Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T11:49:10.706Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Experimental investigation on the leading-edge vortex formation and detachment mechanism of a pitching and plunging plate

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 August 2020

Zhen-Yao Li ,
Li-Hao Feng Open the ORCID record for Li-Hao Feng [Opens in a new window] ,
Johannes Kissing ,
Cameron Tropea  and
Jin-Jun Wang Open the ORCID record for Jin-Jun Wang [Opens in a new window]
Zhen-Yao Li
Affiliation:
Fluid Mechanics Key Laboratory of Education Ministry, Beijing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Beijing100191, PR China
Li-Hao Feng*
Affiliation:
Fluid Mechanics Key Laboratory of Education Ministry, Beijing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Beijing100191, PR China
Johannes Kissing
Affiliation:
Institute of Fluid Mechanics and Aerodynamics, Technische Universität Darmstadt, Alarich-Weiß-Straße 10, 64287Griesheim, Germany
Cameron Tropea
Affiliation:
Institute of Fluid Mechanics and Aerodynamics, Technische Universität Darmstadt, Alarich-Weiß-Straße 10, 64287Griesheim, Germany
Jin-Jun Wang
Affiliation:
Fluid Mechanics Key Laboratory of Education Ministry, Beijing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Beijing100191, PR China
*
†Email address for correspondence: lhfeng@buaa.edu.cn
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The flow topology and leading-edge vortex (LEV) formation and detachment mechanism of a pitching and plunging flat plate are experimentally investigated in this study. Focus is placed on three novel aspects. First, to examine the differences between start-up and cyclic motions, the flow fields of one-shot experiments are compared to cyclic cases. The results show that the start cycle has very limited effect on the cyclic LEV development and flow topology evolution. Next, the influence of the maximum effective angle of attack on the LEV development in cyclic motion is introduced. Different secondary structures that lead to the detachment of LEV are found with variation of maximum effective angle of attack. Depending on the leading-edge shear-layer angle, three different flow topologies develop on the plate: quasi-steady development, boundary-layer eruption and secondary vortex formation. Which of these three topological scenarios occurs depends entirely on the maximum effective angle of attack. A vortex Reynolds number based on the transition time of the leading-edge shear-layer angle is defined to quantitatively assess which of the flow topologies will appear. Finally, a simplified model to describe the observed LEV growth is proposed, based on the assumptions that the velocity is constant at the outer vortex boundary and that the vortex boundary is a circular arc starting from the leading edge. The LEV circulation growth is found to increase linearly with the combination of the effective inflow velocity and the effective angle of attack.

JFM classification

Vortex Flows: Vortex dynamics Biological Fluid Dynamics: Swimming/flying
Type
JFM Papers
Information
Journal of Fluid Mechanics , Volume 901 , 25 October 2020 , A17
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Akkala, J. M. & Buchholz, J. H. J. 2017 Vorticity transport mechanisms governing the development of leading-edge vortices. J. Fluid Mech. 829, 512–537.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, J. M., Streitlien, K., Barrett, D. S. & Triantafyllou, M. S. 1998 Oscillating foils of high propulsive efficiency. J. Fluid Mech. 360 (1), 41–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ashraf, M. A., Young, J. & Lai, J. C. S. 2011 Reynolds number, thickness and camber effects on flapping airfoil propulsion. J. Fluids Struct. 27 (2), 145–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Atassi, H. M. 1984 The Sears problem for a lifting airfoil revisited – new results. J. Fluid Mech. 141, 109–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baik, Y. S. 2011 Unsteady force generation and vortex dynamics of pitching and plunging airfoils at low Reynolds number. PhD thesis, University of Michigan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baik, Y. S. & Bernal, L. P. 2012 Experimental study of pitching and plunging airfoils at low Reynolds numbers. Exp. Fluids 53 (6), 1979–1992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baik, Y. S., Bernal, L. P., Granlund, K. & Michael, O. V. 2012 Unsteady force generation and vortex dynamics of pitching and plunging aerofoils. J. Fluid Mech. 709, 37–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buchner, A. J., Soria, J., Honnery, D. & Smits, A. J. 2018 Dynamic stall in vertical axis wind turbines: scaling and topological considerations. J. Fluid Mech. 841, 746–766.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Champagnat, F., Plyer, A., Le Besnerais, G., Leclaire, B., Davoust, S. & Le Sant, Y. 2011 Fast and accurate PIV computation using highly parallel iterative correlation maximization. Exp. Fluids 50 (4), 1169–1182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Corke, T. C. & Thomas, F. O. 2015 Dynamic stall in pitching airfoils: aerodynamic damping and compressibility effects. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 47, 479–505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dabiri, J. O. 2009 Optimal vortex formation as a unifying principle in biological propulsion. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 41, 17–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Doligalski, T. L., Smith, C. R. & Walker, J. D. 1994 Vortex interactions with walls. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 26, 573–616.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eldredge, J. D. & Jones, A. R. 2019 Leading-edge vortices: mechanics and modeling. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 51, 75–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellington, C. P., Den Berg, C. V., Willmott, A. P. & Thomas, A. L. R. 1996 Leading-edge vortices in insect flight. Nature 384 (6610), 626–630.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Graftieaux, L., Michard, M. & Grosjean, N. 2001 Combing PIV, POD and vortex identification algorithms for the study of unsteady turbulent swirling flows. Meas. Sci. Technol. 12 (9), 1422–1499.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huang, Y. & Green, M. A. 2015 Detection and tracking of vortex phenomena using Lagrangian coherent structures. Exp. Fluids 56 (7), 147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaden, H. 1931 Aufwicklung einer unstabilen Unstetigkeitsfläche. Ing.-Arch. 2, 140–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, Z. Y., Feng, L. H., Karbasian, H. R., Wang, J. J. & Kim, K. C. 2019 Experimental and numerical investigation of three-dimensional vortex structures of a pitching and plunging airfoil at a transitional Reynolds number. Chinese J. Aeronaut. 32 (10), 2254–2266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lin, S. Y., Lin, Y. Y., Bai, C. J. & Wang, W. C. 2016 Performance analysis of vertical-axis-wind-turbine blade with modified trailing edge through computational fluid dynamics. Renew. Energy 99, 654–662.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCroskey, W. J. 1982 Unsteady airfoils. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 14, 285–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Onu, K., Huhn, F. & Haller, G. 2015 LCS tool: a computational platform for Lagrangian coherent structures. J. Comput. Sci. 7, 26–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Panah, A. E., Akkala, J. M. & Buchholz, J. H. J. 2015 Vorticity transport and the leading-edge vortex of a plunging airfoil. Exp. Fluids 56 (8), 160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Read, D. A., Hover, F. S. & Triantafyllou, M. S.2003 Force on oscillating foils for propulsion and maneuvering. J. Fluids Struct. 17 (1), 163–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rival, D. E., Kriegseis, J., Schaub, P., Widmann, A. & Tropea, C. 2014 Characteristic length scales for vortex detachment on plunging profiles with varying leading-edge geometry. Exp. Fluids 55 (1), 1660.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rival, D. E., Prangemeier, T. & Tropea, C. 2009 The influence of airfoil kinematics on the formation of leading-edge vortices in bio-inspired flight. Exp. Fluids 46 (5), 823–833.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sattari, P., Rival, D. E., Martinuzzi, R. J. & Tropea, C. 2012 Growth and separation of a start-up vortex from a two-dimensional shear layer. Phys. Fluids 24 (10), 107102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sciacchitano, A. & Wieneke, B. 2016 PIV uncertainty propagation. Meas. Sci. Technol. 27 (8), 084006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sears, W. R. 1938 A systematic presentation of the theory of thin airfoils in non-uniform motion. PhD thesis, California Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
Theodorsen, T. 1935 General theory of aerodynamic instability and the mechanism of flutter. NACA Tech Rep. 496.Google Scholar
Tian, W., Bodling, A., Liu, H., Wu, J. C., He, G. & Hu, H. 2016 An experimental study of the effects of pitch-pivot-point location on the propulsion performance of a pitching airfoil. J. Fluids Struct. 60, 130–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Visbal, M. R. 2011 Numerical investigation of deep dynamic stall of a plunging airfoil. AIAA J. 49 (10), 2152–2170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Widmann, A. 2015 Formation and detachment of leading edge vortices on unsteady airfoils. PhD thesis, Technischen Universität Darmstadt.Google Scholar
Widmann, A. & Tropea, C. 2015 Parameters influencing vortex growth and detachment on unsteady aerodynamic profiles. J. Fluid Mech. 773, 432–459.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wong, J. G., Kriegseis, J. & Rival, D. E. 2013 An investigation into vortex growth and stabilization for two-dimensional plunging and flapping plates with varying sweep. J. Fluids Struct. 43, 231–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wong, J. G. & Rival, D. E. 2015 Determining the relative stability of leading-edge vortices on nominally two-dimensional flapping profiles. J. Fluid Mech. 766, 611–625.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yu, M., Wang, Z. J. & Hu, H. 2013 High fidelity numerical simulation of airfoil thickness and kinematics effects on flapping airfoil propulsion. J. Fluids Struct. 42, 166–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhou, J., Adrian, R. J., Balachandar, S. & Kendall, T. M. 1999 Mechanisms for generating coherent packets of hairpin vortices in channel flow. J. Fluid Mech. 387, 353–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar