Chinese Journal of Aeronautics, (2019), xxx(xx): xxx–xxx

Chinese Society of Aeronautics and Astronautics

& Beihang University
Chinese Journal of Aeronautics
cja@buaa.edu.cn
www.sciencedirect.com

Streamwise vortex generation by the rod

Ryszard SZWABA *, Pawel FLASZYNSKI, Piotr DOERFFER

Department of Experimental Aerodynamics, Institute of Fluid Flow Machinery, Polish Academy of Sciences, Gdansk 80-231, Poland

Received 10 July 2018; revised 13 August 2018; accepted 24 October 2018

KEYWORDS Abstract The technology development related to aerodynamics is leading to ever increasing loads
Air-jet vortex generator; of wings, airfoils and turbine and compressor blades. The increase in aerodynamic forces is often
Boundary layer; leading to flow separation and depreciation of the aerodynamic performance of flying objects or
Flow control; propulsion systems. Flow control methods are required to avoid these negative effects. In the recent
Rod vortex generator; two decades the flow control by means of air-jet vortex generators has been also intensively inves-
Streamwise vortices tigated. In this method a streamwise vortex is introduced by an oblique jet. The necessity to supply
air by a pipe system may be considered a disadvantage. In order to eliminate this feature, it has been
proposed to put out a rod instead of a jet. It has been shown that the application of a rod can intro-
duce the same effect as a jet, as long as the streamwise vortex generation is concerned and appro-
priate dimensions are used. The present paper focuses on the influence of rod vortex generators on a
flow pattern downstream. The results presented here concern experimental and numerical investiga-
tions and provide guidelines for the design of a new flow control method dedicated mainly to exter-
nal flows.
Ó 2019 Chinese Society of Aeronautics and Astronautics. Production and hosting by Elsevier Ltd. This is
an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

1. Introduction many research centers a lot of effort has been undertaken to

The technology development related to aerodynamics is lead-
ing to ever increasing loads on wings, airfoils or turbine and
compressor blades. The increase of aerodynamic forces is often
related to the formation of shock waves, to the flow separation
leading to the reduction of the aerodynamic performance of
flying objects or propulsion systems. Flow control methods
therefore are required to alleviate these negative effects. In
* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: ryszard.szwaba@imp.gda.pl (R. SZWABA).
Peer review under responsibility of Editorial Committee of CJA.
Production and hosting by Elsevier
find a simple and effective flow control method to counteract
separation. In recent decades several methods of flow control
have been investigated. The research has concerned on plasma
actuators,1 synthetic jets,2 solid (vane3 or wedge type4) Vortex
Generators (VG), inducing streamwise vortices which effec-
tively counteract separation. Another way of flow control is
the introduction of transpiration methods through a wall by
suction and blowing depending on the application. Most
known application of this type of flow control is the passive
control of shock wave boundary layer interaction. In this
method the shock pressure jump along the wall is driving a
transpiration flow through perforated wall into the underlying
cavity. This leads to the blowing upstream of the shock wave
and suction downstream. A lot of attention for this type of
flow control was paid in the European Project Euroshock

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cja.2019.03.033
1000-9361 Ó 2019 Chinese Society of Aeronautics and Astronautics. Production and hosting by Elsevier Ltd.
This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

Please cite this article in press as: SZWABA R et al. Streamwise vortex generation by the rod, Chin J Aeronaut (2019), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cja.2019.03.033
2 R. SZWABA et al.
II.5 The details of flow modelling through perforated walls
were presented in Ref.6.
Very often flow control methods rely on the energizing of
the Boundary Layer (BL) upstream of the critical place (e.g.
shock wave, separation, etc.), making it more resistant to the
adverse pressure gradient and less likely to separate. One of
the first investigations concerning the flow control issue were
carried out by Wallis7 and Pearcey.8 They presented a very
wide range of investigations concerning the flow control by
streamwise vortices. The streamwise vortices were created basi-
cally by the means of solid vortex generators (vane types).
Already then the Air-Jet Vortex Generators (AJVG) were
mentioned as well. Flow control by means of solid VGs was
also carried out in the other research centers over many follow-
ing years.9 In Ref.10 the vane type VGs were used to enhance
the lift over the wing at low speed, then in Ref.11 the VGs were
applied to reduce separation size in the rectangular S-duct dif-
fuser. Vane type VGs have won their important position in the
aviation technology and are broadly used. The main drawback
of this technology is the additional drag which they induce
during nominal conditions, when they are not needed. Follow-
ing this, sub-layer VGs were developed4 and investigated. They
have not established market position however, due to their fra-
gility, causing maintenance problems.
Equivalent method of streamwise vortices generation is by
ejection of an oblique jet. This ‘‘air jet vortex generators” have
been intensively investigated over last two decades. Appropri-
ate configuration of AJVG allows obtaining streamwise vortex
of the similar intensity as in the case of traditional vane type
VG. An advantage of AJVG is the possibility to switch the
jet on and off, when needed, excluding an additional drag in
cruise flight conditions. The streamwise vortices created in
the flow entrain higher momentum fluid towards the wall
and on the other hand push up the low momentum fluid
against the main stream above the boundary layer. This orga-
nized mixing process appeared to be very effective in separa-
tion alleviation or elimination. Nowadays the continuous
increase of the aircraft loading requires new development
and innovative solutions. The idea of streamwise vortex gener-
ation by oblique air jet needs further development. Specific
knowledge is needed to design the effective flow control device
of this type. Therefore the research was also dedicated to the
parametric study of AJVGs.12,13 The research was mostly per-
formed by means of numerical simulations14 allowing for opti-
mization studies. Only selected cases were also investigated
experimentally. Combination of CFD with experiments allows
looking deeply into the flow physics, accompanying the vortex
generation by air-jet.
In our research group a lot of research was devoted to
AJVG15,16 which focused on the passive application where
stagnation parameters of the air jet are equal to the far field
stagnation parameters. In such approach jet stream may be
tapped from any stagnation point, avoiding any additional
energy to be supplied to drive the jets. The large experience
in AJVG implementation17,18 drove our group to the new idea
of introducing a rod instead of a jet. Advantage of this new
idea is that a rod can be easily operated by a MEMS
(Micro-Electro-Mechanical Systems) actuator, allowing for
electrical operation of this device. In many applications a
rod may be superior to an air supply system. It is not so obvi-
ous that a rod may act in a similar manner as air jet. The effec-
tiveness of Rod as Vortex Generator (RVG) has been
Please cite this article in press as: SZWABA R et al. Streamwise vortex generation by the rod, Chin J Aeronaut (2019), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cja.2019.03.033
investigated therefore and the results are presented here. It is
shown that RVG may produce streamwise vortices of the same
intensity as those induced by AJVG. The results presented here
concern experimental and numerical investigations and pro-
vide guidelines for the design of a new flow control method
dedicated mainly to external flows.
The topic of air-jet vortex generators was extensively inves-
tigated in the transonic wind tunnel of IMP PAN. Basing on
this research, the main mechanisms driving the streamwise vor-
tex formation have been identified. The main components of
the flow structure are shown schematically in Fig. 1. The main
stream along the wall is deflected in the normal and transverse
direction. This is a result of jet outflow from the hole, which is
oblique and skewed with respect to the main flow direction. In
the consequence, a large streamwise vortex is created ‘‘main
vortex”. Together with this one, an additional ‘‘lateral vortex”
is induced of the opposite sense of rotation but much weaker.
The main vortex (blue) is formed from the flow deflected in the
normal direction and from the flow deflected on the obtuse
angle side of the jet. The deflected stream flows into the low
pressure zone, which is formed downstream of the jet, starting
in this way a rotational motion. Then, the vortex is carried
downstream keeping close to the wall. It contains also a part
of the mass stream from the jet. The second, so-called lateral
vortex (green), is created from the stream deflected on the
acute side of the jet. Further downstream the main vortex is
dominating the flow, and the ‘‘lateral vortex” is practically
unnoticeable.
While analyzing this vortex formation mechanism, one has
to realize that the oblique jet in the flow acts like an obstacle,
deflecting the incoming flow in an asymmetric way, leading to
streamwise vortex formation. Being treated like an obstacle,
the jet can be replaced by a rod.19 Our investigations have
shown that the equivalent flow structure, as in the case of
AJVG, can be obtained downstream of the rod. To obtain this
effect, a special optimized rod geometry must be applied.
Retractable rods can be built in the MEMS technology allow-
ing easy activation of an RVG. The potential application con-
cerns external flows (e.g. wings, streamwise corners, engines
intakes) where installation of an additional air supply system
for an AJVG is difficult. Some examples for RVG application
for subsonic and transonic flow are already presented. It was
shown by means of numerical simulations that RVG can be
applied on wind turbine blade20 and helicopter rotor blade.21
Experimental investigations of RVG effectiveness in
Fig. 1 Scheme of streamwise vortex creation.
Streamwise vortex generation by the rod 3

Fig. 2 Oil visualization in curved nozzle.

separation reduction as the effect of the shock wave boundary

layer interaction is presented in Ref.22. In Fig. 2, reduction of
the separation zone is shown by the oil visualization. This is a
view on the lower wall through a side wall window. The flow
direction is from left to right and the shock wave location is
marked by the dashed line. In this figure one can notice signif-
icant reduction of the separation size if the RVGs are applied.
The separation length, measured by the distance from the
shock to the reattachment line in the middle of the channel,
is about 60% lower in comparison to the configuration with-
out RVGs.
Presented here paper concerns RVG and investigations of
its optimal configuration. It will be shown that the same flow
structure can be produced downstream of a rod as well as
downstream of a jet. It is expected that the RVG and AJVG
configuration will be different due to the different behavior
of a stiff rod and a soft jet.
At the beginning, the so-called standard configuration was Fig. 3 General view of test section.
used, treated as a validation case. This standard setting was
investigated experimentally to have a validation base for
numerical simulations (e.g. numerical scheme, turbulence
model). Finally, an modified configuration was determined
by numerical simulations. The new configuration was investi-
gated experimentally and validated against CFD. With the
obtained results the RVG effectiveness was confirmed.

2. Experimental setup

The experimental investigations were carried out in a test sec-

tion which is shown in Fig. 3. The nozzle is designed in such a
way as to obtain a constant flow velocity downstream of the
vortex generator, i.e. Ma = 0.3. The lower and upper walls
of the nozzle are rectilinear. The upper wall has an adjustable
inclination angle. This allows compensating the cannel cross
section defect due to the boundary layers at nozzle walls.
The Reynolds number of the flow was Re = 6.6
105. Fig. 4 View of measurement plate.
A more detailed view of the measurement region is shown
in Fig. 4. The VG is placed on a measurement plate and the The pressure measurement taps were located downstream
coordinate X = 0 mm means the location of the rod. The of the RVG (Fig. 4). The taps were located both along the
rod has to be inclined at appropriate angles in relation to the channel and also in the spanwise direction. These taps were
main stream. The rod angles are defined in Fig. 5. There were arranged in 5 rows and 8 columns. There are two traversing
two rod configurations in the flow, a standard one and modi- planes above the 4th and 8th row, downstream of the RVG
fied one. The standard VG configuration was treated as a ref- (Fig. 4, OZY planes, X = 54 mm and X = 114 mm) in which
erence case with the pitch angle (plane OYZ, inclination to the the stagnation pressure was measured. The stagnation pressure
wall) of / = 45° and the skew angle (plane OXZ, inclination measurement was taken by a Pitot probe, 0.5 mm in external
to flow direction) h = 90°. diameter.

Please cite this article in press as: SZWABA R et al. Streamwise vortex generation by the rod, Chin J Aeronaut (2019), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cja.2019.03.033
4 R. SZWABA et al.
Fig. 5 Definition of vortex generator angles.
The following measurements were carried out to investigate
the effects of the RVG on the flow: (A) inlet flow conditions;
(B) static pressure distribution on the wall downstream of
the rod; (C) stagnation pressure planes in the boundary layer
downstream of the rod; (D) oil visualization on the test wall
surface.
3. Experimental results of standard RVG configuration
As mentioned before, the standard configuration of the rod
consisted of the pitch angle / = 45° and the skew angle
h = 90°. The diameter of the standard rod was d = 2.0 mm.
The measurements were carried out for two rod heights, e.g.
h = 1.8 mm and h = 3.6 mm. The undisturbed boundary layer
thickness downstream of the vortex generator at X = 54 mm
was approximate d = 10 mm. Thus the d/d ratio was equal
to 0.2 and the h/d ratio was 0.18 and 0.36 respectively.
The measurement traverses were located at X = 54 mm
(5d) and X = 114 mm (11d) behind the generator, what is
shown in Fig. 4. The position of the generator rod was at
X = 0 mm. Coordinate Z is determined along the channel
width. Z = 0 mm is located at the channel center line. The axis
of the rod is located at Z = 0 mm at the test wall surface. The
width of the measurement traverses was approximate 26 mm
and it was in the range from Z =  16 mm to Z = 10 mm.
Coordinate Y represents the distance above the wall. The influ-
ence of streamwise vortices is shown in the boundary layer as
stagnation pressure distribution. The results of stagnation
pressure measurements as non-dimensional values, measured
downstream of the rod at the plane X = 54 mm for two
RVG heights are shown in Fig. 6. These figures show maps
of normalized stagnation pressure pn , created in relation to
the reference boundary layer stagnation pressure profile. This
reference boundary layer profile is located at Z =  16 mm,
outside the zone of the streamwise vortex influence. Eq. (1)
shows the relation which describes how the normalized stagna-
tion pressure maps were created.
pR =p0
pn ¼
pref =p0
where pR is the stagnation pressure downstream of the rod at
given cross-section, pref is the stagnation pressure in undis-
turbed boundary layer at given cross-section, and p0 is the
stagnation pressure at the inlet of the channel.
In this way the local deficit and surplus of stagnation pres-
sure in relation to the flow without a rod can be visualized.
Such presentation of the stagnation pressure values localizes
the streamwise vortex influence, its position and sense of rota-
Please cite this article in press as: SZWABA R et al. Streamwise vortex generation by the rod, Chin J Aeronaut (2019), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cja.2019.03.033
Fig. 6 Normalized stagnation pressure of standard RVG.
tion very well. Undoubtedly, a very important advantage of
such visualization of the results is that one can see the places
where the vortex transports the momentum towards and away
from the wall. The maps in Fig. 6 show a downstream view
onto the traversing plane. The rod location (54 mm upstream
of the measurement plane) in the spanwise direction is indi-
cated by an arrow.
In Fig. 6 one can see the local minima and maxima of the
normalized stagnation pressure. One minimum (blue area)
and one maximum (red area) correspond to a single stream-
wise vortex generated by a rod. On one side the vortex lifts
the low momentum fluid (blue) and on the other side it pushes
the high momentum fluid down towards the wall (red). The
core of the vortex is located between the minimum and maxi-
mum of the stagnation pressure change. The sense of rotation
of the vortex is indicated by arrows. The color scale is identical
for all plots and shows the normalized pressure (pn ) distribu-
tion in the area of streamwise vortex. The strongest vortex
intensity is generated by a VG which has the largest difference
between the red and blue areas, in other words, where the dif-
ference between the minimum and the maximum in the stagna-
tion pressure is the highest.
Putting a rod of a standard configuration one can see that
two vortices have been created. One maximum and two local
minima are formed. The main streamwise vortex has been cre-
ð1Þ ated on the left side and a secondary, slightly weaker one on
the right side. The vortex intensity increases in proportion to
the VG height. The generator of the 3.6 mm height shows a
slightly larger difference between the minimum and the maxi-
mum (approximate 3%) in relation to the smaller generator.
For the 3.6 mm rod height the secondary vortex is weaker in
relation to the main vortex than in the case of the smaller gen-
erator. For the smaller generator the secondary vortex is
almost as strong as the main one, because the RVG configura-
tion is beyond the optimum. Fig. 6 also show that the main
Streamwise vortex generation by the rod
vortex is located to the left of the vortex generator position.
This means that the vortex core downstream of the rod is shift-
ing in a direction determined by the rod.
Fig. 7 shows map of the normalized stagnation pressure
measured in further traverse downstream of the rod at
X = 114 mm. As one can see, the flow pattern does not
change, there is still the arrangement of two vortices. The vor-
tices become weaker, nevertheless the vortex dissipation rate is
small.
As it has been mentioned before, the desirable flow pattern
is to obtain one strong vortex downstream of the vortex gener-
ator. The secondary, small vortex should be very weak and it
should not be visible in the pressure field in distance of 5d
downstream of the VG.12 Here one has obtained two vortices
of comparable intensity what means that standard RVG con-
figuration (/ = 45°, h = 90°) is far from the optimal one.
Fig. 8 shows the normalized static pressure (ps/p0 ) distribu-
tion downstream of the rod for the 3.6 mm rod height in sev-
eral spanwise locations. One can notice a constant velocity
region downstream of the rod. The changes are very small,
Fig. 7 Normalized stagnation pressure of standard RVG
(h = 3.6 mm, X = 114 mm).
Fig. 8 Static pressure distribution downstream of rod for VG
height of 3.6 mm.
Fig. 9 Surface oil visualization downstream of rod.
Please cite this article in press as: SZWABA R et al. Streamwise vortex generation by the rod, Chin J Aeronaut (2019), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cja.2019.03.033
5
beneath 100 Pa. Nevertheless, the curve for Z = 2.5 mm
shows a tendency towards a higher pressure level, especially
in a short distance downstream of the vortex generator. Prob-
ably it is connected with the fact that there is a higher pressure
zone in this region, due to the mass transport towards the wall
(see Fig. 6(b)). Except that there is almost no influence of the
streamwise vortex on the static pressure distribution in the
spanwise direction.
In Fig. 9 the surface oil visualization of the flow on the noz-
zle lower wall is shown. In this figure trace of vortices down-
stream of the rod is visible which is adequate to the flow
structure shown in the stagnation pressure results. Streamwise
accumulation of oil indicates separatrices located outside of
the arrangement of two vortices. Accumulation of oil in the
longitudinal direction, which is characteristic of the flow with
vortices occurs at the point where the air lifts up (black dashed
lines) away from the wall. In the case of counter-rotating vor-
tices with the sense of rotation shown in Fig. 9, longitudinal
accumulation of oil appears at their outer side. The flow
between adjacent vortices is transported down to the wall
and a reattachment is formed, marked by a white dashed line.
In this region the surface friction coefficient increases and the
oil film thinning occurs. For the higher generator (Fig. 9(b)),
the vortex effect in the spanwise direction is wider, what also
can be seen in the stagnation pressure results (see Fig. 6).
4. Numerical simulations for rod vortex generator
As shown above, streamwise vortices can be successfully gen-
erated by means of the RVG. However, based on the results
of investigation for the jet vortex generators12 or vane and
other type of fixed vortex generators,23,24 one can expect the
influence of the RVG configuration on the streamwise vortex
intensity. In this paper, the effect of the RVG skew angle h
on the streamwise vorticity is discussed. It has been found that
the obtained streamwise vorticity increases with a decreased
pitch angle. The applied minimum pitch angle is / = 30°
due to the technological constraints. Therefore further
research has been carried out at this / value and the results
are shown below.
Validation of the numerical model is carried out by means
of comparison with experimental data for the reference config-
uration (pitch angle / = 45° and the skew angle h = 90°).
Comparison with experimental data (presented above) allows
for assessment of the flow structure prediction. Numerical sim-
ulations for the investigated cases were carried out by means of
ANSYS Fluent and the unstructured hexahedral mesh was
generated in Hexpress/NUMECA.
The computational domain and mesh details close to
the rod are shown in Fig. 10. The domain size in case of
6 R. SZWABA et al.
Fig. 10 Computational domain and mesh details.
simulations for the standard configuration (investigated exper-
imentally) is defined according to the test section dimensions.
In case of simulations for different RVG skew angles, the
domain size is decreased and the dimensions are presented in
Fig. 10. Thus, the mesh size can be reduced by neglecting side
and upper wall boundary layers, which has a negligible effect
on the single vortex generator in the middle of the lower wall.
The mesh consists of about 3
106 hexahedra cells. In both
cases, test section configuration and simplified one, the mesh
is refined close to walls in order to keep about 40 cells in the
boundary layer (y+  1). The mesh is also refined in spanwise
direction (Z direction) downstream of the rod to provide a
high resolution in the vortex zone. At the location of 20 rod
diameters (d) downstream, there are about 40 mesh cells within
the zone of generated vortices. The simulations were done for
k-x SST (Shear Stress Transport).25 Pressure based algorithm
and MUSCL (Monotonic Upwind Scheme for Conservation
Laws) scheme is applied. At the inlet, the total conditions
are defined according to the measurements, so the total pres-
sure in boundary layer profile is set upstream of the RVG.
The boundary conditions for the turbulence model are applied
based on the simulations for the flat plate and the same Mach
number, but without RVG. Due to that, turbulent quantities
in the boundary layer with the imposed total pressure distribu-
tion can be applied at the inlet. At the outlet, the static pres-
sure was adjusted to obtain the required Mach number of 0.3.
As mentioned above, numerical model is validated by com-
parison with experimental data for the standard configuration
(pitch angle / = 45° and the skew angle h = 90°). Numerical
results for diameter d = 2 mm and height h = 1.8 and
Fig. 11 Normalized numerical stagnation pressure of standard RVG with different heights (d = 2 mm, X = 54 mm).
Please cite this article in press as: SZWABA R et al. Streamwise vortex generation by the rod, Chin J Aeronaut (2019), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cja.2019.03.033
h = 3.6 mm are presented (Fig. 11) as a normalized total pres-
sure at the control plane downstream of RVG (X = 54 mm).
These results are compared with the measurements shown in
Fig. 6. In case of both RVG heights, one can notice a lower
range of total pressure non-uniformity in the pitch direction
(Z direction) predicted numerically. Zones of low normalized
pressure are closer to each other than shown by the measure-
ments. It results from the lower diameter of the streamwise
vortex predicted by numerical simulations. Direct comparison
of the vortex size cannot be done due to the lack of measured
velocity. Anyway, the minimum and maximum of the total
pressure predicted by simulations are close to the measured
values. The normalized total pressure distribution shown in
Fig. 11 indicates the existence of the increased normalized
pressure above the maximum located closer to the wall. The
second maximum located further from the wall is an effect
of the fluid transport from the outer zones of the boundary
layer with a higher total pressure level. Such higher values
are not noticed by Pitot probe measurements at a higher dis-
tance from the wall. In spite of such difference, one can con-
clude that the numerically predicted flow structure is similar,
although the vortex size and intensity are different.
As mentioned above, vortex intensity cannot be determined
directly by Pitot probe measurements, but it can be estimated
by the normalized values and the minimum and maximum
location. Numerical simulations provide an opportunity for
a direct comparison of the proposed normalized pressure with
the vorticity field, in particular by the streamwise component
of vorticity vector xx, defined as:
@uz @uy
xx ¼  ð2Þ
@y @z
where uz and uy are the vector velocity components in Z and Y
direction respectively.
Such comparison at a control plane downstream of the
RVG is shown in Fig. 12. In both figures, streamlines located
in the range of streamwise vortices indicate the existence of
two counter-rotating vortices. The vortex located on the left
side is stronger than the one on the right side. This confirms
that the main vortex is stronger than the secondary one. Such
effect is also seen in Fig. 11(a) pressure plot, where the local
minimum of the normalized total pressure is lower on the left
side than on the right side. This effect is in agreement with the
measurements shown in Figs. 6 and 7.
According to the experience arising from the AJVG inves-
tigations, it is known that the vortex intensity (strength) can
Streamwise vortex generation by the rod 7

Fig. 12 Streamlines and normalized stagnation pressure or vorticity of standard RGV (d = 2 mm, h = 3.6 mm).

be increased by a modification of the skew and the pitch
angles. In order to find the rod inclination to the wall and
the main flow direction leading to the maximum vorticity, a
parametric study was carried out. The streamwise vorticity
xx is defined as the objective function. The selected results
for the two RVG diameters (d = 1 mm and d = 2 mm) and
the height of 3.6 mm are shown in Fig. 13. In the plot
(Fig. 13 (a)), the streamwise vorticity xx is normalized by
the vorticity generated with standard configuration (xx-base),
so the ratio indicates how stronger are generated vortices by
modified configurations. As shown, the streamwise vorticity
xx is highly dependent on the skew angle h (for the constant
pitch angle / = 30°) and for higher RVG diameter the maxi-
mum is obtained at a lower h value. Comparing both cases,
one can state that the larger diameter at the same RGV height
induces higher vorticity.
Any modification of the RVG skew angle h has a strong
effect on the local maximum and the vorticity distribution
(Fig. 14). It is shown that one strong vortex is created instead
of two vortices with a similar absolute vorticity value. In the
vicinity of the main vortex, a counter rotating secondary weak
vortex is also created. Although, the flow structure topology
requires further investigation, the obtained results indicate sig-
nificant influence of the skew angle on the generated vortex
intensity and the RVG effectiveness.
5. Experimental results for modified RVG configuration
The modified RVG configuration, according to the numerical
simulations, yielded the pitch angle / = 30° and the skew
angle in the range of h = 40°–50°, depending on the rod diam-
eter. For the experiment requirements the same skew angle
h = 45° for both rod diameters was assumed. As it can be
noticed in Fig. 13, that vorticity for this skew angle is located
very near to the maximum. The modified RVG configuration
is different to the one, considered as the reference one. The
investigations were carried out in the same test section
(Fig. 3) as for a standard configuration and at the same Mach
number for two different generator rod diameters, namely,
d = 1 mm and d = 2 mm. The rod height for each diameter
was the same and equaled to h = 3.6 mm, hence the ratio
h/d = 0.36, and the ratio d/d = 0.1 and 0.2.
Fig. 15 show normalized stagnation pressure maps for two
different rod diameters in the distance 5d downstream of the
vortex generator. In these figures one can see that a single
streamwise vortex (one minimum and maximum of pressure
area) was created in the flow behind the modified rod vortex
generator. This is quite a different flow pattern than in the
case of the standard configuration, where two streamwise
counter-rotating vortices were formed downstream of the
rod. A desirable flow pattern (one main vortex, see Fig. 1)

Fig. 13 Streamwise vorticity of two RVG with different diameters (h = 3.6 mm).

Please cite this article in press as: SZWABA R et al. Streamwise vortex generation by the rod, Chin J Aeronaut (2019), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cja.2019.03.033
8 R. SZWABA et al.
Fig. 14 Streamwise vorticity of RVG (d = 2 mm, h = 3.6 mm).
Fig. 15 Normalized stagnation pressure of modified RVG
(h = 3.6 mm, X = 51 mm (5d)).
downstream of the vortex generator is formed for the modi-
fied configuration.
These results show the effectiveness of the performed para-
metric study, carried out by means of numerical simulations,
which allowed the streamwise vorticity to be increased up to
4 times at the lower diameter/height ratio in comparison to
the standard configuration. The increase in vorticity confirms
the experimental results where a higher pressure difference
between the high and low pressure zone (compare Figs. 6(b)
and 15(b)) is observed. The relative difference between the
modified and standard RVG in the normalized stagnation
pressure is about 60%. Comparing the action of an optimized
generator of different diameters one can see that in the case of
a generator with a larger diameter d = 2.0 mm, the difference
between the minimum and the maximum pressure is higher
compared to the generator of a smaller diameter,
Please cite this article in press as: SZWABA R et al. Streamwise vortex generation by the rod, Chin J Aeronaut (2019), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cja.2019.03.033
Fig. 16 Normalized stagnation pressure downstream of AJVG
(d = 1 mm, 5d downstream of jet).
d = 1.0 mm. Such a result shows that the vortex intensity
increases with an increase in the vortex generator rod diameter.
Fig. 16 shows normalized stagnation pressure maps for sin-
gle AJVG of 1 mm diameter in the distance 5d downstream of
the jet. This result was obtained also for the same flow config-
urations (test section and flow velocity: Ma = 0.3) that in case
of RVG experiments. The jet configuration angles were also
optimized in terms of its intensity.12 In Fig. 16 one can see that
a single streamwise vortex is observed in the flow in some dis-
tance behind the AJVG. Comparing the flow pattern down-
stream of the RVG and AJVG of similar diameter (see
Figs. 15(a) and 16) one can say that in the case of RVG mod-
ified configuration one has obtained the same flow structure as
in flow with AJVG, one minimum and one maximum corre-
spond to a single streamwise vortex generated by a rod or a
jet. In terms of vortex intensity one can conclude that vortex
downstream of RVG is slightly stronger in relation to the
AJVG one. The difference between the minimum and the max-
imum of pressure is slightly higher in case of RVG. The pres-
sure maximum is on the same level, but the pressure minimum
is a little bit lower in case of RVG regards to the AJVG flow
case.
6. Conclusions
An experimental and numerical investigation has been carried
out to study the mechanism of streamwise vortex generation
Streamwise vortex generation by the rod
by the new type of vortex generator, namely the rod vortex
generator. The flow patterns developed downstream of the
rod vortex generator of various configuration were compared
with the air-jet vortex generator. The investigated RVGs were
of different height and diameter. The results presented here
provide guidelines for the design of a new flow control method
dedicated mainly to external flows. The following more
detailed conclusions can be also drawn from the presented
experimental results:
(1) Downstream of the rod vortex generator of a standard
configuration (pitch angle / = 45° and the skew angle
h = 90°) in the flow the two counter-rotating vortices
are created. The vortices intensity increases in propor-
tion to the VG height.
(2) The numerically predicted flow structure is similar to the
experimental one, however due to the complex dissipa-
tive processes in such flow the vortex size and intensity
are different.
(3) A parametric study of RVG configuration made by
means of CFD shows that changing the pitch and skew
angle (to / = 30° and h = 40°-50° respectively) shows a
significant increase of vortex intensity generated by the
rod in relation to the reference configuration and also
significant influence on flow structure topology down-
stream of the vortex generator, one strong vortex is cre-
ated instead of two vortices with a similar absolute
vorticity value.
(4) The experimental comparison of the flow pattern
downstream of the rod and jet of similar diameter
shows that in the case of RVG modified configuration
one has obtained the same flow structure as in flow with
AJVG. In terms of vortex intensity, the vortex down-
stream of RVG is slightly stronger in relation to the
AJVG one.
The most important conclusion which can be drawn from
the above described investigations is that a new method to gen-
erate streamwise vortices, using an appropriately inclined rod
can replace the air-jet vortex. In many types of applications
it can be easier to install rods, activated by MEMS actuators
than air-jets with an air supply system.
One can also conclude that the flow structure downstream
of the rod vortex generator is very similar to the air jet vortex
generator. An optimized rod vortex generator delivers a single
streamwise vortex of the similar intensity, potentially even
higher, as an air-jet vortex generator.
Acknowledgement
The research was supported by a grant from the Polish Min-
istry of Science and Higher Education (No. N502209438).
References
1. Zhang X, Huang Y, Wang X, Wang W, Tang K, Li H. Turbulent
boundary layer separation control using plasma actuator at
Reynolds number 2000000. Chin J Aeronaut 2016;29(5):1237–46.
2. Zhao Q, Ma Y, Zhao G. Parametric analyses on dynamic stall
control of rotor airfoil via synthetic jet. Chin J Aeronaut 2017;30
(6):1818–34.
Please cite this article in press as: SZWABA R et al. Streamwise vortex generation by the rod, Chin J Aeronaut (2019), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cja.2019.03.033
9
3. Tanner LH, Pearcey HH, Tracy CM. Vortex generators: Their
design and their effects on turbulent boundary layer. Columbus:
Aerospace Research Center; 1954, Report No.:16487.
4. Holden H, Babinsky H. Effect of microvortex generators on
separated normal shock/boundary layer interactions. J Aircraft
2007;44(1):170–4.
5. Stanewsky E, Delery J, Fulker J, Matteis P. Drag reduction by
shock and boundary layer control-Results of the project EURO-
SHOCK II. Berlin-Heidelberg: Springer; 2002.
6. Doerffer P, Bohning R. Modelling of perforated plate aerody-
namics performance. Aerosp Sci Technol 2000;4(8):525–34.
7. Wallis RA. The use of air jets for boundary layer control.
Melbourne: Aeronautical Research Laboratories (Australia);
1952.
8. Pearcey HH. Shock-induced separation and its prevention by
design and boundary layer control. In: Lachman GV, editor.
Boundary layer and flow control. Oxford: Pergamon Press; 1961. p.
1167–334.
9. Titchener N, Babinsky H. A review of the use of vortex generators
for mitigating shock-induced separation. Shock Waves 2015;25
(5):473–94.
10. Van der Burg JW, Maseland JEJ, Brandsma FJ. Low speed
maximum lift and flow control. Aerosp Sci Technol 2004;8
(5):389–400.
11. Paul AR, Ranjan P, Patel VK, Jain A. Comparative studies on
flow control in rectangular S-duct diffuser using submerged-vortex
generators. Aerosp Sci Technol 2013;28(1):332–43.
12. Flaszyński P, Szwaba R. Experimental and numerical analysis of
streamwise vortex generator for subsonic flow. Chem Process Eng
2006;27(3/1):985–97.
13. Godard G, Stanislas M. Control of a decelerating boundary layer.
Part 3: Optimization of round jets vortex generator. Aerosp Sci
Technol 2006;10(6):455–64.
14. Saha AK, Yaragani CB. Three-dimensional numerical study of jet-
in- crossflow characteristics at low Reynolds number. Heat Mass
Transfer 2012;48(2):391–411.
15. Szwaba R. Shock wave induced separation control by streamwise
vortices. J Therm Sci 2005;14(3):249–53.
16. Szwaba R, Doerffer P. Separation control by air-jet vortex
generators on turbine blades. Proceedings of 9th European confer-
ence on turbomachinery-fluid dynamics and ther- 608 modynamics;
Istanbul, Turkey. p. 1199–209.
17. Szwaba R. Comparison of the influence of different air-jet vortex
generators on the separation region. Aerosp Sci Technol 2011;15
(1):45–52.
18. Szwaba R. Influence of air-jet vortex generator diameter on
separation region. J Therm Sci 2013;22(4):294–303.
19. Doerffer P, Flaszynski P, Szwaba R, inventors; Longitudinal
vortex generator. PL389685-A1, PL218312-B1. 2013.
20. Martinez J, Flaszynski P, Doerffer P. Application of rod vortex
generators for flow separation reduction on wind turbine rotor.
Wind Energy 2018;21(4):1–14.
21. Tejero F, Doerffer P, Flaszynski P, Szulc O. Passive flow control
application for rotorcraft in transonic conditions. Int J Numer
Meth Heat Fluid Flow 2018;28(5):1080–95.
22. Flaszynski P, Doerffer P, Szwaba R. Comparison of vortex
generators effect on shock wave induced separation. Reston:
AIAA; 2016. Report No.: AIAA-2016-3769.
23. Lin JC. Review of research on low-profile vortex generators to
control boundary-layer separation. Prog Aerosp Sci 2002;38
(4):389–420.
24. Zhen TK, Zubair M, Ahmad KA. Experimental and numerical
investigation of the effects of passive vortex generators on Aludra
UAV performance. Chin J Aeronaut 2011;24(5):577–83.
25. Menter FR. Zonal two equation k-x turbulence models for
aerodynamic flows. Reston: AIAA; 1993. Report No.: AIAA
1993-2906.