Advertisement

Experiments in Fluids

, 47:579 | Cite as

Flow structure on a three-dimensional wing subjected to small amplitude perturbations

  • T. O. Yilmaz
  • Donald Rockwell
Research Article

Abstract

Small amplitude angular perturbations, of the order of one-half degree, can substantially modify the flow structure along a three-dimensional wing configuration, which is quantitatively characterized using a technique of high-image-density particle image velocimetry. Excitation at either the fundamental or the first subharmonic of the spanwise-averaged instability frequency of the separating shear layer from the stationary wing nearly eliminates the large-scale separation zone along the wing at high angle of attack. The physics of the flow is interpreted in terms of time-mean streamlines, vorticity and Reynolds stress, in conjunction with phase-averaged patterns of instantaneous vorticity. Distinctive vorticity patterns occur along the leading edge when the time-averaged separation zone is minimized.

Keywords

Vorticity Particle Image Velocimetry Excitation Frequency Delta Wing Separate Shear Layer 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors gratefully acknowledge the support of the Air Force Office of Scientific Research under grants monitored by Lt. Col. Rhett Jefferies and Dr. John Schmisseur.

References

  1. Bruce RJ (2003) Low speed wind tunnel tests on the 1303 UCAV concept. Technical Report TR025502, QinetiQ LtdGoogle Scholar
  2. Gordnier DV, Visbal MR (1998) Higher-order schemes for Navier-Stokes equations: Algorithms and implementation into FDl3DI. Technical Report AFRL-VA-WP-TR-1998-3060, Air Vehicles Directorate, Air Force Research LaboratoryGoogle Scholar
  3. Gordnier RE, Visbal MR (2005) Compact difference scheme applied to simulation of low-sweep delta wing flow. AIAA J 43:1744–1752CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Gordnier RE, Visbal MR (2006) High-order simulation of low sweep delta wing flows using ILES and hybrid RANS/ILES models. AIAA Paper 2006-0504Google Scholar
  5. Gordnier RE, Visbal MR, Gursul I, Wang Z (2007) Computational and experimental investigation of a nonslender delta wing. AIAA Paper 2097-0894Google Scholar
  6. Gursul I (2004a) Recent developments in delta wing aerodynamics. Invited Review Article, The Aeronautical Journal, pp 437–452Google Scholar
  7. Gursul I (2004b) Vortex flows on UAVs: issues and challenges. Aeronautical J 108:597–610Google Scholar
  8. Gursul I, Gordnier R, Visbal M (2005) Unsteady aerodynamics of nonslender delta wings. Prog Aerospace Sci 41:515–557CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Gursul I, Vardaki E, Wang Z (2006) Active and passive control of reattachment on various low-sweep wings. AIAA Paper 2006-506Google Scholar
  10. Ho C-M, Huerre P (1984) Perturbed free shear layers. Ann Rev Fluid Mech 16:365–422CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Kosoglu MA (2007) Flow structure along a 1303 unmanned combat air vehicle. PhD Dissertation, Lehigh University, Bethlehem, PAGoogle Scholar
  12. McParlin SC, Bruce RJ, Hepworth AG, Rae AJ (2003) Low speed wind tunnel tests on the 1303 UCAV concept. QinetiQ/fST/tR025502/1.0, QinetiQ, Ltd., Farnborough, UKGoogle Scholar
  13. Michalke A (1964) On the inviscid instability of the hyperbolic tangent velocity profile. J Fluid Mech 19:543–556zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  14. Nelson RC, Corke TC, He C, Othman H, Matsuno T (2007) Modification of the flow structure over a UAV wing for roll control. AIAA Paper 2007-884Google Scholar
  15. Ol MV (2006) Water tunnel velocimetry results for the 1303 UCAV configuration. AIAA Paper 2006-2990Google Scholar
  16. Ol MV, Gharib M (2003) Leading-edge vortex structure of nonslender delta wings at low Reynolds number. AIAA J 41:16–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Petterson K (2006) CFD analysis of the low-speed aerodynamic characteristics of a UCAV. AIAA Paper 2006-1259Google Scholar
  18. Sherer SE, Gordnier RE, Visbal MR (2008) Computational study of a UCAV configuration using a high-order overset-grid algorithm. AIAA Paper 2008-626Google Scholar
  19. Taylor G, Wang Z, Vardaki E, Gursul I (2007) Lift enhancement over flexible non-slender delta wings. AIAA J 45(12):2979–2993CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Vardaki E, Wang Z, Gursul I (2008) Flow reattachment and vortex reformation on oscillating low-aspect-ratio wings. AIAA J 46(6):1453–1462CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Visbal MR (2009) High-fidelity simulation of transitional flows past a plunging airfoil. AIAA Paper 2009-391Google Scholar
  22. Wong MD, Flores J (2006) Application of OVERFLOW-MLP to the analysis of the 1303 UCAV. AIAA Paper 2006-2987Google Scholar
  23. Wong MD, McKenzie GJ, Ol MV, Petterson K, Zhang S (2006) Joint TTCP CFD studies into the 1303 UCAV performance: first year results. AIAA Paper 2006-2984Google Scholar
  24. Yaniktepe B, Rockwell D (2004) Flow structure on a delta wing of low sweep angle. AIAA J 42:513–523CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Yaniktepe B, Rockwell D (2005) Flow structure on diamond and lambda planforms: trailing-edge region. AIAA J 43:1490–1512CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Yavuz MM, Elkhoury M, Rockwell D (2004) Near-surface topology and flow structure on a delta wing. AIAA J 42:332–340CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Zhang F, Khalid M, Ball N (2005) A CFD based study of UCAV 1303 model. AIAA Paper 2006-4615Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Mechanical Engineering and MechanicsLehigh UniversityBethlehemUSA

Personalised recommendations