Integrating CFD and Experiment in Aerodynamics - CFD4Aircraft

More documents

Recommendations

Info

simulate the flow correctly, as shown by the large difference in the results. The turbulence intensity was increased to 10%, and a much closer agreement with experiment was obtained. Visualisation of the flow streamlines showed that the separation on the ground upstream of the train was probably eliminated. Clearly, the turbulence parameters significantly affect the CFD modelling of this flow. (The investigation is still in progress, so the results are incomplete. In particular, the effects of turbulence length scale or ground surface roughness have not been investigated.) The results suggest that some of the observed variations between different wind tunnel experiments may be due to this effect. The highly turbulent inflow of the ABL experiment seems to eliminate the upstream separation. It also makes the flow over the train less susceptible to Reynolds number effects. Train on an embankment For a train on a 4m high embankment, experimental and CDF results are shown in Figs. 13 and 14. The inflow turbulence intensity was 3%. The CFD and experimental results are similar for the rolling moment, but not side force. This appears to contradict the result for the flat ground case above. The flow streamlines around the embankment and train are shown in Fig. 15. The flow is attached to the embankment slope and separates cleanly at the edge, reattaching upstream of the rail. It is surmised that the well-defined separation causes the flow to be less sensitive to inflow turbulence. Train motion over the ground It was easy to simulate the effect of the train moving over the ground with the CFD. Preliminary runs indicated only a small change from the corresponding steady flow case, but the inflow profile was not correctly skewed with height. The prospects for examining the effect of train motion and unsteady cross-wind gusts is encouraging. Conclusions CFD has been applied to the case of a train in a turbulent flow. The boundary layer behaviour, particularly on the ground just upstream of the train, was affected by the inflow turbulence intensity and scale, which thus had a strong influence on the forces and rolling moment. With appropriate turbulence intensity, the side force coefficient was predicted to good accuracy. Bibliography 1. Ahmed, K., Development of wind tunnel techniques for unsteady train aerodynamics, MPhil Thesis, QUB Aeronautical Engineering, 2003. 2. Baker, C J, Ground vehicles in high cross winds. Part 1: Steady aerodynamic forces. J. Fluids and Structures, 1991, 5, 69-90. 3. Baker, C J, Ground vehicles in high cross winds. Part 2: Unsteady aerodynamic forces. J. Fluids and Structures, 1991, 5, 91-111. 4. WCRM Wind Loading Studies, Atmospheric Boundary Layer Studies. BMT Fluid Mechanics Ltd. Report 43309rep4v3, Final, 16 January 2003. 5. Fanning, C., CFD investigation of aerodynamics of a high speed train, QUB Aeronautical Engineering, MEng project report, May 2003. 6. Chraibi, H., Turbulent flow over a high speed train on an embankment, QUB Aeronautical Engineering, summer project report, Aug. 2003.
0.9 Cs vs yaw angle Side force coefficient (Cs) 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Yaw angle (deg) QUB 1/50 scale (M-III) MIRA 1/5 scale (APT) Cranfield 1/50 (APT) Turbulence simulation AEA 1/50 (AEA) Turbulence simulation Fig. 1. Coefficient of side force vs. yaw angle: APT (various) and Mark 3 coach (QUB) Fig 2. Class 87 locomotive and Mark 3 coaches: prototype for wind tunnel model
Page 1 and 2:
Integrating CFD and Experiment in A
Page 3 and 4:
Experimentalist’s requirements fo
Page 5 and 6:
persistent discrepancy may be due t
Page 7 and 8:
numbers significantly lower than th
Page 9 and 10:
Heat flux measurements. Over the pa
Page 11 and 12:
The measurements are made on select
Page 13 and 14:
advantage that the signal is emitte
Page 15 and 16:
12. Mébarki, Y. and Mérienne, M.
Page 17 and 18:
castellated nozzles entrained more
Page 19 and 20:
Axisymmetric Regular Convergent Div
Page 21 and 22: Figure 5: Typical instantaneous PIV
Page 23 and 24: Figure 8: Streamwise Velocity Profi
Page 25 and 26: 1.25 CFD (SKW PRESTO) Experimental
Page 27 and 28: 5 Conclusions In this paper we have
Page 29 and 30: 2 which include boundary layer and
Page 31 and 32: 4 not received much attention in th
Page 33 and 34: 6 Although a great deal of effort h
Page 35 and 36: 8 Computational simulations can con
Page 37 and 38: 10 separation location over rounded
Page 39 and 40: 12 3.7 Vortex / flexible wing inter
Page 41 and 42: 14 [8] Mitchell, A.M. and Molton, P
Page 43 and 44: 16 [31] Gursul, I., Proposed Mechan
Page 45 and 46: 18 Figure 3: Spectrum of unsteady f
Page 47 and 48: 20 Figure 7: Flow visualisation of
Page 49 and 50: Figure 11: Upper surface pressure d
Page 51 and 52: While the information presented in
Page 53 and 54: Figure 3 : DFR against Flap angle f
Page 55 and 56: Figure 7 shows a series of plots of
Page 57 and 58: Figure 9 : Contours of Mach number,
Page 59 and 60: ¥:97§Y©R¥e©H !V( H ¨9#f§e!"
Page 61 and 62: é¡êŒëWì¤í?î(ïeð±ñWòL
Page 63 and 64: Ó3×ÓnØ*Ù(Ú*Û+Ü ÝÞ#ß)ÝG
Page 65 and 66: 6‹wB6h67 C,7D4 ')(r,+.st/9:!/L£8
Page 67 and 68: ACBDsEutCIvwlxV^ c Q!Lkd_Q_SFM PQ_^
Page 69 and 70: Ç¹ºF»¼@½:¾¿_À!Á »_ÂÃk
Page 71: yaw angle. Also, extreme value coef
Page 75 and 76: Fig. 5. Grid block structure around
Page 77 and 78: Cs comparison at V=0.6 m/s Fig. 10.
Page 79 and 80: Investigation of Flow Turning in a
Page 81 and 82: duct as it approaches the blocker c
Page 83 and 84: Figure 1. Natural Blockage Thrust R
Page 85 and 86: Figure 7. Post-Exit rake Total Span
Page 87 and 88: Figure 11. Comparison of Static Pre
Page 89 and 90: 2.2 Data Aquired The Embedded Laser
Page 91 and 92: First, plots of the turbulent Reyno
Page 93 and 94: Particles seeding tube 3 m 1 m mode
Page 95 and 96: 000000000 MEASUREM ENT S MEASUREM E
Page 97 and 98: Figure 5: Influence of the pseudo t
Page 99 and 100: Figure 7: Turbulent Reynolds' numbe
Page 101 and 102: Figure 9: Turbulent Reynolds' numbe
Page 103 and 104: Figure 11: Vortex Shedding cycle fo
Page 105 and 106: Figure 13: Comparison with experime
show all

Integrating CFD and Experiment in Aerodynamics - CFD4Aircraft

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?