Aerospace Concept Exploration System
Architecture and Methods for an Air Vehicle Design Tool
Full Document
| Format | File Size | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| PDF file | 0.8 MB | Use Adobe Acrobat Reader version 10 or higher for the best experience. |
The capability to assess aerospace vehicle designs independently, consistently and rapidly can help RAND address complex technological and operational questions with agility, objectivity and precision. We developed the Aerospace Concept Exploration System (ACES) to fulfill this need. In the RAND context, the ACES design tool can serve as the vehicle design component of large-scale end-to-end concept development and system evaluations. This Working Paper details the motivation, theory, applicability and architecture of the ACES design tool.
Table of Contents
Chapter One
Motivation, Requirements and Limitations
Chapter Two
ACES Architecture and Models
Chapter Three
Software Design to Contain Complexity
Chapter Four
Post-Processing and Visualization
Chapter Five
Verification and Validation
Chapter Six
Blended Wing Body UAV Design Study
Chapter Seven
Conclusion
Research conducted by
The research reported here was sponsored by the United States Air Force and conducted by RAND Project AIR FORCE.
This report is part of the RAND Corporation working paper series. RAND working papers are intended to share researchers' latest findings and to solicit informal peer review. They have been approved for circulation by RAND but may not have been formally edited or peer reviewed.
Permission is given to duplicate this electronic document for personal use only, as long as it is unaltered and complete. Copies may not be duplicated for commercial purposes. Unauthorized posting of RAND PDFs to a non-RAND Web site is prohibited. RAND PDFs are protected under copyright law. For information on reprint and linking permissions, please visit the RAND Permissions page.
The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.