A Wind Tunnel Study of Icing Effects on a Business Jet Airfoil

Effect of High-Fidelity Ice Accretion Simulations on the Performance of a Full-Scale Airfoil Model

“…The high-fidelity, ice-casting simulations had a significant impact on the aerodynamic performance. A spanwise-ridge ice shape resulted in a maximum lift coefficient of 0.56 compared to the clean value of 1.85 at Re = 15.9×10 6 and M = 0.20. Two roughness and streamwise shapes yielded maximum lift values in the range of 1.09 to 1.28, which was a relatively small variation compared to the differences in the ice geometry.…”

“…Airfoil performance testing was carried out at the ONERA F1 pressurized wind tunnel using a 72-in. (1828.8-mm) chord NACA 23012 airfoil over a Reynolds number range of 4.5×10 6 to 16.0×10 6 and a Mach number range of 0.10 to 0.28. The high-fidelity, ice-casting simulations had a significant impact on the aerodynamic performance.…”

“…chord (1828.8-mm) NACA 23012 airfoil model. Airfoil performance testing was carried out at the ONERA F1 pressurized wind tunnel over a Reynolds number range of 4.5×10 6 to 16.0×10 6 and a Mach number range of 0.10 to 0.28. A total of six different ice accretion casting simulations were tested.…”

FEM analysis of in-flight ice break-up

“…The business jet main wing airfoil used in this test is based on a GLC-305 airfoil [48]. For ice accretion simulations, the freestream Mach and Reynolds numbers are, respectively, 0.275 and 6.3× 10 6 .…”

Geometry and Reynolds-Number Scaling on an Iced Business-Jet Wing

“…Previous experimental and computational results with subscale airfoils 3,4,5 have shown that iced-airfoil aerodynamics is relatively insensitive to Reynolds number effects. Because of this, simple geometric scaling of the ice shapes has provided very good results for subscale geometry and Reynolds number tests.…”