Abstract
In the thin airfoil theory, the camber line and the thickness distribution of general airfoils are mainly extracted by a linear combination of the upper and lower surfaces, giving rise to geometric distortions at the leading edge. Furthermore, despite the recent effort to obtain analytic expressions for the zero-lift angle of attack and quarter-chord moment coefficient, analytic generalizations are needed for the camber line component in the trigonometric series coefficients. In this sense, the present paper proposes a straightforward algorithm to extract the camber line and thickness distribution of general-shaped airfoils based on a finite difference method and the Bézier curve fitting. Integrals in the thin airfoil theory involving a Bernstein basis are performed, leading to series coefficients related to Gegenbauer polynomials. The algorithm is validated against analytical expressions of the NACA airfoils without introducing or adapting geometric parameters, and the results demonstrate good accuracy. In addition, the proposed algorithm indicated a significantly different geometric behavior for the SD7003 and E387 airfoils’ camber slope at the leading edge in contrast with the classical linear approximation. Moreover, the method can be coupled conveniently in recent unsteady aerodynamic models established on the thin airfoil theory to obtain closed-form expressions for general airfoils.
Similar content being viewed by others
Data availability and materials
Data will be made available from the corresponding author on request.
References
Newman JN (2018) Marine Hydrodynamics. The MIT Press, Cambridge
Prandtl L (1918) Tragflügeltheorie
Katz J, Plotkin A (2001) Low-speed aerodynamics, vol 13. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Anderson JD, Wendt J (1995) Computational fluid dynamics, vol 206. Springer, Cham
Glauert H (1926) The elements of aerofoil and airscrew theory. The University Press, Cambridge
Crighton DG (1985) The Kutta condition in unsteady flow. Annu Rev Fluid Mech 17(1):411–445
Widmann AGM (2015) Formation and detachment of leading edge vortices on unsteady airfoils. Ph.D. thesis, Technische Universität
Wagner H (1925) Über die Entstehung des dynamischen Auftriebes von Tragflügeln. ZAMM-J Appl Math Mech/Zeit Angew Math Mech 5(1):17–35
Theodorsen T (1949) General theory of aerodynamic instability and the mechanism of flutter
Rosenhead L (1931) The formation of vortices from a surface of discontinuity. Proc R Soc London Series A Contain Papers Math Phys Charact 134(823):170–192
Katz J, Weihs D (1978) Behavior of vortex wakes from oscillating airfoils. J Aircr 15(12):861–863
Ramesh K, Gopalarathnam A, Granlund K, Ol MV, Edwards JR (2014) Discrete-vortex method with novel shedding criterion for unsteady aerofoil flows with intermittent leading-edge vortex shedding. J Fluid Mech 751:500–538
Saini A, Narsipur S, Gopalarathnam A (2021) Leading-edge flow sensing for detection of vortex shedding from airfoils in unsteady flows. Phys Fluids 33(8):087105
Saini A, Gopalarathnam A (2018) Leading-edge flow sensing for aerodynamic parameter estimation. AIAA J 56(12):4706–4718
Houghton EL, Carpenter PW (2003) Aerodynamics for engineering students. Elsevier, New York
Li W-L, Xie H, Li Q-D, Zhou L-P, Yin Z-P (2014) Section curve reconstruction and mean-camber curve extraction of a point-sampled blade surface. PLoS ONE 9(12):e115471
Khomiak O, Stetsyuk P, Zhydkov V, Infante L (2023) Using optimization to construct naturally parametrized curve with cubic curvature. In: International conference on smart technologies in urban engineering, Springer, pp 14–24
Boehm W (1987) Bézier presentation of airfoils. Computer aided geometric design 4(1–2):17–22
Shikhar JA (2017) Shape parameterization of airfoil shapes using Bezier curves. In: Innovative design and development practices in aerospace and automotive engineering. Springer, pp 79–85
Ribeiro A, Awruch A, Gomes H (2012) An airfoil optimization technique for wind turbines. Appl Math Model 36(10):4898–4907
Lepine J, Guibault F, Trepanier J-Y, Pepin F (2001) Optimized nonuniform rational B-spline geometrical representation for aerodynamic design of wings. AIAA J 39(11):2033–2041
Barger RL (1975) Adaptation of the Theodorsen theory to the representation of an airfoil as a combination of a lifting line and a thickness distribution. Tech. rep
Theodorsen T (1932) Theory of wing sections of arbitrary shape, US Government Printing Office
Joseph C, Mohan R (2021) Closed-form expressions of lift and moment coefficients for generalized camber using thin-airfoil theory. AIAA J 59(10):4264–4270
Motta V, Guardone A, Quaranta G (2015) Influence of airfoil thickness on unsteady aerodynamic loads on pitching airfoils. J Fluid Mech 774:460–487
Anderson JD (2016) Fundamentals of aerodynamics, 6th edn. McGraw-Hill Education, Columbus
Ashraf M, Young J, Lai J (2009) Effect of airfoil thickness, camber and Reynolds number on plunging airfoil propulsion. In: 47th AIAA Aerospace sciences meeting including the new horizons forum and aerospace exposition, p 1274
Miotto R, Wolf W, Gaitonde D, Visbal M (2023) Pitch-plunge equivalence in dynamic stall of ramp motion airfoils. AIAA J 61(1):174–188
Xu X, Lagor FD (2021) Quasi-steady effective angle of attack and its use in lift-equivalent motion design. AIAA J 59(7):2613–2626
SureshBabu A, Medina A, Rockwood M, Bryant M, Gopalarathnam A (2021) Theoretical and experimental investigation of an unsteady airfoil in the presence of external flow disturbances. J Fluid Mech 921:A21
Narsipur S, Hosangadi P, Gopalarathnam A, Edwards JR (2020) Variation of leading-edge suction during stall for unsteady aerofoil motions. J Fluid Mech 900:A25
Deparday J, Mulleners K (2019) Modeling the interplay between the shear layer and leading edge suction during dynamic stall. Phys Fluids 31(10):107104
Martínez A, He G, Mulleners K, Ramesh KK (2022) Modulation of the leading-edge vortex shedding rate in discrete-vortex methods. In: AIAA SCITECH 2022 Forum, p 2416
Ramesh K, Granlund K, Ol MV, Gopalarathnam A, Edwards JR (2018) Leading-edge flow criticality as a governing factor in leading-edge vortex initiation in unsteady airfoil flows. Theoret Comput Fluid Dyn 32:109–136
Suresh Babu AV, Narsipur S, Bryant M, Gopalarathnam A (2022) Leading-edge-vortex tailoring on unsteady airfoils using an inverse aerodynamic approach. Phys Fluids 34(5):057107
Liu Z, Lai JC, Young J, Tian F-B (2017) Discrete vortex method with flow separation corrections for flapping-foil power generators. AIAA J 55(2):410–418
Paturle ML, Bose C, Viola IM, Ramesh KK (2022) Dynamic detection of flow separation using integral formulation of unsteady boundary layer equations. In: AIAA AVIATION 2022 Forum, p 4138
Narsipur S, Gopalarathnam A, Edwards JR (2019) Low-order model for prediction of trailing-edge separation in unsteady flow. AIAA J 57(1):191–207
Ramesh K (2020) On the leading-edge suction and stagnation-point location in unsteady flows past thin aerofoils. J Fluid Mech 886:A13
Hirato Y, Shen M, Gopalarathnam A, Edwards JR (2021) Flow criticality governs leading-edge-vortex initiation on finite wings in unsteady flow. J Fluid Mech 910:A1
Farouki RT (2012) The Bernstein polynomial basis: a centennial retrospective. Comput Aided Geom Design 29(6):379–419
Jacobs EN, Ward KE, Pinkerton RM (1933) The characteristics of 78 related airfoil section from tests in the variable-density wind tunnel. 460, US Government Printing Office
Kim DS, Kim T, Rim S-H (2012) Some identities involving Gegenbauer polynomials. Adv Differ Equ 2012(1):1–11
Selig MS (1995) Summary of low speed airfoil data. SOARTECH Publications, Ann Arbor
Drela M (1989) XFOIL: an analysis and design system for low Reynolds number airfoils. In: Low reynolds number aerodynamics: proceedings of the Conference Notre Dame, Indiana, USA, 5–7 June 1989, Springer, pp 1–12
Van Dyke MD (1956) Second-order subsonic airfoil theory including edge effects. Tech. rep
Brandão MP (1987) Improper integrals in theoretical aerodynamics: the problem revisited. AIAA J 25(9):1258–1260
Abramowitz M, Stegun IA (1964) Handbook of mathematical functions with formulas, graphs, and mathematical tables, Vol. 55, US Government printing office
Churchill R, Brown J (2014) Ebook: complex variables and applications. McGraw Hill, Noida
Srivastava HM, Choi J (2011) Zeta and q-Zeta functions and associated series and integrals. Elsevier, New York
Kronenburg M (2011) The binomial coefficient for negative arguments. arXiv preprint arXiv:1105.3689
Boros G, Moll V (2004) Irresistible integrals: symbolics, analysis and experiments in the evaluation of integrals. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Acknowledgements
The authors acknowledge the financial support of the Brazilian agencies: the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development — CNPq (Grants #131346/2020-2 and #306824/2019-1) and the São Paulo State Research Agency — FAPESP (Grants #2021/09224-5 and #2020/00326-7).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
GLST: Conceptualization, methodology, software, validation, writing — original draft. FDM: Conceptualization, writing — review and editing, supervision.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
None.
Ethical approval
Not applicable.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Appendices
Appendix
A. Thickness problem integrals
From Eqs. (18), (17) and (42) the induced velocity by the source sheet at \(y=0\) has the form
The first integral in the right-side hand in (A1) can be evaluated by the change of variable \(x_0=u_0^2\):
The formula given by Brandão [47] is helpful in performing principal value integrals as the one in Eq. A2:
Thus, Eq. A2 becomes:
The second integral in Eq. A1 is computed by using the identity \(x^k-x_0^k=(x-x_0)\sum _{m=1}^k x^{k-m}x_0^{m-1}\):
B. Camber-slope integral evaluation
By making use of the identity \(\cos \varphi = (1/2)\left( e^{i\varphi } + e^{-i\varphi }\right)\), \(\varphi \in {\mathbb {C}}\), the integral (46) is evaluated as
The change of variable \(z=e^{i\varphi }\) yields
where C is the positively oriented arc of the circle \(|z|=1\), where \(\mathfrak {arg}(z)\) goes from \(\theta _i = 0\) to \(\theta _f = \pi\).
One can expand the left term in parenthesis on the integrand in a Gegenbauer series:
where \(C^\lambda _\upsilon (x)\) are the Gegenbauer polynomials [48].
Replacing (B8) into Eq. B7 gives
where
By making use of the residue theory [49] and the fact that f(z) is a Laurent series with a singular point at \(z=0\), we have
The \(N^\lambda _{\upsilon }(x)\) polynomials are introduced:
The integral in the complex plane may be evaluated as
In this way, (B13) is replaced into Eq. B9 to give
C. Gegenbauer polynomials
The Gegenbauer series coefficients can be expressed as [50]
where the Pochhammer symbol \((a)_n\) is defined by
In special, we have \((1)_n=n!\).
Hence, the Gegenbauer coefficients in Eq. B12 may be written as
The binomial coefficient for a negative integer k and integer n is given by [51]
For complex \(\lambda\) and integer \(n\ge 0\), the binomial coefficient can be written as [50, 52]
Furthermore, the following properties of the Pochhammer symbol are useful:
The Pochhammer symbols in Eq. C17 need especial attention:
In this way, for a non-zero value in Eq. C17 we must have \(m \ge n\) and \(p\le m-n\). Thus, the binomial coefficient exterior to the summation in Eq. C17 is
Then, the Gegenbauer coefficients in Eq. C17 can be written conveniently as
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Torres, G.L.S., Marques, F.D. Nonlinear geometric decomposition of airfoils into the thickness and camber contributions. Meccanica (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11012-024-01801-6
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11012-024-01801-6