3241 Lecture 8
3241 Lecture 8
3241 Lecture 8
We used subscript to indicate far upstream conditions
Angle of Attack, a: Angle between relative wind (V
Re
Within B.L. flow
highly viscous
(low Re)
Outside B.L. flow
Inviscid (high Re)
LAMINAR VERSUS TURBULENT FLOW
Two types of viscous flows
Laminar: streamlines are smooth and regular and a
fluid element moves smoothly along a streamline
Turbulent: streamlines break up and fluid elements
move in a random, irregular, and chaotic fashion
LAMINAR VERSUS TURBULENT FLOW
All B.L.s transition from
laminar to turbulent
c
f,turb
> c
f,lam
Turbulent velocity
profiles are fuller
FLOW SEPARATION
Key to understanding: Friction causes flow separation within boundary layer
Separation then creates another form of drag called pressure drag due to separation
COMPARISON OF DRAG FORCES
d
d
Same total drag as airfoil
OVERVIEW: AIRFOIL STALL
Key to understanding: Friction causes flow separation within boundary layer
1. B.L. either laminar or turbulent
2. All laminar B.L. turbulent B.L.
3. Turbulent B.L. fuller than laminar B.L., more resistant to separation
Separation creates another form of drag called pressure drag due to separation
Dramatic loss of lift and increase in drag
WHY DOES BOUNDARY LAYER SEPARATE?
Adverse pressure gradient interacting with velocity profile through B.L.
High speed flow near upper edge of B.L. has enough speed to keep moving
through adverse pressure gradient
Lower speed fluid (which has been retarded by friction) is exposed to same
adverse pressure gradient is stopped and direction of flow can be reversed
This reversal of flow direction causes flow to separate
Turbulent B.L. more resistance to flow separation than laminar B.L. because of
fuller velocity profile
To help prevent flow separation we desire a turbulent B.L.
WHY DOES AN AIRFOIL STALL?
Two major consequences of separated flow over airfoil
Dramatic loss of lift (stalling)
Separated flow causes higher pressure on upper surface of airfoil
Major increase in drag
Separation causes lower pressure on trailing edge
Unbalance of pressure force causes pressure drag due to separation
SAMPLE DATA: CAMBERED AIRFOIL STALL
L
i
f
t
o
r
L
i
f
t
C
o
e
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
t
Angle of Attack, a
SUMMARY OF VISCOUS EFFECTS ON DRAG
Friction has two effects:
1. Skin friction due to shear stress at wall
2. Pressure drag due to flow separation
pressure friction
D D D
Total drag due to
viscous effects
Called Profile Drag
Drag due to
skin friction
Drag due to
separation
= +
Less for laminar
More for turbulent
More for laminar
Less for turbulent
So how do you design?
Depends on case by case basis, no definitive answer
LIFT, DRAG, AND MOMENT COEFFICIENTS
Behavior of L, D, and M depend on a, but also on velocity and altitude
V
, r
, compressibility
Characterize behavior of L, D, M with coefficients (c
l
, c
d
, c
m
)
Re , ,
2
1
2
1
2
2
M f c
S q
L
S V
L
c
Sc V L
l
l
l
a
r
r
Matching Mach and Reynolds
(called similarity parameters)
M
, Re
M
, Re
c
l
, c
d
, c
m
identical
LIFT, DRAG, AND MOMENT COEFFICIENTS
Behavior of L, D, and M depend on a, but also on velocity and altitude
V
, r
, compressibility
Characterize behavior of L, D, M with coefficients (c
l
, c
d
, c
m
)
Re , ,
2
1
2
1
3
2
2
M f c
Sc q
L
Sc V
M
c
Scc V M
m
m
m
a
r
r
Re , ,
2
1
2
1
2
2
2
M f c
S q
D
S V
D
c
Sc V D
d
d
d
a
r
r
Re , ,
2
1
2
1
1
2
2
M f c
S q
L
S V
L
c
Sc V L
l
l
l
a
r
r
Comment on Notation:
Lower case, c
l
, c
d
, and c
m
for infinite wings (airfoils)
Upper case, C
L
, C
D
, and C
M
for finite wings (real wings)
SAMPLE DATA: NACA 23012 AIRFOIL
Lift Coefficient
c
l
=L/(rV
2
S)
Moment Coefficient
c
m, c/4
a
AIRFOIL DATA: NACA 23012 WING SECTION
c
l
c
m
,
c
/
4
Re dependence at high a
Separation and Stall
a
c
l
c
d
c
m
,
a
.
c
.
c
l
vs. a
Independent of Re
c
d
vs. a
Dependent on Re
c
m,a.c.
vs. c
l
very flat
AIRFOIL THICKNESS: WWI AIRPLANES
English Sopwith Camel
German Fokker Dr-1
Higher maximum C
L
Internal wing structure
Higher rates of climb
Improved maneuverability
Thin wing, lower maximum C
L
Bracing wires required high drag
EXAMPLE: F-104 LOCKHEED STARFIGHTER
First airplane designed for sustained flight at Mach 2
Very sharp leading edge on wings (razor sharp leading edges, thickness 3.4 %)
Designed to minimize wave drag at supersonic speeds
Very poor low-speed aerodynamic performance
Such wings tend to stall at low angles of attack, C
Lmax
is only about 1.15
V
stall
(full) ~ 198 MPH, V
stall
(empty) ~ 152 MPH (V
stall
proportional to W
1/2
)
EXAMPLE: BOEING 727
Designed in 1960s to operate out of airports with relatively short runways
Desire to minimize take-off and landing distances
Maximum C
L
= 3.0
V
stall
~ 113 MPH
OVERVIEW: KUTTA CONDITION
Suppose we model the flow around an airfoil using a potential flow approach:
How many theoretical potential flow solutions are exist?
The answer is that there are infinitely many.
Flow (1) and Flow (2) satisfy all conditions for potential flow theory, however G
1
G
2
, so we know that L
1
L
2
(recall rotating cylinder example)
Experimental evidence (nature) tells us which G should be used Kutta Condition
(see 4.5)
Flow 1 Flow 2
EXAMPLE: NACA 65-006 SYMMETRIC AIRFOIL
Bell X-1 used NACA 65-006
(6% thickness) as horizontal tail
Thin airfoil theory lift slope:
dc
l
/da = 2p rad
-1
= 0.11 deg
-1
Compare with data
At a = -4: c
l
~ -0.45
At a = 6: c
l
~ 0.65
dc
l
/da = 0.11 deg
-1
Thin airfoil theory:
c
m,c/4
= 0
Compare with data
dc
l
/da = 2p
c
m,c/4
= 0
CAN AN AIRFOIL PRODUCE LIFT WHEN IT IS FLYING UPSIDE DOWN?
NACA 2415 flying right side up
Zero angle of attack
Lift in positive vertical direction
NACA 2415 upside down
Zero angle of attack
Lift in negative vertical direction
Positive angle of attack
Say a=10
Lift in positive vertical direction
Positive angle of attack
Say a=10
Lift in positive vertical direction, but less
than the right side up airfoil
a
a
CAN AN AIRFOIL PRODUCE LIFT WHEN IT IS FLYING UPSIDE DOWN?
NACA 2415 flying upside down at certain angles of attack will generate positive
lift, but less than same airfoil right side up at the same angle of attack
Here is a way to understand this:
If we take airfoil on left and turn it upside down it is same as airfoil right side
up but with a negative angle of attack
Therefore, lift coefficient for upside down airfoil at positive angle of attack is
given by data for negative angles of attack
The negative cl connotes a downward lift on the ordinary right side up airfoil
when pitched to a negative angle of attack
In upside down orientation (airfoil on right), lift is directed upward
a
a
CAN AN AIRFOIL PRODUCE LIFT WHEN IT IS FLYING UPSIDE DOWN?
NACA 2415 AIRFOIL
Zero-lift a, a
L=0
= -2
So airfoil will generate positive
lift (when right side up) for a > -
2
Now turn airfoil upside down
If a = 0, negative lift
If a = 2, zero lift
If a is greater than 2 (but
reading a range) airfoil will
generate lift in positive vertical
direction
Upside down airfoil at same a
generates less lift
Example:
Right side up: a = 10, c
l
= 1.2
Upside down: a = 10, c
l
= - 0.8
VORTEX MOVING BLADE ROW MODEL
Thrust of engine largely
dependent on change in
total pressure across blade rows
Blade row interaction critical to
overall performance
D
e
t
a
i
l
o
f
m
u
l
t
i
p
l
e
c
o
m
p
r
e
s
s
o
r
r
o
w
s
FLIGHT MECHANICS EXAMPLE: GOSSAMER CONDOR
August 26, 1977: Gossamer Condor, designed by Dr. Paul MacCready (Caltech
graduate) in United States and piloted by racing cyclist Bryan Allen, wins 50,000
Kremer prize for first 1 mile figure-of-eight flight by a human-powered aircraft
Wingspan, b ~ 29 m, average chord, c ~ 2.3 m, total mass ~ 95 kg, C
D
~ 0.05
Pilot delivered HP to propel aircraft
For cruise at sea-level, estimate:
1. Cruise speed attained
2. C
L
3. HP required input by pilot to achieve a speed of 20 MPH