Influence of roughness elements present in the lifting surfaces in predicting the

aerodynamic and anti-icing characteristics of lifting surfaces of UAV.

Principal Investigator : Dr. R. KANNAN

Asst. Professor (SG)
Department of Aerospace Engineering
School of Engineering, Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham
Ettimadai, Coimbatore – 641 112
r_kannan@cb.amrita.edu

Co- Principal Investigator : Mr. T. Rajesh Senthil Kumar

Asst. Professor (Sr.Gr)
Department of Aerospace Engineering
School of Engineering, Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham
Ettimadai, Coimbatore – 641 112
t_rajesh@cb.amrita.edu

External Consultant : Dr. T. Murugan

Scientist, Thermal Engineering Division
Central Mechanical Engineering Research Institute,
Durgapur-71320, Kolkata, India
murugan.thangadurai@gmail.com
Present scenario of aviation industry necessitates the requirement of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles

(UAVs) for effective surveillance and recognizance information and also for accurate weapons

delivery towards the specified target. However, the above-mentioned requirements can be

achieved by the proper optimization of UAVs in terms of four major domains such as

aerodynamic design, structural design, avionic system design and propulsive system design (1).

Out of these four major domains, the aerodynamic characteristics of lifting and non-lifting

surfaces will play major role in designing UAVs in terms of aerodynamic aspect. This will in

turn supports for the better structural and avionic system design towards the achievement of

desired performance in the final integrated UAVs.

The aerodynamic characteristics of lifting and non-lifting surfaces are greatly influenced

by the prevailing conditions of the operating atmosphere. The Medium Altitude and Long

Endurance (MALE) UAVs operate at the altitudes upto 12 km and High Altitude and Long

Endurance (HALE) UAVs operate between the altitudes of 12 to 20 km (1, 3). In both cases, the

prevailing operating atmosphere conditions are very low where the temperature is around 216 K

(2). The water droplets are in supercooled liquid state in those altitudes. These supercooled liquid

droplets interact with cold UAV surfaces and give rise to the ice formation on those surfaces and

further aggregates ice on those ice formed surfaces, which will, in turn greatly affect the

aerodynamic performance of the lifting and non-lifting surfaces (3-5). The interacting liquid drop

with solid surfaces undergoes several morphological changes before attaining its equilibrium

wetting shape depending on the velocity and diameter of the liquid drop and also the physio-

chemical nature of the solid surfaces and drop liquid (6-9). Due to the formation and aggregation

of ice on the UAV surfaces, the body of the lifting and non-lifting surfaces (i.e., wing, tail and

fuselage structures) changes from a stream-lined body to a localized bluff body. This will in turn
augments the form drag of the body and also decreases the overall aerodynamic efficiency of the

UAV by its reducing L/D ratio.

Ice formation and aggregation can be controlled by proper modification of surface energy

of the lifting and non-lifting surfaces of the UAV through physical microstructure and / or

chemical modifications of those surfaces, i.e., enabling the surface as superhydrophobic similar

to the wetting behavior of lotus leaf surface with water (10). Out of all those available strategies

of enabling the surface as superhydrophobic, the physical structure modification on the

hydrophobic material surfaces empower the surface properties as sustained non-wetting one.

While enabling physical structure modification as a microstructure and / or nanostructure for

controlling the ice formation and aggregation on the solid surfaces, the changes in the

aerodynamic efficiency of the UAVs have to be addressed properly due to the increase in skin

friction drag associated with the increase in surface roughness for the operating Reynolds

number (Re) regimes of MALE and HALE type UAVs, i.e., Re in the order of 106 (11-15).

Comparing the superhydrophobic surfaces developed using by regular arrangement of micro-

grooves and micro pillars, the superhydrophobic property exhibited by the surface with regular

arrangement of micro-grooves has better water shedding property in the direction of grooves

than in the direction perpendicular to grooves and also in the superhydrophobic surface with

regular arrangement of micro pillars (16).

In this proposed work, the ice formation and aggregation will be controlled by enabling

superhydrophobicity on the lifting and non-lifting surfaces using micro-groove-textured pattern

due to its better water shedding property. In addition to its water shedding property, the drag

penalty induced by the orientation of the micro-grooves with respect to the air flow direction has

to be investigated experimentally for finding the aerodynamic efficiency of the UAVs. The
interacting super cooled liquid drop on the cold UAV surfaces has more chance of aggregating

the ice on the stagnation point region of the lifting and non-lifting surfaces (4). In order to reduce

the drag penalty encountered due to the roughness induced by the surface micro-grooves, the

appropriate location of the surface micro-grooves will be investigated through proper

experiments.

References:

1. Reg Austin, “Unmanned Aircraft Systems - UAVs Design, Development and

Deployment”, John Wiley and Sons, ISBN 978-0-470-05819-0.

2. J D Anderson, “Fundamentals of Aerodynamics”, Mc Graw Hill Publications, Sixth

Edition, 2016.

3. Icing considerations for HALE (High Altitude Long Endurance) aircraft, Technical
Report TR 88-11, 1988, Naval Environmental Prediction Research Facility.

4. M.B. Bragg, A.P. Broeren, L.A. Blumenthal, “Iced-airfoil aerodynamics”, Progress in

Aerospace Sciences, 2005, 41, 323–362.

5. Frank T. Lyncha, Abdollah Khodadoust, “Effects of ice accretions on aircraft

aerodynamics”, Progress in Aerospace Sciences, 200, 37, 669–767.

6. R.Kannan, Visakh Vaikuntanathan and D.Sivakumar, “Dynamic contact angle beating

from drops impacting onto solid surfaces exhibiting anisotropic wetting”, Colloids and
Surfaces A: Physicochemical Engineering Aspects, Vol.386, Issue.1-3, 2011.

7. Visakh Vaikuntanathan, R.Kannan, and D.Sivakumar, “Impact of water drops onto the
interface of a hydrophobic texture and a hydrophilic smooth surfaces”, Colloids and
Surfaces A: Physicochemical Engineering Aspects, Vol.369, Issue.1-3, 2010.

8. R.Kannan and D. Sivakumar, “Impact of liquid drops on a rough surface comprising

microgrooves”, Exp. in Fluids, Vol. 44, No.6, 2008.
9. R.Kannan and D.Sivakumar, “Drop impact process on a hydrophobic grooved surface”,
Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochemical Engineering Aspects, Vol.317, Issue.1-3,
2008.

10. C. Antonini, M. Innocenti, T. Horn, M. Marengo, A. Amirfazli, “Understanding the effect

of superhydrophobic coatings on energy reduction in anti-icing systems”, Cold Regions
Science and Technology, 2011, 67, 58–67.

11. P. Ranjan, R. E. Breidenthal, “Characteristics of an airfoil with stationary vortices”,

International Journal of Emerging Multidisciplinary Fluid Sciences.

12. I. Tani, H. Munakata, A. Matsumoto and K. Abe, “Turbulence Management by Groove

Roughness”, Turbulence Management and Relaminarisation [H. W. Liepmann, R.
Narasimha (Eds.)], IUTAM Symposium Bangalore,India, 1987, 161-172.

13. C. Y. Ching, B. L. Parsons, “Drag characteristics of a turbulent boundary layer over a flat
plate with transverse square grooves”, Experiments in Fluids, 1999, 26, 273 – 275.

14. Ronald D. Grose, Omaha, Nebr, “Cascaded micro-groove aerodynamic drag reducer”,
US Patent No. 4,650,138, 1987.

15. R. I. Bourisli, A. A. Al-Sahhaf, “CFD modeling of turbulent boundary layer flow in

passive drag-reducing applications”, WIT Transactions on Engineering Sciences,
Advances in Fluid Mechanics VII, 2008, 59, 72-90.

16. Z. Yoshimitsu, A. Nakajima, T. Watanabe, K. Hashimoto, Effects of surface structure on

the hydrophobicity and sliding behavior of water droplets, Langmuir 18 (2002) 5818–
5822