Science China Technological Sciences

, Volume 53, Issue 10, pp 2792–2807 | Cite as

Optimization design study of low-Reynolds-number high-lift airfoils for the high-efficiency propeller of low-dynamic vehicles in stratosphere

Article
First Online:
Received:
Accepted:

Abstract

Aerodynamic performance of low-Reynolds-number high-lift airfoil makes a great impact on designing a high-efficiency propeller for low-dynamic vehicles in stratosphere. At high altitude, low-Reynolds-number airfoils are supposed to have high lift-drag ratio or high endurance factor at cruising attack angle along with good stall characteristics. To design such a high-performance low-Reynolds-number high-lift airfoil, the paper established a hierarchical multi-objective optimization platform by combing direct search optimization algorithm EXTREM and airfoil flow field solver XFOIL to automatically and quickly calculate aerodynamic performance function of airfoil by computer. It provides an effective solution to multi-point design problem of low-speed low-Reynolds-number airfoil. It can be seen from the results of three typical optimization examples, the new airfoil E387_OPT2, FX63-137_OPT2 and S1223_OPT2 based on hot low-Reynolds-number high-lift airfoils (Eppler 387 airfoil, Wortmann FX63-137 airfoil and S1223 airfoil) can meet the optimization design requirements and have very good aerodynamic characteristics in both design state and non-design state. Thus, the applicability and effectiveness of hierarchical multi-objective optimization platform are verified.

Keywords

multi-objective optimization low Reynolds number airfoil EXTREM hierarchical multi-objective optimization 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Lewis J, Geoffrey S S, Isaac R. Porche III. High-altitude airships for the future force army. Technical Report (TR-234), 2005Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hao P F. The Future Stratospheric Airships. Beijing: Chinese Newlore Magazine, 2006. 12Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Marcus Y, Stephanie K. An overview of advanced concepts for near-space systems. AIAA-2009-4805, 2009Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Anthony C, Geoffrey A L. Long duration solar flight on venus. AIAA-2005-7156, 2005Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Mueller T J. The influence of laminar separation and transition on low Reynolds number airfoil hysteresis. J Aircraft, 1985, 22: 764–770CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Michael S S, James J G, Andy P B. Experiments on airfoils at low Reynolds number. AIAA-1996-62, 1996Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bai P, Cui E J, Li F, et al. Symmetrical airfoil low Reynolds number of small attack angle lift coefficients nonlinear phenomena research. Chin J Theor Appl Mech, 2006, 38: 1–8MATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Zhu Z Q, Wang X L, Wu Z C. Aerodynamic characteristics of small/micro unmanned aerial vehicles and their shape design. ACTA Aeronautica ET Astronautica Sinica, 2006, 27: 353–364Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Donald G, Phil H. Design and predictions for high-altitude (low Reynolds number) aerodynamic flight experiment. NASA/TM-1999-206579, 1999Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Liu Z, Zhu Z Q, Fu H Y, et al. Design for the high lift-drag ratio. In: The 12th Chinese National Computational Fluid Dynamics Conference, Taiwan, 2005Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fang B R. Design of Aircraft Aerodynamic Configuration. Beijing: Chinese Aviation Industry Press, 1997Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Jacob H G. Rechnergesutzte Optimierung Statischer and Dynamischer System. New York: Springer Verlag, 1982Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Drela. XFOIL: an analysis and designing system for low Reynolds number airfoils. In: Low Reynolds Number Aerodynamics Proceedings of the Conference in Notre Dame. New York: Springer Verlag, 1989Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    XFOIL subsonic airfoil development system user guide. http://web.mit.edu/drela/Public/web/xfoil
  15. 15.
    Wang X P. Genetic algorithms and its application in the aerodynamic optimization design (in Chinese). Dissertation of Doctoral Degree. Xi’an: Northwest Polytechnical University, 2000Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hicks R, Henne P. Wing design by numerical optimization. J Aircraft, 1978, 15: 407–413CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Zhong B W, Qiao Z D. Multiobjective optimization design of transonic airfoils. ICAS-94-2.1.1, 1994Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Chris C C, Harry H H, Robert W B. Aerodynamic characteristics of NACA0012 airfoil section at angles of attack from 0 to 180°. National Advisory for Aeronautics Technical Note 3361, 1995Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Thibert J J, Grandjacques M, Ohman L H. Experimental data base for computer program assessment. AGARD-AR-138, 1979Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    McGhee R J, Walker B S, Millard B F. Experimental results for the Eppler 387 airfoil at low Reynolds numbers in the Langley low-turbulence pressure tunnel. NASA TM-4062, 1988Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Evangelista R, Pfenninger W, Mangalam S M, et al. Design and wind tunnel test of a high performance low Reynolds number airfoil. AIAA 87-2349, 1987Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Selig M S, Guglielmo J J. High-lift low Reynolds number airfoil design. J Aircraft, 1997, 34: 10–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Science China Press and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Key Laboratory of Fluid Mechanics, Ministry of Education, Institute of Fluid Mechanics, School of Aeronautical Science and EngineeringBeijing University of Aeronautics and AstronauticsBeijingChina
  2. 2.Department of Aerospace Science, School of EngineeringCranfield UniversityCranfieldUK

Personalised recommendations