(c)2001 American Institute of Aeronautics & Astronautics or Published with Permission of Author(s) and/or Author(s)' Sponsoring Organization.

A01-31146

AIAA 2001-2566
FENSAP-ICE: A Comprehensive 3D
Simulation System for In-flight Icing
F. Morency and H. Beaugendre
CFD Lab, McGill University

G.S. Baruzzi and W.G. Habashi

Newmerical Technologies International

688 Sherbrooke Street West

Montreal, Qc, Canada, H3A 2M7

15th AIAA Computational Fluid

Dynamics Conference
11-14 June 2001 Anaheim, CA

Anaheim Summer Co-Located Conferences

11-14 June 2001
Anaheim, CA
For permission to copy or to republish, contact the copyright owner named on the first page.
For AIAA-held copyright, write to AIAA Permissions Department,
1801 Alexander Bell Drive, Suite 500, Reston, VA, 20191-4344.
(c)2001 American Institute of Aeronautics & Astronautics or Published with Permission of Author(s) and/or Author(s)' Sponsoring Organization.

AIAA 2001-2566

FENSAP-ICE: A COMPREHENSIVE 3D SIMULATION SYSTEM

FOR IN-FLIGHT ICING

Frangois Morency*, Heloise Beaugendref, Guido S. Baruzzi*, Wagdi G. Habashi5

688 Sherbrooke Street West,

Montreal, Qc, Canada, H3 A 2M7

comprehensive three-dimensional approach to icing

Abstract
In the past two decades 2D and quasi-3D in-flight ice
prediction codes have been developed and widely used
by the aerospace industry. Although efficient for
calculating ice shapes on simple geometries, these
codes encounter major difficulties or simply cannot
simulate ice shapes on 3D geometries such as multi-
element wings, nacelles, engines, as well as integrated
systems or situations that combine external and internal
flows. FENSAP-ICE is a comprehensive icing code,
based on a 3D Navier-Stokes/Euler flow, a 3D droplet
impingement module, a 3D ice accretion module and a
3D heat loads module, interacting as an icing analysis
system. This paper presents the Navier-Stokes flow
solver used to calculate the flow field, the partial
differential equation-based impingement and ice
accretion models, and a sample of 2D ice results for
validation and 3D ones as a proof of concept.
Introduction
Ice accretion simulations are usually based on 2D and
quasi-3D inviscid panel or Euler flow computations for
the air, on Lagrangian tracking techniques for droplet
impingement, and on a 1-D control volume analysis of
the mass and heat transfer for ice accretion. More up-to-
date computational fluid dynamics (CFD) technologies
could easily overcome many of the self-imposed
limitations of these approaches such as limited ability to
handle compressibility, three-dimensionality and flow
recirculation and/or separation. There is a price to pay,
however, in doing so. It is only at the cost of solving
models based on partial differential equations that a
simulation will become possible. The cost of a 3D run,
while high, pales in comparison to a test flight or,
worse, an incident or accident. Realizing how spotty the
nature of icing certification can be, as not all FAR 25
conditions can be icing tunnel-tested, or flight-tested,
nor encountered in natural icing testing, only CFD
makes it possible to explore the entire icing envelope.
To explore accident scenarios it is safer to crash the
computer than the plane. Only a Navier-Stokes code
can:
Harmonize the technology of aerodynamics
and icing groups within the same organization,
Show that worst impingement-ice accretion
(high speed, low AoA) and worst performance
(low speed, high AoA) do not coincide and
must be analyzed separately,
Enable the long known need to analyze the
effect of intercycle ice1-2*3 for boot-protected
airplanes, an exercise that curiously has only
been recently undertaken3 despite the warnings
of 1 and 2. Many turboprop aircraft may thus
be flying today without having been studied
for intercycle ice.
The modern approach suggested here views icing
simulation as the solution of the compressible Navier-
Stokes equations (here with FENSAP4: Finite Element
Navier-Stokes Analysis Package), the computation of
the collection efficiency distribution by an Eulerian
method with DROP3D5, the prediction of the ice
accretion shape by ICE3D6, and the prediction of the

* Research Associate, Computational Fluid Dynamics Laboratory, McGill University

lf
Ph. D. Candidate, Computational Fluid Dynamics Laboratory, McGill University
1
Chief Scientist, Aerodynamics, Newmerical Technologies International
5
Director, CFD Lab and President, Newmerical Technologies International

Copyright <S> 2001 by Newmerical Technologies International. Published by the

American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc., permission.

American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

(c)2001 American Institute of Aeronautics & Astronautics or Published with Permission of Author(s) and/or Author(s)' Sponsoring Organization.
heat loads by CHT3D7, all four being PDE-based. As
shown in figure 1, the four modules are set in an
interactive loop. In addition, to calculate the heat loads
for de-icing or anti-icing, a conduction module CHT3D
has been developed to calculate the heat flux in the
metal skin, together with the convection from the flow
external and internal to the wing, in a fully conjugate
heat transfer mode.
The following methods are used for the numerical
solution of the icing problem:
Each of the four systems of PDEs
(airflow/impingement/accretion/heat-load) is
solved independently, with selected variables
passed between modules, when required.
- FENSAP, DROP3D and CHT3D use a weak-
Galerkin finite element method (FEM), on
structured, unstructured and on hybrid meshes.
In the ice accretion module, ICE3D, a finite
volume method (FVM) is found more
appropriate. The distortion of the solid
surfaces caused by ice growth is automatically
and transparently accounted for by an
Arbitrary Lagrangian Eulerian (ALE) scheme.
The aim of this paper is to demonstrate, using the
ONERA-M6 wing as an example, the 3D ice prediction
capability of FENSAP-ICE. Emphasis is put on the ice
accretion module rather than on the flow solver,
impingement and heat transfer modules, all of which
have already been demonstrated. For completion,
however, a short description of the turbulent flow
solver FENSAP is followed by a presentation of the
droplet flow solver DROP3D and the ice accretion
module ICE3D. Finally, 3D ice accretion results for the
ONERA-M6 wing geometry, using a coarse grid are
shown. These are only meant to illustrate FENSAP-
ICE's 3D capabilities and have not yet been calculated
with precision in mind, a task that will certainly follow.
FENSAP
An accurate and consistent turbulent heat flux
evaluation is of particular importance when dealing
with the ice accretion process. FENSAP-ICE uses one
of two turbulence models: the two-equation k-e model
or the one-equation Spalart-Allmaras8 model. In the
latter case, the transport equation for the dimensionless
turbulent viscosity V is
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
ITL
wall
L
wall
DROP3D
collection efficiency
Fig. 1: Module interactions within ICE3D
Dt
(1)
where d is the distance from the wall, 5 the vorticity at
a point, c6p cb^, c^, K, a, the closure coefficients and
f^ the closure function. This equation has shown to be
particularly attractive for unstructured meshes.
The tripping functions, ftl and //2, permit user
control over the extent of the laminar region before
imposing transition. The extension for rough-wall
treatment9, essential in icing, has been included in the
model. For a roughness coefficient ^, the conventional
Nikuradse sandgrain roughness, the distance from the
wall is increased as follows:
(2)
Spatial discretization is again carried out by a weak-
Galerkin FEM and the equation is linearized by a
Newton method. To advance the solution in time, an
implicit scheme is used, along with an iterative
GMRES procedure to solve the resulting matrix system.
Heat fluxes at the wall are post-processed via a
consistent FEM approach10.
DROP3D
Lagrangian particle-tracking techniques are still widely
used to compute the droplet impingement on aircraft
components. DROP3D, on the other hand, is a fully 3D
(not quasi-3D) Eulerian alternative for airflows
(c)2001 American Institute of Aeronautics & Astronautics or Published with Permission of Author(s) and/or Author(s)' Sponsoring Organization.

containing water droplets. Suitable variables (water
volume fraction and droplet velocity) are then
computed at the same nodes of the discrete domain
where the airflow variables are known, so no particles
have to be tracked as they go through the mesh as in the
Lagrangian approach. On complex 2D or 3D
geometries, the traditional difficulties encountered by a
Lagrangian method (long calculations times, difficulty
near walls, difficulty in determining impingement
limits, sparsely seeded particles, etc.) do not surface in
an Eulerian approach.
velocities are set to zero at all walls at the start of the
calculations. No specific boundary conditions are
needed at outlet.
A weak Galerkin formulation FEM is used to discretize
the equations, with a streamline upwinding Petrov-
Galerkin (SUPG) term11 added. Details of the numerical
method and validations can be found in Morency et al.12
Validation

Once an airflow solution is obtained for a given

Mathematical model and discretization
The Eulerian model used for the impingement
calculations has been introduced for 3D applications in
Bourgault et al5. It is a two-fluid model consisting of
the Navier-Stokes or Euler equations for air, augmented
by new droplet-related continuity and momentum
equations. The latter are, in non-dimensional form,
respectively:
(3)
geometry, DROP3D is used to calculate the droplet
impingement limits and the mass of water captured by
the body. DROP3D has been used successfully to
compute results on complex geometries such as a
complete aircraft13. Impingement results on the
ONERA-M6 wing will be presented in the results
section.
DROP3D results have been compared against other
well-honed numerical results. Figure 2 shows total
collection efficiency around a cylinder for various 0
values of droplet inertia parameter k and <|>:

(6)
dt

where a(x, t) and ud(x, t) are mean values of the water Using the droplet's Reynolds number definition:
volume fraction and of the droplet velocity,
respectively, over a fluid element at location x at time t.
The first term on the right-hand-side of Eq. (4)
represents the air drag force on droplets, while the
second term represents the buoyancy and gravity forces. Total collection efficiency around a cylinder
The non-dimensional air velocity, ua, is obtained by
using any Navier-Stokes or Euler code, here FENS AP.

The two-fluid model assumes spherical droplets of a •ymbote: NACA R«port1215

cMwdHnw :CANICE
single and uniform size, usually chosen to be the
median volume diameter (MVD) of the sample size
distribution. The spherical droplet approximation is
valid for droplet Reynolds numbers below 500. No
collision or mixing between the droplets is accounted
for, as it can be shown not to be important for icing
situations. An empirical equation gives the drag
coefficient for spherical droplets: Fig. 2: Total collection efficiency
around a circular cylinder
CD = for <1300
C D =0.4 for R e > 1300

The droplets' velocity, as well as the liquid water

content, are imposed at free stream. The droplet

American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

(c)2001 American Institute of Aeronautics & Astronautics or Published with Permission of Author(s) and/or Author(s)' Sponsoring Organization.
Fig. 3: Collection efficiency on the surface
of a sphere for an MVD of 16 jim
Re = (7)
<|> is defined as:
M (8)
X
DROP3D results are compared with NASA results14
and CANICE15 results for impingement on a cylinder.
In all three approaches, an inviscid flow is calculated
around the cylinder. Results compare well between
CANICE and DROP3D, because the drag models used
for the droplet movement are similar. As the inertia
parameter increases, discrepancies with the NASA
results are more important, mainly because the drag
values used for the droplet movement are tabulated
values that may differ from CANICE and DROPSD's
droplet drag functional values.
One of the rare 3D cases available for validation is the
impingement of droplets around a sphere. In figure 3,
the collection efficiency distribution is presented. An
inviscid airflow solution is first calculated, and then
DROP3D is used to calculate collection efficiency for
an 18-micron mono-disperse droplet and an 18-micron
MVD distribution. The two collections efficiency
curves are inside the experimental range of error.
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
Once the friction force and the heat fluxes are known
from the airflow solution (FENSAP) and the mass rate
of water caught is known from the impingement
module (DROP3D), the ice accretion can be assessed
byICE3D.
Mathematical model and discretization
The equilibrium model introduced in reference16 has
been further improved to predict the ice accretion and
water runback on the surface6. Figure 4 shows the heat
and mass transfer phenomena taken into account by the
model.
The velocity u r of the water in the film is a function of
coordinates X = (JC lf JC 2 ) on the surface and y normal
to the surface. A simplifying assumption consists in
taking a linear profile for Uy(x,y), with a zero velocity
imposed at the wall, i.e.:
(9)
where Twall, the shear stress from the air, is the main
driving force for the water film. For very thin films, the
terms of order higher than one in the velocity profile are
negligible. In icing or anti-icing simulation, film
thickness is seldom above 10 p,m.17 By averaging along
the thickness of the film, a mean velocity is given as
follows:
The resulting system of partial differential equations is
the following:
Mass Conservation
-m
where the three terms on the right hand side correspond,
respectively, to the mass transfer by water droplets
impingement (source for the film), the evaporation and
the ice accretion (sinks for the film).
(c)2001 American Institute of Aeronautics & Astronautics or Published with Permission of Author(s) and/or Author(s)' Sponsoring Organization.
Energy Conservation
r \*U^LWCP
r (12)
Pw\ Jf
[+div(ufhfCj}\
where the first three terms on the right hand side model,
respectively, the heat transfer caused by the super-
cooled water droplets impingement, the evaporation
and the ice accretion. The last two terms represent the
radiative and convective heat transfer.
The coefficients Pw' ^w' ..**
*^ice»^evap» ^fusion
represent physical properties of water, while T rf/00 , U^,
LWC, a, and T^ are airflow and droplet parameters
specified by the user. The ambient icing conditions
completely determine those values. The tilde symbol
over 7, i.e. 7\ stands for the temperature in Celcius,
otherwise temperature is in Kelvin.
The Eulerian droplet module provides local values for
the collection efficiency /J and the droplet impact
velocity U^. The flow solver provides the local wall
shear stress twall and the convective heat flux Qh. The
evaporative mass flux is recovered from the convective
heat flux using a parametric model18. There remain
three unknowns: the film thickness hr, the equilibrium
temperature T within the air/water film/ice/wall
interface, and the instantaneous mass accumulation of
impingement evap/subl
\
Fig. 4: Heat and mass balance in a thin Him
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
ice mice. Compatibility relations are needed to close the
system. One way to write them is the following:
hf>0
(13)
mke>0 (14)
hff>0 (15)
(16)
The discretization of the equations is by FVM. The hull
of the three-dimensional mesh at the air-structure/ice
shape interface is called the surface mesh. From the
surface mesh a dual surface mesh is obtained by
connecting the ban-centers of the surface mesh cells to
the mid-edges of the cells.
Validation
Ice accretion computation is carried out through a full
interaction between FENSAP, DROP3D and ICE3D. A
turbulent airflow solution is first calculated on a clean
(non-iced) geometry, then DROP3D computes the
droplet impingement and ICE3D the nodal
displacement due to ice accretion. A new solution and
mesh are then automatically generated by FENSAP
with the ALE feature.
Figures 5, 6, and 7 present validations results on a
NACA 0012 airfoil for rime and glaze ice conditions.
Fig. 5: Ice accretion on a NACA 0012 airfoil:
comparison with numerical results,
LEWICE Run 404
(c)2001 American Institute of Aeronautics & Astronautics or Published with Permission of Author(s) and/or Author(s)' Sponsoring Organization.

0 Experimental
2 - NACA 001 2
ICE3d i »...i~>
0 Experimental
Uwfc»7mn • ICE3D
1.5
——— NACA 0012

0.5

-0.5

Fig. 6: Ice accretion on a NACA 0012 airfoil: Fig. 7: Ice Accretion a NACA 0012 airfoil
comparison with experimental results, comparison with experiment,
LEWICE Run 404 LEWICE run 308

Two different configurations have been selected. The

first one, very close to rime ice conditions, corresponds
to LEWICE Run 40419. The ambient conditions are the
following: 7^ = 256.49° JC, LWC = 0.55£/ro3, Drf = 20/im»
a = 3.5°, £/_ = 102.8m Is* Figure 6 shows the comparison
between LEWICE and ICE3D for 60s, 120s and 180s
time ice accretion. Agreement between the two codes is
good, with ICE3D predicting a little more ice. Further
studies would be needed to explore the source of
discrepancy between these different technologies.
Numerical results for LEWICE Run 404 are compared
with experimental results in figure 6 for a 7-minute ice
accretion. ICE3D results slightly overpredict the
accreted mass and LEWICE underpredicts it. This can
be caused by the fact that ice was grown for relatively
long time steps here, more than a minute, before the
airflow solution was updated and the droplet solution
recalculated. The collection efficiency on the clean
airfoil is higher in this case than on the iced airfoil.
The second situation leads to the formation of glaze ice
and corresponds to LEWICE Run 30819. The ambient
conditions are: 7U =262.04° K9 LWC = 1.0g/m3, Drf = 2Q/wi,
a = 3.5°, I/*, = 102.8m/s. Figures 7 shows the resulting ice
shape after a 231 -second ice accretion. As can be seen
from this figure, numerical results for ICE3D are close
to the experimental results, although slightly different
from the LEWICE prediction.
Results on ONERA-M6 wina
Only for the purpose of demonstrating the global 3D
capability of FENSAP-ICE, the ONERA-M6 wing is
studied in icing conditions. This wing is selected
because it is a well-known geometry with several
available experimental and numerical results for the
airflow solution. It is often used for validation of
numerical results in the transonic range, at high Mach
number and high Reynolds number. In the context of
ice accretion simulation, the Mach number and the
Reynolds number have therefore been reduced.
A theoretical icing case is built and the values of Table
1 are used as ambient conditions. While these ambient
boundary conditions are selected arbitrarily, they are
within the range of the plausible icing conditions for a
wing. The selected temperature is expected to give near
rime ice conditions.

American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

(c)2001 American Institute of Aeronautics & Astronautics or Published with Permission of Author(s) and/or Author(s)' Sponsoring Organization.

Airspeed 102.77 m/s

Mach Number 0.32

Re 4.14 106

Static temperature 256.49 K

MVD 20|im

LWC 0.65 g/m2

Pressure 974.38 kPa

Accretion Time 6min.

Table 1: Atmospheric conditions

The only purpose here is to demonstrate that 3D ice Fig. 8: 3D mesh around ONERA-M6 wing
accretion calculations around a wing are possible with
FENSAP-ICE, and thus, a very coarse grid hexahedral also shows the LWC distribution around the wing. Most
mesh of around 200 000 nodes is used. That size of grid of the water mass is caught in the first 10% of the wing
enables a viscous turbulent air solution in reasonable chord, around the leading edge.
times. The upper part of the computational domain is
shown in figure 8, with cutting planes at y=0 and z=0. The resulting ice shape for the studied ambient
conditions is plotted in figures 11 and 12, which clearly
DROP3D uses the turbulent air solution to get the mass show that the ice shape is substantially bigger near the
of water caught by the wing. Although DROP3D does tip of the wing. Because of the cold temperature
not need a fine grid to achieve convergence, it is clear selected, no horns are captured, as one small amount of
that the quality of the droplet solution depends largely water runback gives a rounded shape to the ice
on the quality of the airflow solution. In the present accretion.
case, the size of the boundary layer is exaggerated by
the flow solver, due to the coarseness of the grid nearThe resulting ice shape is quite smooth because it was
the wing surface. calculated using a single airflow solution. This means
that heat transfer coefficients and collection efficiencies
The ratio of tip to root chords is 0.5 for the ONERA- were calculated on the clean wing and then assumed to
M6 wing. 2D cuts along wingspan, shown in figure 9 prevail for the next 6 minutes of ice accretion. This is
as a function of jc, confirm that maximum collection the fastest way to do the calculations, but it probably
efficiency increases toward the tip. This is to be prevents some 3D effects from appearing.
expected since total collection efficiency is usually
higher on small bodies than on large ones. At the tip, Figure 13 shows a closer view of the tip of the wing.
3D vortical effects also dramatically enhance the The ice shape thickness varies from 1.5% of the chord
amount of water caught. It is not clear how a 2D or at the root of the wing to 6.6% at the tip. At the tip, ice
quasi-3D approach could capture such effects, crucial accretes normally to the leading edge but also laterally,
for stability and control and for anti- or de-icing. creating a spherical shape.

Collection efficiency values below 0.05 are probably
inaccurate in the present case because of the coarseness
of the grid.
In figure 10, the collection efficiency distribution
around the wing is plotted. A 2D cut in the x-y plane
The ice accretion calculations on the ONERA-M6 wing
are a good example of the modular interactivity
capability of FENSAP-ICE to predict 3D ice shapes.
The coarse grid used to solve the airflow is, however,
not propitious for some of the 3D effects to occur. Heat
transfer distribution and shear stress on the wing

American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

(c)2001 American Institute of Aeronautics & Astronautics or Published with Permission of Author(s) and/or Author(s)' Sponsoring Organization.

surface may be poorly estimated and prevent the ice

accretion module to give ice shapes with finer details.
Nevertheless, FENSAP-ICE is shown to be able to give
an overall estimate of the 3D ice shape on the wing.

Conclusions
FENSAP-ICE is a comprehensive icing code for in-
flight ice simulations in 3D, as well as in 2D. It is built
in a modular fashion with four modules (three are
described in this paper), each having a specific task but
with all being linked. The first module, FENSAP, takes
care of the airflow computation by either Euler or
Navier-Stokes models. DROP3D uses the calculated
airflow for droplet impingement calculations, with no
particle tracking. Finally, ICE3D uses shear forces and
heat fluxes from the airflow calculation of FENSAP
and the water catch from DROP3D to yield the 2D
shape of the ice on the 3D surface. FENSAP-ICE has
been successfully used to predict collection efficiencies
on 2D and 3D bodies. The ice calculation module has
been validated in 2D and is in the final phases of its
Fig. 9: Collection efficiency distribution as
validation process in 3D, with quite promising results.
function of x: 2D cuts along the wing

American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

(c)2001 American Institute of Aeronautics & Astronautics or Published with Permission of Author(s) and/or Author(s)1 Sponsoring Organization.

Fig. 10: Collection efficiency on Fig. 12:2D cuts of ice shape along
ONERA-M6 wing ONERA-M6 wing span

Fig. 11: Top view of the ice shape on Fig. 13: Ice shape: zoom on the tip of
the ONERA-M6 wing the ONERA-M6 wing

American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

(c)2001 American Institute of Aeronautics & Astronautics or Published with Permission of Author(s) and/or Author(s)' Sponsoring Organization.
References
Abbott I. and von Doenhoff A.E., "Theory of
Wing Sections", Dover Publications, New York,
1949.
Lynch F., Valarezo W. and McGhee R., "The
Adverse Aerodynamic Impact of very Small
Leading-Edge Ice (Roughness) Buildups on
Wings and Tails", Effects of Adverse Weather
on Aerodynamics, AGARD CP-496,p. 12.1-12.8.
Riley J.T., Anderson D., Rios M.A., Dumont
C.J., "A Study of Intercycle, Residual and Pre-
activation Ice" AIAA Paper 2001-0089, January
2001.
Baruzzi, G.S., Habashi, W.G., Guevremont, G.
and Hafez, M.M., "A Second Order Finite
Element Method for the Solution of the
Transonic Euler and Navier-Stokes Equations",
International Journal for Numerical Methods in
Fluids, Vol. 20, 1995, pp. 671-693.
Bourgault, Y., Habashi, W.G., Dompierre, J. and
Baruzzi, G.S., "A Finite Element Method Study
of Eulerian Droplets Impingement Models",
International Journal for Numerical Methods in
Fluids, 29:429-449,1999.
Beaugendre, H., Morency, F. and Habashi,
W.G., "ICE3D, FENSAP-ICE's In-flight Ice
Accretion Module", CASI conference, May 2001.
Croce G., Habashi W.G., Guevremont G. and
Tezok F., "3D Thermal Analysis of an Anti-Icing
Device Using FENSAP-ICE", AIAA paper 98-
0193, 1998.
Spalart, Ph.R. and Allmaras, S.R., "A One-
Equation Turbulence Model for Aerodynamic
Flows" AIAA Paper 92-0439.
Spalart, Ph.R., "Trends in Turbulence
Treatments" AIAA Paper 2000-2306.
10
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
10
Gresho, P.M., Lee R.L., Sani R.L., Maslanik, M.K.
and Eaton, B.E. "The consistent Galerkin FEM for
Computing Derived Boundary Quantities in Thermal
and/or Fluid Problems" International Journal for
Numerical Methods in Fluids, 7, pp.371-394,1987.
11
Hughes, TJ.R and Brooks, A., "A Theoretical
Framework for Petrov-Galerkin Methods with
Discontinuous Weighting Functions: Application to
the Streamline-Upwind Procedure", Finite Elements
in Fluids, Volume 4, Chapter 3, Edited by R.H.
Gallagher, D.H. Norrie, J.T. Oden and O.C.
Zienkiewicz, 1982 John Wiley & Sons.
12
Morency, F., Beaugendre, H. and Habashi, W.G.,
"FENSAP-ICE: a Navier-Stokes Eulerian Droplet
Impingement Approach for High-Lift Devices", CASI
conference, May 2001.
13
Boutanios, Z., Bourgault, Y., Habashi, W.G., Isaac,
G.A. and Cober, S.G., "3-D droplets impingement
analysis around an aircraft's nose and cockpit using
FENSAP-ICE". AIAA Paper 98-0200, January 1998.
14
Brun, R.J., Lewis, W, Perkins, P.L. and Serafm, J.S.,
"Impingement of Cloud Droplets on a Cylinder and
Procedure for Measuring Liquid-Water Content and
Droplet Sizes in Supercooled Clouds by Rotating
Multicylinder Method", NACA Report 1215,1955.
15
Brahimi, M.T., Tran, P., Chocron, D., Tezok, F. and
Paraschivoiu, I., "Effect of supercooled large droplets
on ice accretion characteristics". AIAA Paper 97-
0306.
16
Bourgault, Y., Beaugendre, H. and Habashi, W.G.,
"Development of a Shallow Water Icing Model in
FENSAP-ICE". Journal of Aircraft, 37:640-646,
July-August 2000.
17
Morency, F., Tezok, F. and Paraschivoiu, I., "Anti-
Icing System Simulation Using CANICE", Journal of
Aircraft, 36:999-1006, November-December 1999.
18
Tran, P., Brahimi, M.T. and Paraschivoiu, I., "Ice
Accretion on Aircraft Wings with Thermodynamic
Effects", AIAA Paper 94-0605.
19
Wright, W.B. and Rutkowski, A., "Validation Results
for LEWICE 2.0" and CDROM.