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.