Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-cphqk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-11T22:51:34.194Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Design study of Coanda devices for transonic circulation control

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 July 2017

M. Forster  and
R. Steijl
M. Forster*
Affiliation:
CFD Lab, School of Engineering, University of Liverpool, UK
R. Steijl
Affiliation:
Aerospace Sciences, School of Engineering, University of Glasgow, UK
*
mforster@liv.ac.uk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Circulation control via blowing over Coanda surfaces at transonic freestream Mach numbers is investigated using numerical simulations. The performance and sensitivity of several circulation control devices applied to a supercritical aerofoil are assessed. Different Coanda devices were studied to assess the effect of Coanda radius-to-slot height ratio, nozzle shape and Coanda surfaces with a step. The range of operating conditions for which a supersonic Coanda jet remained attached at transonic freestream conditions were extended by increasing the radius of curvature at the slot exit for Coanda devices with a converging nozzle. Additional improvements were found by reducing the strength of shock boundary-layer interactions on the Coanda surface by expanding the jet flow using a converging-diverging nozzle and also by introducing a step between the Coanda surface and the nozzle exit. The performance when using a converging-diverging nozzle can be matched using a simple stepped Coanda device. It is shown that circulation control has the potential to match the performance of traditional control surfaces during regimes of attached flow at transonic speeds, up to an equivalent aileron deflection angle of 10°. In addition, lift augmentation ratios ΔCl/Cμ of over 100 were achieved.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Aeronautical Journal , Volume 121 , Issue 1243 , September 2017 , pp. 1368 - 1391
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Aeronautical Society 2017 

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.)

References

REFERENCES

1. Paterson, E.G., Baker, W.J., Kunz, R.F. and Peltier, L.J. RANS and detached-eddy simulation of the NCCR airfoil, Proceedings of the 31st Annual International Symposium on Computer Architecture, 2004, Williamsburg, VA, US, pp 112-122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2. Alexander, M.G., Anders, S.G., Johnson, S.K., Florance, J.P. and Keller, D.F. Trailing edge blowing on a two-dimensional six-percent thick elliptical circulation control airfoil up to transonic conditions, Tech Rep TM-2005-213545, 2005, NASA, Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA, US.Google Scholar
3. Carpenter, P.W. and Green, P.N. The aeroacoustics and aerodynamics of high-speed Coanda devices, part 1: Conventional arrangement of exit nozzle and surface, J Sound and Vibration, 1997, 208, (5), pp 777–801.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Sawada, K. and Asami, K. Numerical study on the underexpanded Coanda jet, J Aircr, 1997, 34, (5), pp 641–647.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Abramson, J. and Rogers, E. O. High speed characteristics of circulation control airfoils, AIAA 21st Aerospace Sciences Meeting, 1983, AIAA, Reno, NV, US, p 265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Englar, R.J. Two-dimensional transonic wind tunnel tests of three 15-percent thick circulation control airfoils, Tech Rep AD882075, 1970, DTNSRDC, Bethesda, MD, US.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7. Schlecht, R. and Anders, S.G. Parametric evaluation of thin, transonic circulation-control airfoils, Proceedings of the 45th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting, Vol. 5, 8-11 January 2007, Reno, NV, US, pp 3374-3398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8. Carpenter, P.W. and Smith, C. The aeroacoustics and aerodynamics of high-speed Coanda devices, part 2: Effects of modifications for flow control and noise reduction, J Sound and Vibration, 1997, 208, (5), pp 803–822.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9. Gregory-Smith, D.G. and Senior, P. The effects of base steps and axisymmetry on supersonic jets over Coanda surfaces, Int J Heat and Fluid Flow, 1994, 15, (4), pp 291–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Jones, G.S., Yao, C.S. and Allan, B.G. Experimental investigation of a 2d supercritical circulation-control airfoil using particle image velocimetry, Proceedings of the 3rd AIAA Flow Control Conference, Vol. 1, 5-8 June 2006, San Francisco, CA, US, pp 367-386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11. Von Glahn, U.H. Use of the Coanda effect for jet deflection and vertical lift with multiple-flat-plate and curved-plate deflection surfaces, Tech Rep NACA-TN-4377, 1958, National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics, Lewis Flight Propulsion Lab., Cleveland, OH, US.Google Scholar
12. Dvorak, F.A. and Choi, D.H. Analysis of circulation-controlled airfoils in transonic flow, J of Aircr, 1983, 20, (4), pp 331–337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13. Couluris, G.J., Signor, D. and Phillips, J. Cruise-efficient short takeoff and landing (CESTOL); Potential impact on air traffic operations, Tech Rep CR-2010-216392, 2010, NASA, Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA, US.Google Scholar
14. Cook, M.V., Buonanno, A. and Erbslöh, S.D. A circulation control actuator for flapless flight control, Aeronautical J, 2008, 112, (1134), pp 483–489.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15. Lin, J.C., Andino, M.Y., Alexander, M.G., Whalen, E.A., Spoor, M.A., Tran, J.T. and Wygnanski, I.J. An overview of active flow control enhanced vertical tail technology development, Proceedings of the 54th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting, AIAA SciTech (AIAA 2016-0056), 2016, San Diego, CA, US, p 56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16. Whalen, E., Shmilovich, A., Spoor, M., Tran, J., Vijgen, P., Lin, J. and Andino, M. Flight test of an AFC enhanced vertical tail, Proceedings of the 8th AIAA Flow Control Conference, 2016, Washington, DC, US.Google Scholar
17. Abramson, J. Two-dimensional subsonic wind tunnel evaluation of two related cambered 15-percent thick circulation control airfoils, Tech Rep ASED-373, 1977 DTNSRDC, Bethesda, MD, US.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
18. Wetzel, D.A., Griffin, J. and Cattafesta III, L.N. Experiments on an elliptic circulation control aerofoil, J Fluid Mechanics, 2013, 730, pp 99–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
19. Nishino, T., Hahn, S. and Shariff, K. Large-eddy simulations of a turbulent Coanda jet on a circulation control airfoil, Physics of Fluids, 2010, 22, (12).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
20. Englar, R.J., Jones, G.S., Allan, B.G. and Lin, J.C. 2-d circulation control airfoil benchmark experiments intended for CFD code validation, Proceedings of the 47th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting Including the New Horizons Forum and Aerospace Exposition, 5th-8th January 2009, Orlando, FL, US, p 902.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
21. Wilkerson, J.B. and Montana, P.S. Transonic wind tunnel test of a 16-percent-thick circulation control airfoil with one-percent asymmetric camber, Tech Rep ASED-82/03, 1982 DTNSRDC, Bethesda, MD, US.Google Scholar
22. Wood, N.J. and Conlon, J.A. Performance of a circulation control airfoil at transonic speeds, Proceedings of the AIAA 21st Aerospace Sciences Meeting, 10th-13th January 1983, AIAA, Reno, NV, US, p 83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
23. Pulliam, T.H., Jespersen, D.C. and Barth, T.J. Navier-Stokes computations for circulation control airfoils, Proceeding of the 18th Fluid Dynamics and Plasmadynamics and Lasers Conference, AIAA, 1985, Cincinnati, OH, US, p 1587.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
24. Swanson, R.C., Rumsey, C.L. and Anders, S.G. Aspects of numerical simulation of circulation control airfoils, AIAA Progress in Astronautics and Aeronautics, 2006, 214, pp 469–498.Google Scholar
25. Cornelius, K.C. and Lucius, G.A. Physics of Coanda jet detachment at high-pressure ratio, J of Aircr, 1994, 31, (3), pp 591–596.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
26. Bevilaqua, P.M. and Lee, J.D. Design of supersonic coanda jet nozzles, NASA. Ames Research Center Proceedings of the Circulation-Control Workshop, 1 May 1987, NASA, Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA, US, pp 289-312.Google Scholar
27. Gregory-Smith, D. G. and Gilchrist, A. R., The compressible Coanda wall jet-an experimental study of jet structure and breakaway, Int. J of Heat and Fluid Flow, 1987, 8, (2), pp 156–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
28. Steijl, R., Barakos, G. and Badcock, K. A Framework for CFD analysis of helicopter rotors in hover and forward flight, Int J Numerical Methods Fluids, 2006, 51, pp 819–847.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
29. Steijl, R. and Barakos, G. Sliding mesh algorithm for CFD analysis of helicopter roto-fuselage aerodynamics, Int J Numerical Methods Fluids, 2008, 58, pp 527–549.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
30. Badcock, K., Richards, B. and Woodgate, M. Elements of computational fluid dynamics on block structured grids using implicit solvers, Progress in Aerospace Sciences, 2000, 36, pp 351–392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
31. Barakos, G., Steijl, R., Badcock, K. and Brocklehurst, A. Development of CFD capability for full helicopter engineering analysis, Proceedings of the 31st European Rotorcraft Forum, 13-15 September 2005, Florence, Italy.Google Scholar
32. Carrión, M., Woodgate, M., Steijl, R., Barakos, G., Gomez-Iradi, S. and Munduate, X. Understanding wind-turbine wake breakdown using computational fluid dynamics, AIAA Journal, 2014, 53, (3), pp 588–602.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
33. Lawson, S. and Barakos, G. Evaluation of DES for weapons bays in UCAVs, Aerospace Science and Technology, 2010, 14, (6), pp 397–414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
34. Hoholis, G., Steijl, R. and Badcock, K. Circulation control as a roll effector for unmanned combat aerial vehicles, J of Aircr, 2016, 53, (6), pp 1875–1889.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
35. Wilcox, D.C. Reassessment of the scale-determining equation for advanced turbulence models, AIAA J, 1988, 26, (11), pp 1299–1310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
36. Menter, F.R. Two-equation eddy-viscosity turbulence models for engineering applications, AIAA J, 1994, 32, (8), pp 1598–1605.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
37. Wilcox, D.C. Formulation of the k-ω turbulence model revisited, AIAA J, 2008, 46, (11), pp 2823–2838.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
38. Spalart, P. and Allmaras, S.R. One-equation turbulence model for aerodynamic flows, Recherche Aerospatiale, 1994, pp 5–21.Google Scholar
39. Wallin, S. and Johansson, A.V. An explicit algebraic reynolds stress model for incompressible and compressible turbulent flows, J Fluid Mechanics, 2000, 403, pp 89–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
40. Grigoriev, I.A., Wallin, S., Brethouwer, G. and Johansson, A.V. A realizable explicit algebraic Reynolds stress model for compressible turbulent flow with significant mean dilatation, Physics of Fluids (1994-present), 2013, 25, (10).Google Scholar
41. Min, B.Y., Lee, W., Englar, R. and Sankar, L.N. Numerical investigation of circulation control airfoils, J Aircr, 2009, 46, (4), pp 1403–1410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
42. Elsenaar, A., Waggoner, E.G. and Ashill, P.R. A selection of experimental test cases for the validation of CFD codes, Tech Rep AR-303, 1994, Advisory Group for Aerospace Research and Development, Neuilly-Sur-Seine, France.Google Scholar
43. Londenberg, W. Turbulence model evaluation for the prediction of flows over a supercritical airfoil with deflected aileron at high Reynolds number, Proceedings of the 31st Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, 11-14 January 1993, AIAA, Reno, NV, US, p 191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
44. NATO, AVT-239 innovative control effectors for manoeuvring of air vehicles, https://www.cso.nato.int/ACTIVITY_META.asp?ACT=4343, 2013, Accessed: 15 December 2015.Google Scholar