Numerical simulation of the propeller flow around a four-engined aircraft in high-lift configuration

  • Jörg Hansing
  • Mark Sutcliffe
  • Olaf Knobloch
Conference paper
Part of the Notes on Numerical Fluid Mechanics and Multidisciplinary Design book series (NNFM, volume 87)

Summary

Operating propellers, especially wing mounted propellers have significant and sometimes subtle effects on the aerodynamics of an airplane. In order to shed more light on these effects an actuator disc model to simulate propeller flow has been developed, implemented into the DLR Navier-Stokes code TAU and tested on an actual four-engined transport aircraft in high-lift configuration. Based on a wind tunnel experiment with an isolated propeller, the flow defining parameters of the actuator discs could be evaluated using a numerical model of the isolated propeller. The experiences made with the isolated propeller computations were then utilized to adjust the actuator discs to the aircraft. Low-speed computations of the configuration were then performed for Re = 1.36 × 106, Ma = 0.176 and specific thrust conditions at low and moderate incidences, showing good agreement between the numerical and experimental results in the area of the expected propeller flow. Hence the capability of the new propeller module could be proved.

Keywords

Wind Tunnel Wind Tunnel Test Thrust Coefficient Actuator Disc Outflow Surface 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    unknown. Technical Report - Documentation of the DLR TAU code. DLR, 2001.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    T. Gerhold et al. TAU code User guide. DLR, 2001.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    N.J. Yu; H.C. Chen. Flow Simulations for Nacelle-Propeller Configurations using the Euler Equations. AIAA, 84–2143, 1984.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    N.J. Yu; S.S. Samant; P.E. Rubbert. Flow Prediction for Propfan Configurations Using the Euler Equations. AIAA, 84–2143, 1984.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    R. Wilhelm. Development and Testing of an Aktuator Disk Boundary Condition implemented into the DLR FLOWer Code. Technical report, DLR Braunschweig, 1999. IB 129–99/22.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    A. Jameson. Transonic flow calculation. MAE Report 1651, Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey, 1983.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    P.R. Spalart; S.R. Allmaras. A one-equation turbulence model for aerodynamic flows. AIAA, 92–0439, 1992.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    J.R. Edwards; S. Chandra. Comparison of eddy viscosity-transport turbulence models for three-dimensional, shock-separated flowfields. AIM Journal, 34 (4): 756–763, 1996.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    M. Huhnd. Test Report of Isolated FLA 5.2 Propeller Performance Measurement in LSWT-Bremen. Technical report, Airbus Deutschland GmbH, Bremen, 2002. Report EF-029/01.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    S. Schaber. Test Programme A400M FLA 5.2–03, Final for Testing. Technical report, Airbus Deutschland GmbH, Bremen, 2002. Report EGXG-080/02.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    D. Lejeau. High-Power Effects on Lift and Drag and Comparison of alternative Flap Systems. Technical report, Airbus Deutschland GmbH, Bremen, 2002. Report EGAG 593–02.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    S. Schmid-Göller M. Huhnd. Aspects of low-speed Wind Tunnel Testing on a A400M model with Propeller Simulation. Notes on numerical Fluid Mechanics,77:82–91, 2002. Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jörg Hansing
    • 1
  • Mark Sutcliffe
    • 2
    • 3
  • Olaf Knobloch
    • 4
  1. 1.University of Applied SciencesHamburgGermany
  2. 2.Institute of Aerodynamics and Flow TechnologyDLR GöttingenGöttingenGermany
  3. 3.Methods and ToolsAirbus DeutschlandBremenGermany
  4. 4.High-Lift DesignAirbus DeutschlandBremenGermany

Personalised recommendations