Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T10:10:41.578Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Investigation of skin porosity damping effects on free stream disturbance induced unsteady wing loads

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 January 2016

B. Dahdi ,
M. Mamou ,
M. Khalid ,
S. Benissaad  and
Z. Nemouchi
B. Dahdi
Affiliation:
Département de Génie Mécanique, Faculté des Sciences de l’Ingénieur, Université Mentouri-Constantine, Constantine, Algeria
M. Mamou*
Affiliation:
Aerodynamics Laboratory, NRC Aerospace, National Research Council, Ottawa, Canada
M. Khalid
Affiliation:
Aeronautical Engineering Department, Faculty of Engineering, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
S. Benissaad
Affiliation:
Département de Génie Mécanique, Faculté des Sciences de l’Ingénieur, Université Mentouri-Constantine, Constantine, Algeria
Z. Nemouchi
Affiliation:
Département de Génie Mécanique, Faculté des Sciences de l’Ingénieur, Université Mentouri-Constantine, Constantine, Algeria
*
[email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Numerical simulations were performed to analyse the possibility of damping abrupt incoming free stream disturbances upon a porous aerofoil using an unsteady Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes (URANS) model. To mimic the turbulence disturbance levels that are typically encountered in the atmosphere, two flow configurations were considered. In the first configuration, the unsteadiness of the flow was created with vortices shed from a circular cylinder installed ahead of a WTEA-TE1 aerofoil. The continuous von Kármán shedding vortices contained within the cylinder wake were convected downstream and projected upon the aerofoil. In the second configuration, an instantaneous pair of discrete vortices was created by a rotational snapping of a flat plate, installed upstream of the aerofoil. Solid and porous aerofoil configurations, with porosity settings of 11 and 22%, were applied on 50% of the chord of the aerofoil starting from the leading edge. Both steady and unsteady flow simulations were performed to assess the performance of the porosity under steady and unsteady effects. The steady state flow simulations revealed a noticeable reduction in the aerofoil lift coefficient for the porous aerofoil. For unsteady solutions with a continuous or distinct series of vortices interacting with the aerofoil, the porosity showed insignificant damping of the lift coefficient amplitude. The porosity values investigated in the current exercise had indiscernible effect upon the unsteady lift-load alleviations caused by free stream disturbances.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Aeronautical Journal , Volume 116 , Issue 1184 , October 2012 , pp. 1041 - 1060
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Aeronautical Society 2012 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Khalid, M. Aerodynamic response alleviation studies on airfoils subject to sudden high turbulence environment, 2008, 16th Annual Conference of the CFD Society of Canada, 9-11 June 2008, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada.Google Scholar
2. Bauer, S.X.S. and Hemsch, M.J. Alleviation of side force on tangent-ogive forebodies using passive porosity, 1992, AIAA 1992-2711, AIAA 10th Applied Aerodynamics Conference, 22-24 June 1992, Palo Alto, CA, USA.Google Scholar
3. Bahi, L., Ross, J.M. and Nagamatsu, H.T. Passive shock wave/boundary layer control for transonic airfoil drag reduction, 1983, AIAA 1983-137, AIAA 21st Aerospace Sciences Meeting, 10-13 January 1983, Reno, NV, USA.Google Scholar
4. Fu, J.K. and Liang, S.M. A numerical study on drag reduction for turbulent transonic flow over a projectile, 1991, AIAA 1991-2260, AIAA, SAE, ASME and ASEE 27th Joint Propulsion Conference, 24-26 June 1991, Sacramento, CA, USA.Google Scholar
5. Fu, J.K. and Liang, S.M. Drag reduction for turbulent flows over a projectile: Part I, J Spacecraft and Rockets, 1994, 97, (1), pp 85–92.Google Scholar
6. Lee, S. 1993, Effect of leading-edge porosity on blade-vortex interaction noise, 1993, AIAA 1993-0601, AIAA 31st Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibition, 11-14 January 1993, Reno, NV, USA.Google Scholar
7. Gillan, M.A. and Cooper, R.K. Computational analysis of buffet alleviation over a porous airfoil at high angle of attack, 1994, AIAA 1994-1818, AIAA 12th Applied Aerodynamics Conference, 20-22 June 1994, Colorado Springs, CO, USA.Google Scholar
8. Mineck, R.E. and Hartwich, P.M. Effect of full-chord porosity on aerodynamic characteristics of the NACA 0012 airfoil, 1996, NASA technical paper No 3591.Google Scholar
9. Bush, R.H. Engine face and screen loss models for CFD applications, 1997, AIAA 97-2076, AIAA 13th Computational Fluid Dynamics Conference, 29 June-2 July 1997, Snowmass Village, CO, USA.Google Scholar
10. Frink, N., Bonhaus, D., Vatsa, V., Bauer, S. and Tinetti, A. A boundary condition for simulation of flow over porous surfaces, 2001, AIAA 2001-2412, AIAA 19th Applied Aerodynamics Conference, 11-14 June 2001, Anaheim, CA, USA.Google Scholar
11. Tinetti, A.F., Kelly, J.J., Bauer, S.X.S. and Thomas, R.H. On the use of surface porosity to reduce unsteady lift, 2001, AIAA 2001-2921, AIAA 31st Fluid Dynamics Conference and Exhibition, 11-14 June 2001, Anaheim, CA, USA.Google Scholar
12. Tinetti, A.F., Kelly, J.J., Thomas, R.H and Bauer, S.X.S. Reduction of wake-stator interaction noise using passive porosity, 2002, AIAA 2002-1036, AIAA 40th Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibition, 14-17 January 2002, Reno, NV, USA.Google Scholar
13. Hunter, C.A., Viken, S.A., Wood, R.M. and Bauer, S.X.S. Advanced aerodynamic design of passive porosity control effectors, 2001, AIAA 2001-249, AIAA 39th Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibition, 8-11 January 2001, Reno, NV, USA.Google Scholar
14. Rhyne, H.R. Flight assessment of atmospheric turbulence measurements system with emphasis on long wavelengths, NACA TN-D-8315 197.Google Scholar
15. Riedel, H. and Sitzmann, M. In-flight investigation of atmospheric turbulence, Aerospace Science and Tech, 1998, 5, pp 301–319.Google Scholar
16. Tang, F.C. Wind tunnel test of 16% thick supercritical wind section (WTEA), 1985, LTR-HA-5X5/0154, National Research Council Canada, Ottawa, Canada.Google Scholar
17. ICEM CFD Package 2011, http://www.ansys.com.Google Scholar
18. Mamou, M., Beyers, M., Dagdougui, H. and Hasnaoui, M. Modelling of unsteady turbulent flows past roughened circular cylinders and airfoils, 2008, BBAA VI International Colloquium on Bluff Bodies Aerodynamics and Applications, 20-24 July 2008, Milano, Italy.Google Scholar
19. Spalart, P.R. and Allmaras, S.R. A one-equation turbulence model for aerodynamic flows, 1992, AIAA 1992-0439, AIAA 30th Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibition, 6-9 January 1992, Reno, NV, USA.Google Scholar
20. Menter, F.R. Two equation eddy viscosity turbulence models for engineering applications, AIAA J, 1994, 32, (8), pp 1598–1605.Google Scholar
21. Aumann, P., Bartelheimer, W., Bleecke, H., Kuntz, M., Lieser, J., Monsen, E., Eisfeld, B., Fassbender, J., Heinrich, R., Kroll, N., Mauss, M., Raddatz, J., Reisch, U., Roll, B. and Schwarz, T. FLOWer Installation and User Handbook, 2007, Doc Nr MEGAFLOW-1001, Institute of Aerodynamics and Flow Technology of the German Aerospace Center (DLR).Google Scholar
22. Dahdi, B., Khalid, M., Mamou, M., Nemouchi, Z. and Benissaad, S. Investigation of skin porosity damping effect on atmospheric turbulence induced unsteady wing loads, 2011, 58th Aeronautic Conference and AGM, Canadian Aeronautics and Space Institute AERO 2011, 26-28 April 2011, Montreal, Canada.Google Scholar