometric input to the
method. Section 7 describes the paneling of isolated, non-intersecting
components, including the options available, the applicability and limitations
of the options, user requirements, methods used, and sample results. Section
8 covers themethod o f calculating curves o f intersection between components,
including the theory, restrictions, and verification cases. Finally,
section 9 describes the methods that have been provided for repaneling
components after having calculated the curves ofintersection between them.

6
 5.0 SYMBOLS

A M a t rsoi xuf r f a c e - fci ot e f f i c i e naitnsl g e b r a i c form.

A,B,C,D C o e f f i c i e n t so ft h ee q u a t i o no f a plane.

A,B,C,D, A l g e b r a i cs u r f a c e - f i tc o e f f i c i e n t s .
EsFsGsH,
I,J,K,L,
. . ~

M,N,O,P
C Local value of the chord of acomponent.
d S t r a i g h t - l i n e d i s t a n c e between adjacent points onacurve.
Also used f o r t h e d i s t a n c e f r o m a p o i n t t o a plane.

F Functions used t o express a c u b i c c u r v e i n terms o f t h e f u n c t i o n a l

values and f i r s t d e r i v a t i v e s a t t h e ends o f t h e c u r v e o n l y .

f Dummy v a r i a b l e used t o expressthegeneralform o f a f u n c t i o n used

w i t hs e v e r a ld i f f e r e n tv a r i a b l e s .

G Matrixofsurface-fitcoefficientsingeometric form.

i General s u b s c r i p t used i n a v a r i e t y o f ways.

K Parameter used i n s p e c i f y i n g t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n o f N - l i n e s ona

component.

k Curvature a t a p o i n t ona curve.

R Subscript denoting variables associated with a l i n e o r curve.

M M a t r i x of constants used i n c o n v e r t i n g s u r f a c e - f i t c o e f f i c i e n t s
fromgeometric t o a l g e b r a i c form.

"line Curve onacomponent, generally running spanwise on l i f t i n g

componentsand i n t h e a x i a l d i r e c t i o n on n o n l i f t i n g components.

N T o t a l number o f d e f i n i n g p o i n t s on a curve.

N-1 ine Curve on acomponent, generally running chordwise on l i f t i n g

componentsand i n t h e c i r c u m f e r e n t i a l d i r e c t i o n on n o n l i f t i n g
components.

P Totalarclengthof a curve.

Normalized point number o f the point having index i.

Arc l e n g t h a l o n g a curve.

7
so’sl Arc lengths at beginning and end of acurve.
S Subscript denoting a surface.
T Superscript denoting the transposeof a-matrix.
Parameters used in calculating surface fits.
Coordinates of a point in a Cartesian coordinate system. Also
subscripts referring to these coordinates.
8 Angle around a circle circumscribed about an airfoil section, used
in determining the cosine point spacing distribution.
Angle of a curve at the defining point having index i.
Angle of a straight-line segment of a curvebeginning at the
defining point having index i.

a
 I

6.0 NOMENCLATUREANDARRANGEMENT OF I N P U TP O I N T S

Before describing the geometry package i t s e l f , it i s necessary t o

discussthegeneral scheme f o r i n p u t t i n g p o i n t s and f o r o r d e r i n g t h e elements
t h a t t h e y f o r m and t o d e f i n e some o f t h e termswhich a r e used f r e q u e n t l y
throughouttheremainder ofthereport. Mostprocedures and d e f i n i t i o n s a r e
identicaltothosedescribed i n references 1 and 2, b u t some ( f o r example,
t h ed e f i n i t i o no f" i g n o r e de l e m e n t s " ) have been changed s l i g h t l y . Reference
should be made t o f i g u r e 4 t o c l a r i f y t h e d i s c u s s i o n which follows.

S T R I P ON
N - L I N E S ON

M-LINES ON
INTERSECTED

ON ELEMENT
INTERSECTED

INTERSECTING

-
COMPONENT

V INTERSECTING
CQYPONENT

Figure 4. D e f i n i t i o no ff r e q u e n t l y usedterms.

9
 A complete configuration (such as a wing-fuselage-nacelle-pylon case)
is assumed to be constructed of a number of components, each of which is a
set of associated points. Normally a single component is used to represent
a complete body (such as a wing or a fuselage), but any number of components
per body is allowed. There are twotypes of components - nonlifting and
lifting. Nonlifting components, such as fuselages or other blunt-ended bodies,
are represented by source distributions over their surfaces and hence have no
circulation. Lifting components, such as wings or other bodies with sharp
trai 1 ing edges , are represented by both surface sourceand dipole distribu-
tions. Circulation about any section of a lifting component is adjusted in
such a way as to satisfy the trailing-edge Kutta condition. Lifting
components also have associated dipole sheets which represent trailingvortex
wakes. Points on the wakes must be input to the program, as well as points
on the bodies, and are considered to belong to the same components as the
associated body points.

Each component consists of a set of points which can be connected in

such a wayas to form a network of intersecting lines called N-lines and
"lines. N-lines on lifting components are the lines running approximately
in the chordwise direction. They divide a wing, for example, into a number
of distinct sections. "lines are the lines connecting corresponding points
on the N-lines. On nonl ifting components N-lines are generally those
surrounding the major axis of the body (if it is possible to define an axis
at all). In principle, the roles of the N-lines and "lines on nonlifting
components can be reversed without adversely affectingthe execution o f the
program, but in most portions of the geometry package, it is assumed that the
N-lines play the role described above. The potential-flow program does not
require that all N-lines on nonlifting components have the same number of
points. However since having variable numbers of points per N-line makes it
impossible to define "lines, most applications o f the geometry package require
each N-line to have the same number of points as each other N-line and each
"line to have the same number of points as each other "line. N-lines may
not cross other N-lines (though they may touch at apoint); "lines also may
not cross other N-lines (though they may also touch at apoint).

10
 Points mustbe ordered so t h a t a l l p o i n t s on t h e f i r s t N - l i n e ( i n c l . y d i n g
wake p o i n t s a f t e r t h e body p o i n t s f o r l i f t i n g components) a r e i n p u t con-
secutively,followed by a l l p o i n t s on t h e second N - l i n e and so on. The f i r s t
N - l i n e i n p u t may be t h e one a t e i t h e r extreme o f t h e component, b u t t h e
choice determines the order of input of points along the N-lines. In general,
the order must be such t h a t t h e n e g a t i v e o f t h e c r o s s p r o d u c t o f t h e v e c t o r
from one p o i n t on an N - l i n e t o t h e n e x t p o i n t on t h e N - l i n e w i t h t h e v e c t o r
f r o m a p o i n t on the N-line to the corresponding point on t h e n e x t N - l i n e r e s u l t s
i n a vector which is directed to the exterior of the component. Thisrequirement
may be s a t i s f i e d on a wing, f o r example,by o r d e r i n g t h e N - l i n e s f r o m t i p
t o r o o t and o r d e r i n g p o i n t s on the N-lines f r o m t h e t r a i l i n g edge along the
lower surface to the leading edgeandback along the upper surface to the
t r a i l i n g edge. On a fuselagetherequirement i s s a t i s f i e d by arrangingthe
N-lines from f r o n t t o backand t h e p o i n t s on each N-line increasing counter-
c l o c k w i s e( l o o k i n ga f t ) . The requirement i s a l s o s a t i s f i e d by reversingboth
theorderoftheN-lines and t h e o r d e r o f t h e p o i n t s on theN-lines. However
p a r t s o f t h e geometry package r e q u i r e t h a t N - l i n e s on fuselages s t a r t a t t h e
front of the body, o r more generally, that N-lines on n o n l i f t i n g components
s t a r t a t the end f a r t h e s t f r o m t h e f i r s t "line of any o t h e r components which
i n t e r s e c t t h e component.

The area between adjacent N-lines on a component i s designated a s t r i p .

Each s t r i p on a l i f t i n g component hasone c h a r a c t e r i s t i c v a l u e o f t h e d i p o l e
d i s t r i b u t i o n and one l o c a t i o n where theKuttacondition issatisfied. On
l i f t i n g components, it i s p o s s i b l e t o s p e c i f y t h a t a s t r i p havea dipole
distribution but no s o u r c e d i s t r i b u t i o n s andno boundary c o n d i t i o n s on any
o f i t s elements. Such a s t r i p , c a l l e d an e x t r a s t r i p , i s u s e f u l f o r a v o i d i n g
theabruptendingof a dipole sheet (which would result i n a concentrated
vortex) along the curve of intersection o f two componentsand for controlling
the behavior of the dipole sheet near wing-tips when the piecewise linear
v o r t i c i t y o p t i o n i s used. R e f e rt or e f e r e n c e 1 f o r more d e t a i l s .

The a r e a ( g e n e r a l l y q u a d r i l a t e r a l ) between adjacent "lines on a s t r i p

i s termed an element. Each element has one c o n t r o l p o i n t where t h e boundary
conditions are satisfied andone characteristic value of the source

11
distribution. It is possible to designate some elementsto be ignored elemen'ts.
These elements do not have source distributions and no boundary conditions
are applied tothem. If the component is lifting, ignored elements do have
dipole distributions, however. References 1 and 2 allow for ignored elements
to be defined only for lifting components,but this restriction has been
lifted in the present program.
 7.0 PANELING
OF
ISOLATED
COMPONENTS

7.1 GeneralFeatures o ft h eP a n e l i n g Method

The f i r s t o p e r a t i o n performedbythegeometry package i s t o panel

(i.e. , d i s t r i b u t e t h e elements) the components as isolated bodies, whether or
n o t any o f them i n t e r s e c t . A l t h o u g h t h e r e s u l t i n g e l e m e n t d i s t r i b u t i o n s on
i n t e r s e c t i n g components may n o t be useful for analyzing complete configu-
rations, they serve asa starting point for determining the final distributions
as w e l l as a l l o w i n g a c o n f i g u r a t i o n " b u i l d - u p " t o be performed(i.e.¶the
s u c c e s s i v e a d d i t i o n o f components can be performed, i n order to determine
i n t e r f e r e n c ee f f e c t s ) . t i s assumed t h a t eachcomponent
I i s completely
independent o f a l l o t h e r s . Since a s i n g l e body may becomposed o f more than
onecomponent,however,and since the close proximity of another body may
modifytheelementspacingrequirements o f acomponent, it i s n o t always t r u e
t h a ti n d i v i d u a l components a r ec o m p l e t e l yi n d e p e n d e n t .S u f f i c i e n tf l e x i b i l i t y
hasbeen designed i n t o t h e p a n e l i n g method t o a l l o w p o i n t s t o bematchedwhere
componentsmeet(making their "lines continuous) and t o a l l o w t h e u s e r t o
s p e c i f y whatever d i s t r i b u t i o n hedeems appropriate to account for the
p r o x i m i t y o f o t h e r components.

The panelingof an i n d i v i d u a l component i s accomplished i n twosteps.

F i r s t t h e p o i n t s on t h e i n i t i a l N - l i n e s a r e augmented i n numberand r e d i s t r i -
butedaccording t o t h e numberand the spacing algorithm specified by the user.
For this calculation, the N-lines must be roughly chordwise on l i f t i n g
componentsand, ift h e l a t e r r e p a n e l i n g o f i n t e r s e c t e d components i s required,
the N-lines must be roughly circumferential about an a x i s on n o n l i f t i n g
components. Pointsinthe wake o f an N-line o f a l i f t i n g component are
d i s t r i b u t e di n d e p e n d e n t l yo ft h e body p o i n t s .P r o v i s i o n has been made t o
allow the user to input different numbers o f p o i n t s on t h e i n i t i a l N - l i n e s
o f acomponent. The process o f r e d i s t r i b u t i n g p o i n t s a l o n g t h e N - l i n e s makes
t h e numbers o f p o i n t s equal , t h u s a l l o w i n g M - l i n e s t o be formed. The second
step i s t o augment and r e d i s t r i b u t e t h e N - l i n e s a c c o r d i n g t o t h e number and
a l g o r i t h ms p e c i f i e d by theuser.This i s done byaugmenting and r e d i s t r i b u t i n g
points along each "line.

13
 The process o f r e d i s t r i b u t i n g p o i n t s a l o n g e i t h e r N - l i n e s o r " l i n e s
requires a method o fi n t e r p o l a t i n ga l o n gg e n e r a lc u r v e si n space. Since
these curves (particularly the N-lines) are not usually monotonic i n either
x,y, or Z coordinates, some otherparametermust be usedas the independent
variableofinterpolation. I n thepresent method, theparameter chosen i s
thearclengthalongthepolygonformedbyconnectingstraight-lines between
adjacentpoints. I n t h e remainder o ft h i sr e p o r tt h et e r m" a r cl e n g t h "
a l w a y sr e f e r st ot h i ss t r a i g h t - l i n ea p p r o x i m a t i o n .I n t e r p o l a t i o nf o r a point
on a cuPve r e q u i r e s t h r e e s e p a r a t e i n t e r p o l a t i o n s , one f o r each coordinate,
Each s e p a r a t ei n t e r p o l a t i o n i s accomplished i n twosteps. In thefirst step,
numerical differentiation of the dependent v a r i a b l e w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e a r c -
length i s performed a t each definingpointonthecurve. I n t h e second step,the
values o f t h e f u n c t i o n and i t s d e r i v a t i v e s a t t h e ends of the segments o f t h e
curve are used t o d e r i v e t h e c o e f f i c i e n t s o f c u b i c i n t e r p o l a t i n g p o l y n o m i a l s .

The n u m e r i c a l d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n i s done using a "weighted-angle"approach

(see f i g u r e 5). I nt h i s approach, t h el e n g t h s( d i ) and angles(emi) of
s t r a i g h t - l i n e a p p r o x i m a t i o n s t o segments o f t h e c u r v e a r e f i r s t c a l c u l a t e d .
The angle a t t h e m i d p o i n t o f each segment i s assumed t o equaltheangle of
t h es t r a i g h t - l i n ea p p r o x i m a t i o nt ot h e segment. The angle a t any o f t h e
g i v e n p o i n t s on thecurve ( e i ) i s thendeterminedbytaking an average o f t h e
angles o f a d j a c e n t segments, weighted by the distances t o t h e m i d p o i n t s o f the
segments,

(7.1 .l)

Angles o f t h e f i r s t and l a s t p o i n t s on a curve are determined by extrapolation,

assuming constantcurvature between t h e f i r s t two a n d ' l a s t two p o i n t s . The
derivativesatthegivenpointsarethen found by taking the tangents of the
calculated angles.

In order to facilitate the treatment of components having sections

bounded by s t r a i g h t l i n e s , such as a wing with a k i n k i n i t s t r a i l i n g edge
o r a fuselagewith a c y l i n d r i c a lm i d s e c t i o n , a m u l t i s e c t i o n component o p t i o n
i s provided i nt h en u m e r i c a ld i f f e r e n t i a t i o np r o c e d u r e .W i t ht h i so p t i o n ,

14
 S

Figure 5. Illustration of numerical differentiation procedure.

thecurve i s divided i n t o severalsections. A t the ends of thesections,

extrapolations are used t o determine the derivatives, just as they are a t the
ends of thecompletecurve.Sectionsconsisting of j u s t two pointsare
represented by straight lines. The slopes of thesestraightlines then
determine the derivatives a t the ends of adjacent sections.

The values o f the function and its derivative a t each end of a curve
segment constitute four pieces of information which can be used t o determine
thecoefficients of a cubic polynomial approximating thecurve. The form of
the polynomial is

(7.1.2)
where S is theindependentvariable(arclength ranging from values So
t o SI, f representsthe dependent variable (x, y, o r z coordinates), and
primes denote differentiation. The form of i t s derivative is

f' (5) = f ' ( S o ) + (S - So) f"(S,) f ;(s - SO)* f ' I ' ( S O ) (7.1.3)

15
Given the valuesof f and f ' a t So and SI, the simultaneous solution
of equations(7.1.2) and (7.1.3)yields the valuesof f"(So) and f " ' (So).
Equation (7.1.2) can then be used t o determine the value of thefunctionf(S)
a t any valueof S w i t h i n the given curve segment.

T h i s curve-fit method does not insure continuity of the second deriv-

ative of the function and thus i s not a cubic spline f i t i n the usual sense
(reference 6 ) . I t was chosen rather than a spline method because of 'its
consistentlysuperiorresults i n severaltestcases. For example, figure 6
shows a comparison between t h i s methodand a truecubicspline method.
The interpolated coordinates found by thepresent method areconsiderably
less wavy t h a n thosecalculatedusingthespline method. Both methods
fail to represent the shape accurately i n the after region of the body,
because of thehigherlocalcurvature and theproximityofthe ends ofthe
curve.Other comparisons involving a i r f o i l s andmore generalshapesalso
showed smoother results for the present method thanthespline method, i n

+ INFL'
POINTS
T
INTERPOLATED
POINTS (PRESENT METHOD)
e INTERPOLATED
POINTS
(SPLINE METHOD)

Figure 6. Comparison of curve-fit methods.

16
spite of the alleged proof i n reference 6 t h a t , i n general , a s p l i n e produces
t h e smoothest o f a l l p o s s i b l e c u r v e f i t s . The c o n t r a d i c t i o n o f t h i s p r o o f
may p o s s i b l y be. due t o t h e unusual character of the independent variable (it
being defined as a quantity which varies smoothly along a nonsmooth curve)
o r i t may be due t o t h e p r e s e n t a t i o n of t h e r e s u l t s b y a graph o f one
interpolated result (the z-coordinates) as a f u n c t i o n o f o t h e r i n t e r p o l a t e d
results(thex-coordinates).

7.2 D i s t r i b u t i o no fP o i n t sA l o n g N-Lines

Each o f t h e o p t i o n s f o r d i s t r i b u t i n g p o i n t s a l o n g N - l i n e s ( e x c e p t t h e
trivial option of leaving the initial distribution unchanged) r e q u i r e s an
array of normalized arc lengths which applies to every N-line of the com-
ponentunderconsideration. The formulas f o r t h e s ea r c - l e n g t hd i s t r i b u t i o n s
aregiven below.Given t h es p e c i f i e dd i s t r i b u t i o n s ,t h e method c a l c u l a t e s
t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n oneach i n i t i a l N - l i n e and i n t e r p o l a t e s each coordinate
independently t o determinethevalues a tt h ed e s i r e dl o c a t i o n s .I n some
cases a l l p o i n t s onan N-linecoincide(asatthe end o f a pointed body, f o r
example). Then t h e methoddoes notattempt t o i n t e r p o l a t e , b u t s i m p l y
p r o v i d e st h es p e c i f i e d number o f p o i n t s t o t h a t N - l i n e . The f o l l o w i n go p t i o n s
are available for distributing points on N-lines:
1. I n p udti s t r i b u t i o nu,n a l t e r e d
2. I n p udt i s t r i b u t i o n , augmented i n number
3. Constant increments i na r cl e n g t h
4. Constantincrements on thesuperscribedcircle(cosinespacing)
5. Curvature-dependent d i s t r i b u t i o n
6. U s e r - s p e c i f i eddi s t r i b u t i o n

7.2.1 InpuD
t istributionU
, naltered
With t h i s o p t i o n t h e methoddoesno i n t e r p o l a t i o n . It should be used
whenever t h e i n i t i a l d i s t r i b u t i o n a l r e a d y c o n t a i n s a s u f f i c i e n t number o f
p r o p e r l y spaced p o i n t s . If t h e N - l i n e s o f t h e component underconsideration
a r e t o be r e d i s t r i b u t e d , o r i f t h e component i s involved i n an i n t e r s e c t i o n w i t h
another component, then the number of p o i n t s i n p u t mustbe t h e same on each
component o f t h e N - l i n e . I n a d d i t i o n ,t h ed i s t r i b u t i o no fp o i n t s on adjacent

17
N-lines should be f a i r l y s i m i l a r so t h a t when corresponding points on N-lines
areconnected,theresulting"lines make smooth curves.This istheonly.
option which may r e s u l t i n d i f f e r e n t numbers o f p o i n t s and d i f f e r e n t
distributionsofpoints among theN-lines o f acomponent. Although no
interpolationsarerequired, some c a l c u l a t i o n s a r e s t i l l necessary t o d e t e r -
mine the derivatives with respect to arc length of the coordinates at each
p o i n t on each N-line. These a r e needed i n l a t e r c a l c u l a t i o n s t o d e t e r m i n e
intersection curves.

7.2.2 I n p u tD i s t r i b u t i o n , Augmented i n Number

Thisoptionresultsin a distribution which is similar to the initial

distribution,butcontains a d i f f e r e n t number o f p o i n t s . The i n i t i a l d i s t r i -
b u t i o n used i n t h e c a l c u l a t i o n i s t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n f o r t h e f i r s t N - l i n e on
t h e component, unless a l l p o i n t s c o i n c i d e on t h e f i r s t N - l i n e . I n t h a t case
t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n on the second N - l i n e i s used. The method worksby defining
a "normalized point number", pi , ranging from zero to one,

-
pi = (i l ) / ( N - 1) (7.2.1)

where i i s t h ei n d e xo ft h ep o i n t
N i s t h e t o t a l number ofpoints.
and
Arrays o f normalized point number a r e formed f o r b o t h i n p u t and o u t p u t d i s -
tributions. The o u t p u ta r c - l e n g t hd i s t r i b u t i o ni sd e t e r m i n e db yi n t e r p o l a t i n g
the curve of input arc length versus input normalized point number t o t h e
outputvaluesofthenormalizedpoint number. Thisprocedure i s i l l u s t r a t e d
i n f i g u r e 7. S u i t a b l e cases f o r t h i s o p t i o n i n c l u d e b o t h l i f t i n g andnon-
l i f t i n g t y p e components. t is especially useful for precisely control
I 1i n g
the desired distribution without having to load a l a r g e number o f p o i n t s and
without having to determine i n advancewhat the numerical values of the
arclengthsare.Typicalresultsfor a s e c t i o n o f a s u p e r c r i t i c a lw i n ga r e
shown i n f i g u r e 8.

18
 +
.+
+ INPUT
POINTS
*WTE:
ALL
POINTS ARE
LOCATED
AT
EQUAL INCREMENTS +

OUTPUT POINTS I N NORMALIZED POINT

NWBER .

+
+’
.+
. + .
+

0.0 . +’
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 .o
NORMALIZED POINT NUMBER - [(i- 1 ) / ( N - 1)]

Figure 7 . Method of distributing points on an N-line - input distribution

augmented.

+ INPUT
POINTS
(N = 15) o OUTPUT POINTS
(N = 25)

Figure 8 . Point distribution on a supercritical wing section - input distribu-

tion, augmented.
19
7.2.3 Constant Increments in Arc Length
This option results in points distributed uniformly according to the
formula

Si/P = (i - l)/(N - 1) (7.2.2)

where S is the arc length measured from the first point and P is the
total arc length around the perimeter of the N-line. It should be used for
smooth bodies which do not have large variations in curvature (for example,
the cylindrical fuselage section illustrated in figure 9. It should usually
not be used for wing sections, since, for a reasonable number of points, there
would be too few points to accurately define the shape near the leading edge
or other high-curvature regions and too coarse spacing at the trailing edge
for the Kutta condition to be accurately applied.

Figure 9. Point distribution on a cylindrical fuselage section - constant

increments in arc length.

7.2.4 Cosine Spacing

Cosine spacing is a commonly-used distribution, datingfrom some of the
classical two-dimensional theories (reference 7). Its name derives in an
obvious way from the usual formula for the spacing

20
 Xi/C - 1
2 C 1 + cos[(i - l)a/(N - 1)]> (7.2.3)

wherec i s t h e chord,which i s assumed t o be p a r a l l e lt ot h ex - a x i s . The

s i g n i f i c a n c e o f t h i s method,as i l l u s t r a t e d i n f i g u r e 10, i s t h a t p o i n t s a r e
chosen havingthex-coordinatescorrespondingtoequalincrements i n angle
around a c i r c l e c i r c u m s c r i b e d a b o u t t h e N - l i n e w i t h l e a d i n g and t r a i l i n g edges
i n veryfinespacingnearleading
t o u c h i n gt h ec i r c l e .T h i sr e s u l t s and
t r a i l i n g edgesand coarsespacing i n regions away fromthese edges. It i s a
useful distribution option for wing sections but would probably not be
comnonlyused f o r n o n l i f t i n g components.

I EOUAL INCREMENTS OF

Figure 10. Method o f d i s t r i b u t i n g p o i n t s on an N - l i n e - cosinedistribution.

Equation (7.2.3) isnotdirectlyusefulfordeterminingthespecified
arc-length distributions which the method o f t h i s geometry package requires.
Todo t h i s , t h e w i n g s e c t i o n i s f i r s t scaled t o u n i t chord, t r a n s l a t e d t o
put the origin of the coordinate system a t t h e l e a d i n g edge, and r o t a t e d t o
make thechordpara1le1tothex-axis. The angle (6) about thesuperscribed
c i r c l e i s then calculated for each p o i n t on the N-line by solving the equation
1 (7.2.4)
Xi/C = 7 (1 + cos B )

21
using the transformed values of the x-coordinates. The arc-length distribution
corresponding to the input points is also calculated. For both the angle and
arc-length calculations, only the first N-line on a component is used (unless
its length is zero, in which case the second one is used). Given the values
of thearc-length distribution and the angle distribution for the input
coordinates, and the desired values of the angledistribution for the output
coordinates (uniform increments), the arc-length distribution for the output
coordinates is determined by interpolation.

Results of this option for the samesupercritical wing section used

previously are shown in figure 1 1.

Figure 11. Point distribution on a supercritical wing section -cosine

distribution.

7.2.5 Curvature - Dependent Distribution

The accuracy and computational efficiency of thepotential-flow method
are both improved by using fine spacing in regions of high curvature and
coarser spacing in regions of low curvature. This option produces a point
distribution which depends on the curvaturedistribution along the first
N-line of the component (or the second if the length of the first is zero).
If the component is of lifting type, the point distribution is also made to
be a function of the proximity to the trailing and leading edges in order to
allow the trailing-edge Kutta condition to be accurately satisfied and to
keep the variation o f the spacing smooth in the leading-edge region where the
curvature varies rapidly.

22
 The following relationship between the curvature
and the spacing increments
is employed :
Asi = (1 - A - ~ ~ ) ( +~ AS mi n/Asmax'Asmax(7.2.5)
S ~ ~ ~ / A S ~ki/kmax)

where Asi is the ith increment in normalized arc length between adjacent
points, ki is the absolute value of the curvature at the center of theith
segment, kmax is the maximum absolute value of the curvatureon the N-line,
and Asmin and Asmax are, respectively, the minimum and maximum allowable
increments in arc length. In this application, the ratio Asmin/~smax is
specified to be 0.25.

To implement this relationship requiresan iterative procedure. First

the arc-length and curvature distributions are calculated. Then, if the
component is of lifting type, the variable which plays the role of the
curvature in equation (7.2.5) is modified to makeits value at the trailing
edge equal to its leading-edge value and to make it vary linearly from the
leading and trailing-edge values to thevalues at 7.5 percent o f the N-line's
perimeter on either side of the leadingand trailing-edge points. This
modification insures thatpoints will be closely spaced near the trailing
edge and that the spacingwill not vary abruptly near theleading and trailing
edges. To start the iterations, estimates of the values of bsmax and all
the values of AS^ are required. These are a1 1 taken to be equal to the total
length o f the curve divided by the number of segments it contains. Given the
estimated values o f Asmax and AS^, the curvature at the center o f each
segment (modified as described above)is determined by interpolation of the
curvature versus arc-length relationship and used in equation (7.2.5) to
update the estimatedvalues of AS^. These values are then scaled to make
their sum equal to the total length of the N-line and searched to determine
the value of AS,,,^^. These updated values of AS^ and ~s~~~ are then used
in the next iteration and the process is repeated a maximumof five times or
until the required scale factorfor the lengths of the increments is
sufficiently close tounity.

Results of this option for the supercritical wing section used previously
are shown in figure 12. Results for a section of a nonlifting component are
shown in figure 13.
23
Figure 12. Point distribution on a supercritical wing section-curvature-
dependent distribution.

Figure 13. Point distribution on a section of a nonlifting component-

curvature-dependent distribution.

7.2.6 User-Specified Distribution

For N-lines o f unusual shape or when components are located very close
together, it is possible that none of the options described above will produce
an adequate point distribution. To account for this possibility, provision
has been made for the user to specify (as input data) values o f the normalized
arc lengths, which are used directly to determinethe augmented coordinates.

7.3 Distribution of N-lines

After the points on the initial N-lines have been redistributed, each
N-line on a component has the same numberof points distributed in a similar
manner. Connecting corresponding points on a1 1 N-1 ines generates a set o f 1 ines
designated "lines. Since the distribution of points is the same on each N-line,
the "lines are smooth and have fairly small curvature. The process o f
24
augmenting and redistributing the N-lines is accompllshed by augmenting and
redistributing pointsalong these "lines. For thesecalculations, i t is
required that each "line have a total length greater than zero.

There arefouroptionsavailablefor the distribution Of "lines. They are:

1. Input d i s t r i b u t i o n , una1 tered
2. Input distribution, augmented i n number
3. Constant
increments
4. User-specified
distribution
The descriptions of a1 1 four options are completely analogous t o the descrip-
tions of the corresponding options for distribution o f points on N-lines
described i n section 7.2.

There are twomodes of operationof this portion of the geometry package.

The f i r s t (and most common)mode i s designated the planar-secti on mode and the
second i s termed thearc-length mode i n thediscussions which follow.

7.3.1 The P1 anar-Section Mode

The usual way of i n p u t t i n g data to the potential-flow program is t o make
theN-lines on a component planarcutsperpendicularto some axis of the
component. For nonlifting components, t h i s convention is just a convenience
t o theuser. For l i f t i n g components, however, theelementsare approximated
by trapezoids, so that i f the N-1 ines are notpara1 le1 , the accuracy of repre-
sentation of the component by i t s elements is notas good.

The planar section mode of operation redistributes the points on the

"lines i n such a way that a l l N-lines, exceptperhaps the first and l a s t ones
on a component, are parallel. T h e f i r s t and l a s t N-lines generally define the
planform view ofthe component, which is not required to becomposed onlyof
straight lines. The method does not a l t e r these N-lines d u r i n g this portion of
the calculations. The distributionsdescribed above generally refer to the
distances between the parallel planes, normalized by the distances between the
f i r s t and l a s t N-lines. A t the edqesof the component, when the f i r s t and l a s t
N-linesarenotplanar, the distributions refer to distances between the f i r s t

25
 p o i n t on t h e N - l i n e under consideration and t h e f i r s t p o i n t on t h e f i r s t N - l i n e
o f t h e component, r e s o l v e d i n t h e d i r e c t i o n p e r p e n d i c u l a r t o t h e p a r a l l e l p l a n e s
and normalized by the distance between t h e f i r s t p o i n t s on t h e f i r s t and l a s t
N - l i n e so ft h e component. The o r i e n t a t i o n o f t h e p l a n e s i s d e f i n e d b y s p e c i f y -
i n g (as i n p u t d a t a ) t h e d i r e c t i o n c o s i n e s o f a vectorperpendiculartotheplanes.
For t h i s c a l c u l a t i o n , t h e sense o f t h e normal v e c t o r i s n o t i m p o r t a n t . However,
i f intersection curves are calculated and the components aresubsequentlyrepan-
eled,thenthevector must p o i n t i n t h e d i r e c t i o n o f i n c r e a s i n gN - l i n e s . I
f the
directioncosinesarenotspecified and t h e p l a n a r s e c t i o n mode i s used, d e f a u l t
values o f (1.0, 0.0, 0.0) f o r n o n l i f t i n g -1 .O, 0.0) f o r l i f t -
componentsand (0.0,
i n g components are assumed. When thedefaultvaluesare used, N-lines must be
i n p u t from f r o n t t o back on n o n l i f t i n g components and from t i p t o root o f l i f t i n g
components.

i s t o determine
The f i r s t step i n d i s t r i b u t i n g t h e p o i n t s on t h e " l i n e s
theequationoftheplanesrepresentingtheN-lines and t h e i n t e r p o l a t i n g p o l y -
nomialsrepresentingthe"line segments. The equations o f t h e planes o f the
N-1 ine2 are o f form

Ax + By t Cz t Di = 0 (7.3.1)
where A, B, and C are
equal t ot h e x, y, and z d i r e c t i o nc o s i n e so f
thevector normal to the planes (andhence are the same f o r a1 1 planes on t h e
component). The values o f Di ( d i f f e r e n tf o r each plane)aregiven by

Di = Dl + Ki (D2 - Dl ) (7.3.2)

where Dl and D2 arethecoefficientsoftheplanespassingthroughthe

f i r s t and l a s t p o i n t s , r e s p e c t i v e l y , on t h e f i r s t " l i n e o f t h e component and
Ki i s t h ev a l u eo ft h ed i s t r i b u t i o np a r a m e t e rf o rt h eN - l i n e underconsider-
ation. Dl i s determinedfromtherelationship

(7.3.3)

where xl, y, , and z1 arethecoordinates o f t h ef i r s tp o i n t on t h e f i r s t

"line. De i s determined i n a s i m i l a r manner, u s i n gt h el a s tp o i n t on the
first"line. The i n t e r p o l a t i n gp o l y n o m i a l sf o rt h e" l i n e segments a r e
determinedbythecurve-fitproceduredescribed i n s e c t i o n 7.1.

26
 The second step i n d i s t r i b u t i n g points on the "lines i s t o determine which
"line segments intersect which planes. For this step, i t i s assumed that"line
curvature i s small enough so that straight-line approximations to the "line seg-
ments may be used.

Then, knowingwhich "line segments intersect which planes andknowing the

equations of the "line segments and theplanes,thecoordinates ofeach inter-
sectionpoint can becomputed. Todo this for any point,substitutetheexpres-
sionsforx,y,zas a function of arclengthalongthe"line segment (each
having the form of equation(7.1.2))intotheequationoftheplane(7.3.1). This
gives a singlecubicequation w i t h S i , thearclengthalongthe"line segment
totheintersectionpoint,astheonly unknown. This i s solved by Newton's
method. Using the intersectionpoint of the plane and thestraight-line approx-
imation to the "line segment t o determine the starting point, the method typi-
cally requires only three or four iterations to converge t o an adequatesolution.

Figures 14 and 15 show thetop views of two typical wings both before
and after redistributing the N-lines. Since the wing i n figure 14 is trape-
zoidal i n planform and has a linear twist distribution, only the N-lines at
the t i p and rootare needed i n the initial geometricrepresentation.Since
the initial representations of the t i p and root sections are already planar
and all "lines are s t r a i g h t l i n e s , the planar-section modeand thearc-length
mode (described i n thenextsection) produce identicalresults. A more gen-
eral case, for which the twomodes ofoperationshouldgivevery different
results is shown i n figure15. In this case,the"lines on the entireout-
board half of the span are straight lines, b u t they are curved on theinboard
portion.Therefore,themultisection component optiondescribed i n section 7.1
i s used,allowingthelinearportionofthe geometry t o be represented using
only two N-lines. Figure 16 shows thetop view of a fuselagebefore and a f t e r
redistributing the N-lines. This fuselage has a cylindricalmidsection w i t h
semi-ellipsoidalsectionsfore and a f t . Again, themultisection component
optionallowsthelinearportionto be represented using only two N-lines. In
all three of these cases, the redistributed N-1 ines are equally spaced.

27
~ "" ..- __
. ._- . ". . .
" __
. . ..- ___ _.. .. . .. . . _...-- . . - ._

INITIAL ELEMENT
DISTRIBUTION

ELEMENT DISTRIBUTION
AFTERREPANELING

Figure 14. Redistribution o f elements on a trapezoidalwing{cosinespacing

chordwise, constant increments spanwi se, planar- secti'on mode).

28
INITIAL ELEMENT
DISTRIBUTION

ELEMENT DISTRIBUTION
AFTER REPANELING

Figure 15. Redistribution o f elements on a supercritical wing (cosine spacing

chordwise, constant increments spanwise, planar-section mode,
mu1 tisection componentoption).

29
w
0

I N I T I A L ELEMENT DISTRIBUTION

ELEMENTDISTRIBUTIONAFTERREPANELING

Figure 16. Redistribution o f elements on a fuselage (constant increments around circumference and in
axial direction, planar-section mode, multisection component option).
 7.3.2 The Arc-Length Mode
Insome cases the N-line a t the edge of a component maybe so highlynonplanar
t h a t a strip bounded by this N-line andan adjacent planar N-line would vary
strongly i n w i d t h , resulting i n areastoosparsely covered w i t h elements. An
example of this i s the under-wing pylon shown i n figure17(a). In this figure
thethicknessofthe wing has been exaggerated tohelpillustratethepoint. In
such cases the arc-length mode of d i s t r i b u t i n g N-lines on the component should be
used. In this mode thespecifieddistributionparametersrefer t o fractionsof
the total arc lengths of the “lines, rather than to normalized distances between
planes. The points on all “lines o f a component are d i s t r i b u t e d i n a similar
manner, so that the N-lines i n the vicinity o f thenonplanar edge of the compo-
nent curve smoothly around to create a more uniform distribution of the elements,
asillustrated i n figure17(b). In this mode of operation,the method of redis-
t r i b u t i n g pointsalong M-lines i s completelyanalogous to the method ofredis-
t r i b u t i n g pointsalongN-lines.

Planar-Section
(a) Mode. ( b ) Arc-Length Mode.
Figure 17. Comparison of planar-section and arc-length modes o f distribution of
N-lines - strut on a thick wing.

31

I
 8.0 CALCULATION OF INTERSECTION CURVES

8.1 General Features of the Method

The second major operation performed by the geometry package i s the cal cu-
lationofthecurves of intersection between body components. For this calcu-
lation i t i s assumed that the "lines of one of the components (designatedthe
intersecting component) pierce the surface of the other component (designated
theintersected component). The finalsolution is a set of intersectionpoints,
one for each augmented M-line on the intersecting component. In general , the
method calculates the intersection point o f a curve and a surface and hence
requires a surface-fit method as well as a curve-fit method. The surface-fit
method usesthetheory of parametriccubicsurfacepatchesoriginated byCoons
(reference 8 ) and extensively developed and applied by a number of other
investigators(reference 9 , f o r example). The curve-fi t method i s the same
one used i n thepaneling of isolated componentsand described i n section 7.1.

8.2 Restrictions and Limitationsof the Method

The intersection method i s designed t o handlecases which occurfrequently

i n aircraft applications, such as wing-fuselage intersections, wing-pylon
intersections,etc.It i s notdesigned for complex cases i n which the inter-
sectioncurve is discontinuousorforcasesinvolving f i l l e t s o r smooth transi-
tions fromonecomponent tothenext. Use of the method i s limitedtocases
I i n which thefollowingrestrictionsapply:
1. A distinction can be made between intersecting and intersected
components.
2. A component can intersect only one other componentand can be inter-
sected by only one other component. If a body intersects or i s
intersected by severalbodies, i t must be divided up intoseveral
components. A single componentcan intersect one componentandbe
intersected by another component, however.
3. The "lines on the intersecting component pierce the surface of the
intersected component a t a sharpangle.Surfacesarenottangent
where they meet.

32
 4. The “fines on the intersecting component extend sufficiently far
into the interior of the intersected component to allow a planar
representation of the elements on the intersected component to be
used in the process of searching for the elements whichare inter-
sected by the M-1 ines.
5. The intersecting componenthas at least one N-line which lies entirely
in the interior of the intersected component.
6. No ”line on the intersecting component intersectsthe intersected
component more thanonce.

8.3 Details of the Method of Solution

The method of calculation of the intersection curve between two components
I !

requi resthat one component be assigned the role of the intersecting component
and the other component be assigned the role of the intersected component.
This is done by the user in the input data to the geometry package. The inter-
section curve is then defined by the set of intersection points between the
“lines on the intersecting component and the elements on the intersected
component. In order to define this curve at a sufficient number of points,
every “line on the intersecting component (after redistributing and augmenting
the points on the N-lines) is used. On the intersected component, in principle
either the original input elements or the elements after augmentingpoints on
just the N-lines, or the elements after augmenting points on both N-lines and
“lines could be used for defining surface patches which are intersected by the
”lines of the intersecting component. Since parametric cubic surface patches
are used, however, it is not necessary to use the large numberof elements that
exist after augmenting points on both N-lines and “lines. Since the input
points may vary in number from one N-line to the next, and since the distribu-
tions may also be dissimilar, use of the original input elements could result
in surface patches having much more extreme curvature(and hence less accuracy)
than use of either of the other twosets of elements. Therefore, the elements
after augmenting points on the N-lines but before augmenting points on the
M-lines are used for the formation of surface patches.

One possible method for calculating intersections of an M-1 ine and a

surface might operate as follows: Derive mathematical formulas to represent
33
each segment of the "line and each element of the surface and f i n d the roots o f
theequationsobtainedby.equatingcoordinatevalues on the segments and the ele-
ments. If a particularequation has no real roots, or i f i t does have real roots
b u t the points they represent fall outside the bounds of theelement or the seg-
ment, thentheelement and the segment have no intersection points. Ifthe equa-
tion does have real roots and thepointstheyrepresent do f a l l w i t h i n the bounds
of both theelement and the surface, then the roots are the intersection points.
When a l l such equations havebeen solved,theintersectionpointsaregrouped,
somehow, to determinetheintersectioncurves. Such a methodwould have tosolve
a large number of equations(a number equal to the number of "line segments
multiplied by the numberof surface elements) and many of these equations would
f a i l t o have solutions. I t would, therefore, be very uneconomical t o use.

A more economical approach,adoptedi n the present method, f i r s t compares

maximum and minimum coordinate values on the "line segments and the surface
elements and eliminates from considerationthosecombinations which obviously
contain no intersectionpoints. Then.an approximateintersection method,
w i t h planarelementrepresentations, i s used to determine which "line segments
and surfaceelementscontainintersectionpoints and to get approximatevalues
of theintersectionpointcoordinates. Then, mathematical representationsare
obtainedonlyforthoseelementscontainingintersectionpoints, and these are
used,together w i t h the representations of the M-1 ine segments, to calculate
theintersectionpoints more accurately.Details of this approach are given
bel ow.

8.3.1 The I n i t i a l Search for "LineSegmentsand Surface Elements Containing

Intersection Points
The basicinformation needed to conduct the i n i t i a l stages of thesearch
incl udes the maximum and minimum values of each coordinate on each element of
the intersected component, on each strip of the intersected component, on each
segment of the intersecting "line, and on the entire intersecting "line.
Because i t i s assumed that the intersecting "lines extend some distance into
the bodyand a planarelementrepresentation canbe used, i t i s legitimate to
assume that the maximum and minimum values onan element must occur a t one
of i t s corners. A quick comparison of thecoordinatesofthecornerpoints

34
t h u s determines the extrema. Extreme values on a strip aredetermined'by com-
paringtheextremevalues o f each of i t s elements. Values on the"line segments
are determined more accurately, assuming cubic relationships between the coord-
inatevalues and thestraight-linearclengthsalong the "line (equations(7.1.2)
and (7.1.3)). Equation equation(7.1.2) tozero(separatelyforx,y, and z) and
solvinggives two valuesofarc-lengthalongthe"line(foreachcoordinate).
The real solutions which fa1 1 w i t h i n the bounds of the segment are used to cal cu-
late coordinate values which are compared, along w i t h thevalues a t t h e ends o f
the segment, to'determinethe extreme values. Maximum and minimum values on the
entire intersecting "line are determined by comparing the extreme values of each
of i t s segments.

Having determined the extreme values of thecoopdinates on s t r i p s and

elements of the intersected componentand on segments and the entirety of the
intersecting "line, the searchingprocedurebegins by comparing the extreme
coordinatevalues on the f i r s t strip of the intersected component w i t h the
valuesfor the entire "line. If the rangeof any of the coordinatevalues
on the strip f a i l s t o include a t l e a s t p a r t of therange of the values of the
same coordinate on the "line, then no intersection can possiblyoccur on that
strip. Successive strips are compared w i t h the"line u n t i l one i s found
which may possiblycontaintheintersectionpoint. Then each element on the
strip i s compared w i t h the"line u n t i l a possibleintersected element i s
found. Then each segment on theintersecting"line is compared w i t h theele-
ment u n t i l a possibleintersecting segment i s found.

8.3.2 The FinalSearch f o r "LineSegmentsand Surface Elements Containing

Intersection Points and the Approximate Determination o f the Inter-
section Points
Having found an element on the intersected componentand a segment of
the intersecting "line which share, a t l e a s t p a r t i a l l y , the ranges of t h e i r
x, y , and z-coordinates, a more careful check on whether or not they inter-
sect i s made. If the element i s notalreadytriangular, i t is dividedinto
two triangles by drawing one of the diagonalsacross the quadrilateral region.
Each element i s t h e n represented bytwo planar,triangular subelements. The
planar coefficients of each subelement are determined, starting from the
general form of the equation o f a plane
35
 A x + By + Cz + D = 0 (8.3.1)

D ( i l l u s t r a t i n gt h a tt h e r ea r eo n l yt h r e e
by f i r s t d i v i d i n g t h r o u g h b y
independent unknowns i n equation(8.3.1)) and r e a r r a n g i n g t o g e t

A/Dx + B/Dy + C/Dz = -1 (8.3.2)

and t h e n s u b s t i t u t i n g t h e c o o r d i n a t e s o f t h e c o r n e r p o i n t s o f t h e subelement
i n t o e q u a t i o n (8.3.2) t o o b t a i n a third-order system of linear equations which
i se a s i l ys o l v e df o r A/D, B/D, and C/D. A, B, and C arethenfoundby
m u l t i p l y i n g b y any a r b i t r a r i l y chosen ( f i n i t e , n o n z e r o ) v a l u e o f D.

A check i s then made t o see if the ends o f t h e " l i n e segment l i e on

oppositesidesoftheplane.This i s done bycomputingthedirecteddistance
from each p o i n t t o t h e p l a n e , u s i n g the.formula

(8.3.3)
dA2+ B2 + C2

where d i st h ed i s t a n c e and (xl , y1 , z1 ) a r et h ec o o r d i n a t e so ft h ep o i n t .

If t h ev a l u eo f d has t h e same s i g n f o r b o t h end points,the segment does
n o ti n t e r s e c tt h ep l a n e o f t h e t r i a n g u l a r subelement. I f t h i s i s t r u e f o r
bothsubelements on theelement,theelement and t h e " l i n e segment do n o t
i n t e r s e c t and the next segment i s considered.

When an " l i n e segment which does cross the plane of oneof the subelements
i s found, t h e p o i n t o f i n t e r s e c t i o n of the segment and the plane i s foundusing
the method described i n section 7.3.1. F o rt h i sc a l c u l a t i o n ,t h e" l i n e seg-
ment i s againrepresentedby a cubicpolynomial.Giventheintersectionpoint,
it i s next necessary t o checkwhether o r n o t it fa1 1s w i t h i n t h e t r i a n g u l a r
r e g i o no ft h e subelement. Todo t h i s ,t h ep r e s e n t methodchecks t h a t each s i d e
of the triangle lies on the same s i d e o f b o t h t h e i n t e r s e c t i o n p o i n t and the
opposite apex o f t h et r i a n g l e . To determinethat A and B y l i e
two points,
on the same s i d e o f a l i n e f r o m p o i n t s 1 t o 2, the method takesthecross
p r o d u cot tfh ev e c t o r sf r o m A t o 1 and from A t o 2 and thecross
product o f thevectorsfrom B t o 1 and from B t o 2 and checks whether
or not the dot product of the two r e s u l t i n g v e c t o r s i s p o s i t i v e .

36
 If the p o i n t does not f a l l w i t h i n the bounds of either t r i a n g u l a r subele-
ment, thenext segment of the "line is checked. I f none of the segments
intersectstheelement,thenext element i s checked i n the abovemanner. If
no element on the current strip contains the intersection p o i n t , the entire
procedure,includingthe i n i t i a l searchdescribed i n section 8.3.1 , i s
repeated for the next strip, and so on, u n t i 1 e i t h e r an element of the inter-
sected body and a segment of the intersecting "line which contain the inter-
section p o i n t are found, o r all possible combinations of elements and M-line
segments areexhausted.If an approximate intersection point is found i n
this manner, i t i s used as a s t a r t i n g p o i n t for the iterative method des-
cribed below, t o determinea more preciseintersection p o i n t . I f the method
f a i l s t o f i n d an approximate intersection p o i n t , calculations continue,
s t a r t i n g w i t h thenext"line on theintersecting component.In thiscase,
execution of the computer program i s terminated after the intersection calcu-
lations since the final repaneling method requires the intersection curve t o
be u n i n terrupted and compl etel y def i ned .

8.3.3 Derivation of a Mathematical Representation of theSurface of an

Element
In order t o compute a more accurate intersection point, i t is necessary
t o obtain an equation f o r thesurface of the element.This i s done u s i n g the
theory of parametriccubicsurfacesdescribed i n references 8 and 9. The
following discussion i s a sumnary of relevantportions of thetheory.

Requiredgeometric quantities a t each corner p o i n t of the-element under

considerationincludethefollowing (as well asthecorresponding y and z
Val ues ) :

where thesubscriptsindicatedifferentiation and u and w arethe param-

e t e r s upon which thesurface f i t is based. On the boundary curves of an
element, u represents a fraction of thestraight-linearclength between
the two M-1 ine boundary curves and w represents a fraction of the straight-
1ine arc 1ength between the two N-1 ine boundary curves. On the interior of
an element, u and w representquantities analogous tothosedefined abov'e
37
 ~

but, for elements w i t h compound c u r v a t u r e , t h e p h y s i c a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f the

parameters i s l e s s obvious.xu a t a c o r n e ri n d i c a t e st h ed e r i v a t i v eo f x
with respect to straight-line arc lengthalongtheN-linepassingthroughthe
corner, normalized by the straight-line distance between adjacent points
on t h e N-1 ine. xw i n d i c a t e s t h e d e r i v a t i v e w i t h r e s p e c t t o s t r a i g h t - l i n e
arc length along the "line passing through the corner, normalized by the
s t r a i g h t - l i n ed i s t a n c e between adjacentpoints on t h e" l i n e . xuw andxwu
i n d i c a t ec r o s sd e r i v a t i v e terms i nt h ed i r e c t i o n so ft h e" l i n e and N-line.
The f i r s t d e r i v a t i v e terms (not normalized) were previously required for the
calculations to redistribute and augment p o i n t s a l o n g t h e " l i n e s and N-lines.
They need o n l y be normalized by the proper element side length to be a p p l i c -
ablehere. The crossderivativeterms xuw and xwu areobtainedby numer-
ically differentiating the unnormalized f i r s t d e r i v a t i v e terms
along the "lines and N-lines, respectively, and thennormalizingbythe
productofthelengthsoftheadjacentelementsides. The two c r o s s - d e r i v a t i v e
values a t each cornerarethenaveraged,sincetheequation used t o r e p r e s e n t
the surface implies that they are equal.

These geometricquantities,for x, y , and z and f o r each c o r n e ro ft h e

element, c o n s t i t u t e t h e s o - c a l l e d " p a r a m e t r i c c u b i c p a t c h c o e f f i c i e n t s in
geometric form." The c o e f f i c i e n t s canbe arranged i n m a t r i x f o r m as f o l l o w s
(shown o n l yf o rt h e x coordinates):

I x10 xll xwlo xwl

"

CGXl = x X X X
(8.3.5)
uoo uol uwoo uwol
I xulo
L
xull
X
uwl
0 uwl
1
X

I nt h i sm a t r i xt h e u and w subscriptsagainrepresentderivatives asabove.

The 0 and 1 s u b s c r i p t st o g e t h e ri n d i c a t et h ec o r n e ro ft h e elementbeing
considered, the first indicating the N-1 i n e and t h e second i n d i c a t i n g t h e
"line. The 0 indicatesthe lower-numbered l i n e on theelement and the 1
indicatesthehigher-numberedline.Similarmatricesarealsoformedforthe
y and z-coordinate
terms.

38
 The matrixof coefficients i n geometric form, [G,], and the corresponding
y and z matricescontain a l l the information needed t o derive algebraic
expressions for the coordinates a t any point on the surface of the element i n
terms of the parametricvariables. These expressionsare of the following form
(again shown only f o r the x coordinates):

x(u,w) = w 3[Axu 3 + Bxu 2 + CXu + DX]

+ w 2[Exu 3 + Fxu 2 + G,u + Hxl

(8.3.6)
+ w [Ixu 3 + Jxu2 + Kxu + Lx]

+ [Mxu 3 + Nxu 2 + PXu + Px]

The coefficients of equation(8.3.6) canbe grouped t o form the so-called

"matrix of coefficients i n algebraic form," [A,] as follows:

I
p x Bx cx
Ex Fx Gx
CAX1 = (8.3.7)
IX J x Kx
LMX Nx b, LpXX
To show how the matrix of coefficients i n geometric form maybe converted
i n t o thematrix o f coefficients i n algebraic form, i t i s f i r s t necessary t o study
theproperties of equation(8.3.6)further. On the boundaries of the element
one of the parametric variables i s constant, either zero or one, and the other
varies from zero t o one. For definiteness, assume thatthevariable w is
equal tozero. Equation (8.3.6) thenreduces t o a cubicequation w i t h u as
theonlyindependent variable. On the oppositeside of the element, w i s
equal t o one and equation (8.3.6) reduces toanothercubicequation,again
w i t h u as the onlyindependentvariable. The entiresurface of the element
can be considered t o be a collection o f cubiccurves w i t h w constant and u
variable. Each of thesecurves has the form ofequation(7.1.2), whichcanbe
converted to the form
f ( u ) = F1(u)f(0) + F 2 ( u ) f ( l ) + F3(u)f'(0) + F 4 ( u ) f ' ( l ) (8.3.8)
39
by solving for the secondand t h i r d d e r i v a t i v e terms i n (7.1.2) as described i n
s e c t i o n 7.1. When t h i s i s done, theterms F1 (u),F2(u),F3(u),. and F4(u)are
given by
2 = 2~3
F1 (u) - 3~ + 1

F2(u)2 = 02u3 + 3u
(8.3.9)
F3(u) = u3 - 2u2 + u
3
F4(u) = u - u2

(8.3.10)

where
-2 +1 +1
t 3 -1 -2
CMI = (8.3.11 )
0 + 1 0
0 0 0
I nm a t r i xn o t a t i o n ,e q u a t i o n (8.3.8) becomes

F(u) = [F] - [f (0) f ( 1 ) f ' ( 0 ) f'(l)lT

(8.3.12)
= [u3 u2 u 1 1 M
[I [f(O) f(1) f'(0) f'(1)IT

where T indicatesthatthetranspose o f t h em a t r i xi s t o be taken. Now, using

(8.3.12), theequations for x(u) and xw(u) on the boundary curves w = 0
and w = 1 can be w r i t t e n as
3 2
X(U,O) = [u u u 1 1 [MI . [xoo xl0 xu IT
00 x u l o

3 2
Xw(U,l) = [U u u 13 [MI 9 [X, X X IT
uwxuwll
01 wll ol

40
o r more compactly

(8.3.14)
Equation (8.3.12) can also be used t o derive the expression

x(u,w) = [w 3 w2 W 11 [MI [X(U,O) X(u,1) Xw(U,o) xw(u,l)lT (8.3.15)

or equivalently

Combining (8.3.1.4) and (8.3.16)gives

3 2 T
x(U,w) = [u-? U2 u 11 [MI [G,] [MIT [w w w 13 (8.3.17)

Sinceequation (8.3.6) canbe rearranged and written as

3 2 T
X(U,W) = [u3 u2 u !I * LAXI [W w w 1 I (8.3.18)

the matrixof coefficients i n geometric form i s converted t o thematrixof

coefficients i n algebraic form by the operation

(8.3.19)

Expressions f o r the y and z coordinatesasfunctions of the parameters u

and w areobtained i n asimilar manner, u s i n g thematrices of geometric
q u a n t i t i e s [G 1 and [G,].
Y
Including coefficients for all three coordinates, there are forty-eight
parametriccubicquantitiesassociated w i t h each element. Except f o r the
coordinatesthemselves (twelve of the forty-eight quantities), these quanti-
ties aregenerallynotshared by adjacent elements. However, these coeffici-
ents a r e a l l derived from geometricdata which i s continuous from element to
elementand, therefore, i s shared by adjoiningelements.Therefore,alarge
reduction i n the computer program storagerequirements can be made, a t a
small expense of additional computatjon time, by storing all data i n the
(unnormal ized) geometric formand converting to the algebraic form of equation
(8.3.6) only when actually needed. Therefore, the coordinates, their deriva-
tives along the N-lines, and "lines, their cross-derivatives, and the arc
41
lengths between adjacent points are the onlygeometricdata used i n the present
method.

8.3.4 Computation of More Precise Values of the CoordinatesoftheInter-

section P o i n t
A t this point, analytic expressions have been obtainedforthecoordi-
natesalong the intersecting M-line segment i n termsof s , thearclength
alongthe segment (equation(7.1.2)) and forthecoordinates on thesurface
of theelement i n termsof theparametricvariables u and w (equation
(8.3.6)).Designatingpoints on the surface by thesubscript s and points
on the"line segment by thesubscript E, expressions have been obtained
f o r xQ(s),y,(s), z Q ( s ) . x S ( u , w ) , ys(uyw), and zs(u,w). A t theintersec-
tionpoint

(8.3.20)

Equation (8.3.20) represents a system of threesimultaneousnonlinear equa-

tions i n the three unknowns (u,w,s).

The s o l u t i o n of this systemofnonlinearequationsrequires an i t e r a t i v e

procedure which must s t a r t from some estimate of thesolution. An estimate
o f the solution, i n terms of thecoordinates of the intersection point
(xi , yi , z i ) was obtained d u r i n g thesearchingproceduretodetermine which
"line segment intersects which element of theintersected component. An
estimate of s i , thearclengthalongthe M-line segment totheintersection
point, was alsoobtained. The coordinatedata must be used t o determine esti-
mates of the values o f the u and w variablesattheintersectionpoint
( u i , wi ) . In the present method , the two pl anar subelements are converted
into a singleplanarelement and thevalues of u and w i n theplanar
element arethendetermined. The planarelement i s formedfrom thethree
cornerpointsdefiningthesubelement i n which the approximation to the inter-
section point i s located and a fourthpointobtained by rotating the other
cornerpoint of the original elementaboutthelineseparating the two sub-
elements u n t i l i t lies i n theplane of theotherthreepoints.

42
 The parametric coefficients of a point i n a planarelement bounded by
straight lines can be determined most easily be f i r s t noting that all coef-
ficients of second- and third-order terms i n equation (8.3.6) must vanish
and then by f i n d i n g the other four coefficients directly from the properties
of the sides of the element. The result i s thatequation (8.3.6) reduces t o

x(u,w) = x00 + (x10 - x00)u + (x01 -xoo)w + (x11 - x10 - x01 + XO&W

(8.3.21)
Equations f o r the y and z coordinates have similar form. Given the
values of x,y and z a t a point,equation (8.3.21) and thecorresponding
y and z equationsconstitute a systemof threeequationsforthe two
unknowns ( u and w ) . The nonlinear term uw i s eliminated from each equa-
tion and then one equation i s added t o eachof the other two equations to
result, finally, i n a systemof two independent linear equations for the two
unknowns.

Given the estimate of thevariables (si , u i , w i ) a t theintersection

point, Newton’s method i s used tosolvethenonlinear system (8.3.20). The
process generally takes only four or five iterations to converge to an error
i n thesquare-rootofthe sum of thesquares o f the variables of less t h a n
f o r a typicalcase. When solved,si can be used i n equation (7.1.2)
and thecorrespondingequationsfor y and z toobtain the coordinates of
theintersectionpoint.Alternatively, ui and wi could be used i n (8.3.6)
and thecorresponding y and z equations.

8.3.5 Test Cases fortheIntersection Method

In order to verify the accuracy of the present method, a number of t e s t
cases were run. These arenot examples of r e a l i s t i c a i r c r a f t components, b u t
they were chosen because their intersection curves can be analytically deter-
mined. Figure18 shows a relatively simplecase,theintersectionof two
circular cy\ inders, Using onlyfourelementstorepresent each quadrant of
each cylinder producesremarkably good results. There i s no discernable d i f -
ference between thetheoretical and the calculatedresults(tothescale
plotted). This i s an especiallyaccuratecasefor any method, sincethe
intersecting “lines are straight lines and theelements on the intersected
43
componenthave curvatureinonly one d i r e c t i o n . A more d i f f i c u l t case, t h e
i n t e r s e c t i o n o f two spheres, i s shown i n f i g u r e 19. This case t e s t s t h e f u l l
c a p a b i l i t yo ft h ei n t e r s e c t i o n method. The i n t e r s e c t i n g " l i n e segments a r e
c i r c u l a ra r c s . The i n t e r s e c t e d elements have curvature i n b o t hd i r e c t i o n s and
some of the intersected elements have zero-length sides (i.e. , some elements
aretriangular).Nevertheless,thepresentmethod'sresults,using 250 e l e -
ments on each sphere, a r e v e r y a c c u r a t e ; t h e c a l c u l a t e d i n t e r s e c t i o n . c u r v e i s
o n l yv e r ys l i g h t l yd i f f e r e n tf r o mt h et h e o r e t i c a l one. Figure 20 shows the
f i n a l t e s t case, t h e i n t e r s e c t i o n o f two e l l i p s o i d s . L i k e t h e case o f t h e
two spheres, t h i s case shows good r e s u l t s ,u s i n g 250 elementsperbody. The
method f a i l e d t o f i n d i n t e r s e c t i o n p o i n t s f o r t h e " l i n e s p a r a l l e l t o t h e
x-axis i n f i g u r e 20, sincethese"lines meet t h e i n t e r s e c t e d component
tangential ly.

In order to illustrate the method f o r a c o n f i g u r a t i o n more t y p i c a l of

a i r c r a f tc o n f i g u r a t i o n s ,f i g u r e 21 i s included.This shows a wingintersect-
i n g a c y l i n d r i c a ls e c t i o ns i m i l a rt ot h em i d s e c t i o no f a typicalfuselage. To
givetheintersectioncurve more character, the thickness of the wing hasbeen
greatly exaggerated.

7- THEORETICALINTERSECTION

CALCULATED INTERSECTIONPOINTS
CURVE

Figure 18. I n t e r s e c t i o n method t e s t case - intersectionof two c i r c u l a r

cylinders(sideview).

44
 SIDE VIEW END VIEW

THEORETICALINTERSECTION CURVE """ THEORETICALINTERSECTION CURVE

0 CALCULATED INTERSECTION POINTS CALCULATED INTERSECTIONPOINTS

Figure 19. Intersection method test case - intersection o f two spheres.

Figure 20. Intersection method test case -intersection o f two ellipsoids

(sideview).
45
 9.0 FINAL REPANELING OF COMPONENTS

9.1 General Considerations

The final major operation performed by the geometry package is the
redistribution of points on a l l components which intersect other components.
The pointspacingrequirements of the potential-flow method for intersecting
bodies arenotas wellunderstood asthoseforisolatedbodies. The accuracy
of surface-singularity type methods i n regionsnear concave corners is a
matterof dispute i n two-dimensions (reference 10) and has not been exten-
sively.studied i n three dimensions. Some obviousrequirements can be identi-
fied, however. One i s thatportionsof componentswhich fallinsideother
components should be eliminated,or i n certaincases,designatedasextra
s t r i p s o r ignoredelements. Another i s thattherepanel i n g shouldnotcause
abrupt changes i n the elementspacing.Therefore, the entire component should
be repaneledto produce a smooth transition from thepaneling i n theregion
of the intersection curve to the paneling i n distant regions, rather than just
theregion o f theintersection curvebeingrepaneled. I t i s alsopossible
that future potential-flow methods (suchas the method of reference 5) will
require the matching ofthecornersoftheelementsofadjacent components t o
eliminate or at least reduce the size of any gaps between elements.

I t i s possibleto envision innumerable different types of intersections

between bodies, each of which would have i t s own specialpanelingrequire-
ments. I t i s not possibleto develop a method sufficiently general to deal
w i t h them a l l . However, plausiblepaneling schemes can be developed forcer-
tain frequently occurring configurations, such as wing-fuselage or wing-pylon
cases,sothatthesecases can be handled routinely. The present method
divides all componentswhich areinvolved i n intersections into three distinct
general categories and providesseparate means ofdealing w i t h each o f them.
A1 1 intersecting components (those w it h M-1 ines which pierce other components)
are repaneled one way, w i t h only minor variations (whether they are l i f t i n g
ornonlifting).Nonliftingintersected components are repaneled differently,
and l i f t i n g intersected components are repaneled i n a different way s t i l l .
The methods used for these three categories are described i n thefollowing
sections.
47
 9.2 Intersecting Components
Typical examples of intersecting components includethe wing i n a wing-
fuselage case, the pylon i n a wing-pylon case, the winglet i n a wing-winalet
case, etc. A1 though a1 1 these examples are of 1ifting intersecting components,
they can also be n o n l i f t i n g (struts, for example). L i f t i n g and n o n l i f t i n g
intersecting components arerepaneled i n essentially the same manner. There
i s no redistribution o f points alongN-lines,only a redistribution of N-lines.
In every case, a new N-linealongthe intersection curve i s added. Ifthe
component i s of l i f t i n g type and i f the intersecting end of the component i s
designatedas having an extra strip, thentheentireareainsidetheinter-
sected component (from the intersection curve to the end N-line) i s made i n t o
a single strip by eliminatingallinterveningN-lines.Ifthe component i s o f
n o n l i f t i n g type, or i t does not havean extra strip at the intersecting end,
then the portion insidetheintersected component i s simply eliminated. In
the simplestcases, no other redistribution of points or N-lines i s necessary.
In most cases, however, theremainingN-lines on the exterior of the component
must bemoved i n order t o avoid i r r e g u l a r i t i e s i n thewidths o f the strips.
This i s done by simply scaling the specified distances between N-lines by the
fraction of the span of the componentwhich lies outside the intersected
component. To bemore precise,thespecifieddistances mentioned above are
either the normalized distances between theplanes of the N-1 ines (for the
planar-section mode of operation) or the fraction of the arc lengths along
the"lines (for thearc-length mode o f operation). The fraction of the span
of the componentwhich lies outside the intersected component is the fraction
of the arc length along the "line under consideration (for the arc-length
mode of operation) or the fraction of the arc length along the f i r s t M-1 ine
of the component (for the pl anar-section mode o f operation). The numerical
techniquesrequired t o move theN-lines i n t h i s manner involveonlyinterpola-
t i o n procedures or cubiccurve-planeintersectionprocedures whichwere
described i n section 7 above.

An example o f the program capabilities for repaneling intersecting

components i s shown i n figure 22. Figure 22(a) shows a wing-fuselagecase
w i t h the elementsrequired fortheinitial geometricrepresentation. In
figure 22(b), theisolated componentshavebeen repaneled,theintersection
 ( a ) I N I T I A L ELEMENT DISTRIBUTION

.(b) ELEMENT DISTRIBUTION

AFTER FINAL REPANELING OF WING

Figure 22. Finalrepaneling of i n t e r s e c t i n g components -wing-fuselagecase.

49
curve has been made an N - l i n e and a l l e x t e r i o r N - l i n e s havebeen redistributed
t o produce asmooth d i s t r i b u t i o n .I na d d i t i o n ,t h ea r e ai n s i d et h ei n t e r s e c t e d
componenthasbeen made i n t o an e x t r a s t r i p , b u t f o r c l a r i t y o f p r e s e n t a t i o n ,
the extra strip has n o t been shown i n t h e f i g u r e .

More complicatedcases, i n which abody i n t e r s e c t s more than one o t h e r

body , can a l s o be t r e a t e d by t h i s geometrypackage. However, i n thesecases ,
t h ei n t e r s e c t i n g bodymust be d i v i d e d i n t o more than onecomponent. For
example, i n t h e case o f t h e w i n g - f u s e l a g e w i t h t i p - t a n k shown i n f i g u r e 23,
thewing i s divided(atfifty-percent semispan) i n t o twocomponents,an
inboard component which intersects the fuselage andan outboard component
whichintersectsthetip-tank.Sincethe same a l g o r i t h m was used f o r d i s t r i -
b u t i n gp o i n t s on the N-lines o f eachcomponent,and s i n c e p o i n t s on theN-lines
o f i n t e r s e c t i n g components do n o t g e t r e d i s t r i b u t e d , t h e r e i s no mismatch i n
theelements a t t h ej u n c t i o n between t h e components.Because of t h e r e d i s t r i -
b u t i o n o f theN-lines, however, t h e r e i s a smalldifference i n t h e w i d t h of
t h es t r i p si nt h ei n b o a r d and outboardportions o f thewing. Cases i n which
abody completelypiercesseveralotherbodies canbe handledby d i v i d i n g t h e
i n t e r s e c t i n g body i n t o components i n an obvious way.

Figure 23. F i n a lr e p a n e l i n go fi n t e r s e c t i n g components -wing-fuselage-tip-tank

case.
50
 9.3NonliftingIntersected Components

Typical examples of nonl i f t i n g intersected components include the fuselage

i n awing-fuselagecase,thetank i n awing-tip-tankcase,etc. The most common
application is tothewing-fuselagecase.Therefore,therepanel i n g method i n
this geometry package was conceivedprimarily w i t h fuselages i n mind, b u t i t
should also be useful for other types of cases.

Three options are provided for the final repaneling of nonlifting inter-
sected components. The simplestoption i s t o dono repaneling a t a l l , i n which
casethefinal element distributionsareas shown i n figures 22 and 23. If this
option i s used, aportion of the intersected component falls inside the inter-
secting component. If the intersecting component is notverythick, an adequate
potential-flowsolution may s t i l l be obtained i n spite of this. If the inter-
secting component covers a significant area on the intersected component, then
the elements inside the intersecting component should be designatedignoredele-
ments (elements w i t h no singularities and no boundary conditions).Sincethere
i s no repaneling, however, some elements are only partially covered and the deci-
sion whether ornottheelementsshould be ignored requires some user judgment.
For this reason, nomechanism has been provided for automatically designating
elements t o be ignoredelements on nonliftingintersected components. If the
userdesiresto use ignoredelements, he must repaneltheconfiguration using the
geometry package, punch theresultingcoordinates on cards, and terminate execu-
tion of the program. Thenhe must executethe program a second time, u s i n g the
punched output from theprecedingcaseas i n p u t data,designatingtheignored
elementshimself w i t h the appropriate flags, s k i p p i n g the geometry package, and
proceeding straight to the potential -flow calculations.

W i t h the f i r s t option, the element distribution

on the intersected component
is notinfluenced by the element distribution on the intersecting component.
Experience w i t h the method ofreferences1 and 2 indicates that there i s no strong
need to repanel fuselages i s most wing-fuselagecases;accuracy of the potential-
flow solution is usuallyadequate u s i n g a distribution of elements appropriate
for an isolatedfuselagecase. However, i n some cases even better accuracy i s
desired. Also the newer potential-flow methods, using surfacedoublet d i s t r i b u -
tions, may require the elimination of the smallgaps which result when the edges
51
of adjacent elements are not carefully aligned. The second and third options
(both very similar) repanel nonlifting intersected components to produce element
distributions which depend strongly on the element distributions on the inter-
secting components.

The calculations in both options start by defining a leading-edgeand a

trailing-edge point on the intersection curve. The trailing-edge point is
assumed to be the first or last point on the intersection curve, since this curve
is an N-line of the intersecting component and points on N-lines are input start-
ing at the trailing edge, working around the perimeter, and ending back at the
trailing edge. The leading-edge point is found by searching for the point on the
intersection curve which has the smallest projected distance in the axial direc-
tion from the front of theinteresected component. Because of this, nonlifting
intersected components whichare repaneled with one of these two options must be
input starting at the upstream end, must have roughly streamwise "lines, and
must be paneled using the planar-section mode of operation. The axial direction
is defined by the direction cosinesof the vector perpendicular to the planes of
the N-lines. Planar cuts are then made through the leading and trailing-edge
points on the intersection curve, perpendicular to the axis of the intersected
component. The points of intersection of these planes and the "lines of the
intersected component define new N-lines. All N-lines forward o f the leading-
edge point and all those aft of the trailing-edge point are then redistributed
in a manner similar to the redistribution of the N-lines on intersecting compo-
nents. Forward of the leading-edge point, this is done by scaling the projected
distances in the axial direction from thefront o f the component by a factor
equal to the ratio of the distance from the front of the component to the leading-
edge point and the distance from the front of the component to the first N-line
aft of the leading-edge point. Aft o f the trailing-edge point, the redistribu-
tion is done the sameway, except that the back of thecomponent, the distance
to the trailing-edge point and the distance to the first N-line in front of the
trai 1 ing-edge poi nt are used.

The two options differ only in the distribution of N-lines in the region
between the leading and trailing-edge points on the intersection curve. One
of the two options passes planar sections through each point on the inter-
section curve and uses the points of intersection o f these planes and the
52
M-lines of the intersected component todefine new N-lines. T h i s option can be
used whenan element distribution w i t h no gaps between adjacent elements is
desired. The otheroptionpassesplanarcutsthroughevery second point
on the intersection curve, starting w i t h theleading-edgepoint and working
a f t on both upper and lower surfaces of the intersectioncurve.Since each
surface may contain either an even or odd number of points, i t i s possible
that planes will be passedthrough two consecutivepoints a t the back ofthe
intersectioncurve. T h i s option can be used when gaps between adjacent
elements can be tolerated, b u t i t i s desired to keep their size fairly small.

Having redistributed the N-1 ines , i t is next necessary to redistribute

the points on each N-line. The method f o r doing this is the same for both
availableoptions. First, a search of the N-linepassingthroughtheleading-
edge point on the intersection curve i s conducted to f i n d the point closest
( i n arclengthalongtheN-line)totheleading-edgepoint. T h i s point i s
moved tocoincide w i t h theleading-edge p o i n t . The otherpoints on this
N-line are redistributed i n a mannerwhichmakes the resulting arc-length
distributionreasonably smoothand similar tothepreviousdistribution. For
points on the N-linebeforethepointclosesttotheleading-edgepoint on
theintersectioncurve, this i s done by scaling the arc l e n g t h alongthe
N-line by a factor equal to the ratio of the arclengthtotheleading-edge
point and thearclengthtothepointclosesttotheleading-edgepoint. For
points on theN-line after the point. closest to the leading-edgepoint,arc
lengths are scaled the sameway, b u t using arc lengths from the other end of
the N-line. Having determined thearc-lengthdistribution of theredistributed
points, the coordinatesare found by the same interpolationproceduredescribed
i n section 7.1. Pointsareredistributed on N-linesforward of the leading-
edge point using the same arc-length distribution as on the N-line which
passesthrough this point. Between leading-edge and trailing-edgepoints,
points on N-lines are redistributed i n a similar manner by scaling the arc
lengths by a factor determined from the ratio o f the distances to the inter-
section point and to the point on the same M-1 i ne as the point cl osest t o the
leading-edgepoint. Aft o f the trailing-edgepoint,points on a l l N-lines
are redistributed using the same arc-length distribution as the redistributed
points on the N-1 inepassingthrough the t r a i 1ing-edge point. Because the

53
N-lines t h r o u g h the intersection points between theleading- and trailing-edge
points are broken by the intersection curve, i t i s necessary t o break the
component i n t o more than one component. Presently,the program breaks the
component i n t o four smaller components , one forward o f the leading-edge p o i n t ,
onebelow the intersection curve, oneabove the intersection curve, and one
a f t of the intersection curve.

A typical example o f the results of this repaneling method i s shown i n

figure 24. Thiscase shows awing-fuselage w i t h the wing a t zeroincidence,
locatedslightly above the axis of thefuselage. In thiscase, use has been
made of the option which passes an N-line through every p o i n t on the inter-
sectioncurve.Figure 25 shows a similarcase,.usingthe same option. In
this case, however, the wing has tendegrees of incidence, illustrating the
p o i n t t h a t , for such cases, the present method bunches points below the
intersection curve and spreads them out above theintersectioncurve. In
extreme cases, this may r e s u l t i n an unacceptable.element distribution w i t h
many elements bunched t i g h t l y near the bottom of the component and very few
elementsnearthe top. However, most caseswill probably be much less
extreme than the oneshown, for which theelement distribution is adequate.
Figure 26 shows a wing-fuselagecasesimilar t o the one o f figure 24, b u t
w i t h the wing located a t the same levelastheaxis of thefuselage. In this
case,the option which passesN-lines through every second p o i n t on the
intersection curve hasbeen used.

9.4 L i f t i n g Intersected Components

The most common example of a lifting intersected component i s the wing

i n a wing-pylon o r wing-with-strut case.

As i n thecase of nonlifting intersected components, l i f t i n g components

are treated three different ways. Again, thesimplest option i s t o do no
repaneling a t a1 1. In this case, p a r t of theintersecting component covers a
portion of thesurface of the intersected component and the remarks of sec-
t i o n 9.3 concerningaccuracy of the solutions, the desirability of using
ignoredelements, and the mechanism for generating them again apply.

54
 TOP VIEW

SIDE VIEW (fuselage only)

Figure 24. Final repaneling of nonlifting intersected components - wing-fuselage

case (zero-incidence wing, N-lines through every point o f intersec-
tion curve).

SIDE VIEW (fuselage only)

Figure 25. Final repaneling of nonlifting intersected components -wing-fuselage

case (wing with 10" incidence, N-1 ines through every point on inter-
section curve).
55
 TOP VIEW

SIDE VIEW

Figure 26. Finalrepaneling of nonliftingintersection components -wing-fuselag:

case(zero-incidence wing, N-linesthroughevery otherpoint on
intersectioncurve).

In some cases the intersecting component covers a significant portion of the

surface of theintersected component, indicating a need for the use o f ignored
elements, b u t thepaneling of the intersected component i s so coarsethatlarge
gaps wouldbe created by t h e i r use. The geometry package provides an option whic;
greatlyreducesthesize of these gaps. In this option a search i s conducted t o
f i n d the points on the intersection curve having the minimum andmaximum projectel
distance i n theaxialdirection on theintersected componentfrom the f i r s t point
on the f i r s t N-line of the component. The intersected componentmustbe paneled
usingtheplanar-section mode of operation for this calculation t o be performed.
The axial direction is defined by thedirectioncosines of thevectorperpendic-
ulartotheplanes of theN-lines. New N-linespassingthroughthe minimum and
maximum points on the intersection curve and lying i n planesperpendiculartothe
56
axial direction are t h e n created. The N-lines on either side of the intersection
curve are redistributed i n a smoothmanner using the same procedure as the redis-
tribution of N-lines upstream anddownstream of the intersection curve on a non-
l i f t i n g intersected component. No redistribution o f points on theN-lines i s
performed. The elementscovered by theintersecting component areautomatically
designatedasignoredelements by the geometry package and i t is possible t o
proceed directly to the potential-flowsolutionwithoutcheckingor changing the
results of the geometry package. Figure 27 shows the results of this repaneling
option for the wing i n a wing-pylon case.

When more accuracy i n theregion of the intersection curve is desired,

a t h i r d option can be used, resulting i n no gaps between elements. T h i s
option first repanels the intersected component i n a manner nearly identical
tothe one described above. The onlydifference is thattheN-lines imnedi-
ately on either side of the intersection curve do not actually pass through
any o f thepoints on theintersectioncurve.Instead, each is offset a
distance equal t o the thickness of the intersecting component (projected i n
theaxialdirection). The elements covered by theintersecting component are
againdesignatedto be ignoredelements. Now the method adds a new nonlifting

Figure 27. Finalrepaneling o f lifting intersected components -wing-pylon case.

57
 component w i t h elementsdesigned t o f i l l i n the gapsaround the intersection
curve. The new componenthas only one strip (two N-lines). One of the
N-linescoincides w i t h theintersectioncurve. The other N-1 inefollowsthe
boundaries of thequadrilateralregioncontainingtheignoredelements.
Figure 28 shows the resulting element distribution for a case w i t h very sparse
p o i n t spacing on thepylon. Because o f thecorrespondence o f the numbers of
points on the pylon and on theboundaries o f theregioncontainingtheignored
elements,thepaneling produced onlyquadrilateralelements(except a t thelead-
ing and t r a i l i n g edges of thepylon). If the numbers do not correspondas i n
figure 28, then one or the other of theN-lines on the new component contains
repeatedpoints and t r i a n g u l a r elements are produced. Pointsarerepeated in
such a way t h a t thelength of each "line on the new component is minimized.
Figure 29 shows a case having more points on the pylon than on theboundaries of
theregioncontainingtheignoredelements, showing therepeatedpoints on one
N-line and the resulting triangular elements.

N-lines which bound extra strips falling inside another component are n o t
moved d u r i n g therepaneling of l i f t i n g intersected components. Because o f t h i s
and because none of theoptionsdescribed above in thissection changes the

BOlTOM VIEW

REGION CONTAINING

Figure 28. Final repaneling of lifting intersected components - wing-pylon case

(sparse element distribution on pylon).
58
 BOTTOM VIEW

REGIONCONTAINING
IGNORED ELEMENTS AND
EXTRA NONLIFTING ELEMENTS

Figure 29. Finalrepaneling of l i f t i n g intersected components -wing-pylon case

(more points on pylon thansurroundingregion on wing).
point distributions on N-lines, therepaneling of a l i f t i n g intersected compon-
ent does nothing to destroy anymatch-up of the elements along the curve of inter-
sectionofthe component w i t h another componentwhich i t pierces.Therefore, one
component can playtheroleof both an intersected andan intersecting component
(although one component cannot intersect or be intersected by more than one
other component). Figure 30 shows thefinal element distribution for a wing-
fuselage-pyloncase. In this case,the wing and pylon were f i r s t repaneledas
intersecting components; t h e n the fuselage and the wing were repaneledas inter-
sected components.

59

I "" . ....
- . ._ . ,

Figure 30. F i n a le l e m e n td i s t r i b u t i o n on awing-fuselage-pyloncase.

60
 10.0 CONCLUSIONS

The geometry package described above provides a m a n s for significantly

reducing the effort required to prepare the input data for three-dimensional
potential-flow calculations. Data may be input to the program using either
the original input format of reference 4 or the format of reference 5.
Geometric input data generally consists of thecoordinates of sets of sparsely
defined points. In most cases, the nunJ>er of points input can be at least an
order ofmagnitude less than the number of points required for the potential-
flow calculations. Each component of the configuration is automatically
paneled using one of several a1 gori thms provided by the method. The number of
algorithms provided and the generality of some of them provide the user with a
great deal of flexibility in determining the character of the resulting element
distributions. Curves of intersection of components are automatically calcu-
lated and all intersecting components are repaneled in a suitable manner for
the potential-flow calculations. In many cases the potential-flow calculations
can be performed in the same computer run as the geometry package calcula-
tions, without interruption. To allow for intermediate checking, however, and
to provide for those cases which cannot be run completely without interruption,
provision has been made for the punched output of the defining coordinate data
at each stage of the geometry calculation in a format suitablefor reinput to
the program.

61
 11 .o REFERENCES

1. Hess,J.L.: C a l c u l a t i o no fP o t e n t i a l Flowabout A r b i t r a r y Three-Dimensional

L i f t i n g Bodies. F i n a l Tech. Rept.McDonnellDouglas Report No.
MDC J5679-01, October 1972. ( A v a i l a b l e f r o m DDC as AD 755 480. )

2. Hess, J.L.: -The Problem o f Three-Dimensional L i f t i n g P o t e n t i a l Flow and

I t s S o l u t i o n b y Means o f S u r f a c e S i n g u l a r i t y Dhtribution. Computer
Methods i n Applied Mechanics and Engineering,Vol. 4, No.3, November 1974.
3. Loeve, W. and Sloof, J.W.: On the Use o f "PanelMethods" f o rP r e d i c t i n g
SubsonicFlowAbout A e r o f o i l s and A i r c r a f t C o n f i g u r a t i o n s . NLRMP71018U,
October 1971.
4. Mack, D.P.: CalculationofPotentialFlowaboutArbitraryThree-Dimensional
L i f t i n g Bodies.Users Manual. McDonnel1 Douglas Report No. MDC 55679-02,
October 1972.

5. T u l i n i u s , J., e ta l . :T h e o r e t i c a l P r e d i c t i o n of A i r p l a n e S t a b i l i t y
D e r i v a t i v e sa tS u b c r i t i c a l Speeds. NASA CR-132681 , 1975.

6. G r e v i l l e , T.N.E.: Theory and ApplicationsofSplineFunctions. Academic

Press, New York , 1969.
7. Weber, J.: The C a l c u l a t i o n o f t h e P r e s s u r e D i s t r i b u t i o n Over theSurface
o f Two-Dimensional and Swept Wings withSymmetricalAerofoilSections.
A.R.C. Tech. Report R&M No. 2918, 1956.

8. Coons, S.A. : Surfaces f o r Computer-AidedDesign o f Space Figures.

Massachusetts I n s t i t u t e o f Techno1ogy , ESLMemorandum9442-"139,
January 1964.
9. Peters, G.J.: I n t e r a c t i v e Computer GraphicsApplicationoftheBi-Cubic
ParametricSurfacetoEngineering DesignProblems. Paper presented t o
1973 National Meeting, Society of .Industrial and Applied Mathematics,
June 1973.
10. Hess, J.L. : Review o f I n t e g r a l - E q u a t i o n Techniques f o r S o l v i n g P o t e n t i a i -
FlowProblems w i t h Emphasis on theSurface-Source Method. Computer Methods
i n Applied Mechanics and Engineering,Vol .
5, J u l y 1974.

62
 ~-___ "_

1
~

No.1. Report 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient's Catalog No.

NASA CR-2962
I
I 4. T i leandSub
A keometl
. ~ .
~;;Package forGeneration
~

f o r aThree-Dimensional
o f Input Data
Potential-Flow Program
5. ReportDate
June 1978

____________

%
7. Authorb) 8. Performin OrnizationReport No.
N. Douglas HalseyandJohn L. Hess MDC J j 7 f i
._10. WorkUnit No.
9. Performing Organization Name and Address

McDonnell Douglas Corporation

Douglas
3855 Lakewood Long
Aircraft Company
Blvd.,
Beach, Ca. 90846 11. ContractNASl -1 4402 No.
Grant or

13. Tvpe of Rep rt and Period Covered

Contracfor Report
12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address

NASA LangleyResearchCenter 5 7 76 8/22/77-

I
14. Sponsoring Agency Code
Hampton , Va. 23665
~
. ~".
15. Supplementary Notes

LangleyTechnicalMonitor: James L. Thomas

Final Report
. - . - ------ .." . ~ . ... . . - -~ -
16. Abstract
The preparationofgeometricdatafor i n p u t tothree-dimensionalpotential-
flow programs i s a very tedious, time-consuing(andtherefore expensive)
task. This reportdescribes ageometrypackage t h a t automates and simpli-
f i e st h i st a s kt o a largedegree.Inputtothe computer program f o r the
geometrypackage consists o f a verysparse set o f coordinate data, often
w i t h an order o f magnitude fewer pointsthan required for the actual poten-
t i a l flowcalculations.Isolated components,such a s wings, fuselages, etc.
a r e paneledautomatically,using one ofseveralpossibleelement distribu-
tionalgorithms. Curves ofintersection between components a r ec a l c u l a t e d ,
using a hybridcurve-fit/surface-fitapproach.Finally,intersecting
components are repaneled so thatadjacentelements on e i t h e r side of the
intersection curves line u p i n a s a t i s f a c t o r y manner for the potential-flow
calculations. The geometrypackagehas been incorporatedinto the NASA
Langley version of the 3-D l i f t i n g p o t e n t i a l f l o w program and i t i s possible
t o run many casescompletely(frominput, t h r o u g h the geometrypackage, and
throughtheflowcalculations)withoutinterruption. Use of t h i s geometry
package can significantly reduce the time and expense involvedin making
three-dimensionalpotential-flowcalculations.

17.Key Words (Suggested by Author(s))

Aerodynamics
I APPROVED FOR PUBLICRELEASE;
18. DistributionStatement

Geometry Preparation DISTRIBUTIONUNLIMITED

Three-Dimensional Flow
Subject Category 02
I J
19. Securitv Classif. lof'thisreport) 20. Security Classif. [of this p a g e ) I 21. of Pages J 22. Price'
NO.

Unclassified
Unclassified 66 $5.25 1 ~~

'For sale by the National Technicd Information Service. Springfield, Virginia 22161

NASA-Langley, 1978