Hostname: page-component-f554764f5-c4bhq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-21T06:09:27.083Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Transonic aerofoils admitting anomalous behaviour of lift coefficient

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 January 2016

A. Kuzmin  and
A. Ryabinin
A. Ryabinin
Affiliation:
Laboratory of Aerodynamics, St Petersburg State University, St Petersburg, Russia
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Transonic flow past a Boeing 737 Outboard aerofoil and Whitcomb one with a defected aileron is studied. The flow simulation is based on the system of Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes equations. The numerical study demonstrates the existence of free-stream conditions in which small perturbations produce abrupt changes of the lift coefficient. Also the simulation reveals adverse conditions in which aileron deflections have no influence on the lift.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Aeronautical Journal , Volume 118 , Issue 1202 , April 2014 , pp. 425 - 433
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Aeronautical Society 2014 

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

1. Jameson, A. Airfoils admitting non-unique solutions of the Euler equations, AIAA Paper, 91-1625, 1991.Google Scholar
2. Huyse, L. and Lewis, R.M. Aerodynamic shape optimization of two-dimensional aerofoils under uncertain conditions, NASA/CR-2001-210648, ICASE Report 2001-1, 2001.Google Scholar
3. Padovan, L., Pediroda, V. and Poloni, C. Multi objective robust design optimization of aerofoils in transonic field, Mathematics in Industry, 2005, 6, pp 283–295.Google Scholar
4. Ciprian, M., Clarich, A., Pediroda, V. and Poloni, C. Multiattribute design of aerofoil under uncertainties by combining game theory and MCDM methods, Proc. of the 18th International Conference on Multiple Criteria Decision Making. MCDM 2006 (Chania, Greece), 2006.Google Scholar
5. Kuzmin, A. Aerodynamic surfaces admitting jumps of the lift coefficient in transonic flight, Comput. Fluid Dynamics Review 2010, World Scientific Publishing Co, 2010, pp 543–562.Google Scholar
6. Kuzmin, A. Non-unique transonic flows over aerofoils, Comput Fluids, 2012, 63, pp 1–8.Google Scholar
7. Hafez, M. and Guo, W. Some anomalies of numerical simulation of shock waves. Part II: Effect of artificial and real viscosity, Comput Fluids, 1999, 28, pp 721–739.Google Scholar
8. Kuzmin, A. and Ryabinin, A. Sensitivity of transonic flow past a symmetric aerofoil to free-stream perturbations. Centre pour la Communication Scientifique Directe, CNRS, 2011, http://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00648215 Google Scholar
9. Jameson, A., Vassberg, J.C. and Ou, K. Further studies of aerofoils supporting non-unique solutions in transonic flow, AIAA J, 2012, 50, (12), pp 2865–2881.Google Scholar
10. Kuzmin, A. and Ryabinin, A. Airfoils admitting anomalous behavior of lift coefficient in descending transonic flight, The Seventh Int Conf on Computational Fluid Dynamics, 2012, http://www.iccfd.org/iccfd7 Google Scholar
11. Kuzmin, A. Adverse free-stream conditions for transonic aerofoils with concave arcs, Computational Fluid Dynamics, 2010 (Proc. ICCFD6, Springer), 2011, pp 887–891.Google Scholar
12. Barth, T.J. and Jespersen, D.C. The design and application of upwind schemes on unstructured meshes, AIAA Paper 89-0366, 1989.Google Scholar
13. Menter, F.R. Review of the Shear-Stress Transport turbulence model experience from an industrial perspective, Int J Comput Fluid Dynamics, 2009, 23, pp 305–316.Google Scholar
14. Sharcnet. Computing tomorrow’s solutions, https://www.sharcnet.ca/Software/Fluent14/help/cfx_thry/i1302321.html#i1302567, 2013.Google Scholar
15. ANSYS CFX-11.0 user manual, ANSYS Inc., Canonsburg, 2006.Google Scholar
16. Merchant, A.A. Design and analysis of supercritical aerofoils with boundary layer suction, Master’s thesis, Massachusetts Instit Technology, 1996.Google Scholar
17. Collyer, M.R. An extension to the method of Garabedian and Korn for the calculation of transonic flow past an aerofoil to include the effects of a boundary layer and wake, Aeronautical Research Council, Reports and Memoranda, RAE Farnborough, Hants, UK, 1978, 3828.Google Scholar
18. STAR-CCM. Transonic flow: RAE2822 aerofoil using overset mesh, Star-CCM Tutorial, www.saec.ru/downloads/?file=6-3_Tutorial_STAR-CCM.pdf (in Russian), 2012.Google Scholar
19. Kudinov, P.I. A comparison of the Spalart-Allmares and Menter turbulence models in case of a test problem on transonic flow over a RAE2822 aerofoil, http://www.docme.ru/doc/120854/kudinov-p-i-sravnitelnoe-testirovanie-modelej-turbulentn... (in Russian), 2004.Google Scholar
20. Moelyadi, M.A. Improvement of transonic aerofoil aerodynamic performance with trailing edge modification using wedge configuration, Paper ICAS, 2002-R44, http://www.icas.org/ICAS_ARCHIVE/ICAS2002/PAPERS/R44.PDF, 2002.Google Scholar
21. Cook, P.H., McDonald, M.A. and Firmin, M.C.P. Aerofoil RAE 2822 pressure distributions, and coor layer and wake measurements. Experimental data base for computer program assessment, AGARD Report, AR 138, 1979.Google Scholar
22. UIUC Airfoil Coordinates Database http://www.ae.illinois.edu/m-selig/ads/co-ord_database.html, 1995-2013.Google Scholar