DOCSLIB.ORG

Active Flow Separation Control of a Laminar Airfoil at Low Reynolds

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Active Flow Separation Control of a Laminar Airfoil at Low Reynolds Active Flow Separation Control of a Laminar Airfoil at Low Reynolds Number DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Nathan Owen Packard, B.S, M.S Graduate Program in Aeronautical and Astronautical Engineering The Ohio State University 2012 Dissertation Committee: Dr. Jeffrey P. Bons, Advisor Dr. Jen-Ping Chen Dr. Mohammad Samimy Dr. Andrea Serrani Copyright by Nathan Owen Packard 2012 Abstract Detailed investigation of the NACA 643-618 is obtained at a Reynolds number of 6.4x104 and angle of attack sweep of -5° < α < 25°. The baseline flow is characterized by four distinct regimes depending on angle of attack, each exhibiting unique flow behavior. Active flow control is exploited from a row of discrete holes located at five percent chord on the upper surface of the airfoil. Steady normal blowing is employed at four representative angles; blowing ratio is optimized by maximizing the lift coefficient with minimal power requirement. The range of effectiveness of pulsed actuation with varying frequency, duty cycle and blowing ratio is explored. Pulsed blowing successfully reduces separation over a wide range of reduced frequency (0.1-1), blowing ratio (0.5–2), and duty cycle (0.6–50%). A phase-locked investigation, by way of particle image velocimetry, at ten degrees angle of attack illuminates physical mechanisms responsible for separation control of pulsed actuation at a low frequency and duty cycle. Temporal resolution of large structure formation and wake shedding is obtained, revealing a key mechanism for separation control. The Kelvin-Helmholtz instability is identified as responsible for the formation of smaller structures in the separation region which produce favorable momentum transfer, i assisting in further thinning the separation region and then fully attaching the boundary layer. 4 Closed-loop separation control of an oscillating NACA 643-618 airfoil at Re = 6.4x10 is investigated in an effort to autonomously minimize control effort while maximizing aerodynamic performance. High response sensing of unsteady flow with on-surface hot- film sensors placed at zero, twenty, and forty percent chord monitors the airfoil performance and determines the necessity of active flow control. Open-loop characterization identified the use of the forty percent sensor as the actuation trigger. Further, the sensor at twenty percent chord is used to distinguish between pre- and post- leading edge stall; this demarcation enables the utilization of optimal blowing parameters for each circumstance. The range of effectiveness of the employed control algorithm is explored, charting the practicality of the closed-loop control algorithm. To further understand the physical mechanisms inherent in the control process, the transients of the aerodynamic response to flow control are investigated. The on-surface hot-film sensor placed at the leading edge is monitored to understand the time delays and response times associated with the initialization of pulsed normal blowing. The effects of angle of attack and pitch rate on these models are investigated. Black-box models are developed to quantify this response. The sensors at twenty and forty percent chord are also monitored for a further understanding of the transient phenomena. ii Dedicated to Telisha. iii Acknowledgments First, and foremost, I acknowledge my beautiful wife, Telisha. I thank her for standing by my side and supporting me. I thank her for joining me on this difficult yet extremely rewarding experience. I also want to thank my children: Sidney, 6, Owen, 4, and Tanner, 3. I hope to instill in you the desire to get all the education you can, and to never stop learning. I need to thank my parents, Paul and Sherrie, for instilling in me the importance of doing well in school. I must acknowledge Dr. Jeffrey Bons. He has been an inspiration and guide, both professionally and personally. I thank him for his tireless efforts, and recognize how inadequate this work would be without his assistance. Lastly, I acknowledge God for his support and direction. To him I owe all that I have and am. iv VITA April 2007……………………………………….B.S. Applied Physics, Minor Mathematics, Brigham Young University August 2009……………………………………..M.S. Mechanical Engineering, Brigham Young University, Thesis Title: Numerical Characterization of the Inlet Flow of Eleven Radial Flow Turbomachines PUBLICATIONS Packard, N. O., Thake, M. P., Bonilla, C. H., Gompertz, K., Bons, J. P., “Active Control of Flow Separation on a Laminar Airfoil,” Under Review, AIAA Journal, Feb. 2012. Packard, N. O. and Bons, J. P., “Pulsed Blowing on a Laminar Airfoil at Low Reynolds Number,” AIAA 2011-3173, 29th AIAA Applied Aerodynamics Conference, Honolulu, HW, 27-30 June, 2011. Packard, N. O. and Bons, J. P., “Closed-Loop Separation Control of Unsteady Flow on an Airfoil at Low Reynolds Number,” AIAA-2012-754, 50th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting, Nashville, TN, 9-12 Jan, 2012. FIELDS OF STUDY Major Field: Aeronautical and Astronautical Engineering Specialization: Experimental Fluid Dynamics v Table of Contents Abstract ........................................................................................................................... i Acknowledgments ......................................................................................................... iv VITA .............................................................................................................................. v Table of Contents .......................................................................................................... vi List of Tables ............................................................................................................... viii List of Figures ............................................................................................................... ix Nomenclature ............................................................................................................ xviii Chapter 1: Introduction .................................................................................................. 1 Chapter 2: Experimental Setup ....................................................................................... 9 2.1 Wind Tunnel ......................................................................................................... 9 2.2 Airfoil ................................................................................................................... 9 2.3 Flow Control ....................................................................................................... 10 2.4 Data Acquisition ................................................................................................. 18 Chapter 3: Results ........................................................................................................ 24 3.1 Baseline Airfoil Characterization ....................................................................... 24 vi 3.2 Open-loop Flow Control ..................................................................................... 30 3.3 Instability Classification ..................................................................................... 55 3.4 Closed-Loop Separation Control ........................................................................ 68 3.5 Transients of the Aerodynamic Response to Flow Control ................................ 86 Chapter 4: Future Considerations ............................................................................... 112 Chapter 5: Conclusions .............................................................................................. 119 References .................................................................................................................. 122 vii List of Tables Table 1 Combinations of frequencies and duty cycles used in search of dynamic motion ............................................................................................................................... 47 Table 2. FOPDT model parameters for 2° ≤ α ≤ 10°, along with a nominal model for 5° ≤ α ≤ 9° ......................................................................................................................... 92 Table 3. Comparison of model parameters for the static airfoil versus a dynamic airfoil at nominal pitch rate and double pitch rate for α = 5°, 7° and 9°. .................................. 111 viii List of Figures Figure 1. The flow structure of a laminar separation bubble. Taken from [39]. ............ 3 Figure 2. Typical surface pressure distributions with and without a separation bubble. Taken from [5]. ................................................................................................................... 4 Figure 3. NACA 643-618 airfoil with pressure tap and flow control locations. ............. 5 Figure 4. Internal structure of the NACA 643-618 airfoil with pressure taps and active flow control. ...................................................................................................................... 10 Figure 5. Streamlines and normalized mean velocity magnitude for BR = 0.5, depicting the domain of slow moving reverse flow formed behind the jet. Taken from [21]. ......... 11 Figure 6. Streamlines and normalized mean velocity magnitude for BR = 2.5, depicting the advection of the jet far from the wall. Taken from [21]. ............................................ 12 Figure 7. Cartoon depicting
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Chapter 4: Immersed Body Flow [Pp
    MECH 3492 Fluid Mechanics and Applications Univ. of Manitoba Fall Term, 2017 Chapter 4: Immersed Body Flow [pp. 445-459 (8e), or 374-386 (9e)] Dr. Bing-Chen Wang Dept. of Mechanical Engineering Univ. of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, R3T 5V6 When a viscous fluid flow passes a solid body (fully-immersed in the fluid), the body experiences a net force, F, which can be decomposed into two components: a drag force F , which is parallel to the flow direction, and • D a lift force F , which is perpendicular to the flow direction. • L The drag coefficient CD and lift coefficient CL are defined as follows: FD FL CD = 1 2 and CL = 1 2 , (112) 2 ρU A 2 ρU Ap respectively. Here, U is the free-stream velocity, A is the “wetted area” (total surface area in contact with fluid), and Ap is the “planform area” (maximum projected area of an object such as a wing). In the remainder of this section, we focus our attention on the drag forces. As discussed previously, there are two types of drag forces acting on a solid body immersed in a viscous flow: friction drag (also called “viscous drag”), due to the wall friction shear stress exerted on the • surface of a solid body; pressure drag (also called “form drag”), due to the difference in the pressure exerted on the front • and rear surfaces of a solid body. The friction drag and pressure drag on a finite immersed body are defined as FD,vis = τwdA and FD, pres = pdA , (113) ZA ZA Streamwise component respectively.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 4: Immersed Body Flow [Pp
    MECH 3492 Fluid Mechanics and Applications Univ. of Manitoba Fall Term, 2017 Chapter 4: Immersed Body Flow [pp. 445-459 (8e), or 374-386 (9e)] Dr. Bing-Chen Wang Dept. of Mechanical Engineering Univ. of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, R3T 5V6 When a viscous fluid flow passes a solid body (fully-immersed in the fluid), the body experiences a net force, F, which can be decomposed into two components: a drag force F , which is parallel to the flow direction, and • D a lift force F , which is perpendicular to the flow direction. • L The drag coefficient CD and lift coefficient CL are defined as follows: FD FL CD = 1 2 and CL = 1 2 , (112) 2 ρU A 2 ρU Ap respectively. Here, U is the free-stream velocity, A is the “wetted area” (total surface area in contact with fluid), and Ap is the “planform area” (maximum projected area of an object such as a wing). In the remainder of this section, we focus our attention on the drag forces. As discussed previously, there are two types of drag forces acting on a solid body immersed in a viscous flow: friction drag (also called “viscous drag”), due to the wall friction shear stress exerted on the • surface of a solid body; pressure drag (also called “form drag”), due to the difference in the pressure exerted on the front • and rear surfaces of a solid body. The friction drag and pressure drag on a finite immersed body are defined as FD,vis = τwdA and FD, pres = pdA , (113) ZA ZA Streamwise component respectively.
    [Show full text]
  • Upwind Sail Aerodynamics : a RANS Numerical Investigation Validated with Wind Tunnel Pressure Measurements I.M Viola, Patrick Bot, M
    Upwind sail aerodynamics : A RANS numerical investigation validated with wind tunnel pressure measurements I.M Viola, Patrick Bot, M. Riotte To cite this version: I.M Viola, Patrick Bot, M. Riotte. Upwind sail aerodynamics : A RANS numerical investigation validated with wind tunnel pressure measurements. International Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow, Elsevier, 2012, 39, pp.90-101. 10.1016/j.ijheatfluidflow.2012.10.004. hal-01071323 HAL Id: hal-01071323 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01071323 Submitted on 8 Oct 2014 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. I.M. Viola, P. Bot, M. Riotte Upwind Sail Aerodynamics: a RANS numerical investigation validated with wind tunnel pressure measurements International Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow 39 (2013) 90–101 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheatfluidflow.2012.10.004 Keywords: sail aerodynamics, CFD, RANS, yacht, laminar separation bubble, viscous drag. Abstract The aerodynamics of a sailing yacht with different sail trims are presented, derived from simulations performed using Computational Fluid Dynamics. A Reynolds-averaged Navier- Stokes approach was used to model sixteen sail trims first tested in a wind tunnel, where the pressure distributions on the sails were measured.
    [Show full text]
  • Airfoil Boundary Layer Separation Prediction [Pdf]
    Airfoil Boundary Layer Separation Prediction A project present to The Faculty of the Department of Aerospace Engineering San Jose State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Master of Science in Aerospace Engineering By Kartavya Patel May 2014 approved by Dr. Nikos Mourtos Faculty Advisor ABSTRACT Airfoil Boundary Layer Separation Prediction by Kartavya Patel This project features a MatLab complied program that predicts airfoil boundary layer separation. The Airfoil Boundary Layer Separation program uses NACA 4 series, 5 series and custom coordinates to generate the airfoil geometry. It then uses Hess-Smith Panel Method to generate the pressure distribution. It will use the pressure distribution profile to display the boundary layer separation point based on Falkner-Skan Solution, Stratford’s Criterion for Laminar Boundary Layer and Stratford’s Criterion for Turbulent Boundary Layer. From comparison to Xfoil, it can be determined that for low angle of attacks the laminar flow separation point can be predicted from Stratford’s LBL criterion and the turbulent flow separation point can be predicted from Stratford’s TBL criterion. For high angle of attacks, the flow separation point can be predicted from Falkner-Skan Solution. The program requires MatLab Compiler Runtime version 8.1 (MCR) which can be downloaded free at http://www.mathworks.com/products/compiler/mcr/ . ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank Dr. Nikos Mourtos for his support and guidance throughout this project. I would also like to thank Hai Le, Tommy Blackwell and Ian Dupzyk for their contribution in previous project “Determination of Flow Separation Point on NACA Airfoils at Different Angles of Attack by Coupling the Solution of Panel Method with Three Different Separation Criteria”.
    [Show full text]
  • Turbulent Boundary Layer Separation (Nick Laws)
    NICK LAWS TURBULENT BOUNDARY LAYER SEPARATION TURBULENT BOUNDARY LAYER SEPARATION OUTLINE ▸ What we know about Boundary Layers from the physics ▸ What the physics tell us about separation ▸ Characteristics of turbulent separation ▸ Characteristics of turbulent reattachment TURBULENT BOUNDARY LAYER SEPARATION TURBULENT VS. LAMINAR BOUNDARY LAYERS ▸ Greater momentum transport creates a greater du/dy near the wall and therefore greater wall stress for turbulent B.L.s ▸ Turbulent B.L.s less sensitive to adverse pressure gradients because more momentum is near the wall ▸ Blunt bodies have lower pressure drag with separated turbulent B.L. vs. separated laminar TURBULENT BOUNDARY LAYER SEPARATION TURBULENT VS. LAMINAR BOUNDARY LAYERS Kundu fig 9.16 Kundu fig 9.21 laminar separation bubbles: natural ‘trip wire’ TURBULENT BOUNDARY LAYER SEPARATION BOUNDARY LAYER ASSUMPTIONS ▸ Simplify the Navier Stokes equations ▸ 2D, steady, fully developed, Re -> infinity, plus assumptions ▸ Parabolic - only depend on upstream history TURBULENT BOUNDARY LAYER SEPARATION BOUNDARY LAYER ASSUMPTIONS TURBULENT BOUNDARY LAYER SEPARATION PHYSICAL PRINCIPLES OF FLOW SEPARATION ▸ What we can infer from the physics TURBULENT BOUNDARY LAYER SEPARATION BOUNDARY LAYER ASSUMPTIONS ▸ Eliminate the pressure gradient TURBULENT BOUNDARY LAYER SEPARATION WHERE THE BOUNDARY LAYER EQUATIONS GET US ▸ Boundary conditions necessary to solve: ▸ Inlet velocity profile u0(y) ▸ u=v=0 @ y = 0 ▸ Ue(x) or Pe(x) ▸ Turbulent addition: relationship for turbulent stress ▸ Note: BL equ.s break down
    [Show full text]
  • Computational and Experimental Study on Performance of Sails of a Yacht
    Available online at www.sciencedirect.com SCIENCE DIRECT" EIMQINEERING ELSEVIER Ocean Engineering 33 (2006) 1322-1342 www.elsevier.com/locate/oceaneng Computational and experimental study on performance of sails of a yacht Jaehoon Yoo Hyoung Tae Kim Marine Transportation Systems Researcli Division, Korea Ocean Research and Development Institute, 171 Jang-dong, Yuseong-gu, Daejeon 305-343, South Korea ^ Department of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering, Chungnam National Un iversity, 220 Gung-doiig, Yuseong-gu, Daejeon 305-764, South Korea Received 1 February 2005; accepted 4 August 2005 Available online 10 November 2005 Abstract It is important to understand fiow characteristics and performances of sails for both sailors and designers who want to have efhcient thrust of yacht. In this paper the viscous fiows around sail-Hke rigid wings, which are similar to main and jib sails of a 30 feet sloop, are calculated using a CFD tool. Lift, drag and thrust forces are estimated for various conditions of gap distance between the two sails and the center of effort ofthe sail system are obtaiaed. Wind tunnel experiments are also caiTied out to measure aerodynamic forces acting on the sail system and to validate the computation. It is found that the combination of two sails produces the hft force larger than the sum of that produced separately by each sail and the gap distance between the two sails is an important factor to determine total hft and thrust. © 2005 Elsevier Ltd. AU rights reserved. Keywords: Sailing yacht; Interaction; Gap distance; CFD; RANS; Wind tunnel 1. Introduction The saihng performance of a yacht depends on the balance of hydro- and aero-dynamic forces acting on the huU and on the sails.
    [Show full text]
  • Lift Forces in External Flows
    • DECEMBER 2019 Lift Forces in External Flows Real External Flows – Lesson 3 Lift • We covered the drag component of the fluid force acting on an object, and now we will discuss its counterpart, lift. • Lift is produced by generating a difference in the pressure distribution on the “top” and “bottom” surfaces of the object. • The lift acts in the direction normal to the free-stream fluid motion. • The lift on an object is influenced primarily by its shape, including orientation of this shape with respect to the freestream flow direction. • Secondary influences include Reynolds number, Mach number, the Froude number (if free surface present, e.g., hydrofoil) and the surface roughness. • The pressure imbalance (between the top and bottom surfaces of the object) and lift can increase by changing the angle of attack (AoA) of the object such as an airfoil or by having a non-symmetric shape. Example of Unsteady Lift Around a Baseball • Rotation of the baseball produces a nonuniform pressure distribution across the ball ‐ clockwise rotation causes a floater. Flow ‐ counterclockwise rotation produces a sinker. • In soccer, you can introduce spin to induce the banana kick. Baseball Pitcher Throwing the Ball Soccer Player Kicking the Ball Importance of Lift • Like drag, the lift force can be either a benefit Slats or a hindrance depending on objectives of a Flaps fluid dynamics application. ‐ Lift on a wing of an airplane is essential for the airplane to fly. • Flaps and slats are added to a wing design to maintain lift when airplane reduces speed on its landing approach. ‐ Lift on a fast-driven car is undesirable as it Spoiler reduces wheel traction with the pavement and makes handling of the car more difficult and less safe.
    [Show full text]
  • Studies of Mast Section Aerodynamics by Arvel Gentry
    Studies of Mast Section Aerodynamics By Arvel Gentry Proceedings of the 7th AIAA Symposium on the Aero/Hydronautics of Sailing January 31, 1976 Long Beach, California Abstract This paper summarizes the studies that were conducted with the objective of obtaining a mast-section shape with improved aerodynamic flow properties for use on the 12-Meter Courageous. TheDecember project 1999 consisted of a theoretical study defining the basic aerodynamics of the mast-mainsail combination followed by both analytical and experimental studies of various mast-section shapes. A new 12-Meter mast-section shape evolved from these studies that demonstrated significantly improved airflow patterns around the mast and mainsail when compared directly with the conventional 12-Meter elliptical section. This new mast shape was used in constructing the mast for Courageous used in the successful 1974 defense of the America's cup against the Australian challenger Southern Cross. 1. Introduction The mast has always been thought of as being an Bill Ficker, who skippered Intrepid in the 1970 defense, was undesirable but necessary appendage on a sailboat. It slated to be the skipper of the new aluminum Courageous. holds the sails up but contributes considerable drag and Ficker and David Pedrick (S&S project engineer on disturbs the airflow over the mainsail so that its efficiency Courageous) wondered if a new mast-section shape might is greatly reduced. This popular belief has led to a number lead to improved boat performance. This paper describes of different approaches in improving the overall efficiency the work done in attempting to answer that question. of a sailing rig.
    [Show full text]
  • Adaptive Separation Control of a Laminar Boundary Layer Using
    J. Fluid Mech. (2020), vol. 903, A21. © The Author(s), 2020. 903 A21-1 Published by Cambridge University Press doi:10.1017/jfm.2020.546 Adaptive separation control of a laminar https://doi.org/10.1017/jfm.2020.546 . boundary layer using online dynamic mode decomposition Eric A. Deem1, Louis N. Cattafesta III1,†,MaziarS.Hemati2, Hao Zhang3, Clarence Rowley3 and Rajat Mittal4 1Mechanical Engineering, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL 32310, USA 2Aerospace Engineering and Mechanics, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55455, USA https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms 3Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ 08544, USA 4Mechanical Engineering, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD 21218, USA (Received 18 November 2019; revised 13 April 2020; accepted 22 June 2020) Adaptive control of flow separation based on online dynamic mode decomposition (DMD) is formulated and implemented on a canonical separated laminar boundary layer via a pulse-modulated zero-net mass-flux jet actuator located just upstream of separation. Using a linear array of thirteen flush-mounted microphones, dynamical characteristics of the separated flow subjected to forcing are extracted by online DMD. This method provides updates of the modal characteristics of the separated flow while forcing is applied at a rate commensurate with the characteristic time scales of the flow. In particular, online DMD provides a time-varying linear estimate of the nonlinear evolution of the controlled , subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at flow without any prior knowledge. Using this adaptive model, feedback control is then implemented in which the linear quadratic regulator gains are computed recursively. This physics-based, autonomous approach results in more efficient flow reattachment compared with commensurate open-loop control.
    [Show full text]
  • Flow Over Immerced Bodies
    Department of Mechanical Engineering AMEE401 / AUTO400 Instructor: Marios M. Fyrillas Aerodynamics Email: [email protected] HOMEWORK ASSIGNMENT #2 QUESTION 1 Clearly there are two mechanisms responsible for the drag and the lift, the pressure and the shear stress: The drag force and the lift force on an object can be obtained by: Dpcos d Aw sin d A Lpsin d A w cos d A LIFT: Most common lift-generating devices (i.e., airfoils, fans, spoilers on cars, etc.) operate in the large Reynolds number range in which the flow has a boundary layer character, with viscous effects confined to the boundary layers and wake regions. For such cases the wall shear stress, w , contributes little to the lift. Most of the lift comes from the surface pressure distribution, as justified through Bernoulli’s equation. For objects operating in very low Reynolds number regimes (i.e. Re 1) viscous effects are important, and the contribution of the shear stress to the lift may be as important as that of the pressure. Such situations include the flight of minute insects and the swimming of microscopic organisms. DRAG: Similarly, when flow separation occurs, i.e. a blunt body or a streamlined body at a large angle of attack, the major component of the drag force is pressure differential due to the low pressure in the flow separation region. On the ultimately streamlined body (a zero thickness flat plate parallel to the flow) the drag is entirely due to the shear stress at the surface (boundary layers) and, is relatively small.
    [Show full text]
  • Numerical Investigation of the Turbulent Wake-Boundary Interaction in a Translational Cascade of Airfoils and Flat Plate
    energies Article Numerical Investigation of the Turbulent Wake-Boundary Interaction in a Translational Cascade of Airfoils and Flat Plate Xiaodong Ruan 1,*, Xu Zhang 1, Pengfei Wang 2 , Jiaming Wang 1 and Zhongbin Xu 3 1 State Key Laboratory of Fluid Power and Mechatronic Systems, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310027, China; [email protected] (X.Z.); [email protected] (J.W.) 2 School of Engineering, Zhejiang University City College, Hangzhou 310015, China; [email protected] 3 Institute of Process Equipment, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310027, China; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +86-1385-805-3612 Received: 24 July 2020; Accepted: 27 August 2020; Published: 31 August 2020 Abstract: Rotor stator interaction (RSI) is an important phenomenon influencing performances in the pump, turbine, and compressor. In this paper, the correlation-based transition model is used to study the RSI phenomenon between a translational cascade of airfoils and a flat plat. A comparison was made between computational results and experimental results. The computational boundary layer velocity is in reasonable agreement with the experimental velocity. The thickness of boundary layer decreases as the RSI frequency increases and it increases as the fluid flows downstream. The spectral plots of velocity fluctuations at leading edge x/c = 2 under RSI partial flow condition f = 20 Hz and f = 30 Hz are dominated by a narrowband component. RSI frequency mainly affects the turbulence intensity in the freestream region. However, it has little influence on the turbulence intensity of boundary layer near the wall. A secondary vortex is induced by the wake–boundary layer interaction and it leads to the formation of a thickened laminar boundary layer.
    [Show full text]
  • The Dynamics of Static Stall
    16th Int Symp on Applications of Laser Techniques to Fluid Mechanics Lisbon, Portugal, 09-12 July, 2012 The Dynamics of Static Stall Karen Mulleners1∗, Arnaud Le Pape2, Benjamin Heine1, Markus Raffel1 1: Helicopter Department, German Aerospace Centre (DLR), Göttingen, Germany 2: Applied Aerodynamics Department, ONERA, The French Aerospace Lab, Meudon, France * Current address: Institute of Turbomachinery and Fluid Dynamics, Leibniz Universität Hannover, Germany, [email protected] Abstract The dynamic process of flow separation on a stationary airfoil in a uniform flow was investigated experimentally by means of time-resolved measurements of the velocity field and the airfoil’s surface pressure distribution. The unsteady movement of the separation point, the growth of the separated region, and surface pressure fluctuations were examined in order to obtain information about the chronology of stall development. The early inception of stall is characterised with the abrupt upstream motion of the separation point. During subsequent stall development, large scale shear layer structures are formed and grow while travelling down- stream. This leads to a gradual increase of the separated flow region reaching his maximum size at the end of stall development which is marked by a significant lift drop. 1 Introduction Stall on lifting surfaces is a commonly encountered, mostly undesired, condition in aviation that occurs when a critical angle of attack is exceeded. At low angles of attack a, lift increases linearly with a. At higher angles of attack an adverse pressure gradient builds up on the airfoil’s suction side which eventually forces the flow to separate and the lift to drop.
    [Show full text]