0
Research Papers: Flows in Complex Systems

Experimental Study of Suction Flow Control Effectiveness in a Serpentine Intake

[+] Author and Article Information
M. C. Keerthi

Department of Aerospace Engineering,
Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur,
Kanpur 208016, Uttar Pradesh, India
e-mail: mckee@iitk.ac.in

Abhijit Kushari

Mem. ASME
Department of Aerospace Engineering,
Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur,
Kanpur 208016, Uttar Pradesh, India
e-mail: akushari@iitk.ac.in

Valliammai Somasundaram

Aeronautical Development Agency,
Bengaluru 560017, Karnataka, India
e-mail: valli@jetmail.ada.gov.in

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Fluids Engineering Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF FLUIDS ENGINEERING. Manuscript received March 28, 2016; final manuscript received May 17, 2017; published online July 21, 2017. Assoc. Editor: Feng Liu.

J. Fluids Eng 139(10), 101104 (Jul 21, 2017) (12 pages) Paper No: FE-16-1198; doi: 10.1115/1.4036827 History: Received March 28, 2016; Revised May 17, 2017

The intakes of modern aircraft are subjected to ever-increasing demands in their performance. Particularly, they are expected to carry out diffusion with the highest isentropic efficiency while subjected to aggressive geometry requirements arising from stealth considerations. To avoid a penalty in engine performance, the flow through intake needs to be controlled using various methods of flow control. In this study, a serpentine intake is studied experimentally and its performance compared with and without boundary layer suction. The performance parameters used are nondimensional total pressure loss coefficient and standard total pressure distortion descriptors. The effect is observed on surface pressure distributions, and inferences are made regarding separation location and extent. A detailed measurement at the exit plane shows flow structures that draw attention to secondary flows within the duct. Suction is applied at three different locations, spanning different number of ports along each location, comprising of ten unique configurations. The mass flow rate of suction employed ranges from 1.1% to 6.7% of mass flow rate at the inlet of the intake. The effect is seen on exit total pressure recovery as well as circumferential and radial distortion parameters. This is examined in the context of the location of the suction ports and amount of suction mass flow, by the deviation in surface pressure distributions, as well as the separation characteristics from the baseline case. The results show that applying suction far upstream of the separation point together with a modest amount of suction downstream results in the best performance.

Copyright © 2017 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Wong, S. K. , Riseborough, E. , Duff, G. , and Chan, K. K. , 2006, “ Radar Cross-Section Measurements of a Full-Scale Aircraft Duct/Engine Structure,” IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag., 54(8), pp. 2436–2441. [CrossRef]
Gerhold, M. N. , 1977, “ Aerodynamic Performance Tests of S-Curved Diffusers Incorporating Bypass Cavities,” Hawker Siddeley Aviation International Report, Report No. HSA-KGT-B-GEN-O0655.
Squire, H. B. , and Winter, K. G. , 1951, “ The Secondary Flow in a Cascade of Airfoils in a Nonuniform Stream,” J. Aeronaut. Sci., 18(4), pp. 271–277. [CrossRef]
Hawthorne, W. R. , 1951, “ Secondary Circulation in Fluid Flow,” Proc. R. Soc. A, 206(1086), pp. 374–387. [CrossRef]
Bansod, P. , and Bradshaw, P. , 1972, “ The Flow in S-Shaped Ducts,” Aeronaut. Q., 23(2), pp. 131–140. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/aeronautical-quarterly/article/flow-in-sshaped-ducts/A19E39DF0765B8AB6F3C71F1AAD2A551
Taylor, A. M. K. P. , Whitelaw, J. H. , and Yianneskis, M. , 1982, “ Developing Flow in S-Shaped Ducts 1: Square Cross-Section Duct,” Final Report, Imperial College of Science and Technology, London, Report No. 3550 https://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=19820016574.
Gad-el-Hak, M. , and Bushnell, D. M. , 1991, Separation Control: Review, ASME J. Fluids Eng., 113(1), pp. 5–30. [CrossRef]
Ball, W. H. , 1984, “ Tests of Wall Blowing Concepts for Diffuser Boundary Layer Control,” AIAA Paper No. 84-1276.
Ball, W. H. , 1985, “ Tests of Wall Suction and Blowing in Highly Offset Diffusers,” J. Aircr., 22(3), pp. 161–167. [CrossRef]
Johnston, J. P. , and Nishi, M. , 1990, “ Vortex Generator Jets—Means for Flow Separation Control,” AIAA J., 28(6), pp. 989–994. [CrossRef]
Sullerey, R. K. , Mishra, S. , and Pradeep, A. M. , 2002, “ Application of Boundary Layer Fences and Vortex Generators in Improving Performance of S-Duct Diffusers,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 124(1), pp. 136–142.
Tani, I. , 1969, “ Boundary-Layer Transition,” Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech., 1(1), pp. 169–196. [CrossRef]
Reichert, B. , and Wendt, B. , 1994, “ Improving Diffusing S-Duct Performance by Secondary Flow Control,” AIAA Paper No. 94-0365.
Prandtl, L. , 1904, “ On Motion of Fluids With Very Little Friction,” Verhandlungen des dritten internationalen Mathematiker-Kongresses in Heidelberg (English Translation: J. A. K. Ackroyd , B. P. Axcell , and A. I. Ruban , eds., 2001, Early Developments of Modern Aerodynamics, Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford, UK, pp. 77–87).
Antonia, R. A. , Zhu, Y. , and Sokolov, M. , 1995, “ Effect of Concentrated Wall Suction on a Turbulent Boundary Layer,” Phys. Fluids, 7(10), p. 2465. [CrossRef]
Kirk, A. M. , 2006, “ Active Flow Control in an Advanced Serpentine Jet Engine Inlet Duct,” M.S. dissertation, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX. http://oaktrust.library.tamu.edu/handle/1969.1/ETD-TAMU-1027
Kirk, A. M. , Gargoloff, J. I. , Rediniotis, O. K. , and Cizmas, P. G. A. , 2009, “ Numerical and Experimental Investigation of a Serpentine Inlet Duct,” Int. J. Comput. Fluid Dyn., 23(3), pp. 245–258. [CrossRef]
Reid, C. , 1969, “ The Response of Axial Flow Compressors to Intake Flow Distortion,” ASME Paper No. 69-GT-29.
Keerthi, M. C. , Kushari, A. , and Somasundaram, V. , 2013, “ Study of Serpentine Intake Performance With and Without Flow Control,” XXI International Symposium on Air Breathing Engines, Busan, South Korea, Sept. 9–13, Paper No. ISABE 2013-1424.
Preston, J. H. , 1953, “ The Determination of Turbulent Skin Friction by Means of Pitot Tubes,” J. R. Aeronaut. Soc., 58(518), pp. 109–121. [CrossRef]
Keerthi, M. C. , and Kushari, A. , 2014, “ Effectiveness of Vortex Generator Jets and Wall Suction on Separated Flows in Serpentine-Duct Diffuser,” Aerosp. Sci. Technol., 34, pp. 12–19. [CrossRef]
Sullerey, R. K. , and Pradeep, A. M. , 2004, “ Secondary Flow Control Using Vortex Generator Jets,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 126(4), pp. 650–657. [CrossRef]
Pradeep, A. M. , and Sullerey, R. K. , 2004, “ Detection of Separation in S-Duct Diffusers Using Shear Sensitive Liquid Crystals,” J. Visualization, 7(4), pp. 299–307. [CrossRef]
SAE, 1978, “  Gas Turbine Engine Inlet Flow Distortion Guidelines,” SAE Aerospace Recommended Practice, S-16 Turbine Engine Inlet Flow Distortion Committee, SAE International, Warrendale, PA, Standard No. ARP 1420. http://standards.sae.org/arp1420/
Goldsmith, E. L. , and Seddon, J. , 1993, Practical Aerodynamic Intake Design, Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford, UK, Chap. 2.
Rott, N. , 1959, “ On the Viscous Core of a Line Vortex II,” Z. Angew. Math. Phys., 10(1), pp. 73–81. [CrossRef]

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

(a) Schematic of the wind tunnel, (b) schematic of the serpentine intake diffuser with the transition section, and (c) details of the intake with reference locations labeled

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

(a) Photograph of the downstream end of the intake model with flow control ports, (b) schematic of the same section showing the arrangement of ports, and (c) configuration of suction ports for different cases

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Circumferential distortion intensity and extent definitions (inset: choice of area for PWORST-60)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Variation of wall static pressure coefficient along the upper and lower wall centerlines

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Variation of indicative skin-friction coefficient along the upper and lower wall centerlines

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

(a) Total pressure loss coefficient contours and (b) streamwise velocity magnitude contours in the AIP for the intake without flow control

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Circumferential distortion intensity and extent for each radial station for the baseline case

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Variation of total pressure loss coefficient for the baseline case, with in-plane streamlines overlaid

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Variation of wall static pressure coefficient along the lower wall centerline for all the cases

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Variation of wall static pressure coefficient along the upper wall (a) for the entire length of the duct (b) expanded for the region of interest between x/c = 0.6 and 1.0. Legend specifications are identical to those in Fig. 9.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Variation of indicative skin-friction coefficient along the upper wall centerline within the region of interest. Legend specifications are identical to those in Fig. 9.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Total pressure loss coefficient contours in the AIP for all flow controlled cases: (a) case 1, (b) case 2, (c) case 3, (d) case 4, (e) case 5, (f) case 6A, (g) case 6B, (h) case 7A, (i) case 7B, (j) case 8, (k) case 9, and (l) case 10

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Circumferential distortion intensity at different radial stations for all the cases. Legend specifications are identical to those in Fig. 9.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Circumferential distortion extent at different radial stations for all the cases. Legend specifications are identical to those in Fig. 9.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Radial distortion intensity at different radial stations for all the cases. Legend specifications are identical to those in Fig. 9.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Variation of total pressure loss coefficient for the case 8, with in-plane streamlines overlaid

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

The performance of various suction configurations compared using the parameters (a) average total pressure loss coefficient, ωAV, (b) maximum total pressure loss coefficient, ωMAX, and (c) DC60

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In