Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

StaticTrim routine fails with Dynamic control surfaces #122

Open
ngoiz opened this issue Mar 4, 2021 · 1 comment
Open

StaticTrim routine fails with Dynamic control surfaces #122

ngoiz opened this issue Mar 4, 2021 · 1 comment
Assignees
Labels

Comments

@ngoiz
Copy link
Contributor

ngoiz commented Mar 4, 2021

When a control surface is classified as Dynamic (i.e. in the aero.h5 input file control_surface_type[i_cs] = 1), the StaticTrim routine fails because it is unable to change the control surface deflection angle.

Minor impact since you can get the trim condition with the control surface as static first (i.e. control_surface_type[i_cs] = 0) and then run the Dynamic simulation starting from StaticCoupled with the already known trim values. However, this behaviour is worth fixing.

@ngoiz ngoiz added the bug label Mar 4, 2021
@ngoiz ngoiz self-assigned this Mar 4, 2021
@ngoiz ngoiz changed the title StaticTrim routine fails with Dynamic surfaces StaticTrim routine fails with Dynamic control surfaces Mar 4, 2021
@p-smith22
Copy link

Hello. I am currently facing this problem. Could you clarify how to use Static first and then transfer to the Dynamic simulation? I understand that you would generate the sharpy file up until StaticTrim using the static type control surface, but isn't AeroGridLoader the main component of the dynamic controls (which is done before StaticTrim in the flow definition)? Would you have to run the generate_solver_file function up until Static trim, switch the control surfaces types, and then resume? Thank you in advance for your reply!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants