Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Barlow
Reprinted from
Journal ol Aircraft
AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF AERONAUTICS AND ASTRONAUTICS 1290
Volume 19. Number 3, March 1982, Page 193 This paper is declared a work of the U S Government and therefore is in the public domain
AVENUE
OF THE
AMERICAS
NEW
YORK,
NEW
YORK,
N.Y.
10104
VOL.
19, NO.
J. AIRCRAFT
MARCH
1982
AIAA
80-1872R
NASA/TM.
- _ o ---"
208075
__ '
....
.fL
Katz, Victor
A rues
R. Corsig/ia,t
Center,
Research
The pressure
recovery
of incoming
cooling
with engine
cooling
of a typical
general
aviation twin-engine aircraft was investigated 40 80-Foot Wind Tunnel at Ames Research
experimentally. The semispan model was mounted vertically in the Center, The propeller was driven by an electric motor to provide
thrust with low vibration levels for the cold-flow configuration, it was found that the propeller slip-stream reduces the frontal air spillage around the blunt nacelle shape. Consequently, this slip-stream effect promotes flow realtaehmenl at the rear section of the engine nacelle and improves inlet pressure recovery. These effects are most pronounced at high angles of attack; that is, climb condition. For the cruise condition those improvements were more moderate.
Nomenclature
AI
A= Co cp Cp u cr D Ds=l J
n
= cooling air inlet area = upstream cooling airstream = drag coefficient = propeller power coefficient = upper plenum total pressure = propeller ---propeller =measured system = propeller = revolutions = propeller
well. Recent studies in Refs. 1-5. These tube area 5 2D* tunnel scale World aircraft whereas War II era
of this so-called studies differ and before in opposed War I! the designer
"cooling drag" are cited from the studies of the that most engine aircraft with general aviation configurations, used air-cooled a list of engine
= P/p=n3D coefficient
thrust coefficient = T/p**n diameter [ 193 cm (76 in.)] drag component by the
installation data and a procedure for sizing the components of a cooling system. The reshaping of cooling air inlets to provide less pressure head loss was studied by Miley et al. 2._ They were successful however, nacelle drag Extensive studies were performed Research Center. in increasing data were not of opposed inlet pressure reported. engine recovery; nacelle drag
P P_ot P** q S T V=
= V**/nD
piston
in the 40 80-Foot Wind Tunnel at Ames These studies 4,5 were carried out without the
ftJ)]
= propeller thrust - freestream airspeed = cooling air mass-flow =required lb/s)] cooling air
propeller in order to measure mass-flow rates and nacelle drag accurately. In the work reported herein, an electric-motordriven propeller was added to the nacelle; this made it possible to study the effect of the propeller slip-stream on the pressure recovery of the cooling air inlets and major advantage of using an electric was that cold-flow measurements propeller-off vibration propeller accurate data torque could and on the nacelle drag. The motor for this purpose comparable to the Moreover, the electric-motor-driven resulted low-
W,
O_ (3075
angle
be performed. thrust of an
6of P**
in a more
design has
Experimental
Apparatus
attention as fuel efficiency factor in aircraft development. research, originally directed problems, is now concerned
has become a more important As a result, engine installation at solving powerplant cooling with nacelle drag reduction as
The general layout of the vertically mounted semispan model is seen in Fig. I. The end plate was used to separate the model from the tunnel boundary layer and to serve as a reflection plane. Forces were measured through a shielded strut that passed through the end plane to the tunnel scales below the floor. inlet area when Three placed inlet into inserts (Fig. the production 2) served inlet to decrease The internal an incoming cross-section diffusion, via the inlet the of
Presented as Paper 80-1872 at the AIAA Aircraft Systems and Technology Meeting, Anaheim, Calif., Aug. 4-6, 1980; submitted Sept. 12, 1980; revision received July 6, 1981. This paper is declared a work of the U.S. Government and therefore is in the public domain. "NRC Associate. Present address: Department of Mechanical Engineering, Technion, Haifa, Israel. tAerospace Engineer. Member AIAA. gAerospace Engineer.
of the nacelle and a sketch of are shown in Fig. 3. The upstream streamtube enters is A=; into after the the external plenum airstream upper
upper plenum the pressure pressure (K!el) probes and corner of the plenum.
193
194
J.AIRCRAFT
highest value the sensors were then flowed through The size of the engine baffle
an adjustable orifice plate orifice opening was used configurations and served the cooling channel. The was measured in a similar four head used The
plenum. various
to vary the mass-flow rate through total pressure in the lower plenum manner by four Kiel probes and the total was also (250 through torque hp) at a and
static holes; a rake of four Kiel probes measured at the exit downstream of a cowl flap, which to control the flow rate. electric motor [maximum to to output: 186 kW was connected which was able the propeller record shaft
propeller thrust simultaneously. Incoming filtered with a 10-Hz low-pass filter before The accuracy of drag-thrust data was of the lift accuracy was one order of magnitude
better.
The objective of the study reported here was to investigate the parametric behavior of inlet pressure recovery and nacelle drag, relative to propeller-off measurements. 4._ As a first step the propeller was calibrated tion of advance ratio J and for torque blade-pitch and thrust as a funcangle/_o 75- The results with a propeller are contained theory in Ref. ratio for to be in 1 be
of these tests along with a comparison and a description of a spinner correction 6. Figure 4 shows various blade-pitch Fig. I Cooling-drag model in 40 x 80-Foo! Wind Tunnel. thrust angles.
agreement with the values obtained using the wind-tunnel scales and setting the model at 0 deg angle of attack. Table shows the propeller operating conditions selected to
Ai
COOLING STREAM
AIR TUBE
LOWER
PLENUM ADJUSTABLE
\'COWL ORIFICE
FLAP PLATE
EXIT
Fig. 3
Scbemalle
of nacelle.
CTSCALE .10
= _ [CDMEAS [ 20 25"
_ COpRoP] OFF
':'"24
.06
_3/4
TSHAFT
CT .02'040
m____BALANCE
-02 Fig. area: 265cm 2 Interchangeable large, 2 (41 690 in.2). cm 2 (107 inlets in.2); to reduce mediunt, inlet 393 size. cm 2 Production (61 in.2); inlet small, Fig. 4 Comparison
.2
a .4
J .6
.8 J
1.0
1.2
1,4
J 1.6
of
thrust
measured
on
wind-tunnel
scales
with
corresponding
values measured
on shaft
balance.
MARCH
1982
ENGINE
COOLING
SYSTEM
195
Table
q,
Test conditions
cm H20 (Ib/ft z ) 13. I (26) 15. I (30) 40.3 (80) 40.3 (80)
6cf, deg 30 30 0 0
J=
rpm 2450
hp 180 0.063
nD 0.58
Cruise
2450
150
0.039
1.06
t " CRUISE
------
WITH
PROPELLER
1.0
,\
--
WITHOUT
PROPELLER
.6 .6 Cp u .4 Cp u
.4
L .2
L .4
I .6 A_/Ai
I .8
I 1
1 .5
I 1.0
I 1.5
Fig. 5
Effect
of propeller
on inlet pressure
recovery. Fig. ? Inlet pressure recovery vs cooling with propeller. air mass-flow rate: climb,
I
i -----.O6 M AL L IN L E T-'_,,,,,._ _ _(_ -WITH PROPELLER PROPELLER
WITHOUT
Cp u
o
Fig. 6 Inlet pressure with propeller.
.;
recovery vs cooling
1 tlo
air mass-flow rate: cruise, Fig. 8
_l
.O2 0 .2 .4 A=/Ai .6
CRUISE
.8 t 1
Effect of propeller
on semispan
nacelle-wing
drag.
These representative conditions were of a cruise used and a climb condition. These those in the present study.
data
were
obtained
for
both
the
cruise
and
climb
conditions that are given in Table I. The measured pressure recoveries presented in Fig. 5 are in agreement with the results obtained by Miley et al.2.J for inlets of area ratio 0.3 and 0.6. Because their inlet configurations however, slightly The the had improved internal small inlets (A=/A,=0.6) pressure recovery the propeller on diffuser in their contours, test gave a at
Variation The
recovery data
improved effect of
pressure recovery Cpu as a function of inlet area ratio A=/Ai, where A= is the incoming flow cross-section area ahead of the model (Fig. 3) and A, is the inlet area, is given in Fig. 5. Here the pressure coefficient is defined as
cruise is small. This agrees with the observation of Miley et al. z.3 of a 5% increase in inlet total head because of propeller slip-stream. For the climb condition and the lowest value of A /A, (largest about 20/0 to inlet area), the effect of the propeller the upper plenum pressure. This is, with the results of Miley et al.2.3 is to add again, in At higher
Cp u = (Pro,-P)/q=
(1)
close
agreement
196
values propeller propeller pressure of A=/A, (smallest inlet area) is much greater. Nevertheless, installed, there is a substantial recovery C. as A=/A, increases.
KATZ, CORSIGLIA,
the effect of the the inlet that even with decrease in This indicates
AND
BARLOW
J. AIRCRAFT
Fig.
8. At cruise
the drag
increases
as
power
is increased,
at climb separation
even with the propeller shp-stream considerable internal flow separation This nonlinear behavior is demonstrated which the mass-flow
present, there ts still in the upper plenum. in Figs. 6 and 7, in C_ is plotted a slight increase vs in
rates ( W W c <0.8), however, the effect is large enough that drag is not reduced the thrust becomes greater. The increase in the drag coefficient rate is increased (with the propeller 10. When the propeller was added, drag was observed for for the larger inflows, root and in the thinner boundary
as the cooling air flow off) is presented in Fig. however, a reduction in rates. at It seems that the propeller resulting in a
pressure recovery is measured for the higher flow rates. This might possibly be an indication of reattachment in the internal flow. The basic trend of higher pressure recovery for the larger inlets is maintained with the propeller A=/A, 8 and thrust scale on for the in the the cooling The air flow rates drag coefficient that were tested. C ovs area ratio
O58
hscal e for
O54 75 = 17 )
C o = (D_cal e + T)/qS Therefore the C o values reflect the influence of the slip-stream on the wing nacelle, but do not include thrust. To interpret these results, a schematic around based that and the wing nacelle on tuft observations the high airstream local spillage, velocities is drawn in in the wind that at the nacelle
(2)
. 0063 .05O (;_0 75 = 19 )
CO 046
Fig. 9. The drawing tunnel which indicated boundary front end, layer causes blunt
is, thickened
flow separation at the aft section of the wing-nacelle fairing. The drag results in Fig. 8 can be interpreted in terms of this flowfield sketch. In the cruise condition, the angle of attack is low and favorable separation, increased propeller propeller increased. stantially on the aft A related the drag showed, the aft flow effect of the but skin separation propeller is small. Therefore slip-stream reduces the by of the flow the the
020
.5
1 0
1.5
w_
Fig. I0 Effect of propeller production configuration. power on wing-nacelle drag for
on drag is small. In the climb configuration off, however, the aft flow separation The net effect, then, of the propeller reduce nacelle. study the drag by suppressing by the Becker, flow 7 who
with the has been is to subseparation measured His results drag even model was
was
conducted
i=! i
AFT
FAIRtNG
bodies with frontal inlets. the smaller inlet had lower since the aft section of his
of Power drag of increasing for the large inlet of the power power setting area, in Fig. is the same is plotted 10. It can shown vs be in
0,58
AFT
FAIRING
.......c......__
054
FF
CLIMB
the effect
as that
.05O
_----'W"
_ _'_7...-_ _"I_'-----
OFF
S- ;E'::S%
c D FRONTAL SPILLAGE [ al l
.046
028
AFT
"---_ _
---"
I,"
"--_--.,t
o24
ON ---0- ---_@
OFF ON
/
SEPARATED
of flowfield
of aft
failing
on
wing-nacelle
drag
for production
MARCH 1982
-----.062 AFT FAIRING --
197
air. as shown For this in Fig. configuration 12. The the results cowl of flap 5 Ref.
exits exit
of was
__'_ .O58
OFF
show that this particular side exit configuration increased flow separation over the rear part of the nacelle and thereby increased the drag. In Ihe presence of the propeller slipstream, however, also continues to the drag decrease flow that is not only lower (generally), but with flow rate; this is in contrast for which the drag rates. When comparing Figs. 11 at cruise the side exiting conthe standard cowl the absence of the especially with the
.O54 ON CLIMa
with
the
propeller-off
configuration,
slightly increased with and 12 it is concluded figuration exit. But cowl flap
.O5O _.
o'e.a.
_ OFF SiDE EXITS
has slightly higher drag than for the powered climb condition makes the side exits competitive, on, Conclusions
aft fairing
.046
CD ON .042
addition of a propeller to a wing-nacelle configuration the amount of flow separation over the aft part of the and at the inlet of the cooling air flow. This leads to a in the configuration is increased, since drag when inlet spillage the cooling is reduced. air massWhen the
inlet area was reduced, the drag decreased, unlike the propeller-off case in which the nacelle drag continued to be almost unaffected as the inlet area was reduced. These effects are more The inlet as much climb this production pronounced in the climb condition than pressure recovery for the cruise condition as 570 because of the slip-stream effect, improvement (large) inlet is of the order and even more of 20070 for smaller at cruise. improves while at for the inlets.
ON "_'_=_----:'_--_-v---5_:
.024
.;
110
115
These improvements are partially a result of propeller slipstream related pressure rise, but the major effect is the reduction in the amount of flow separation inside the inlet at side exits for the higher angles of attack.
drag (using
References Variation of Nacelle Aft Section dependence behind of nacelle the nacelle. drag To I Monts, F., "The Development of Reciprocating Engine Installation Data for General Aviation Aircraft," SAE Paper 73-0325, April 1973. "Miley, S.J., Cross, E.J. Jr., and Owens, J.K., "An Investigation of the Aerodynamics and Cooling of a Horizontally Opposed Engine Installation," SAE Paper 77-0467, March-April 1977. 3Miley, S.J., Cross, E.J. Jr., Lawrence, D.L., and Owens, J.K., "Aerodynamics of Horizontally Opposed Aircraft Engine Installations," AIAA Paper 77-1249, April 1977. 4Corsiglia, V.R., Katz, J., and Kroeger, R.A., "Full-Scale Wind Tunnel Sludy of Nacelle Shape on Cooling Drag," Journal of Aircrafl, VoI. 18, No. 2, Feb. 1981, pp. 82-88. _Katz, J., Corsiglia, V.R., and Barlow, P.R., "Study of Cooling Air Inlet and Exit Geometries for Horizontally Opposed Piston Aircraft Engines," AIAA Paper 80-1242, June 1980. 6Barlow, P.R., Corsiglia, V.R., and Ka_z, J., "'Full-Scale Aerodynamic Characteristics of a Propeller Installed on a Small TwinEngine Aircraft Wing Panel," NASA TM 81285, May 1981. 7Becket, V.J., "Wind Tunnel Tests of Air Inlet and Outlet Openings on a Streamline Body," NACA Wartime Rept, L-300, Nov. 1940.
reduce that effect, an aft fairing (shown in Fig. 11) was tested with various nacelle configurations. The results in Fig. 11 show that for both propeller-off (solid lines) and propeller-on (dashed present. lines) the drag reduction At the cruise condition effect of the aft fairing is this reduction is of the same
propeller-off case, and at the climb condition the drag reduction is smaller (by 20 to 4070) than the drag reduction, especially for the higher flow is because the propeller with the aft fairing off, effect of the aft fairing has suppressed the as discussed above, is therefore less.
Side Exits Similar added to behavior a nacelle was observed configuration when the aft fairing was thai uses side ports for the