Downloaded from SAE International by Michele Trancossi, Tuesday, October 23, 2018

2018-01-1955 Published 30 Oct 2018

Numerical and Experimental Second Law Analysis

of a Low Thickness High Chamber Wing Profile
Michele Trancossi Sheffield Hallam University

Shivesh Sharma Henri Coanda Labs LLC

Citation: Trancossi, M. and Sharma, S., “Numerical and Experimental Second Law Analysis of a Low Thickness High Chamber Wing
Profile,” SAE Technical Paper 2018-01-1955, 2018, doi:10.4271/2018-01-1955.

Abstract
assessment of the wing a complete experimental characteri-

T
his paper presents a coupled numerical and experi-
mental study of an unconventional wing profile such
as cp-180-050-gn (Cambered plate C = 18% T = 5%
R = 0.78). This wing profile deals with low speeds. It is not
currently used on any aircraft model. Otherwise, it presents
interesting performances that can be exploited for the design
of low-speed STOL or VTOL aircraft by mean of the very
high lift that it can generate and can fit with different uses
such as VAWT, cyclorotors drones, which are designed
explicitly for low-speed operations. After a preliminary CFD
sation also at high angles of attack has been performed. The
excellent agreement between CFD and experiments has
allowed producing a complete analysis of the behaviour of
the wing profile both before and after stall conditions. This
study has the objective of analysing the viability of such an
unconventional wing in traditional or over-stalling condi-
tions. A complete modelling of the specific wing is produced
with the definition of its potential deployment into uncon-
ventional aircraft architectures and both Darreius and
Savonius wind turbines.

Introduction
Since the early work of Eiffel [1] and Joukowski (cited

T
his paper presents a coupled numerical and experi-
mental study of an unconventional wing profile, with
particular reference to cp-180-050-gn (Cambered plate
C = 18% T = 5% R = 0.78).
While dozens of bibliographic references are present on
high Re wings the one on high Re ones is much more limited,
even if they can be applied to high-efficiency propulsion and
wind energy, with particular attention to VAWT, but also
low-speed vehicles.
FIGURE 1 Wing profile by Airfoiltools (http://airfoiltools.com)
© SAE International
through Jones [2]) at the turn of the century, fluid-dynamic
specialists have recognized the importance of the airfoil
shape and have developed a multiplicity of airfoil designs
and families for different uses. It is otherwise evident that
the shape of a wing profile depends on Reynolds Number
(Re) and then on the size, the speed and the atmospheric
conditions at which it operates. In the pioneering era of aero-
nautics, Blumenthal [3] intensely studied the pressure distri-
bution on Joukowski wings. He stated that the three dimen-
sions characterize a Joukowski wing. They are namely the
length, the chamber and the radii difference. It is necessary
to add the angle of attack to these fundamental
magnitudes.
In particular, Blumenthal determines the ratio of the

absolute velocity of the airflow on the wing to the velocity in

infinity with a good level of approximation by taking into
account the geometrical construction by Trefftz, which is
annexed to the same NACA Report (Figure 2).
Blumenthal model has been improved by Betz [4] and
Glauert [5]. In particular, Glauert [5] and Prandtl [6] have
TABLE 1 Wing characteristics considered circular arc-shaped wings that can be derived from
Camber 18% the well-known Glauert-Prandtl equation and obtained very
accurate results.
© SAE International

Wall thickness 5%
Kaplan [7] has solved the problem of the pressure distri-
Radius 0.784
bution for the flow of a compressible fluid past a circular arc
Max thickness 5% at 3.2% chord profile by an iteration process. The procedure is to expand the
Max camber 16.4% at 49.3% chord velocity potential in a power series of the camber coefficient.

© 2018 SAE International. All Rights Reserved.

 Downloaded from SAE International by Michele Trancossi, Tuesday, October 23, 2018
2 NUMERICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL SECOND LAW ANALYSIS OF A LOW THICKNESS HIGH CHAMBER WING PROFILE
FIGURE 2 Graphical design of a Joukowski wing by
Trefftz [3].
© SAE International
He has used the first two terms of the development correspond
to the Prandtl-Glauert approximation and yield the well-
known correction to the circulation about the profile.
The second approximation, involving the square of the camber
coefficient, improves the velocity and pressure fields but yields
no new results about the circulation, since the circulation
about the profile is an odd function of the camber coefficient.
The third approximation, involving the cube of the camber
coefficient, permits the use of higher values of the camber
coefficient and furthermore yields an improvement to the
Prandtl-Glauert rule concerning the effect of compressibility
on the circulation of the circular arc profile.
Lissaman [8] have stated that the airfoil section is the
quintessence of a wing or lifting surface and, as such, occupies
a central position in any design discipline relating to fluid
mechanics, from animal flight through marine propellers to
aircraft. He has assumed that the proper functioning of the
airfoil is the prerequisite to the satisfactory performance of
the lifting surface itself, and thus the airfoil is of fundamental
technical importance. Carmichael [9] has developed an ency-
clopaedic work that produces a useful classification of low Re
high-lift wings. Englar [9] has assessed a circulation control
method for high lift and drag generation on STOL aircraft.
Ellington [10] and Thomas [11] have analyzed the flight of
insect and its origin, verifying the effectiveness of high
chamber low thickness wings at low speeds. Mateescu and
Abdo [12] have studied several airfoil profiles at very low Re.
More recently low Re high-camber wings have been consid-
ered for use on both drones by Kanistras [13] and human-
powered vehicles by Nazari [14]. Anderson [15] and Bachmann
[16] have considered the barn owl wing model for silent flight
options. Bindal and Sharma [17, 18] have studied fluid dynamic
behaviour and of bat wings, which has been studied in terms
of aspect ratio by Schunk [19]. Nagy et al. [20] and Nguyen
et al. [21] have studied flexible wing configurations.
Some authors have attempted an effective coupling of
Liftand Drag equations with the second principle of
thermodynamics. The preliminary attempt refers to Greene [22],
and it has been assessed by Moorhouse [23, 24] and Nixon
[25, 26]. In particular, Greene has developed a fundamental
approach to the aircraft minimum induced drag problem by
defining a “viscous lifting line,” that is based on the minimum
entropy production principle. This model predicts induced drag
is proportional to the square of the lift coefficient and inversely
proportional to the wing aspect ratio. Otherwise, for the induced
drag is Reynolds number dependent and that the optimum
spanwise circulation distribution is non-elliptic. Moorhouse has
preliminarily presented the necessity of a vision and need for
energy-based design methods in aircraft design. He has also
defined system-level multidisciplinary analysis technique based
on exergy methods for aircraft design. Nixon presents a drag
formulation that considers the relation between surface pressures
and entropy, which is generated predominantly by the vorticity
in the flow field. This approach allows splitting the total drag into
the contributions made by different flow features.
Paulus and Gaggioli [27] focus on the exergy-based
systems integration and the analytical methods used to char-
acterize each system and to optimize within and between
systems. Li, Stewart and Figliola [28] define the guidelines in
the direction of using computational fluid dynamics (CFD)
solver, to assess of full field entropy generation, to optimize
2-D airfoil shapes with imposed constraints, such as maximum
lift/drag ratio. In particular, they perform a two-objective
optimization on the 2-D airfoil using a genetic algorithm-
based scheme with the goal of coupling the numerical code
with a shape-shifting algorithm. They have also analyzed the
entropy generation evaluation in a three-dimensional domain
in a fully turbulent flow. In addition, they examine the issues
of accuracy that may arise with turbulent modelling.
Von Spakovsky et al. [29] investigate the use of Exergy
and decomposition techniques in the development of general
analysis and optimization methodologies, which can be applied
to the Synthesis/Design of aircraft/aerospace systems,” Drela
[30] develops a thermodynamic model to assess power balance
in aerodynamic flows. It is a classical thermodynamic model
considering two sub reference volumes: the aircraft and a far
field surrounding air volume. Doty, Camberos and Moorhouse
state the benefits produced by exergy-based analysis for aero-
space engineering applications.
More recently, Arntz and Hue [31] have analyzed the exergy-
based performance assessment according to the NASA Common
Research Model. Hayes et al. [32, 33] produce a complete review
of entropy Generation Minimization and Exergy analysis
approaches for aerospace applications and complete and exhaus-
tive comparison of Exergy and Breguet Approaches.
Definition of the Problem
Preliminary Discussion
This paper has the objective of analyzing the aerodynamic
and energetic behaviour of a particular wing profile such as
cp-180-050-gn (Cambered plate C = 18% T = 5% R = 0.78). It
has two main characteristics: a very high camber and very
low thickness.
© 2018 SAE International. All Rights Reserved.
 Downloaded from SAE International by Michele Trancossi, Tuesday, October 23, 2018

 NUMERICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL SECOND LAW ANALYSIS OF A LOW THICKNESS HIGH CHAMBER WING PROFILE 3

FIGURE 3 Control volume around the wing. 2. Potential energy related power term:
dPE
= Wh
dt
3. Axial K.E. outflow

òò 2 ru × (U
1
Wa = E a = 2
¥ + u )dS 0

4. Turbulent K.E. outflow

òò 2 r (v )
1
Wv = E v = 2
+ w 2 × (U ¥ + u )dS 0
© SAE International

5. Pressure work:

òò 2 ( p - p
1
W p = E p = ¥ ) ×u dS 0
A preliminary sample of the control volume around the Considering a subsonic system (Ma < 0.3) the wave term
wing is presented according to Drela’s model into Figure 3. can be neglected.
According to Drela [30] it is possible to consider two different A first law model such as the one by Drela must consider
domains: outer boundary S0 includes Trefftz Plane, which is and evaluate analytically the viscous losses, which can
normal to the freestream and the Side Cylinder parallel to be otherwise neglected in the second law analysis.
freestream; inner body boundary SB that includes any mechan-
ical component including propulsion blading, to include shaft
power, internal ducting to include flow losses, pump power. It
F=
òòò ( t × Ñ ) × U × dS
S
(5)

reduce to one F* if no propulsive or internal flux is present. In the specific case, they reduce to the ones generated by
The following governing equations can be assumed the surface, the ones generated by the wake and the ones
according to Nobile [35]: by vortices.
1. conservation of mass L2
E v = Fvortex = Di × U ¥ = V¥
Ñ × ( rU ) = 0 (1) 1
rU ¥2 p b 2e (6′)
2
2. conservation of momentum
sin L L2
r U ×ÑU = -Ñp + Ñ × t (2) E w = Dw ×U ¥ ³ V¥
1 - M ^2 1 rV¥2p b 2 (6″)
2
3. conservation of energy It is convenient to work with a dissipation coefficient CD:
æ1 ö
r U ×Ñ ç U 2 ÷ = -Ñp × U + ( Ñ × t ) × U (3) é d ¶u ù
è2 ø
Two models can be considered.
Fsurface =
òò ò
ê t xy dy ú dx dz =
ë 0 ¶y û òò r U C
e
3
¥ D dx dz (7)

Definition of a First Law FIGURE 4 General equations for dissipation in boundary

Model layer and wakes. (From Drela [30]).

First law problem has been solved by Drela [30]. By integrating

the equation of Kinetic Energy, it is possible to obtain the
following general integral form
N S + N K + N V = Wh + E a + E v + E p + E w + f (4)

Neglecting shaft power Ns and kinetic energy by inflow

NK, equation (9) simplifies to
N V = Wh + E a + E v + E p + E w + F (4′)

The following terms can be assumed:

© SAE International

1. Pressure Power:
NV =
òòò ( p - p )Ñ × UdS
¥

© 2018 SAE International. All Rights Reserved.

 Downloaded from SAE International by Michele Trancossi, Tuesday, October 23, 2018

4 NUMERICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL SECOND LAW ANALYSIS OF A LOW THICKNESS HIGH CHAMBER WING PROFILE

and it is analogous to skin friction coefficient Equation 4 can be also obtained by following the Arntz
and Hue, by considering the exergy of the flow ε, which is
Df =
òò éët xy ùû y =0 dx dz =
òò r U C
e
3
¥ f dx dz (8) defined as the total enthalpy hi relative to the freestream minus
the reference temperature T∞ times the entropy s relative to
and Φ captures all drag-producing loss mechanisms Cf the freestream,
and Df still leave out the pressure-drag contribution. CD and
Φ are scalars and CD is strictly positive. e = ( hi - hi¥ ) - T¥ ( s - s¥ ) (10)
Drela clearly demonstrates that lost of power is constant
for any Trefftz plane normal to the fluid flow. It can be then The derivation with respect to time is
possible to express the losses in different formulation, so that Ñ × ( re U ) = Ñ × ( rd hi U ) - T¥ Ñ × ( rd s × U ) , (14)
the more convenient one can be adopted.
ì which seems much more coherent with the solution by
ï x Drela, can be expressed as the sum of elementary terms.
ò
dissipation
ï r¥U ¥3 C Ddx
ï 0 coefficient Ñ × ( rd hi U ) = Ñ × ( rd eU ) + p¥Ñ × U +
ïï 1 (11)
( )
ye

ò ò
1 æ1 ö
dF = í r¥U ¥3 ×q * = r U ¥2 - u2 udy K E thickness + Ñ × ( p - p¥ ) U + Ñ × ç rU 2U ÷
ï2 0 2 è2 ø
ï K E and where p∞∇ ⋅ U has been added and subtracted. The total
( )
ye
ï 1 r U 3 ×d =
ò
1
r U ¥2 - u2 udy momentum enthalpy outflow is set to be zero according to the first law,
ï2 ¥ ¥ K 0 2
ïî thickness it is possible to integrate Equation 11 within the control
volume and apply the divergence theorem to get the
The kinetic energy losses along the wing can be esti- following equation
mated by
x Jmax 0 = - DV¥ + E u + E v + E p + E th + E w (12)
ò ò
1
dF = dF = r¥U ¥3 × q * ( RJ ) (9)
0 0 2 in which

FIGURE 5 Same lost power (LHS) is obtained for any

DU ¥ = U ¥
ò So
éë r × u × ( U × n ) + ( p - p¥ ) nx ùû dS

chosen RHS Trefftz Plane location (from Drela [30]).

Definition of a Second Law
Model
Doty et al. [32, 33] have stated that a fourth equation can
be considered according to Moran and Sciubba [36] and Bejan
[37]. It is the equation of the local entropy generation rate
(WK-1 m-3) in a three-dimensional flow field, which has been
derived by a balance of the conservation equations and the
© SAE International

second law of thermodynamics across a differential fluid

volume. It assumes the following general form:
k m
× ( ÑT ) + × F
²¢ 2
S gen = (10)
T2 T
in which Φ is a dissipative term, which is the viscous
dissipation term.
FIGURE 6 Schema of a circular arc shaped wing such as Wing profile Drag can be related directly to entropy
the one considered. generation by the following equation:

òòò S ²¢
gen × dF * ´ T¥
F* (11)
D=
U¥
It is possible to derive equation (11) from (10) by consid-
ering the identity of drag and enthalpy stated by equation (9).
The integration of the conservation of equation within the
control volume and use of the divergence theorem yields the
theoretical equivalence between the near-field drag (friction
© SAE International

drag and pressure drag) and far-field drag:

Dp + D f = -
ò F*
éë rU (U × n ) + ( P - P¥ ) × n x ùû dF * (12)

© 2018 SAE International. All Rights Reserved.

 Downloaded from SAE International by Michele Trancossi, Tuesday, October 23, 2018

 NUMERICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL SECOND LAW ANALYSIS OF A LOW THICKNESS HIGH CHAMBER WING PROFILE 5

where Dp and Df are respectively the pressure drag and of a vehicle the rates of exergy use of interest are the exergy
the friction drag, forming the near-field drag. The right-hand use to overcome drag during uniform speed cruise
side integral is a far-field expression of drag, which constitutes
the starting point of any far-field drag formulation. The X D = D U ¥ (18)
viscous forces have been neglected as they rapidly disappear
where the reference velocity, u0, is given as zero and the
a few body lengths downstream of the body. This latter term
exergy required keeping the system in flight, also known as
will be identified in the outflow of total enthalpy.
the exergy of lift, which can be expressed as follows:
Arntz and Hue [32] determine exergy by equation 12. It
can be obtained one obtain the following expression of X L = L w (19)
equation 12:
DU ¥ = X m + X th + A f + A ÑT + A w (13) Paulus [27] verifies that the reference velocity w 0 cannot
equal zero. Given steady cruise flight, w = 0, if the reference
in which, the following terms are defined: velocity was also equal to zero it suggests no exergy input is
1. mechanical exergy required to maintain level flight and keep the system mass
aloft, which cannot be the case.
X m =
ò
1 2
F* 2
r u ( U × n ) dF * +
ò
1
So 2
( )
r v 2 + w 2 ( U × n ) dF * Otherwise, considering equation (17) it is evident that
drag force is affected by the lift coefficient.
(14)
ò
1
+ ( p - p¥ ) éë(U - U ¥ ) × n ùû dF * éæ C2 ö ù
F* 2 X D = D U ¥ = êç C Do + L ÷ rU ¥2 A plant ú × U ¥ (20)
êëè p eA ø úû
2. thermal exergy
In particular, it is possible to split the Drag related exergy

ò
1 into two terms:
X th = éë r ( ¶e - T¥¶s ) + p¥ ùû ( U × n ) dF * (15)
F* 2
X Do = éëC Do rU ¥2 A plant ùû × U ¥ (21)
Assuming a perfect gas, internal energy is proportional
to temperature [38].
é C L2 ù
¶e = c v × ¶T X Lo = ê rU ¥2 A plant ú × U ¥ (22)
ë p eA plant û
The maximum amount of work that is theoretically
extractable from the thermal energy is the combination of the It is then evident that the minimum amount of exergy
following three terms: destroyed during flight is X Lo .
•• the rate of thermal energy outflow
•• the outflow rate of anergy,
•• the rate of (isobaric) surroundings work [39], which is a Further Considerations
non-available work due to the interaction with the
reference atmospheric pressure field at p∞ [40]. If the aircraft is an isolated system within the reference
environment, and there is no energy recovery from the
Hayes et al. [34] suggest another approach, which is aircraft wake, such as that found information f lying
directly based n the determination of CL and CD which has patterns, it is possible to link directly power to entropy
the benefits of being easily coupled with CFD results. according to Oswatitsch [44]. He stated that drag produces
Following a similar methodology, it is possible to evaluate lift a generation of entropy, and thus the generation rate of
and drag coefficients: such entropy can be assumed equal to the rate of exergy
2L destruction. Thus, the drag force can be defined as an
CL = (16)
rU ¥2 A plan integral of entropy flow by considering the Guoy-Stodola
thermodynamic theorem, which states that the decrease of
C L2 useful work of a thermal machine is equal to the entropy
C D = C Do + (17) change of the system times the surrounding temperature.
p eA
In this case, no useful work is done and u∞F corresponds
where e is the Oswald efficiency factor. to the lost energy.
The rate of work done (power), ˙N, on a body to move
through a fluid is given as, ˙N = F U, where F is the driving
force of the body at velocity U. According to Dewulf and Van X des = u ¥F = T¥
òò F*
( s - s¥ ) NdF * (23)
Langenhove [41] have verified that the rate of exergy use can
be consequently defined from (14) as: It can be Possible to consider the general formulation of
the Bejan number as defined by Sciubba [45]:
X = F (U - U 0 )
S gen
¢
,DT
where the reference state velocity U0. Dewulf and Be =  ¢ (24)
Trancossi [42, 43] derives for the not accelerated cruise motion S gen ,DT + S ¢gen ,Dp
© 2018 SAE International. All Rights Reserved.
 Downloaded from SAE International by Michele Trancossi, Tuesday, October 23, 2018

6 NUMERICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL SECOND LAW ANALYSIS OF A LOW THICKNESS HIGH CHAMBER WING PROFILE

Considering the phenomena at domain level, it can and a lift coefficient CLplant.
be defined according to Sciubba a global Bejan number with In particular, CDLplant can be expressed as follows:
the following formulation
C L2
CD =

Be =
ò F*
S ¢gen ,DT dF *
(25)
2eA
Consequently the total drag force is
ò
F*
S ¢gen ,DT dY +
ò F*
S ¢gen ,DpdF *
1 æ C2 ö
D = r u¥2 S plant ç C D 0 plant + L ÷
The friction phenomena generate heat even if, when 2 è p eA ø
the difference of temperature is small, we can neglect them and exergy dissipation rates are equal to
and assume the system as isothermal. Otherwise, viscous Otherwise, considering equation (17) it is evident that
friction over the wing will generate a certain amount of drag force is affected by the lift coefficient.
heat, which equal to the work of viscous drag. Considering
equation (18) can be expressed by two different expressions éæ C2 ö ù
X D = D U ¥ = êç C Do + L ÷ rU ¥2 A plant ú × U ¥ (20)
of Bejan number. êëè p eA ø úû
D f U ¥ D f ,x C f ,x In particular, it is the possible to split the Drag related
Be x @ = =
DU ¥ D CD exergy into two terms:
D f , yU ¥ D f , y C f , y X Do = éëC Do rU ¥2 A plant ùû × U ¥ (21)
Be y @ = =
LU ¥ L CL
é C L2 ù
X Lo = ê rU ¥2 A plant ú × U ¥ (22)
These considerations allow further future exploration in ë p eA plant û
the direction of a closer connection between the domain of It is then evident that the minimum amount of exergy
fluid dynamic and thermodynamic analysis. of Reynolds destroyed during flight is X Lo .
number with the formulation
ì1 m2
ï C Dfront A front Re2
1 m r ×u ×l ï2
2 2 2 2
r × l2
D = CDS
2 r × l2 m2
=í
ï1 C m2 (27) Preliminary General
Re2
ïî 2 Dplant A plant
r ×l 2
Investigation
Drag can be expressed as the change in pressure times At primary stage of designing wind turbine blades, three
the wet area Aw on which it is achieved. airfoils of similar dimensions (100 mm chord and thickness)
were selected based on high CL values at low Reynolds number.
1 m2
Dp × Sw = × C Dfront × S f × × Re2 (28) 1. cr001 sm-il (maximum camber 4.1% at 45.4% chord,
2 r × l2
maximum thickness 7.3% at 27.1% chord)
In particular, CDfront becomes: 2. s1223-il (maximum camber 8.1% at 49% chord,
S DpD × r × l 2 1 S plant DpD × l 2 1 maximum thickness 12.1% at 19.8% chord)
C Dfront = 2 plant = 2
S front m2 Re2 S front r ×n 2 Re2 (29) 3. s1210 (maximum camber 6.7% at 51.1% chord,
The fluid dynamic definition of the Bejan number, as maximum thickness 12% at 21.4% chord)
defined by Bhattacharjee and Grosshandler [46], applied by
Mahmud in convective problems [47, 48] and generalized by A preliminary CFD analysis allows verifying that the
Avad [49], above-cited wings provide high lift at a certain angle of attack.
Dp × l 2 For rotational movement airfoils need flapping for achieving
Be = (30) high lift. In particular, it has been verified that they have a
r ×n 2 much higher CL at low speed and high angles of attack and
allows producing a more compact and effective formula- that their stall conditions correspond to large values of the
tion of CD: angle of attack. It has also been discovered that the lower
S Be curved surface of airfoil plays an essential role in achieving
C Dfront = 2 × plant × D2 (31)
S front Re high lift because at negative angles of attack it can allow the
creation of a large low-speed high-pressure vortex that has a
In the case, in which such as for wings both drag and lift precise role through producing an increase of the lift force.
coefficient are evaluated with reference to the plan area, it At positive angles of attack, the wing acts a wing of an aircraft
reduces to: in high lift takeoff and landing configurations. A shape of the
Be airfoil (of similar dimension) was produced with a high curva-
C Dplant = 2 × D2 (31′)
Re ture on the lower surface. During testing, it was found that
For any wing, it is possible to define a drag coefficient the curvature of the surface provides high lift. By comparing
the results of 18% camber and 16% camber, it was found that
C Dplant = C D 0 plant + C DLplant 18% produces more lift in comparison to 16%. Hence, 18%
© 2018 SAE International. All Rights Reserved.
 Downloaded from SAE International by Michele Trancossi, Tuesday, October 23, 2018

 NUMERICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL SECOND LAW ANALYSIS OF A LOW THICKNESS HIGH CHAMBER WING PROFILE 7

model was selected for the airfoil blade. Because of the above FIGURE 8 2D mesh (wing profile details).
preliminary analysis, the thin profile, high chord cp-180-
050-gn wing has been selected. It has been explored by coupled
mean of CFD and experimental testing in the wind tunnel of
Sheffield Hallam University.

© SAE International
CFD Investigation
Generalities
To facilitate the prototyping activity, after a preliminary CFD
activity that has stated that the difference was in the range of
2% it has assumed a constant thickness profile such as the one
presented in Figure 6. CFD and experimental testing have
been conducted in a range speed from 3.5 to 15.5 m/s consid- FIGURE 9 Preliminary domain mesh.
ering a range of angles of attack between -90° and +90°. After
defining a preliminary 18% chamber profile with the charac-
teristics in Table 2, an effective testing has been produced.

CFD Methods
2D and 3D simulations have been produced by Ansys Fluent
17.1. In both case ERCOFTAC guidelines [60] as described
Rizzi [61] and Celik [62] have been assumed as a general
reference.
The grid setup has been performed in unsteady conditions
in order to setup the optimum sizing of the grid (numerically
stable grid) through the numerical computation of the grid
at different refinement levels.
It has been found that, when the grid resolved the viscous
sub-layer until y+ value less than 2, it is possible to keep the
wing performances independent of the grid.
Turbulence models have been Spalart Allmaras [66, 67]
© SAE International

for preliminary setup and SST K-ω [68, 69] model. Second
order upwind scheme has been used to describe the
momentum equation and k and ω model. The pressure and
velocit y have been coupled t hroug h t he PISO

TABLE 2 Main geometrical properties of the wing

Length 140.21 mm
Span 152 mm FIGURE 10 Detail view of the mesh on the surface.
Thickness 1.50 mm
© SAE International

FIGURE 7 Cad profile of the considered wing with

dimensions.
© SAE International

© SAE International

© 2018 SAE International. All Rights Reserved.

 Downloaded from SAE International by Michele Trancossi, Tuesday, October 23, 2018

8 NUMERICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL SECOND LAW ANALYSIS OF A LOW THICKNESS HIGH CHAMBER WING PROFILE

TABLE 3 Fluid properties for the simulations FIGURE 12 Skin friction coefficient (0°, 3.5 m/s).

© SAE International
Air at 15.0°C
Temperature (K) 288.15
Density (kg/m3) 1.225
Viscosity (kg/m-s) 0.0000179

(Pressure-Implicit with Splitting of Operators) method [71].

Pressure gradient term has been modelled by using the
PRESTO (PREssure STaggering Option) method [72]. The
PRESTO scheme provides improved pressure interpolation

© SAE International
in situations where large body forces or strong pressure
variation are present. The unsteady term has been discretized
using first-order implicit method taking advantage of uncon-
ditionally stable with respect to time step size, which has
been as taken Δt = 1 × 10-03 s.
3D CFD analysis has been performed in the same
­dimensions of the wing for wind gallery testing. The profile
of Figure 7 has been extruded for 152 mm.
The properties of the fluid are reassumed in Table 3. FIGURE 13 Static pressure (0°, 3.5 m/s).

2D CFD Analysis
A large 2D CFD campaign has been produced for a prelimi-
nary assessment of the problem. Those preliminary activity
has allowed do determine a preliminary and cheap problem
assessment.
In particular, the CFD results have allowed verifying the
robustness of the proposed model. Preliminary results have
been reported in the table below.
CFD results have been preliminary reassumed in Figures

© SAE International
16 and 17.

3D CFD Analysis
3D CFD analysis has been performed on a wing with the same
dimensions of the wing, which has been setup for wind gallery
testing. The profile of Figure 7 has been extruded for 152 mm.
FIGURE 14 Preliminary 2D CFD results, Lift.

FIGURE 11 Sample of vectors around the airfoil (0°).

© SAE International

© SAE International

© 2018 SAE International. All Rights Reserved.

 Downloaded from SAE International by Michele Trancossi, Tuesday, October 23, 2018

 NUMERICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL SECOND LAW ANALYSIS OF A LOW THICKNESS HIGH CHAMBER WING PROFILE 9

FIGURE 15 Preliminary 2D CFD results, Drag. FIGURE 17 CFD analysis of the 3D wing - Drag (N).
© SAE International

© SAE International
FIGURE 16 CFD analysis of the 3D wing - Lift (N). © SAE International
FIGURE 18 18% cambered tested wing.
© SAE International

FIGURE 19 Physical Model of airfoil for Wind Tunnel

mounting.

Experimental Validation
The 3D results have been preliminary validated by testing a
model of the wing realized in the technology lab of Sheffield
Hallam University. The realization of the wing has been shown
in Figures 18 and 19. After finalizing the airfoil profile, a wind
© SAE International

tunnel test was conducted on airfoil profile. The airfoil profile

was developed in the workshop using cold rolling
technique.
This research was conducted in the Sheffield Hallam
UIUC low-turbulence subsonic wind tunnel shown in Figure
20. The wind tunnel is an open-return type with a 7.5:1
contraction ratio. The rectangular test section is nominally are variable up to 36 m/s via an AC motor connected to a
305×305 mm in cross section and 600 mm long. five-bladed fan.
Over the length of the test section, the width increases For a Reynolds number of 35000 to 300000, which is
by approximately 0.5 in. (1.27 cm) to account for boundary- based on an airfoil chord of 1 ft (0.140 m), the resulting test-
layer growth along the tunnel sidewalls. Test-section speeds section speed has been varied between 3.5 to 15.5 m/s.
© 2018 SAE International. All Rights Reserved.
 Downloaded from SAE International by Michele Trancossi, Tuesday, October 23, 2018

10 NUMERICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL SECOND LAW ANALYSIS OF A LOW THICKNESS HIGH CHAMBER WING PROFILE

FIGURE 20 Wind tunnel facility. FIGURE 23 Exergy disruption by CFD data.

© SAE International

© SAE International
FIGURE 21 Test chamber with mounted wing profile.
Photographs of the test section and fan are presented in
Figure 20.
The results of wind tunnel testing are reported against
3D CFD simulations in Figure 22. They testify the excellent
correlation between the results of CFD and experiments. The
results have been evaluated by mean of the analysis of drag
force that appears clearly of excellent quality.
© SAE International

Further Analysis of the

Results
By mean of the CFD values, it is possible to evaluate the effec-
tive exergy losses in terms of power. Experimental and CFD
results can assess total losses. The total exergetic dissipation
FIGURE 22 Validation of CFD results against experimental has been evaluated through equation 9. They have been
ones. reported in Figure 23. During the experimental activity, the
pressure in two points has also been evaluated, one upstream
the wing and one downstream (Figure 24). By considering the

FIGURE 24 Identification of the pressure sensors, which

have been setup, aligned with the rotation axis of the wing.
© SAE International

© SAE International

© 2018 SAE International. All Rights Reserved.

 Downloaded from SAE International by Michele Trancossi, Tuesday, October 23, 2018
 NUMERICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL SECOND LAW ANALYSIS OF A LOW THICKNESS HIGH CHAMBER WING PROFILE
FIGURE 25 Evaluation of the components exergy
disruption rate due to Drag and lift.
© SAE International
above graphs of drag as a function of CD and CL , it can
be possible to assess of the different components generated by
CD and CL according to the graph presented in Figure 25.
Conclusions
This paper defines a first and second law model of a very high
lift wing with a thin profile and high-chamber, such as cp-180-
050-gn (Cambered plate C = 18% T = 5% R = 0.78), by a
complete CFD and experimental testing up to very high angles
of attack.
In particular, it has been demonstrated the actual feasi-
bility of direct first and second law analysis on a wing deter-
mining directly the exergy losses due to aerodynamic
phenomena according to Roth [40].
This analysis goes in the direction of a future definition
of aerodynamic phenomena in terms of the second law of
thermodynamics. It is expected to be a reference for future
activity in the direction of assessing an effective second law
analysis of related aerodynamic phenomena.
References
1. Eiffel, G., “Method Rendering It Possible, in Testing Airplane
Wing Models at the Eiffel Laboratory, to Obtain Comparable
Polars, Whether the Supports Are Attached to the Upper or
Lower Side of Model,” NACA Report NACA-TM-156, 1922,
https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc55804/
m2/1/high_res_d/19930083161.pdf.
2. Jones, R.T., “Classical Aerodynamic Theory,” NASA-
RP-1050, A-7556, https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.
ntrs.nasa.gov/19800006774.pdf.
3. Blumenthal O., “Pressure Distribution on Joukowski Wings,”
1913, Translated into English by NACA, Included into
NACA Report n. 336, 1925.
© 2018 SAE International. All Rights Reserved.
11
4. Betz, H., “Applied Airfoil Theory,” in Durand, W.F.,
Aerodynamic Theory - A General Review of Progress under a
Grant of the Guggenheim Fund for the Promotion of
Aeronautics (Springer, 1935), ISBN:978-3-642-89630-9.
5. Glauert, H., “Airplane Propellers,” in Durand, W.F.,
Aerodynamic Theory - A General Review of Progress under a
Grant of the Guggenheim Fund for the Promotion of
Aeronautics (Springer, 1935), ISBN:978-3-642-89630-9.
6. Kaplan, C., “The Flow of a Compressible Fluid Past a Circular
Arc Profile,” NACA Report n. 794, 1944, http://naca.central.
cranfield.ac.uk/reports/1944/naca-report-794.pdf.
7. Lissaman, P.B.S., “Low-Reynolds-Number Airfoils,” Annual
Review of Fluid Mechanics 15(1):223-239, doi:10.1146/
annurev.fl.15.010183.001255.
8. Carmichael, B.H., “Low Reynolds Number Airfoil Survey,”
Vol. I, NASA CR 165803, NASA, 1981.
9. Englar, R.L.L., “Circulation Control for High Lift and Drag
Generation on STOL Aircraft,” Journal of Aircraft 12(5):457-
463, 1975.
10. Ellington, C.P., “Aerodynamics and the Origin of Insect
Flight,” Advances in Insect Physiology 23:171-210, 1995,
doi:10.1016/S0065-2806(08)60094-6.
11. Thomas, A.L.R. and Norberg, R.Å., “Skimming the Surface -
The Origin of Flight in Insects?” Trends in Ecology &
Evolution 187-188, 1996, doi:10.1016/0169-5347(96)30022-0.
12. Mateescu, D. and Abdo, M., “Aerodynamic Analysis of
Airfoils at Very Low Reynolds Numbers,” 42 AIAA
Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit 2004, 2004, 1053,
doi:10.2514/6.2004-1053.
13. Kanistras, K., Rutherford, M.J., and Valavanis, K.P.,
“Development of a Circulation Control Wing for UAVs,”
Aerospace Conference, 2014, Mar. 2014, 1-8, doi:10.1109/
AERO.2014.6836386.
14. Nazari, A., Darbandi, M., and Schneider, G., “Drag
Reduction in Turbulent and Laminar Flows Using
Deflectable Surface,” 47th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting
Including the New Horizons Forum and Aerospace
Exposition, 2009, 1110, doi:10.2514/6.2009-1110.
15. Anderson, G.W., “An Experimental Investigation of a High
Lift Device on the Owl Wing (no. gam/ae/73-6),” Air Force
Inst of Tech Wright-Patterson AFB OH School
of Engineering.
16. Bachmann, T., Mühlenbruch, G., and Wagner, H., “The Barn
Owl Wing: An Inspiration for Silent Flight in the Aviation
Industry,” SPIE Smart Structures and Materials+
Nondestructive Evaluation and Health Monitoring,
International Society for Optics and Photonics, 2011, 79750N.
17. Bindal, G., Sharma, S., Janser, F., and Neu, E., “Detailed
Analysis of Variables Affecting Wing Kinematics of Bat
Flight,” SAE Int. J. Aerosp. 6(2):811-818, 2013,
doi:10.4271/2013-01-9003.
18. Sharma, S. and Bindal, G., “Computational Analysis of 3D
Unsteady Flow over Flapping Wing,” SAE Technical Paper
2013-01-2098, 2013, doi:10.4271/2013-01-2098.
19. Schunk, C., Swartz, S.M., and Breuer, K.S., “The Influence of
Aspect Ratio and Stroke Pattern on Force Generation of a
Bat-Inspired Membrane Wing,” Interface Focus
7(1):20160083, doi:10.1098/rsfs.2016.0083.
 Downloaded from SAE International by Michele Trancossi, Tuesday, October 23, 2018
12 NUMERICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL SECOND LAW ANALYSIS OF A LOW THICKNESS HIGH CHAMBER WING PROFILE
20. Nagy, A., Gati, B., Cestino, E., and Marzocca, P., “Improved
Multibody Model of Flexible Wing,” SAE Technical Paper
2013-01-2265, 2013, doi:10.4271/2013-01-2265.
21. Nguyen, T.T., Sundar, D.S., Yeo, K.S., and Lim, T.T.,
“Modelling and Analysis of Insect-Like Flexible Wings at
Low Reynolds Number,” Journal of Fluids and Structures
62:294-317, 2016, doi:10.1016/j.jfluidstructs.2016.01.012.
22. Greene, G., “An Entropy Method for Induced Drag
Minimization,” SAE Technical Paper 892344, 1989,
doi:10.4271/892344.
23. Moorhouse, D., “The Vision and Need for Energy-Based
Design Methods,” 8th Symposium on Multidisciplinary
Analysis and Optimization, Sept. 2000, 4850.
24. Moorhouse, D.J., “Proposed System-Level Multidisciplinary
Analysis Technique Based on Exergy Methods,” Journal of
Aircraft 40(1):11-15, 2003.
25. Nixon, D., “A Relationship between Wave Drag and Induced
Drag,” SAE Technical Paper 2003-01-3021, 2003,
doi:10.4271/2003-01-3021.
26. Nixon, D., “Relationship of Wing Drag to Entropy
Production,” SAE Technical Paper 2005-01-3359, 2005,
doi:10.4271/2005-01-3359.
27. Paulus, D.M. Jr. and Gaggioli, R.A., “The Exergy of Lift and
Aircraft Exergy Flow Diagrams,” International Journal of
Thermodynamics 6(4):149-156, 2003 http://dergipark.gov.tr/
eoguijt/issue/5750/76658.
28. Li, H., Stewart, J., and Figliola, R., “Exergy Based Design
Methodology for Airfoil Shape Optimization and Wing
Analysis,” 25th International Congress of the Aeronautical
Sciences, Sept. 2006, http://icas.org/ICAS_ARCHIVE/
ICAS2006/PAPERS/515.PDF
29. Von Spakovsky, M.R., Periannan, V., Markell, K.C., and Brewer,
K.M., “The Use of Exergy and Decomposition Techniques in the
Development of Generic Analysis, and Optimization
Methodologies Applicable to the Synthesis/Design of Aircraft/
Aerospace Systems,” VPI-208-11-110F-107-353-1, Department of
Mechanical Engineering, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and
State University, Blacksburg, 2006.
30. Drela, M., “Power Balance in Aerodynamic Flows,” AIAA
Journal 47(7):1761-1771, 2009, doi:10.2514/1.42409.
31. Doty, J.H., Camberos, J.A., and Moorhouse, D.J., “Benefits of
Exergy-Based Analysis for Aerospace Engineering
Applications-Part I,” International Journal of Aerospace
Engineering, Article ID 409529, 11, 2009,
doi:10.1155/2009/409529.
32. Arntz, A. and Hue, D., “Exergy-Based Performance
Assessment of the NASA Common Research Model,” AIAA
Journal 54(1):88-100, 2015, doi:10.2514/1.J054127.
33. Hayes, D., Lone, M.M., Whidborne, J., and Coetzee, E.,
“Entropy Generation Minimisation and Exergy Analysis
Approaches for Aerospace Applications - A Review,” 54th
AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting, 2016, 0866.
34. Hayes, D., Lone, M. M., Whidborne, J., and Coetzee, E.,
“Evaluating the Rationale for Folding Wing Tips Comparing
the Exergy and Breguet Approaches,” 55th AIAA Aerospace
Sciences Meeting, 2017, 0464, doi:10.2514/6.2017-0464..
35. Guignard, D., Nobile, F., and Picasso, M., “A Posteriori Error
Estimation for the Steady Navier-Stokes Equations in
Random Domains,” Computer Methods in Applied
Mechanics and Engineering 313:483-511, 2017, doi:10.1016/j.
cma.2016.10.008.
36. Moran, M.J. and Sciubba, E., “Exergy Analysis: Principles
and Practice,” Journal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and
Power 116(2):285-290, 1994, doi:10.1115/1.2906818.
37. Bejan, A., Entropy Generation Minimization: The Method of
Thermodynamic Optimization of Finite-Size Systems and
Finite-Time Processes (CRC Press, 1995).
ISBN:9780849396519.
38. Moran, M.J. and Sciubba, E., “Exergy Analysis: Principles
and Practice,” Journal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and
Power 116(2):285-290, 1994, doi:10.1115/1.2906818.
39. De Oliveira, S., Jr., Exergy: Production, Cost and
Renewability, First Edition (London, Springer-Verlag, 2013),
5-53, 237-280, Chaps. 2, 8.
40. Roth, B., “Aerodynamic Drag Loss Chargeability and Its
Implications in the Vehicle Design Process,” 1st AIAA
Aircraft, Technology, Integration, and Operations Forum,
AIAA Paper, 2001, 2001-5236, doi:10.2514/6.2001-5236.
41. Dewulf, J. and Van Langenhove, H., “Exergetic Material
Input per Unit of Service (EMIPS) for the Assessment of
Resource Productivity of Transport Commodities,” Resour.
Conserv. Recycl. 38(2):161-174, 2003, doi:10.1016/S0921-
3449(02)00152-0.
42. Trancossi, M., “What Price of Speed? A Critical Revision
through Constructal Optimization of Transport Modes,”
International Journal of Energy and Environmental
Engineering 7(4):425-448, 2016, doi:10.1007/s40095-015-
0160-6.
43. Trancossi, M., “A Response to Industrial Maturity and
Energetic Issues: A Possible Solution Based on Constructal
Law,” European Transport Research Review 7(1):1-14, 2015,
doi:10.1007/s12544-014-0150-4.
44. Oswatitsch, K., Contributions to the Development of
Gasdynamics (Friedr. Vieweg & Sohn Verlagsges GmbH,
1980). ISBN:978-3-528-08452-3.
45. Sciubba, E., “A Minimum Entropy Generation Procedure for
the Discrete Pseudo-Optimization of Finned-Tube Heat
Exchangers,” Revue générale de thermique 35(416):517-525,
1996, doi:10.1016/S0035-3159(99)80079-8.
46. Bhattacharjee, S. and Grosshandler, W.L., “The Formation of
a Wall Jet near a High Temperature Wall under Microgravity
Environment,” Proceedings, ASME 1988 National Heat
Transfer Conference, Houston, TX, 1988, 1 (A89-53251 23-
34), 711-716.
47. Mahmud, S. and Fraser, R.A., “Thermodynamic Analysis of
Flow and Heat Transfer inside Channel with Two Parallel
Plates,” Exergy, an International Journal 2(3):140-146, 2002.
48. Mahmud, S. and Fraser, R.A., “The Second Law Analysis in
Fundamental Convective Heat Transfer Problems,”
International Journal of Thermal Sciences 42(2):177-186,
2002.
49. Awad, M.M. and Lage, J.L., “Extending the Bejan Number to
a General Form,” Thermal Science 17(2):631, doi:10.2298/
TSCI130211032A.
50. ElQatary, I. and Elhadidi, B., “Comparison of CFD with
BEM Technique for Wind Turbine Simulation of Thin and
© 2018 SAE International. All Rights Reserved.
 Downloaded from SAE International by Michele Trancossi, Tuesday, October 23, 2018

 NUMERICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL SECOND LAW ANALYSIS OF A LOW THICKNESS HIGH CHAMBER WING PROFILE 13

Thick Rotor Blades,” 31st AIAA Applied Aerodynamics CLα - lift coefficient at given angle of attack (rad−1)
Conference, 2013, 2417. D - drag (N)
51. Lambert, T. and Dimitriadis, G., “Induced Drag Calculations
F - general Force (N)
with the Unsteady Vortex Lattice Method for Cambered
Wings,” AIAA Journal 1-5:668-672, 2015, doi:10.2514/1.J055135. T - thrust (N)
L - lift (N)
P - pressure (Pa)
Acknowledgments R - aircraft Range (m)
Data have been partially derived from final year project by S - wing reference area (m2)
Shivesh Sharma, Sheffield Hallam University, Sheffield, UK, 2017.
U - internal energy (J)
T - temperature (K)
Definitions/Abbreviations e - Oswald efficiency factor (−)
α - Angle of attack (rad) m - mass (kg)
Ap - planform area (m2) s - entropy (JK−1)
Cf - skin-friction drag coefficient (−) t - time (s)
CL - lift coefficient (−) u - velocity, with components u x, uy, uz (ms−1)
CD0 - parasitic zero-lift drag (−) w - work done on a system (J)
CDi - lift induced drag (−) E - exergy (J)

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical,
photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the copyright holder.

Positions and opinions advanced in this paper are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of SAE International. The author is solely responsible for the
content of the paper.

ISSN 0148-7191