Fixed and rotary wing transonic aerodynamic improvement via surface-based trapped vortex generators

Abstract

A novel passive flow control concept for transonic flows over airfoils is proposed and examined via computational fluid dynamics. The control concept is based on the local modification of the airfoil's geometry. It aims to reduce drag or to increase lift without deteriorating the original lift and/or drag characteristics of the airfoil, respectively. Such flow control technique could be beneficial for improving the range or endurance of transonic aircraft or for mitigating the negative effects of transonic flow on the advancing blades of helicopter rotors. To explore the feasibility of the concept, two-dimensional computational fluid dynamics simulations of a NACA 0012 airfoil exposed to a freestream of Mach 0.7 and Re = 9 × 10⁶ as well as of a NASA SC(3)−0712(B) supercritical airfoil exposed to a freestream of Mach 0.78 and Re = 30 × 10⁶ were conducted. The baseline airfoil simulations were carefully verified and validated, showing excellent agreement with wind tunnel data. Then, 32 various local geometry modifications were proposed and systematically examined, all functioning as a trapped-vortex generator. The surface modifications were examined on both the upper and lower surfaces of the airfoils. The upper surface modifications demonstrated remarkable ability to reduce the strength of the shockwave on the upper surface of the airfoil with only a small penalty in lift. On the other hand, the lower surface modifications could significantly increase the lift-to-drag ratio for the full range of the investigated angles of attack, when compared to the baseline airfoil.

Keywords

Surface-based trapped vortex generators technique transonic flow shockwave control drag reduction rotorcraft aircraft

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Leishman

. Principles of helicopter aerodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2006.

Lin JC, Howard FG, Bushnell DM, et al. Investigation of several passive and active methods for turbulent flow separation control. In: 21st Fluid dynamics, plasma dynamics and lasers conference, 1990, p.1598. Seattle, WA: AIAA.

Reuss RL, Hoffman MJ and Gregorek GM. Effects of surface roughness and vortex generators on the NACA 4415 airfoil. Contract No: DE-AC36-83CH10093, National Laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy, 1995.

Zha GC and Paxton CA. Novel airfoil circulation augment flow control method using co-flow jet. In: 2nd AIAA flow control conference, 2004, pp.1–13. Portland, OR: AIAA.

You D and Moin P. Large-eddy simulation of flow separation over an airfoil with synthetic jet control. Annual Research Briefs, Center for Turbulence Research, 2006, pp.337–346.

Yeung

WWH

. Lift enhancement on unconventional airfoils. J Mekanikal 2006; 22: 17–25. .

Shan

Jiang

Liu

, et al. Numerical study of passive and active flow separation control over a NACA0012 airfoil. Comput Fluids 2008; 37: 975–992.

Prince

Khodagolian

Singh

. Aerodynamic stall suppression on airfoil sections using passive air-jet vortex generators. AIAA J 2009; 47: 2232–2242.

Anand U, Sudhakar Y, Thileepanragu R, et al. Passive flow control over NACA0012 airfoil using vortex generators. In: Proceedings of the 37th national & 4th international conference on fluid mechanics and fluid power, 2010, pp.1–8. Chennai, India: IIT Madras.

10.

Favier

Pinelli

Piomelli

. Control of the separated flow around an airfoil using a wavy leading edge inspired by humpback whale flippers. C R Mec 2012; 340: 107–114.

11.

Srivastav D. Flow control over airfoils using different shaped dimples. In: International conference on fluid dynamics and thermodynamics technologies, Singapore, Vol. 33, 2012.

12.

Yagiz

Kandil

Pehlivanoglu

. Drag minimization using active and passive flow control techniques. Aerosp Sci Technol 2012; 17: 21–31.

13.

Bourgois

Tensi

Sommier

, et al. Experimental investigation on fluidic control over an airfoil. J Flow Visualization Image Process 2014; 13: 265–286.

14.

Bouzaher

. Large eddy simulation of flow separation control over a NACA2415 airfoil. Int J Mech Aerosp Indust Mechatron Eng 2014; 8: 867–870.

15.

Singh

Peake

Kokkalis

, et al. Control of rotorcraft retreating blade stall using air-jet vortex generators. J Aircr 2006; 43: 1169–1176.

16.

Roedts RL II. Rotorcraft performance enhancement due to a lower-surface miniature effector. Master's Thesis, Department of Aerospace Engineering, The Pennsylvania State University, United States, 2008.

17.

Barbarino

Gandhi

Webster

. Design of extendable chord sections for morphing helicopter rotor blades. J Intell Mater Syst Struct 2011, pp. 22: 891–2 .

18.

Rong

PinQi

. Control of dynamic stall of helicopter rotor blades. Sci China Tech Sci 2012; 56: 171–180.

19.

Heine B, Mulleners K, Joubert G, et al. Dynamic stall control by passive disturbance generators. In: 29th AIAA applied aerodynamics conference, 2011, pp.1–14. Honolulu, Hawaii: AIAA.

20.

Le Pape

Lienard

Bailly

. Active flow controls of helicopters. J Aerosp Lab 2013; 6: 1–11.

21.

Lee

Shu

. Aerodynamic design optimization of helicopter rotor blades including airfoil shape for hover performance. Chin J Aeronaut 2013; 26: 1–8.

22.

Lefebvre A and Zha GC. Pitching airfoil performance enhancement using co-flow jet flow control at high Mach number. In: 52nd Aerospace sciences meeting, 2014, pp.1–16. Maryland: AIAA SciTech.

23.

Kline RL and Fogleman FF. Airfoil for aircraft. Patent application No. 20195, USA, 1970.

24.

Fertis

. New airfoil design concept with improved aerodynamic characteristics. J Aerosp Eng 1994; 7: 328–339.

25.

Finaish

Witherspoon

. Aerodynamic performance of an airfoil with step induced vortex for lift augmentation. J Aerosp Eng 1998; 11: 9–16.

26.

Al-Jaburi KJ. An experimental study of backward facing step's effect on the aerodynamic characteristics of airfoils at low flight speeds. Master's Thesis, University of Technology, Baghdad, 2003.

27.

Voona R. Enhancing the aerodynamic performance of the stepped airfoils. Master's Thesis, Missouri University of Science and Technology, Missouri, 2012.

28.

Boroomand M and Hosseinverdi S. Numerical investigation of turbulent flow around a stepped airfoil at high Reynolds number. In: Proceedings of the ASME 2009 fluids engineering division summer meeting, Vail, Colorado, 2–6 August 2009.

29.

Mishriky

Walsh

. Effect of the backward-facing step location on the aerodynamics of a morphing wing. MDPI Aerospace 2016; 3: 1–15. .

30.

Charles DH. Two-dimensional aerodynamic characteristics of the NACA0012 airfoil in the Langley 8-foot transonic pressure tunnel. NASA TM-81927, 1981.

31.

Johnson WG Jr, Hill AS and Eichmann O. High Reynolds number tests of a NASA SC(3)-0712(B) airfoil in the Langley 0.3-meter transonic cryogenic tunnel. NASA TM-86371, 1985.

32.

Al-Jaburi

Feszty

. Passive flow control of dynamic stall via surface-based trapped vortex generators. J Am Helicopter Soc 2018; 63: 1–14.

33.

Thomas

Salas

. Far-field boundary conditions for transonic lifting solutions to the Euler equations. AIAA J 1986; 24: 1074–1080.

34.

Blazek

. Computational fluid dynamics: principles and applications, 1st ed. UK: Elsevier Science Ltd, 2001.

35.

Rumsey C, Smith BR and Huang GP. Description of a website resource for turbulence modeling verification and validation. In: 40th AIAA fluid dynamics conference and exhibit, Chicago, IL, 2010, pp.1–17.

36.

Wakefield

Dubuque

. Exceeding tire speed rating during takeoff. Boeing Aero-magazine (QTR) 2009. 2: 15–19. .