Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-2dmjx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-08T09:39:08.601Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Coherence of unsteady wake of periodically plunging airfoil

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 March 2022

Burak Turhan
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Bath, Bath BA2 7AY, UK
Zhijin Wang
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Bath, Bath BA2 7AY, UK
Ismet Gursul*
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Bath, Bath BA2 7AY, UK
*
†Email address for correspondence: ensiag@bath.ac.uk

Abstract

We present an experimental investigation of the flow structure in the near wake of a NACA0012 airfoil plunging sinusoidally at a chord Reynolds number of Re = 20 000 and for a wide range of reduced frequency k and Strouhal number based on peak-to-peak amplitude St. Estimated mean thrust coefficients using the mean and fluctuating velocity fields confirm the St2 dependence as well as a significant effect of the reduced frequency for k ≤ 1. Generally, time-averaged flow quantities are better correlated with St than k in the range tested (k ≤ 3.14 and St ≤ 0.24). Analysis of the streamwise flow and cross-flow in the near wake using two-point cross-correlations and proper orthogonal decomposition reveals that the unsteady characteristics are even better correlated with St than the mean flow quantities. The percentage energy of the fundamental wake modes of the streamwise flow and the flapping mode of the cross-flow increases with increasing St, but at different rates in the drag-producing and thrust-producing wakes. There are similarities to the wake synchronisation behind oscillating bodies. The spanwise-averaged cross-correlation coefficient in the measurement domain grows linearly for small St (in drag-producing wakes), and is nearly constant at a high value for larger St (in thrust-producing wakes). Results show that the Strouhal number is the most important parameter that determines the degree of two-dimensionality of the wake, and suggest that spanwise vortices are quasi-two-dimensional for St ≥ 0.05 and x/c ≤ 4. The implications for experimental gust generators using oscillating airfoils are discussed.

Information

Type
JFM Papers
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press
Figure 0

Figure 1. Schematic of the experimental set-up and PIV measurements.

Figure 1

Figure 2. Map of normalised plunge amplitude and reduced frequency values tested.

Figure 2

Figure 3. Instantaneous vorticity contours at a fixed value of A/c = 0.1 for (a) k = 0, (b) k = 0.63, St = 0.02, (c) k = 1.26 St = 0.04 and (d) k = 1.88, St = 0.06.

Figure 3

Figure 4. Instantaneous vorticity contours at a fixed value of k = 1.26 for (a) A/c = 0.05, St = 0.02, (b) A/c = 0.1, St = 0.04, (c) A/c = 0.2, St = 0.08 and (d) A/c = 0.4, St = 0.16.

Figure 4

Figure 5. Variation of (a) time-averaged streamwise velocity deficit/excess, (b) r.m.s. of cross-stream velocity fluctuations of the stationary and oscillating airfoil for the same reduced frequency (k = 1.26) and various amplitudes; x/c = 4.03.

Figure 5

Figure 6. The mean streamwise velocity at the centreline (x/c = 4.03 and y/c = 0) for all cases as a function of (a) reduced frequency, (b) Strouhal number.

Figure 6

Figure 7. The maximum r.m.s. cross-stream velocity fluctuation ($v_{rms}$) at x/c = 4.03 for all cases as a function of (a) reduced frequency, (b) Strouhal number.

Figure 7

Figure 8. Variation of momentum thickness for all cases as a function of (a) reduced frequency, (b) Strouhal number.

Figure 8

Figure 9. Variation of (a) estimated thrust coefficient and comparison with the results of direct force measurements from the literature; (b) $({C_T} - {C_{T0}})/({F^2} + {G^2})$ as a function of Strouhal number.

Figure 9

Figure 10. Contours of cross-correlation of the cross-stream velocity component Cvv (left column); its variation in the streamwise distance at y/c = 0 (right column) for A/c = 0.1 and (a) stationary airfoil, (b) k = 0.63, St = 0.02, (c) k = 1.26, St = 0.04 and (d) k = 1.88, St = 0.06.

Figure 10

Figure 11. First two POD modes of cross-stream velocity component for A/c = 0.1 and (a) stationary airfoil, (b) k = 0.63, St = 0.02, (c) k = 1.26, St = 0.04, (d) k = 1.88, St = 0.06 and (e) ratio of the energy of mode to the total energy.

Figure 11

Figure 12. Contours of cross-correlation of cross-stream velocity component Cvv (left column); its variation in the streamwise distance at y/c = 0 (right column) for k = 1.26 and (a) A/c = 0.05, St = 0.02, (b) A/c = 0.1, St = 0.04, (c) A/c = 0.2, St = 0.08, and (d) A/c = 0.4, St = 0.16.

Figure 12

Figure 13. First two POD modes of cross-stream velocity component for k = 1.26 and (a) A/c = 0.05, St = 0.02, (b) A/c = 0.1, St = 0.04, (c) A/c = 0.2, St = 0.08, (d) A/c = 0.4, St = 0.16 and (e) ratio of the energy of mode to the total energy.

Figure 13

Figure 14. Ratio of the energy of the first two modes to the total energy as a function of (a) reduced frequency, (b) Strouhal number.

Figure 14

Figure 15. Contour plots of r.m.s. cross-stream velocity fluctuations (left column); cross-correlation of cross-stream velocity component (middle column); its variation in the spanwise direction at y/c = 0 (right column) for A/c = 0.1 and (a) k = 0, (b) k = 0.63, St = 0.02, (c) k = 1.26, St = 0.04 and (d) k = 1.88, St = 0.06.

Figure 15

Figure 16. First POD mode of cross-stream velocity component for A/c = 0.1 and (a) k = 0, (b) k = 0.63, St = 0.02, (c) k = 1.26, St = 0.04, (d) k = 1.88, St = 0.06 and (e) ratio of the energy of mode to the total energy.

Figure 16

Figure 17. Contour plots of r.m.s. cross-stream velocity fluctuations (left column); cross-correlation of cross-stream velocity component (middle column); its variation in the spanwise direction at y/c = 0 (right column) for k = 1.26 and (a) A/c = 0.05, St = 0.02, (b) A/c = 0.1, St = 0.04, (c) A/c = 0.2, St = 0.08 and (d) A/c = 0.4, St = 0.16.

Figure 17

Figure 18. First POD mode of cross-stream velocity component for k = 1.26 and (a) A/c = 0.05, St = 0.02, (b) A/c = 0.1, St = 0.04, (c) A/c = 0.2, St = 0.08 and (d) A/c = 0.4, St = 0.16 and (e) ratio of the energy of mode to the total energy.

Figure 18

Figure 19. Ratio of the energy of the first mode to the total energy as a function of (a) reduced frequency, (b) Strouhal number.

Figure 19

Figure 20. Spanwise-averaged cross-correlation at y/c = 0 as a function of (a) reduced frequency and (b) Strouhal number. Dashed lines indicate curve fits for small and large Strouhal numbers.

Figure 20

Figure 21. Ratio of the amplitude of lift to that of quasi-steady lift from the literature for travelling-wave gusts, standing-wave gusts, plunging airfoils, the Sears and Theodorsen predictions.