Adam Sieradzki1

Łukasiewicz Research Network,

Institute of Aviation,
Aleja Krakowska 110/114,
Warsaw 02-256, Poland
e-mail: adam.sieradzki@ilot.lukasiewicz.gov.pl
Tomasz Kwiatkowski
Łukasiewicz Research Network,
Institute of Aviation,
Aleja Krakowska 110/114,
Warsaw 02-256, Poland
e-mail: tomasz.kwiatkowski@ilot.
lukasiewicz.gov.pl
Mark G. Turner
University of Cincinnati,
P O. Box 210070,
Cincinnati, OH 45221
e-mail: mark.turner@uc.edu
Borys Łukasik
Łukasiewicz Research Network,
Institute of Aviation,
Aleja Krakowska 110/114,
Warsaw 02-256, Poland
e-mail: borys.lukasik@ilot.lukasiewicz.gov.pl
Numerical Modeling and Design
Challenges of Boundary Layer
Ingesting Fans
Studies show that boundary layer ingesting (BLI) propulsion can provide significant fuel
burn reduction relative to pylon-mounted turbofan engines. However, this type of propul-
sion can lead to serious difficulties and engineering challenges. Numerical analyses of
the fan with a uniform flow at the inlet and that exposed to the distorted flow were per-
formed. These required the use of a full-annulus unsteady time-marching computational
fluid dynamics (CFD) model, which was validated with experimental data obtained at a
test rig. The first negative effect of the distorted inlet velocity profile is a variable incidence
angle of the rotor. Both the calculations and the experiment show the nonuniform axial and
tangential velocity profiles in front of the rotor. As a result, significant changes in the angle
of attack of the blades and corresponding unsteady rotor loads are observed. The research
was performed for different operating conditions to obtain performance curves and assess
the BLI influence. This demonstrated the second problem arising from the operation of the
fan with the distorted flow at the inlet, which is a reduction of the stall margin (48% reduc-
tion in the experiment). The whole stage was optimized for the axisymmetric flow to ensure a
required value of stall margin and the highest possible efficiency at the design point. The
experimental efficiency of the rig at the design point with the distorted inlet was 2.05%
lower than the undistorted one. The CFD model shows a 1.25% reduction. Similar reduc-
tions were obtained for other operating points. [DOI: 10.1115/1.4055265]
Keywords: boundary layer ingestion (BLI), fan, modeling, experimental, aerodynamics,
computational fluid dynamics (CFD), aerodynamic design

Introduction
The concept of a boundary layer ingesting (BLI) propulsion
system is widely recognized as one of the key enablers (together
with the hybrid/electric systems and distributed propulsion),
which allow a significant reduction in mission energy consumption
of future airplanes due to the aircraft wake reenergizing and
increased propulsive efficiency [1–3]. NASA’s Generation-After
Next (N + 2) Blended Wing Body aircraft is planned to feature
theaft-mounted,airframe-embeddedpropulsionsystem,whichwould
be capable of ingesting some amount of reduced velocity boundary
layer air (up to 16%). Previous research [4] has shown that configu-
ration can provide up to 3–5% of fuel reduction, in relation to the
undistorted, pylon-mounted, ultra-high bypass ratio (15–18) base-
line turbofans. For the N + 3 generation aircraft, even more drastic
fuel burn reduction (on the order of 10%) is anticipated due to the
ingestion of the larger amount of boundary layer air.
The nonuniform, nonaxisymmetric flow at the inlet of the fan is a
key challenge associated with the BLI propulsion. Research con-
ducted at UTRC and NASA Glenn [5,6] and at Whittle Laboratory
[7] showed that the highly distorted flow at the inlet would be
responsible for a drop of the fan efficiency as well as reduction in
stall margin (relative to the nondistorted flow) [8]. It would also
result in an alternating loading of the blades during one revolution
and thus reduction of the margin to the endurance limit of the rotor
components. The mentioned drawbacks proves that the BLI capable
propulsion system would require significant modifications in the
propulsor design (like the embedded inlet [9] or nonaxisymmetric
outlet guide vanes (OGV) [10,11]). That is why there is still a
vast demand for the numerical and experimental research in that
field to further investigate the influence of the inlet flow distortions
and examine means to diminish it.
The aim of this article is to present high-resolution experimental
measurements and their correlation with the results of the high fidel-
ity CFD analyses. Both numerical and experimental data were
obtained as an outcome of the BLI Fan research program. The
goals of that program were to:
• develop aerodynamic design and optimization algorithms,
which could be used to design the distortion-tolerant fan.
• design and build the low-speed fan test rig, which would be
used to conduct experimental research for the axisymmetric
flow and for the distorted flow at the inlet.
• perform the tests that would lead to more information about the
nature of the distorted flow and which would allow validation
of the design and optimization algorithms and thus ensure their
high fidelity.
• use these algorithms to redesign the fan to attenuate the influ-
ence of distortion.
• perform test campaigns to verify which design has a potential
to deliver the smallest drop of the fan performance character-
istics in relation to the baseline.
The ultimate goal of the project was to deliver the tools and gain
the knowledge, which could be used to design and build a high-
speed, high-pressure ratio (∼1.3) fan test rig. It would allow com-
plete investigation of not only aerodynamic aspects but also aero-
mechanics, aeroelasticity, and rotor dynamics issues, to design the
high-performance distortion-tolerant fan.

Fan Design Process and Properties

1
Corresponding author. The fan was designed not only based on a set of guidelines estab-
Contributed by the International Gas Turbine Institute (IGTI) of ASME for
publication in the JOURNAL OF TURBOMACHINERY. Manuscript received January 26,
lished during a comprehensive review of the literature but also
2021; final manuscript received July 24, 2022; published online September 13, resulting from the parameters and limitations of electric motors
2022. Tech. Editor: David G. Bogard. and the limited total cost of the entire test rig. The most important

Journal of Turbomachinery Copyright © 2022 by ASME NOVEMBER 2022, Vol. 144 / 111012-1
requirements to be met by the fan and influencing its design are
listed as follows:
• Load coefficient should be equal to 0.47, and flow coefficient
should be equal to 0.50. These are typical values of the afore-
mentioned coefficients for a high-loaded single-fan stage (a fan
with identical values was used in the Whittle Laboratory
research program [7]).
• Rotor hub-to-tip ratio should be in range 0.30–0.33 (the values
resulting from current trends).
• Number of stator blades should be greater than or equal to
2 × n + 1, where n is the number of rotor blades. This value
was intended to reduce the noise level generated by the
working fan.
• Due to the limited number of available motor variants on the
market, it was impossible to design a fan without taking into
account the parameters of the available motors. On the con-
trary, it was necessary to adjust the fan parameters to the
motor parameters. The selection of a given motor determined
the minimum diameter of the hub and the maximum torque
that can be generated by the fan at a given rotational speed.
• Maximization of stage efficiency for axisymmetric flow while
maintaining the adequate stall margin (it was assumed that the
stall margin should be at least 12%).
The fan design process began with establishing the basic param-
eters of the fan and finding a satisfactory operating point of the
motor and the fan. These parameters are presented in Table 1. At
this stage, a simple one-dimensional analysis and the initial three-
dimensional blade design were created, using open-source software
developed by the Gas Turbine Simulation Laboratory at University
of Cincinnati, namely, TCDES and T-AXI [12]. Initially, the Free
Vortex assumption was used because it was found to be the most
favorable for the fan without externally forced flow. Other assump-
tions (e.g., exponential) led to flow separation problems near the
hub—due to the low momentum flow in this region. The second
design phase involved introducing a series of manual modifications
to the initial geometry. Some of these modifications were based on
guidelines available in the literature (e.g., Carter rule), while others
in turn used preliminary results of CFD simulations. The general
aim of these modifications was to develop the best possible geom-
etry, which was then used as the starting point for the final stage of
the design process—an automatic multi-objective optimization.
A multi-objective genetic algorithm embedded in the Dakota
package was used for the optimization [13,14]. To provide a large
variety of individuals in the first population, a Latin Hypercube
sampling was used [15]. For the CFD-based optimization, a
mixing plane model and Spalart–Allmaras turbulence model was
used. Isentropic efficiencies in the design point (DP) and near-stall
(NS) conditions were defined as objective functions. During auto-
matic optimization of the rotor and stator, the inlet metal angles,
blade chords, blade bow, and curvature of the profiles have been
optimized. The parametric model of the blades was created using
the open-source blade geometry builder T-BLADE3 [16,17]. As a
result of the optimization, a set of individual designs constituting
the Pareto front was obtained and presented in Fig. 1. From this
set, one solution was chosen as the final geometry, which was char-
acterized by the greatest efficiency improvement in the design point
Table 1 Design point flow parameters and geometry for
baseline fan
Channel diameter (m) 0.58
Flow coefficient 0.5
Stage load coefficient 0.47
Rotor tip Mach number 0.223
Rotor inlet hub/tip radius ratio 0.31
Running tip clearance in mm (% span) 1.0 (0.35)
Number of rotor/stator blades 15/31
Rotational speed (rpm) 2500
111012-2 / Vol. 144, NOVEMBER 2022
(0.6%) and the efficiency at near-stall preserved. This innovative
approach allowed for stage optimization while also accounting for
stall margin, which should be considered crucial for the practical
design methodology. The numerical and experimental results pre-
sented in this article proved that the final optimized configuration
met all the requirements.
The geometry somewhat resembles the single-stage fan tested in
the Whittle Lab research program [7]. It was the intention to be
guided by the Gunn and Hall design—to give a credible comparison
to an existing study. However, what distinguishes the presented
case is that it has been thoroughly optimized for the axisymmetric
flow. This is an important issue if later comparisons with a
BLI-optimized geometry are considered and can lead to erroneous
conclusions and favoring the BLI-optimized design over the not
optimized baseline. Moreover, the final geometry has been entirely
defined and parameterized using the open-source software, making
it possible to share design details with any interested researcher.
Experimental Test Rig
The low-speed fan test rig was designed and built to test perfor-
mance characteristics of the fan with the nonuniform, nonaxisym-
metric velocity profile at the inlet. It was located in the test
facility with the relatively large volume (1200 m3) and with a
high ceiling. It was also positioned vertically (axis of rotation is per-
pendicular to the ground) to allow the air to be sucked from above
the inlet and hence minimize the influence of the limited space of
the facility. The height of the test rig is about 5 m. It consists of a
bell mouth inlet, followed by 1.5 m inlet duct. The bell mouth is
covered from the top with a plenum, which is made of cloth,
stretched around the light aluminum frame. The task of the
plenum is to attenuate the flow instability caused by the limited
volume of the laboratory [18]. The single-stage fan is located
right beneath the inlet duct. The fan is driven by the electric
motor mounted in the hub. The outlet section is about 1 m long
and is closed with a throttling cone that changes the exit area to
throttle the flow and thus adjust the air mass flow. A schematic of
the test rig is shown in Fig. 2. Figure 3(a) presents the photo of
the real object.
The desired velocity profile is obtained using a distortion screen
with variable porosity, shown in detail in Figs. 3(b)–3(d ). It is
placed at a distance over one diameter upstream of the rotor, fol-
lowed by a flow straightener (honeycomb) to stabilize the velocity
profile generated by the gauze. The use of the distortion screen
allows the introduction of any velocity profile at the inlet. A
method used to design the gauze is described in Ref. [19]. For mea-
surements without distortion, only the inlet plenum was mounted
and no honeycomb. The location of measurement sections is
shown in Fig. 2. Circumferential static pressure measurements (8
probes) presented in Sec. 1 allows the mass flowrate (MFR) estima-
tion in real time, with or without the distortion gauze mounted. The
long inlet duct ensures an undistorted static pressure profile at this
section for both cases. This way the required flow conditions can
be verified. The other measurement presented in Secs. 2–5 are
designed to work with a dedicated rotating traverse system. It can
be equipped with four different probes simultaneously, which
could be five-hole pressure probes, hot wire probes, or temperature
probes. The mechanism allows traversing all probes radially and
circumferentially, with 180 deg range of rotation. With the use of
a predefined map of measurement points, fully automated and
precise cross-sectional measurements are possible.
Inlet Distortion Characterization
The inlet distorted velocity profile used in the experiment (EXP)
and CFD calculations was based on the profile obtained in
Cambridge-MIT Institute Silent Aircraft project (SAX-40) [20]
and utilized later in the Whittle Laboratory Research Program [7].
The flow distortion for design point, measured in Sec. 2, is
Transactions of the ASME
 Fig. 1 Pareto front obtained during multi-objective optimization

presented in Fig. 4. Similar profiles were also obtained for other
operating conditions.
Data from these measurements were used as the inlet boundary
condition in the CFD simulations, after necessary modifications in
the near-wall region. It was not possible to repeatedly capture the
casing boundary layer velocity profile using five-hole pressure
probe. Using this type of probe could lead to erroneous measure-
ments if the distance to the wall is smaller than 3 probe diameters.
Moreover, for the points in the boundary layer, the data were
characterized by greater scatter and lower repeatability due to
high turbulence levels. Therefore, it was decided to perform only
a few measurements of the boundary layer using pressure probes
and hot wire probes, and on that basis the profile obtained numeri-
cally for the corresponding case was adapted. The comparison of
the measured data and the final velocity profile near the wall is
shown in Fig. 5. A similar approach was used in the postprocessing

Fig. 2 Schematic of the test rig: (1) inlet plenum, (2) bell mouth, (3) inlet duct, (4) distortion
screen, (5) inlet duct downstream of the screen, (6) fan stage section, (7) rotating traverse
ring, (8) support frame, and (9) throttle cone

Journal of Turbomachinery NOVEMBER 2022, Vol. 144 / 111012-3


Fig. 3 General view of the test stand (a) and distortion gauze
(b), close-up of the high (c) and low (d) porosity part of the gauze
Fig. 4 Measured velocity profile at Sec. 2 in the BLI test rig (aft
looking forward (ALF)).
of data presented in Sec. 5—the downstream section needed to cal-
culate the performance of the analyzed single-fan stage.
During the test campaign, great emphasis was also placed on tur-
bulence measurements. The authors believe that this aspect may
play an important role in the performance prediction of the BLI
fan and is not sufficiently researched in the literature. In the real
application of the BLI fan, much higher turbulence level at the
inlet should be expected than for conventional applications. There-
fore, the hot wire probes were used to measure the turbulence inten-
sity in every section.
Numerical Modeling
Full-annulus time-marching Reynolds-averaged Navier–Stokes
(RANS) simulations were performed of the fan operating with the
distorted and undistorted flow at the inlet. For this purpose, a well-
known commercial CFD solver was used—FINE/Turbo, together
111012-4 / Vol. 144, NOVEMBER 2022
Fig. 5 Scaled CFD boundary layer profile compared with five-
hole probe measurements
with the industrial standard k-ω shear stress transport (SST) turbu-
lence model. In addition, the Abu-Ghannam and Shaw (AGS) alge-
braic transition model was used to predict the laminar flow regions
on the blades [21]. It has been found that consideration of laminar
flow areas has a significant impact on the performance of the low-
pressure fan. The use of two different transition models (AGS and
γ-Reθ) showed a similar increase in efficiency of 0.9% for the base-
line case. Finally, the AGS model was chosen because of its simpli-
city and lower computational cost. The compressible flow model
was used (Air Perfect Gas), with Merkle preconditioning turned
on due to low subsonic Mach number regime. The central scheme
was chosen for spatial discretization, while temporal discretization
was carried out using an explicit four-stage Runge–Kutta scheme
and dual time-stepping technique [22].
The structural computational meshes of the multiblock O4H
topology were created with AUTOGRID5/IGG meshing software. A
grid dependency study was performed using axisymmetric undis-
torted inlet flow conditions and the steady mixing plane model.
An optimal mesh density was determined that balances a compro-
mise between the computational cost and the solution accuracy.
The results of the grid dependency study are presented in Fig. 6
using the calculated stage efficiency value. The total cell count
for optimal mesh, presented in Fig. 7, was around 24 million.
However, a second, substantially denser mesh was also prepared
to investigate the differences between experimental and computa-
tional results obtained using the optimal density grid. The total
cell count for fine mesh was approximately 82 million. For both
meshes, the y+ values were kept around 1. Simulations performed
on the optimal grid were run using ten time-steps per blade passing
period, while the fine grid computations used 50 time-steps per
blade passing period. The inlet of the domain corresponded to
Fig. 6 Grid dependence study (the black dot indicates the
optimal mesh used)
Transactions of the ASME
 Fig. 7 Optimal computational mesh density
location of the test rig presented in Sec. 2, while the outlet was
placed about 0.1 m downstream of the OGV.
At the inlet boundary condition, total pressure was specified
using the experimentally measured profile. A constant total inlet
temperature was assumed for all cases despite the fact that it was
not possible to maintain a constant temperature in the test room
during the tests. On the other hand, the outlet boundary condition
consisted of static pressure specification, which was adjusted
during computation run to maintain the required MFR value. Turbu-
lence intensity values, measured by hot wire probes in Sec. 2, were
also used as the inlet boundary condition in CFD computations. The
appropriate size of the turbulence length scale was estimated to
guarantee the turbulent dissipation rate and turbulence intensity
values at Sec. 3 consistent with the experiment. Changes of the tur-
bulence intensity upstream of the rotor are presented in Fig. 8.
Unsteady Rotor Loads
Figure 9 presents the flow redistribution observed upstream of the
BLI fan. The difference in the axial velocity value between the high
and low momentum regions is significantly reduced when moving
from Secs. 2 and 3. This is due to the fluid migration from the
upper half of the annulus toward the bottom, as marked with the
arrow in Fig. 9. This results in the circumferential component of
the velocity vector (swirl) appearing on azimuths of approximately
±90 deg, while the strongest radial component is to be expected at
Fig. 8 Calculated turbulence intensity changes upstream of the
rotor with sections marked (BLI, DP, CFD: optimal mesh)
Journal of Turbomachinery
Fig. 9 Flow velocity redistribution upstream of the rotor with
sections marked (BLI, DP, CFD: optimal mesh)
the azimuth around 0 deg. Observed flow field changes upstream of
the rotor are consistent with that described in the literature [7].
Effects of the described mass redistribution are directly visible in
Sec. 3, located just in front of the rotor. The velocity magnitude and
direction nonuniformity observed there are of key importance for
the operation of the fan. Changes in axial velocity and swirl angle
are particularly important because they directly affect the angle of
attack of the rotor blades. The incidence angle could then be calcu-
lated, as the difference in the angle of attack between BLI and base-
line case:



Vθ,3 − ΩR Vθ,3 − ΩR
irotor = atan −atan (1)
Vz,3 BLI Vz,3 BASELINE
The mentioned details of the flow field, measured and calculated at
Sec. 3, are presented for three different radial positions in Fig. 10. In
general, very good agreement of the experimental and CFD data was
obtained. The oscillations of the swirl angle visible for the CFD
results are due to the fact that these data come from a nonaveraged
solution (snapshot in time), and the influence of the rotor blades is
visible. Obviously it was not possible to capture this effect experi-
mentally because each pressure measurement was averaged over
time.
The highest incidence of the rotor blades under BLI conditions was
obtained for high radial positions and the azimuth angles correspond-
ing to the low momentum flow. This is in line with expectations, and
in this case, the main reason for the high incidence is the low value of
Vz,BLI/Vz,BASELINE ratio. The situation is different for low radial posi-
tions, where the main factor causing changes in incidence is the
occurrence of nonzero swirl angle in the BLI case and not changes
in the axial flow velocity. The values of Vz,BLI/Vz,BASELINE ratio
there could be higher than 1 for every circumferential position, but
still positive incidence angle can be observed for the blade moving
out from low momentum flow region, θ ∈ (−120 deg ; − 30 deg).
Thorough analysis of the incidence is important because it is
directly correlated with changes in load acting on blades, as well as
losses generated in the turbomachinery. The computed variation of
the total axial force acting on the rotor blade is shown in Fig. 11.
Every point in the graph represents 1 of the 15 rotor blades, and
the load values are related to the baseline case. The load oscillations
of the BLI fan change in the range of 89–111% of the baseline blade
load, during each rotor revolution. At first glance, it looks like these
changes are small, but they can actually have a significant impact on
the fatigue strength of selected rotor components. This is not the case
for the low-pressure ratio fan presented because of unrealistically
large safety margins obtained from the Goodman diagram.
NOVEMBER 2022, Vol. 144 / 111012-5
 Fig. 10 Measured and computed axial velocity ratio, swirl angle, and rotor incidence
(Sec. 3, DP, CFD: optimal mesh).
However, for high-pressure ratio fans, the impact of the load oscilla-
tions due to BLI could be much higher, as presented in Ref. [23].
Stall Margin and Efficiency Reduction
Performance of the fan was measured and computed not only for
one but also for several different operating conditions (MFR
values). Figure 12 shows the resulting 100% speed lines for baseline
111012-6 / Vol. 144, NOVEMBER 2022
and BLI cases, with CFD and experimental results. This plot dem-
onstrates another problem arising from the distorted velocity profile,
the stall margin reduction.
The stall phenomenon is characterized by high flow unsteadiness
that does not occur under the conditions near the design point.
However, indication of the mass flowrate at which stall occurs is
not an easy task and can be problematic because it is hard to
judge what amount of unsteadiness should be considered as a
stall. The amount of flow unsteadiness itself is hard to quantify.
Transactions of the ASME

Fig. 11 Computed axial force acting on rotor blade (BLI, DP,
CFD: optimal mesh)
The analysis of the total pressure ratio (PR) curve can lead to the
conclusion that the beginning of the stall occurs for the MFR at
which the maximum pressure ratio is achieved. This approach
could be successfully used for the baseline case with the axisym-
metric flow, when all blades are evenly loaded. In the BLI case,
Fig. 12 Measured and computed performance curves for the baseline and BLI case
(CFD: optimal mesh)
Journal of Turbomachinery
there is a possibility that in some regions, due to the unevenly
loaded blades, the flow separations could appear, even though the
maximum pressure ratio is not reached. In this article, however,
the criterion of the maximum pressure ratio was used for the numer-
ical stall condition determination for both cases. Another approach
uses the fact that flow unsteadiness is often correlated with loss
regions in the turbomachinery blade rows, so the efficiency mea-
surement or calculation can be theoretically used to judge stall phe-
nomena. Conversely, experimentally it is quite easy to recognize
when the stall begins due to the noise level change and sudden
drop of the MFR connected with stall. This method works well
for a low-speed machine and was used to roughly estimate the
lowest MFRs measured for the baseline and BLI case, which corre-
spond to the near-stall conditions. For MFRs lower by about 0.1 kg/
s, a noticeable increase in the noise level was noted, and it was
assumed that this is the beginning of a stall for the analyzed
configurations.
When compared with CFD results, it turned out that measured NS
MFR corresponds to the maximum value of computed pressure ratio
quite well, which is in line with expectations for the axisymmetric
case. For the BLI case, the maximum computed pressure ratio value
was obtained for about 0.2 kg/s lower MFR. At the same time, the
analysis of the CFD results leads to the conclusion that the total
NOVEMBER 2022, Vol. 144 / 111012-7
 Table 2 Estimated values of stall margin Table 3 Measured and computed stage isentropic efficiency
drop due to BLI (CFD: optimal mesh)
Stall margin
Efficiency drop due to BLI
Baseline BLI Reduction
MFR (kg/s) EXP CFD
EXP (noise level/MFR drop) 14.4% 7.5% 48%
CFD (max. PR) ∼12.0% ∼8.9% ∼26% 7.70 −2.08% −1.89%
8.16 (DP) −2.05% −1.25%
8.80 −1.90% −1.17%

pressure ratio drop connected with stall appears to be milder in the

BLI case.
In the presented work, the stall margin was calculated using the
following equation:
PRNS MFRDP
SM = × −1 (2)
PRDP MFRNS
Estimated values of stall margin from experimental tests and CFD
computations are presented in Table 2. Due to the availability of
simulation results only for selected MFRs, it should be kept in
mind that the given stall margin values are approximate
(maximum PR may occur at a slightly different MFR than
calculated).
The reduction of the stall margin for the BLI case is caused
directly by the off-design work conditions of the stage. Flow distor-
tion causes nonzero incidence of the rotor, as described in the pre-
vious section. However, for the analyzed stage configuration, the
OGV is more prone to stall first, not the rotor. Figure 13 presents
the OGV incidence measured at the test rig and computed using
CFD. It is worth mentioning that for the stationary row, the inci-
dence literally means the difference in the flow swirl angle
between the BLI and baseline case:



Vθ,4 Vθ,4
istator = atan −atan (3)
Vz,4 BLI Vz,4 BASELINE
At first glance, it looks similar to the rotor, but it should be noted
that the maximum values of the stator incidence are higher than rotor
incidence. Of course, this is not a sufficient condition to state that the
second row is responsible for reducing the stall margin. It all depends
on how heavily loaded the blades of individual rows are. Neverthe-
less, for the modern high-loaded and properly designed single-fan
stage, it can be stated that all blades are similarly loaded in the relation
to the maximum load they can handle. Assuming this, the analysis of
the incidence angle could be used to identify the most heavily loaded
row, which is often likely to stall first.
Furthermore, there is no blade load unsteadiness and dynamic
effects as in the case of rotating rows. This also makes the stationary
rows more susceptible to flow separations, as some of the blades
could be constantly critically overloaded. Conversely, rotating
rotor blades could be repeatedly critically overloaded, but only on
certain azimuths and for a short period of time. Dynamic loading
of the rotor, because of hysteresis, tends to make it less prone to
stall.
The experimentally measured efficiencies (Fig. 12) were calcu-
lated using a calorimetric method. It means that changes in effi-
ciency are much more accurately determined than its absolute
values due to the presence of heat losses difficult to estimate (con-
vection, radiation, etc.). Therefore, a decision was made to correct
efficiency values measured experimentally by adding a certain
constant to obtain exactly the same values from experiment and
CFD for the baseline case at design point. The same value of
6.4% was added for both baseline and BLI cases, resulting from
the mentioned heat losses and the CFD model simplifications dis-
cussed in the following section. This facilitated the EXP-CFD com-
parison of changes in efficiency within each case and between them.
Very good agreement of results was obtained for the baseline effi-
ciency curve. It shows that the CFD model correctly predicts the
increase in losses connected with decreasing of the mass flowrate.
In the case of BLI, the difference in efficiency between high
MFR point (8.8 kg/s) and design point (8.16 kg/s) is also quite
well predicted. However, at the near-stall condition (7.7 kg/s), a
more significant efficiency drop can be observed in the computa-
tions than measured experimentally. Another important issue is
the efficiency drop due to BLI effect. The values calculated for
three different MFRs are presented in Table 3. A general conclusion
is that the efficiency drop increases with decreasing MFR. It is
visible for both experiment and CFD. However, it should be
noted that for the lowest MFR considered, CFD predicts a much
higher difference between BLI and baseline case, than for DP and
high MFR. It is contrary to the experimental values, which are char-
acterized by smaller changes. The reason for the efficiency drop in
the CFD simulations of the BLI case is probably the more intense
flow separations predicted numerically, discussed in detail in the
following section.
The measured and computed stage efficiency drop due to the BLI
effect is in the range reported in the literature [7]. However, numer-
ical simulations show a smaller decrease in efficiency than experi-
mental tests. This could be due to an enhancement of turbulence
with BLI that could dramatically change the location of transition.
This would be the weakest issue with a RANS turbulence model.
Another possible explanation is also discussed in the following
section.

Results Discussion
This section contains the discussion of experimental and compu-
tational results obtained in Secs. 4 and 5 and focuses mainly on the
explanation of discrepancies. All pressure data from Sec. 5, pre-
sented in this section, were integrated to calculate selected points
of the pressure curves shown in Fig. 12.
All total pressure values in contour maps and line plots were non-
dimensionalized using the equation:

Pt,5 − Pt,2
Fig. 13 Measured and computed stator incidence (Sec. 4, DP, PT = 2
(4)
CFD: mesh density impact). 0.5ρUmid

111012-8 / Vol. 144, NOVEMBER 2022 Transactions of the ASME

where Pt,2 is the mass flowrate averaged value of total pressure at
Sec. 2.
General comparison of the stator exit total pressure fields for
design point conditions of the baseline and BLI case are presented
in Fig. 14. Full-area contour plots of the measured data were
obtained using the boundary layer reconstruction procedure, as
described in the section about the inlet distortion characterization.
Good overall comparison of the results for the most downstream
section testifies to the correct reconstruction of flow conditions
throughout the entire stage. For the baseline case, although most
of the flow is relatively well resolved, the total pressure values in
the hub area are overestimated by CFD. This is more clearly seen
on the line plots in Fig. 15, showing only the narrow range of cir-
cumferential coordinate θ corresponding to two stator blades. The
reason for such discrepancies is probably the lack of modeling of
the cavity between the rotor and the stationary part of the hub, as
well as the lack of streamwise cavities between the individual plat-
forms of the rotor blades in the CFD model. The presence of all
these details in the real geometry should result in greater losses in
the hub area and thus the lower total pressure values at
Sec. 5. Similar observations can be made near the shroud wall.
Fig. 14 Measured and computed time-averaged stator exit total pressure for the baseline and
BLI case (Sec. 5, DP, CFD: optimal mesh, ALF)
Journal of Turbomachinery
Total pressure values predicted by CFD are also overestimated
here, but to a much lesser extent than at the hub, and this is probably
due to the assumption of a perfectly smooth shroud surface in the
simulations. In the experiment, the shroud surface has a finite
roughness and, due to the layered construction of the test rig,
there are joints on the shroud surface. Taking into account the man-
ufacturing tolerances, this may result in small steps. Both of these
factors can lead to greater pressure losses in the shroud region.
Figure 15 shows the results of two CFD simulations that differ in
spatial and temporal resolution. Relatively small differences in the
results prove that the optimal density of the computational grid
obtained as a result of the grid dependency study allows achieving
a satisfactory comparison with the experiment. Unfortunately, this
is not the case for BLI simulations, where the discrepancies
between experimental and optimal mesh density numerical results
are visible at higher radial positions and depend on the azimuth
(Fig. 14). To better visualize them, appropriate line plots were pre-
pared and shown in Fig. 16. For the radial position corresponding to
41% of the stator blade span, a very good agreement between the
measured and computed values was obtained for any circumferen-
tial position, regardless of the mesh density used. Conversely, at
NOVEMBER 2022, Vol. 144 / 111012-9
 Fig. 15 Measured and computed time-averaged total pressure changes at given radial posi-
tions (baseline, Sec. 5, DP, CFD: mesh density impact)
87% blade span and azimuths from −180 deg to −70 deg, the total
pressure values are significantly underestimated by CFD simula-
tion. However, a big improvement is noticeable for the computation
performed with the use of fine grid. It can therefore be concluded
that the numerical analysis of the BLI case requires greater resolu-
tion of the CFD model than the axisymmetric flow simulation. The
use of the optimal density grid leads to differences at azimuths asso-
ciated with the passage of the rotor blade through the distortion area,
where the most dynamic phenomena occur. The computational grid,
optimal for the analysis of the axisymmetric case with relatively low
flow unsteadiness due to rotor wakes only, does not allow an accu-
rate representation of the high level of flow unsteadiness in the BLI
case.
Based on a similar rationale, attempts were made to explain the
differences presented in Fig. 13, for the stator incidence angle.
However, increasing the resolution of the simulations only partially
improved the comparison with measured data in this case. At 80%
blade span and azimuths from −180 deg to −70 deg, the compli-
ance has been improved, but around 0 deg azimuth, the result of
the fine grid CFD actually differs more from the experimental
data. For this reason, other sources of the received discrepancies
were sought. One of the hypotheses was the difference between
the actual tip clearance values and the value used in the calculation
model. The CFD model was set up using a design tip clearance
value of 1 mm. The actual tip clearance value was monitored at
the test rig using a light probe system. It turned out that during
hot days and long lasting tests of the BLI case, the temperature in
the test room increased to 30–35 °C. Under these conditions, mea-
sured tip clearance value decreased to 0.80–0.85 mm due to the
high thermal expansion of the aluminum alloy from which the
rotor blades were made. As a result, some of the measurements
111012-10 / Vol. 144, NOVEMBER 2022
could have been with smaller tip clearance than assumed in the
CFD simulations. The mentioned effect should be less important
in the baseline case, due to much shorter tests and lower tempera-
tures, resulting from measuring only a fragment of the section area.
To check how the reduction of tip clearance affects the simulation
results, a second calculation case characterized by tip clearance of
0.8 mm was prepared. The investigation was carried out using the
optimal computational grid density. The impact of the tip clearance
in relation to the stator incidence is presented in Fig. 17. A similar
improvement in data consistency can be seen at azimuths from
−180 deg to −70 deg and 80% blade span, as in the case of simu-
lations performed using the fine computational mesh and with
1.0 mm tip clearance. Interestingly, the reduced tip clearance simu-
lation shows a better prediction accuracy also for 20% blade span at
the mentioned azimuth range, and near the 0 deg azimuth for 80%
span, as opposed to the simulation based on the fine grid. Superpo-
sition of both factors, mesh refinement and tip clearance reduction,
could give the best comparison of numerical and experimental
results, but due to the very high computational cost of fine mesh
computation, it was not investigated.
Higher tip clearance in the CFD model could also cause a differ-
ence in the near-stall conditions. The observed decrease in effi-
ciency in calculations for the MFR of 7.7 kg/s, not reflected in
experimental measurements, may be the result. Figure 18 shows
the stator exit total pressure field comparison for those conditions.
For the original simulation case, two regions with significantly
reduced pressure are visible, resulting from the appearance of sig-
nificant losses in flow. The first region is located in the bottom
part of the annulus from the hub to mid-span, while the second
can be observed near the casing at azimuths from −180 deg to
−45 deg. In the experimental data, the first region looks slightly
Transactions of the ASME
 Fig. 16 Measured and computed time-averaged total pressure changes at given radial posi-
tions (BLI, Sec. 5, DP, CFD: mesh density impact)

different but can be identified. It is connected with the flow separa-
tions on the OGV blades. The second region is not visible in the
measured data at all and is the source of additional losses in CFD
results. Figure 18 demonstrates that overestimated tip clearance in
the original CFD model could be partially responsible for that.
The reduction of tip clearance, investigated numerically, signifi-
cantly improved the flow quality near the shroud. However, it
should be noted that some improvement is also visible in the case
of calculations performed using the fine computational grid and
1.0 mm tip clearance.
An interesting conclusion can be drawn from the aforementioned
analysis. Keeping tip clearance as low as possible can be particu-
larly important to BLI performance as it likely delays the occur-
rence of unfavorable flow separation areas located near the
shroud on azimuths associated with rotor blades leaving the low
momentum region. As a result, the impact of the flow distortion
on the reduction of stall margin in BLI conditions could be mini-
mized. The other issue related to the tip clearance is its roundness.
In the experiment, unlike CFD calculations, the roundness may
have some deviations, which are also very difficult to maintain
when changing the configuration of the test rig (removal of the
casing required).
Both analyzed factors, i.e., insufficient CFD resolution and over-
estimated tip clearance, could also be an explanation why the differ-
ence between measured and calculated total pressure ratio is greater
for the BLI case, as shown in Fig. 12. Figure 19 presents a detailed
view of the pressure ratio curves in the MFR range from near-stall to
design point, along with added points representing the results of

Fig. 17 Measured and computed stator incidence (Sec. 4, DP, CFD: optimal
mesh)

Journal of Turbomachinery NOVEMBER 2022, Vol. 144 / 111012-11

 Fig. 18 Measured and computed stator exit total pressure for the BLI case (BLI, Sec. 5,
MFR = 7.7 kg/s, CFD: optimal mesh, ALF)

Fig. 19 Detailed view of total pressure ratio curves for BLI

111012-12 / Vol. 144, NOVEMBER 2022 Transactions of the ASME

 Fig. 20 Resolution of the measurement point map (black dots) presented
in Sec. 5, with added boundary layer points.
Fig. 21 Measured and computed stator exit turbulence intensity for the BLI case (BLI, Sec. 5,
DP, CFD: fine mesh, ALF).
simulations made using the fine computational mesh and the
optimal mesh but with the reduced tip clearance. It can be seen
that in both additional cases, there is a reduction in the difference
between the experimental and CFD data. Again, the superposition
of both analyzed factors could lead to a total pressure ratio value
more consistent with the experiment.
Another reason for the overestimated total pressure ratio values in
experimental measurements may be the insufficient resolution of
the measuring point maps in Sec. 5. A thorough analysis of
Figs. 15 and 16 shows that some of the stator blade wakes are not
sufficiently resolved, i.e., the minimum pressure value in the
wake is not captured. The wake of the stator captured using the mea-
surement point map is presented in Fig. 20. For the BLI case, there
were 9360 measurement points given in Sec. 5. It can be seen that in
some places a higher measurement resolution would be advisable,
but the authors decided to use such a number of points due to the
long measurement time of this section, which was 18 h.
As previously mentioned, turbulence measurements were also
made at every station. A comparison of the turbulence intensity
between experiment and fine grid CFD is shown in Fig. 21 for
the BLI case at the design MFR. The experimental data have had
the rotor wake contribution removed through appropriate filtering.
The measurements show larger values of Tu than the RANS
model despite the use of a high-resolution CFD model that predicts
other flow quantities well.
Conclusions and Future Work
A low-speed fan has been designed with an open-source design
system, built, and run successfully in a baseline configuration and
with a BLI screen. Good comparisons are shown between time-
marching RANS simulations and the experiments. Differences are
apparent and have been discussed. There was a drop in design
Journal of Turbomachinery
point efficiency due to the BLI distortion of 2.05% from measure-
ments, whereas the CFD showed only a 1.25% drop. At the near-
stall point, there was a reduction of 2.08% experimentally and
1.89% from CFD. A dramatic stall margin reduction from 14.4%
for baseline to 7.5% for BLI was measured experimentally, while
with CFD, it went from approximately 12% for baseline to 8.9%
for BLI.
A design and optimization process was used with a novel multi-
objective optimization approach. The two objectives were high
design point efficiency and high efficiency at a reduced near-stall
mass flowrate. This led to a Pareto front showing the tradeoff
between the two. This approach should lead to a high stall margin
design if higher efficiency is found at the lower mass flow. The
results presented in this article demonstrate that the optimized con-
figuration met the stall margin requirement experimentally.
The concept of boundary layer ingesting propulsors seems to
have a lot of advantages, but generates significant engineering chal-
lenges, discussed in the article. To fully utilize the potential of this
technology, it is necessary to eliminate or minimize these problems,
because they can affect both safety and costs. To make this possible,
it is necessary to acquire proven and computationally efficient
models that allow free exploration of the solution space, to find
the optimal distortion-tolerant fan. Design approaches to minimize
the BLI effects will be explored in the future.
However, further work is needed to more fully understand the
issues with the CFD model. Improvements to the simulations will
include modeling cavities in the hub as well as other small geometry
and test features. Also the prediction of turbulence levels with
RANS is a very challenging task as it was presented for the
section located downstream of the stator. The comparison reflects
these difficulties in modeling turbulence.
The discussion presented in the article showed that the sources of
discrepancies between experimental and CFD data may result from
both the adopted calculation method and the complexity of the
NOVEMBER 2022, Vol. 144 / 111012-13
experiment. This is a good example that numerical simulations Society for Airbreathing Engines, Gothenburg, Sweden, Sept. 12–16, Paper No.
should be performed to better understand experimental research ISABE-2011-1340.
[2] Felder, J. L., Kim, H. D., and Brown, G. V., 2009, “Turboelectric Distributed
and vice versa. The synergy between an experiment and numerical Propulsion Engine Cycle Analysis for Hybrid Wing Body Aircraft,”
simulation is necessary and essential for current research because it Proceedings of 47th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting, Orlando, FL, Jan. 5–
offers many more possibilities and significantly improves the cred- 8, Paper No. AIAA 2009-1132.
ibility of the study. [3] Felder, J. L., Kim, H. D., and Brown, G. V., 2011, “An Examination of the Effect
of Boundary Layer Ingestion on Turboelectric Distributed Propulsion Systems,”
Proceedings of 49th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting, Orlando, FL, Jan. 4–
7, Paper No. AIAA 2011-300.
Acknowledgment [4] Hardin, L. W., Tillman, G., Sharma, O. P., Berton, J., and Arend, D. J., 2012,
“Aircraft System Study of Boundary Layer Ingesting Propulsion,” Proceedings
Described research was carried out as part of the BLI-Fan of 48th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference and Exhibit,
research program, which was one of the outcomes of the Atlanta, GA, July 30–Aug. 1, Paper No. AIAA 2012-3993.
Polish-American partnership and collaboration between Łukasie- [5] Florea, R. V., Voytovych, D., Tillman, G., Stucky, M., Shabbir, A., Sharma, O.,
and Arend, D. J., 2013, “Aerodynamic Analysis of a Boundary-Layer-Ingesting
wicz Research Network—Institute of Aviation and The Ohio Distortion-Tolerant Fan,” Proceedings of ASME Turbo Expo 2013, San
State University. The authors would like to acknowledge Professor Antonio, TX, June 3–7, pp. 1–7.
Meyer J. Benzakein affiliated with The Ohio State University for [6] Arend, D. J., Wolter, J. D., Hirt, S. M., Provenza, A., Gazzaniga, J. A., Cousins,
being the co-initiator of this cooperation, as well as for his invalu- W. T., Hardin, L. W., and Sharma, O. P., 2017, “Experimental Evaluation of an
Embedded Boundary Layer Ingesting Propulsor for Highly Efficient Subsonic
able support and technical contribution to this research. The authors Cruise Aircraft,” Proceedings of 53rd AIAA/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion
would like also to express their gratitude to the members of the Conference, Atlanta, GA, July 10–12, Paper No. AIAA 2017-5041.
BLI-Fan task group, for their contribution and vast commitment [7] Gunn, E. J., and Hall, C. A., 2014, “Aerodynamics of Boundary Layer Ingesting
to this research. The calculations were carried out at the Academic Fans,” Proceedings of ASME Turbo Expo 2014, Düsseldorf, Germany, June 16–
20, pp. 1–13.
Computer Centre in Gdań sk. [8] Perovic, D., Gunn, E. J., and Hall, C. A., 2015, “Stall Inception in a Boundary
Layer Ingesting Fan,” Proceedings of ASME Turbo Expo 2015, Montreal,
Canada, June 15–19.
Conflict of Interest [9] Florea, R. V., Matalanis, C., Hardin, L. W., Stucky, M., and Shabbir, A., 2015,
“Parametric Analysis and Design for Embedded Engine Inlets,” J. Propul.
There are no conflicts of interest. Power, 31(3), pp. 843–850.
[10] Hall, D. K., Greitzer, E. M., and Tan, C. S., 2016, “Analysis of Fan Stage Design
Attributes for Boundary Layer Ingestion,” Proceedings of ASME Turbo Expo
2016, Seoul, Korea, June 13–17.
Data Availability Statement [11] Gunn, E. J., and Hall, C. A., 2017, “Non-Axisymmetric Stator Design for
Boundary Layer Ingesting Fans,” Proceedings of ASME Turbo Expo 2017,
The datasets generated and supporting the findings of this article Charlotte, NC, June 26–30, pp. 1–14.
are obtainable from the corresponding author upon reasonable [12] Turner, M. G., Merchant, A., and Bruna, D., 2011, “A Turbomachinery Design
request. Tool for Teaching Design Concepts for Axial-Flow Fans, Compressors, and
Turbines,” ASME J. Turbomach., 133(3), p. 031017.
[13] Adams, B. M., Ebeida, M. S., Eldred, M. S., Jakeman, J. D., Swiler, L. P.,
Stephens, J. A., Vigil, D. M., et al., 2015, “Dakota, a Multilevel Parallel
Nomenclature Object-Oriented Framework for Design Optimization, Parameter Estimation,
Uncertainty Quantification, and Sensitivity Analysis: Version 6.0 User’s
i = incidence angle Manual,” Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM, Report No.
k = turbulent kinetic energy SAND2014-4633.
B = blade span [14] Mahmood, S. M. H., Turner, M. G., and Siddappaji, K., 2016, “Flow
P = pressure Characteristics of an Optimized Axial Compressor Rotor Using Smooth Design
Parameters,” Proceedings of ASME Turbo Expo 2016, Seoul, South Korea,
U = rotor blade speed June 13–17, pp. 1–12.
V = velocity √  [15] Swiler, L. P., and Wyss, G. D., 2004, “A User’s Guide to Sandia’s Latin
Tu = turbulence intensity 2k/3/Vlocal Hypercube Sampling Software: LHS UNIX Library/Standalone Version,”
Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM, Report No. SAND2004-2439.
[16] Nemnem, A. F., Turner, M. G., Siddappaji, K., and Galbraith, M., 2014, “A
Greek Symbols Smooth Curvature-Defined Meanline Section Option for a General
Ω = rotor shaft speed Turbomachinery Geometry Generator,” Proceedings of ASME Turbo Expo
2014, Düsseldorf, Germany, June 16–20.
θ = circumferential coordinate [17] Siddappaji, K., Turner, M. G., and Merchant, A., 2012, “General Capability of
ρ = density Parametric 3D Blade Design Tool for Turbomachinery,” Proceedings of ASME
Turbo Expo 2012, Copenhagen, Denmark, June 11–15.
[18] Sieradzki, A., and Łukasik, B., 2021, “Influence of the Limited Room Space on
Subscripts Inlet Conditions and Fan Operation at the Rotating Test rig,” J. Phys.: Conf.
2 = value just downstream the gauze Ser., 1736(1), p. 012051.
[19] Kwiatkowski, T., Sieradzki, A., and Łukasik, B., 2022, “Method of Designing a
3 = value at rotor inlet Distortion Gauze for Testing a Boundary Layer Ingesting Fan,” Trans. Aerosp.
4 = value at rotor exit Res., 2022(1), pp. 1–17.
5 = value at stator exit [20] Dowling, A. P., and Greitzer, E. M., 2007, “The Silent Aircraft Initiative—
BASELINE = value for baseline (undistorted) case Overview,” 45th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting, Reno, NV, Jan. 8–11,
2007, Paper No. AIAA-2007-0452.
BLI = value for BLI (distorted) case [21] Abu-Ghannam, B. J., and Shaw, R., 1980, “Natural Transition of Boundary
mid = value at mid-span Layers—The Effects of Turbulence, Pressure Gradient, and Flow History,”
t = total quantity J. Mech. Eng. Sci., 22(5), pp. 213–228.
z = axial component [22] Jameson, A., 1991, “Time Dependent Calculations Using Multigrid, With
Applications to Unsteady Flows Past Airfoils and Wings,” Proceedings of 10th
θ = circumferential component Computational Fluid Dynamics Conference, Honolulu, HI, June 24–26, Paper
No. AIAA 91-1596.
[23] Bakhle, M. A., Reddy, T. S., and Coroneos, R. M., 2014, “Forced Response
References Analysis of a Fan With Boundary Layer Inlet Distortion,” Proceedings of 50th
[1] Felder, J., Brown, G., Kim, H., and Chu, J., 2011, “Turboelectric Distributed AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference, Claveland, OH, July
Propulsion in a Hybrid Wing Body Aircraft,” Proceedings of 20th International 28–30, Paper No. AIAA-3734.

111012-14 / Vol. 144, NOVEMBER 2022 Transactions of the ASME