Effect of Airfoil Geometry on Performance With Simulated Ice Accretions Volume 2

81 Pages·2003·2.29 MB·English

by  Carol Capelli

DOT/FAA/AR-03/65 Effect of Airfoil Geometry on

Performance With Simulated Ice
Office of Aviation Research

Washington, D.C. 20591
Accretions Volume 2: Numerical
Investigation

August 2003

Final Report

This document is available to the U.S. public
through the National Technical Information
Service (NTIS), Springfield, Virginia 22161.

U.S. Department of Transportation
Federal Aviation Administration
NOTICE

This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the U.S.
Department of Transportation in the interest of information exchange. The
United States Government assumes no liability for the contents or use
thereof. The United States Government does not endorse products or
manufacturers. Trade or manufacturer's names appear herein solely
because they are considered essential to the objective of this report. This
document does not constitute FAA certification policy. Consult your local
FAA aircraft certification office as to its use.

This report is available at the Federal Aviation Administration William J.
Hughes Technical Center's Full-Text Technical Reports page:
actlibrary.tc.faa.gov in Adobe Acrobat portable document format (PDF).
Technical Report Documentation Page
1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient's Catalog No.

DOT/FAA/AR-03/65
4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date

EFFECT OF AIRFOIL GEOMETRY ON PERFORMANCE WITH SIMULATED August 2003
ICE ACCRETIONS, VOLUME 2: NUMERICAL INVESTIGATION 6. Performing Organization Code

7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No.

Jianping Pan and Eric Loth
9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS)

University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
104 S. Wright Street 11. Contract or Grant No.
Urbana, IL 61801 DTFAMB 96-6-023
12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period Covered

U.S. Department of Transportation Final Report
Federal Aviation Administration
Office of Aviation Research 14. Sponsoring Agency Code
Washington, DC 20591 AIR-100
15. Supplementary Notes
The FAA William J. Hughes Technical Center Technical Monitor was James Riley.
16. Abstract

A computational study was completed in parallel with the experimental study to investigate the level of robustness of numerical
methodologies for iced airfoil aerodynamic performance for a range of Reynolds and Mach numbers and to examine the effects of
airfoil shape as well as ice shape location and height. The primary computational methodology employed herein was the WIND
code. The grid sensitivity, turbulence model effect, and three-dimensional (3-D) capability aspects of WIND were assessed
though detailed validations of selected clean and iced airfoil/wing cases. Of the various Reynolds-Averaged Navier-Stokes
(RANS) turbulence models considered, the Mentor Shear Stress Transport and especially the Spalart-Allmaras models gave the
best overall performance, and the latter was chosen for all the performance simulations. The WIND methodology was able to
consistently predict the subtle measured trends associated with Reynolds and Mach numbers as well as the dramatic measured
trends noted for variation in ice shape height and location, especially for upper surface ice locations and thick airfoils. For a
leading-edge iced airfoil, the size effect is still significant but not as large and, in general, the variations in lift, drag, and pitching
moment tend to vary more linearly with ice shape size. However, a significant shortcoming of the numerical methodology was
the inability to predict a maximum lift coefficient (though such a maximum was noted in the experiments) for airfoils with a large
upper surface ice shape; this result was consistent with other codes that use RANS turbulence models. To improve the predictive
performance for iced airfoil aerodynamics with respect to stall conditions, unsteady 3-D numerical methodologies, which capture
the vertical dynamics (such as Detached Eddy Simulations or Large Eddy Simulations), should be considered.

17. Key Words 18. Distribution Statement
Simulated ice shape, Computational fluid dynamics, This document is available to the public through the National
Reynolds-Averaged Navier-Stokes, Turbulence model, Iced Technical Information Service (NTIS) Springfield, Virginia
airfoil performance degradation 22161.
19. Security Classif. (of this report) 20. Security Classif. (of this page) 21. No. of Pages 22. Price

Unclassified Unclassified 81
Form DOT F1700.7 (8-72) Reproduction of completed page authorized
TABLE OF CONTENT

Page

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
xi
1. INTRODUCTION
1
2. PREVIOUS NUMERICAL STUDIES
2
2.1 Iced Airfoil RANS Simulations
2
2.2 Iced Wing RANS Simulations
4
3. COMPUTATIONAL METHODOLOGY
5
3.1 Navier-Stokes Equations
5
3.2 Simulation Programs
6
3.2.1 Overview of WIND
6
3.2.2 Overview of FLUENT
7
3.3 Turbulence Models and Transition
7
3.3.1 Spalart-Allmaras Turbulence Model 8

3.3.2 Other Turbulence Models 9

3.3.3 Transition Point Specification 11

3.4 Grid Generation and Boundary Conditions 11

4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 13

4.1 Assesment of Numerical Parameters 13

4.1.1 Grid Dependence Sensitivity for Clean NACA 23012 Airfoil 13

4.1.2 Turbulence Model Sensitivity and Selection 17

4.1.3 Assessment for Clean and Iced Wings 19

4.1.4 Assessment of WIND vs FLUENT 23

4.2 Effect of Reynolds Number for NACA 23012 Airfoil 26

4.2.1 Effect of Reynolds Number for Clean Airfoil 26

4.2.2 Effect of Reynolds Number for Upper Surface Iced Airfoil 29

4.3 Effect of Mach Number for NACA 23012 Airfoil 34

4.3.1 Effect of Mach Number for Clean Airfoil 35

4.3.2 Effect of Mach Number for Upper Surface Iced Airfoil 37

iii
4.4 Effect of Ice Shape Size for Airfoils 39
4.4.1 Upper Surface Ice Shape Size Effect for NACA 23012 39
4.4.2 Leading-Edge Ice Shape Size Effect for NLF 0414 41
4.5 Effect of Wing vs Airfoil 43
5. CRITICAL ICE SHAPE METHODOLOGY 45
5.1 Effect of Ice Shape Location for Iced NACA 23012 Airfoil 45
5.2 Effect of Ice Shape Location on Other Airfoils 53
5.3 Effect of Ice Shape Location on Iced NACA 23012 Wing 62
6. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS 64
6.1 Summary 64
6.2 Conclusions 65
6.3 Recommendations 67
7. REFERENCES 67
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Page
1 Typical Ice Accretion Shapes 1
2 Lift Coefficient for a NACA 23012m Airfoil With k/c = 0.0083 Quarter-Round
Ice Shape Located at x/c = 0.1 3
3 Drag Coefficient for a NACA 23012m Airfoil With k/c = 0.0083 Quarter-Round
Ice Shape Located at x/c = 0.1 4
4 Typical Grid for an Iced NACA 23012 Airfoil 12
5 Lift Coefficient for a Clean NACA 23012 Airfoil at Re = 10.5x106 , M = 0.12 14
6 Drag Coefficient for a Clean NACA 23012 Airfoil at Re = 10.5x106 , M = 0.12 15
7 Pitching-Moment Coefficient for a Clean NACA 23012 Airfoil at Re = 10.5x106 ,
M = 0.12 16
8 Pressure Distribution for a Clean NACA 23012 Airfoil at Re = 10.5x106 ,
M = 0.12, α= 15° 17
iv
9 Lift Coefficient for an Iced NACA 23012 Airfoil at Re = 10.5x106, M = 0.12 18

10 Drag Coefficient for an Iced NACA 23012 Airfoil at Re = 10.5x106, M = 0.12 18

11 Pitching-Moment Coefficient for an Iced NACA 23012 Airfoil at Re = 10.5x106,

M = 0.12 19

12 Three-Dimensional Grid for a Rectangular Clean NACA 0012 Wing 20

13 Sectional Lift Along the Span for a Clean NACA 0012 Wing at Re = 10.5x106,

M = 0.15, α = 8° 20

14 Pressure Distribution for the Midspan of a Clean NACA 0012 Wing at

Re = 10.5x106, M = 0.15, α = 8° 21

15 Sectional Lift Along the Span for an Iced NACA 0012 Wing at Re = 10.5x106,

M = 0.15, α = 4° (8°) 21

16 Pressure Distribution for the Midspan of an Iced NACA 0012 Wing at

Re = 10.5x106, M = 0.15, α = 4° 22

17 Pressure Distribution for the Midspan of an Iced NACA 0012 Wing at

Re = 10.5x106, M = 0.15, α = 8° 22

18 Pressure Distribution for a Clean NACA 23012 Airfoil at Re = 10.5x106,

M = 0.12, α= 0° With Second-Order Schemes 23

19 Pressure Distribution for a Clean NACA 23012 Airfoil at Re = 10.5x106,

M = 0.12, α= 10° With Second-Order Schemes 24

20 Pressure Distribution for an Iced NACA 23012 Airfoil (k/c = 1.39%, x/c = 0.10)

at Re = 10.5x106, M = 0.12, α= 0° for First-Order Schemes 25

21 Pressure Distribution for an Iced NACA 23012 Airfoil (k/c = 1.39%, x/c = 0.10)

at Re = 10.5x106, M = 0.12, α =0° With Second-Order Schemes 25

22 Reynolds Number Effect on Lift Coefficient for a Clean NACA 23012 Airfoil at

M = 0.12 26

23 Reynolds Number Effect on Drag Coefficient for a Clean NACA 23012 Airfoil at

M = 0.12 27

24 Reynolds Number Effect on Pitching-Moment Coefficient for a Clean NACA

23012 Airfoil at M = 0.12 27

25 Pressure Distributions for a Clean NACA 23012 Airfoil at Re = 10.5x106,

M = 0.12 28

v
26 Reynolds Number Effect on Lift Coefficient for an Iced NACA 23012 Airfoil
(k/c = 1.39%, x/c = 0.10) at M = 0.12 29
27 Lift Curve Slope for an Iced NACA 23012 Airfoil at Re = 10.5x106, M = 0.12 30
28 Reynolds Number Effect on Drag Coefficient for an Iced NACA 23012 Airfoil
(k/c = 1.39%, x/c = 0.10) at M = 0.12 30
29 Reynolds Number Effect on Pitching-Moment Coefficient for an Iced NACA
23012 Airfoil (k/c = 1.39%, x/c = 0.10) at M = 0.12 31
30 Streamline Configurations for an NACA 23012 Airfoil (k/c = 1.39%, x/c = 0.10)
at Re = 10.5x106, M = 0.12 33
31 Pressure Distributions for an Iced NACA 23012 Airfoil (k/c = 1.39%, x/c = 0.10)
at Re = 10.5x106, M = 0.12 34
32 Mach Number Effect on Lift Coefficient for a Clean NACA 23012 Airfoil at
Re = 10.5x106 35
33 Mach Number Effect on Drag Coefficient for a Clean NACA 23012 Airfoil at
Re = 10.5x106 36
34 Mach Number Effect on Pitching-Moment Coefficient for a Clean NACA 23012
Airfoil at Re = 10.5x106 36
35 Mach Number Effect on Lift Coefficient for an Iced NACA 23012 Airfoil
(k/c = 1.39%, x/c = 0.10) at Re = 10.5x106 37
36 Mach Number Effect on Drag Coefficient for an Iced NACA 23012 Airfoil
(k/c = 1.39%, x/c = 0.10) at Re = 10.5x106 38
37 Mach Number Effect on Pitching-Moment Coefficient for an Iced NACA 23012
Airfoil (k/c = 1.39%, x/c = 0.10) at Re = 10.5x106 38
38 Ice Shape Size Effect on Lift Coefficient for a NACA 23012 Airfoil (x/c = 0.10)
at M = 0.12, Re = 10.5x106 40
39 Ice Shape Size Effect on Drag Coefficient for a NACA 23012 Airfoil (x/c = 0.10)
at M = 0.12, Re = 10.5x106 40
40 Ice Shape Size Effect on Pitching-Moment Coefficient for a NACA 23012 Airfoil
(x/c = 0.10) at M = 0.12, Re = 10.5x106 41
41 Ice Shape Size Effect on Lift Coefficient for an NLF 0414 Airfoil (s/c = 3.4%) at
M = 0.185, Re = 10.8x106 42
42 Ice Shape Size Effect on Drag Coefficient for an NLF 0414 Airfoil (s/c = 3.4%) at
M = 0.185, Re = 10.8x106 42
vi
43 Ice Shape Size Effect on Pitching-Moment Coefficient for an NLF 0414 Airfoil

(s/c = 3.4%) at M = 0.185, Re = 10.8x106 43

44 Surface Grid Profile of Iced NACA 23012 Wing 44

45 Lift Coefficient for the Iced NACA 23012 Airfoil and Wing (k/c = 1.39%,

x/c = 0.10) at M = 0.12, Re = 10.5x106 44

46 Drag Coefficient for the Iced NACA 23012 Airfoil and Wing (k/c = 1.39%,

x/c = 0.10) at M = 0.12, Re = 10.5x106 45

47 Leading-Edge Ice Shape Configurations on a NACA 23012 Airfoil With

k/c = 4.44% Ice Shape at Different Leading Edge Locations 46

48 Upper Surface Ice Shape Configurations on a NACA 23012 Airfoil With

k/c = 1.39% Ice Shape at Different Upper Surface Locations 46

49 Ice Shape Location Effect on Lift Coefficient for the Leading-Edge Iced NACA

23012 Airfoil (k/c = 4.44%) at M = 0.12, Re = 10.5x106 47

50 Ice Shape Location Effect on Lift Coefficient for the Upper Surface Iced NACA

23012 Airfoil (k/c = 1.39%) at M = 0.12, Re = 10.5x106 47

51 Ice Shape Location Effect on Drag Coefficient for the Leading-Edge Iced NACA

23012 Airfoil (k/c = 4.44%) at M = 0.12, Re = 10.5x106 49

52 Ice Shape Location Effect on Drag Coefficient for the Upper Surface Iced NACA

23012 Airfoil (k/c = 1.39%) at M = 0.12, Re = 10.5x106 49

53 Ice Shape Location Effect on Pitching-Moment Coefficient for the Leading-Edge

Iced NACA 23012 Airfoil (k/c = 4.44%) at M = 0.12, Re = 10.5x106 50

54 Ice Shape Location Effect on Piching-Moment Coefficient for the Upper Surface

Iced NACA 23012 Airfoil (k/c = 1.39%) at M = 0.12, Re = 10.5x106 50

55 Pressure Distributions for the Upper Surface Iced NACA 23012 Airfoil at α = 0°,

M = 0.12, Re = 10.5x106 51

56 Streamline Configurations for the Upper Surface Iced NACA 23012 Airfoil at

α = 0°, M = 0.12, Re = 10.5x106 52

57 Geometry Profiles for the Five Airfoils Studied 53

58 Ice Shape Location Effect on Lift Coefficient for a NACA 3415 Airfoil

(k/c = 1.39%) at M = 0.185, Re = 10.8x106 54

59 Ice Shape Location Effect on Lift Coefficient for an NLF 0414 Airfoil

(k/c = 1.39%) at M = 0.185, Re = 10.8x106 54

vii
60 Ice Shape Location Effect on Lift Coefficient for an LTHS Airfoil (k/c = 1.39%)
at M = 0.12, Re = 10.5x106 55
61 Ice Shape Location Effect on Lift Coefficient for a BJMW Airfoil (k/c = 1.39%)
at M = 0.12, Re = 10.5x106 55
62 Ice Shape Location Effect on Drag Coefficient for a NACA 3415 Airfoil
(k/c = 1.39%) at M = 0.185, Re = 10.5x106 57
63 Ice Shape Location Effect on Drag Coefficient for an NLF 0414 Airfoil
(k/c = 1.39%) at M = 0.185, Re = 10.8x106 57
64 Ice Shape Location Effect on Drag Coefficient for an LTHS Airfoil (k/c = 1.39%)
at M = 0.12, Re = 10.5x106 58
65 Ice Shape Location Effect on Drag Coefficient for a BJMW Airfoil (k/c = 1.39%)
at M = 0.12, Re = 10.5x106 58
66 Ice Shape Location Effect on Pitching-Moment Coefficient for a NACA 3415
Airfoil (k/c = 1.39%) at M = 0.185, Re = 10.8x106 59
67 Ice Shape Location Effect on Pitching-Moment Coefficient for an NLF 0414
Airfoil (k/c = 1.39%) at M = 0.185, Re = 10.8x106 59
68 Ice Shape Location Effect on Pitching-Moment Coefficient for an LTHS Airfoil
(k/c = 1.39%) at M = 0.12, Re = 10.5x106 60
69 Ice Shape Location Effect on Pitching-Moment Coefficient for a BJMW Airfoil
(k/c = 1.39%) at M = 0.185, Re = 10.8x106 60
70 Ice Shape Location Effect on Break-Lift Coefficient for the Iced Airfoils 61
71 Pressure Distributions for the Clean Airfoils at C = 0.5 62
l
72 Surface Grid for Iced NACA 23012 Wing With k/c = 1.39%, x/c = 0.02 63
73 Ice Shape Location Effect on Lift Coefficient for a NACA 23012 Wing
(k/c = 1.39%) at M = 0.12, Re = 10.5x106 63
74 Ice Shape Location Effect on Drag Coefficient for a NACA 23012 Wing
(k/c = 1.39%) at M = 0.12, Re = 10.5x106 64
viii
LIST OF TABLES

Table Page

1 Reynolds Number Effect for Clean NACA 23012
28
2 Reynolds Effect for Iced NACA 23012
32
3 Mach Number Effect for Clean NACA 23012 at Re = 10.5x106
37
4 Mach Number Effect for Iced NACA 23012
39
5 Ice Shape Size Effect for NACA 23012
40
6 Ice shape Size Effect for NLF 0414
42
7 Ice Shape Location (Leading-Edge) Effect for NACA 23012
48
8 Ice Shape Location (Upper Surface) Effect for NACA 23012
48
9 Ice Shape Location Effect for NACA 3415
56
10 Ice Shape Location Effect for NLF 0414
56
11 Ice Shape Location Effect for LTHS
56
12 Ice Shape Location Effect for BJMW
56
13 Relation Between Critical Ice Shape Location and Special Surface Pressure

Locations 62

14 Ice Shape Location Effect for NACA 23012 64

ix/x