NASA NTRS2018
A computational study of the wing for the distributed electric propulsion X-57 Maxwell airplane configuration at cruise and takeoff/landing conditions was completed. Three unstructured-mesh, Navier-Stokes computational fluid dynamics methods, FUN3D, USM3D and Kestrel, were used to predict the performance buildup of components to the full X-57 configuration. The goal of the X-57 wing and distributed electric propulsion system design was to meet or exceed the required lift coefficient of 3.95 for a stall speed of 58 knots. The X-57 Maxwell airplane was designed with a small, high aspect ratio cruise wing that was designed for a high cruise lift coefficient of 0.75 at a cruise speed of 150 knots and altitude of 8,000 ft, with an angle of attack of approximately 0deg. The computational data indicates that the X-57 full aircraft drag would meet the cruise drag goal with a 25 count drag margin. The cruise configuration maximum lift coefficient is 2.07 and without including the stabilator is 1.86 at an angle of attack of 14 deg, predicted with the USM3D flow solver using the Spalart-Allmaras turbulence model. The maximum lift coefficient for the high-lift wing (with the 30deg flap deflection) without the stabilator contribution is 2.60 at an angle of attack of 13 deg. For high-lift blowing conditions with 13.7 hp/prop, the maximum lift coefficient excluding the stabilator is 4.426 at (alpha) = 13 deg. Therefore, the lift augmentation from the high-lift propellers is 1.7 and the total lift augmentation from the high-lift system (30 deg flap deflection and the high-lift blowing) is 2.38. The drag for the high-lift wing with 30 deg flap deflection is much higher than the cruise wing configuration, but the high-lift system is used only during a small portion of the flight envelope. The pitching moment is relatively constant for both blown and unblown conditions when the stabilator is excluded. Modeling the full geometry has indicated some adverse effects from the fuselage on the wing and stabilator. At high angles of attack, the solutions with the USM3D flow solver using the Spalart-Allmaras turbulence model indicates large flow separation on the wing upper surface between the two high-lift nacelles near the fuselage, and also a reduction in sectional lift on the stabilator in the first 50 percent of the stabilator semispan. However, the large flow separation near the fuselage is mostly eliminated in the solutions predicted with two codes, USM3D and Kestrel, using Hybrid Reynolds-averaged Navier Stokes/Large Eddy Simulation turbulence models.