CFD Online Logo CFD Online URL
www.cfd-online.com
[Sponsors]
Home > Forums > Main CFD Forum

airfoil at low Reynlods

Register Blogs Members List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old   April 17, 2009, 07:00
Default airfoil at low Reynlods
  #1
New Member
 
Rauno
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: San Diego (USA); Pisa (Italy); Munich(Germany)
Posts: 10
Rep Power: 8
fulkrum is on a distinguished road
Hi!
I have to draw a polar, or at least a cl - alpha plot (in order to evaluate the Clmax) of an airfoil (Eppler 420 or similar) at Reynolds of about (1.5-3)*10^5.

Xfoil,the Eppler's program and similar (base on potential + boundary layer) are not much reliable due to the laminar flow separation bubble.

A CFD, with 2D and incompressible flow, would do a better job with reasonable calculation resources.
However, with CFD, will be the results reliable? At what extent?
Which is the best turbulence modeling to adopt?
Are there some free codes well suited for this task?
Thank you
fulkrum is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   April 17, 2009, 11:33
Default
  #2
Member
 
Anton Lyaskin
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Samara, Russia
Posts: 66
Rep Power: 8
A_Lyaskin is on a distinguished road
To get reliable CFD data you'll need a turbulence model capable for simulating free transition.

The other problem is that such kind of flow is very sensitive to external conditions - look for experimental data and you'll see that there's a huge data scattering between different wind tunnels. So the questions is - what will be the criteria for reliability of the results?
A_Lyaskin is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   April 17, 2009, 16:06
Default 2D vs 3D
  #3
Senior Member
 
Aroon
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Racine WI
Posts: 148
Rep Power: 8
vishyaroon is on a distinguished road
I had a comment for the question you have posted. You are carrying out a 2D calculation for the airfoil. I have come across studies that show that even for 2D studies a 2D/3D calculation (convert 2D case to 3D with periodic BCs in the spanwise direction) can predict certain characteristics better. For example if you are planning to analyze the shear layer, it is better if you do a 2D/3D calculation as compared to 2D, as 2D supresses the vortex interaction in the third dimension.
vishyaroon is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   April 18, 2009, 01:26
Default
  #4
Senior Member
 
N/A
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 188
Rep Power: 8
harishg is on a distinguished road
If you want to study the LSB, I would suggest you to use the Spalart-Allmaras model. The model has been specifically developed for external flows with separation. If you need unsteady flow field data, you can use the DES version of the model. The model has been implemented in OpenFOAM.

Regarding reliability of results you would find abundant data on measurements for airfoils and you can validate with any one of the different shapes. NACA 0012/0015 have lot of data available for low Re.
harishg is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   April 18, 2009, 06:39
Default
  #5
New Member
 
Rauno
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: San Diego (USA); Pisa (Italy); Munich(Germany)
Posts: 10
Rep Power: 8
fulkrum is on a distinguished road
1)
It is true that even wind tunnel experimentation show an important scattering, since the problem (laminar separation - transition - boundary layer reattachment) is very sensitive to external conditions.
In fact, I should first answer myself what would I consider reliable.
I would say to evaluate the clmax the airfoil is capable of, and at the same time have an estimation of the cd at clmax.
However the great sensitivity to external conditions may avoid any certainty a priori.
I don't know if the Eppler e420 FX doesn't present a strong sensitivity around 1.5-3 Reynlods.
However, in order to obtain more reliable results, even if not always the best results, I would consider to add something "disturbing" the flux in order to achieve a turbulent flow early (the model I am designing has to just to take off with the maximum possible weight, and after a very very brief flight it should land, thus the design point is near CL = CLmax).
In such a situation, simulation with turbulent flow would give "good" Clmax estimation (and at least an acceptable one for the drag).

2)
It's true that turbulence has a tree-dimensional nature, thus a bidimensional simulation would not comply with reality. Thank you, I forgot this :-)

3)
Thank you very much for the technicl advices!
fulkrum is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Low Speed Airfoil Mancusi FLUENT 7 April 3, 2014 06:11
2D Low Speed Airfoil Problem when altering Inlet mike wilson CFX 12 August 3, 2010 11:06
Low Reynolds number airfoil. Pablo Cornejo FLUENT 14 October 19, 2005 09:41
About low Reynolds number airfoil experiment data. zqnwpu Main CFD Forum 5 December 25, 2004 04:52
Multicomponent fluid Andrea CFX 2 October 11, 2004 05:12


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 22:20.