SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “XFOIL”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

4 records

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

DOE OSTI2025

The Fluid Dynamics Uncertainty Quantification Challenge Problem: XFOIL vs. MFOIL

Uncertainty quantification (UQ) has become more critical in aerospace engineering due to the growing dependence on computational tools for design optimization and performance analyses of aerospace vehicles. Even though the significance of UQ in assessing the credibility of computational analyses is well recognized, its costs and complexity impede its integration into standard practices, particularly in computational fluid dynamics (CFD) and other fluid analyses. This paper presents a UQ study for low-fidelity computational aerodynamics analyses with XFOIL and mfoil (i.e., the MATLAB version of XFOIL with several implementation modifications); these tools are utilized widely in both research and education. The main contributions of this paper are as follows: 1) improved precision in quantifying the uncertainty of the baseline Monte Carlo results used to benchmark surrogate modeling techniques for UQ, 2) quantification of the effect of the implementation differences between XFOIL and mfoil on solution quantities of interest (QoIs), such as lift and pitching moment coefficients, and 3) development of an open-source UQ library for use with XFOIL and mfoil, which has educational values and helps promote UQ for fluid analyses with aerospace applications. Results and discussions revolve around cases 1-4 of the challenge problem posed by the AIAA Fluid Dynamics Technical Committee’s Uncertainty Quantification Discussion Group (UQDG). In case 3, this work employs CFDverify, an open-source solution verification software, to quantify the discretization error and evaluate the extrapolated QoIs based on the grid convergence index (GCI). This UQ study differentiates itself from previous studies in the rigor of handling baseline Monte Carlo uncertainty and in including mfoil, which is a more accessible alternative to XFOIL. Finally, despite the growing computing power, low-fidelity computational tools remain valuable, such as for aerodynamic shape optimization at Mach numbers below 0.65 and low-to-mid Reynolds numbers.

Lay, Aidan S [University of Tennessee, Knoxville (↗

DOE OSTI2024

AI Design Assistant

SAND2025-01930O The AI Design Assistant uses ChatGPT to provide a natural language interface to airfoil analysis tools (XFOIL). Most of the code base is glue code, connecting XFOIL (a tool for analyzing airfoils) to the OpenAI interface. Among the more novel features are an airfoil geometry class and methods on how to extract detailed data from XFOIL. Sandia National Laboratories is a multimission laboratory managed and operated by National Technology & Engineering Solutions of Sandia, LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of Honeywell International Inc., for the U.S. Department of Energy’s National Nuclear Security Administration under contract DE-NA0003525.

Karcher, Cody↗

DOE OSTI2026

FOILPOLARS (Grassmannian Foil Shape Sweeps for Polar Generation) [SWR-26-095]

FOILPOLARS (Grassmannian Foil Shape Sweeps for Polar Generation): Multifidelity aerodynamic polar data generation for hydrofoil/tidal-turbine airfoil sections. Foilpolars ties together three pieces: *AeroSandbox supplies the baseline airfoil coordinates (UIUC database). *G2Aero parameterizes those shapes on a Grassmannian manifold (Karcher mean + PGA basis) and samples new perturbed shapes around that basis. *XFoil (panel method) and NeuralFoil (neural-network surrogate, shipped with AeroSandbox) each solve the resulting shapes for lift, drag, moment, and pressure at the swept angles of attack, Reynolds numbers, and n_crit values. Design optimization of foil shapes in a computationally efficient way requires polars data across many candidate shapes, not just a handful of baseline foils. However, high-fidelity CFD at that scale is too costly, and naive shape perturbation strays from realistic geometries. FOILPOLARS addresses this by loading baseline airfoils (via AeroSandbox) and mapping them onto a Grassmannian manifold (via G2Aero), computing a Karcher mean and principal geodesic analysis (PGA) basis. New shapes are sampled by perturbing PGA coefficients, keeping them close to the manifold of realistic foils. Each sampled shape is evaluated across a configurable sweep of angle of attack, Reynolds number, and critical amplification factor using two solvers: XFoil (panel method) and NeuralFoil (neural-network surrogate), producing a paired dataset of lift, drag, moment, pressure, convergence, and confidence, indexed alongside each shape's PGA coefficients and shared Grassmannian basis in a single xarray dataset. From this, FOILPOLARS produces convergence summaries and comparison plots per shape, Reynolds number, and n_crit. A command-line interface exposes each pipeline stage independently, supporting data-driven design, optimization, and machine-learning workflows for foils.

Sandhu, Rimple [National Laboratory of the Rockies↗

DOE OSTI2025

Open-Source Offshore Airfoil Summary (V.1.0)

The Open-Source Offshore (OSO) airfoils have been developed for research purposes for offshore wind turbines, offering a set of airfoils that align with modern turbine design requirements and industry design practices without proprietary constraints on research use. The eventual airfoil family will target the IEA 22 MW reference wind turbine, which was originally developed with the FFA airfoils. The two airfoils summarized in Table 1 (OSO-21-WT1 and OSO-30-WT1) started development as part of a family of airfoils being designed to target the IEA 22 MW wind turbine. The criteria used to design these airfoils are summarized in Table 1, which aim to encapsulate requirements of modern airfoils for offshore wind turbine applications, and were developed with feedback from industry and research experts. The airfoils were designed using XFOIL and candidate airfoils were then analyzed in RFOIL, which is considered more accurate than XFoil for high lift predictions of thicker airfoils. The design process for a preliminary family of airfoils is available, including a more detailed explanation of the design requirements and metrics similar to those used for these airfoils. Most of the design criteria are met for these two airfoils, with two exceptions. For both airfoils, the L/D Roughness Loss metric is exceeded (42% > 40% goal) and the desired lift coefficient margin over the design value (“CL_Margin”) was moderately exceeded (0.43 > 0.3) while smooth-stall characteristics (computed) were achieved. Note that all of the metrics were computed using RFOIL, and like other new airfoils, these will need to be experimentally validated at a range of Reynolds numbers. The airfoil coordinates will be shared publicly on Sadia National Laboratories’ public Github repository:

17 WIND ENERGY↗