Delta Wing Flow Control Using Dielectric Barrier Discharge Actuators

Greenblatt, David; Kastantin, Y.; Nayeri, Navid; Paschereit, Christian Oliver

doi:10.2514/6.2007-4277

Cited by 10 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The configuration of the actuator differed somewhat from those commonly employed in published studies (e.g., [8,9]). In the original study [13], the common configuration was tested, with no significant effect on wing performance measured; hence, that configuration was not tested in detail. For all data reported herein, the encapsulated and exposed electrodes (both 70 m thick) were mounted on opposite surfaces of the wing, separated by three layers of 50-m-thick Kapton tape (Fig.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This was achieved by placing the model in a Plexiglas box (60 40 20 cm) and measuring the wall jet produced by the actuator using LDA. The calibration was carried out at five locations along the leading edge in the range of 0:15 x 0 =c 0:85 at 3, 5, and 7 mm downstream of, and normal to, the trailing edge [13]. At distances less than approximately 3 mm from the actuator, no data were measurable, because the LDA probe volume was located in the plasma sheath.…”

Section: Actuator Calibrationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The flowfield was interrogated by means of flow visualization, PIV, and laser Doppler anemometry (LDA). The present Note differs from the original conference paper [13] in the following respects: the preliminary Gurney flap data are not included, the conventional DBD actuator was eliminated, and the actuator calibration was repeated based on a more accurate measurement and data processing technique. These items are subsequently discussed further.…”

mentioning

confidence: 97%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Delta-Wing Flow Control Using Dielectric Barrier Discharge Actuators

et al. 2008

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

1 hC i = momentum coefficient, oscillatory component, hJi=cq 1 c = model chord length DC = duty cycle F = reduced excitation frequency, f m c=U 1 f = plasma driving frequency f m = pulsed-modulation frequency J = time-mean component of jet momentum hJi = oscillatory component of jet momentum q 1 = freestream dynamic pressure Re = Reynolds number based on chord length s = model semispan length s L = local semispan length at corresponding x=c t = wing thickness U,V,W = chordwise coordinate system U p = plasma-jet velocity U 1= freestream velocity x, y, z = chordwise coordinate system x 0 , y 0 , z = leading-edgewise coordinate system = angle of attack = delta-wing sweepback angle = control-cycle phase angle ! x = streamwise vorticity, @W=@y @V=@z

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Actuator Calibrationmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 97%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Delta-Wing Flow Control Using Dielectric Barrier Discharge Actuators

et al. 2008

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Comparatively little work on delta wings with Gurney flaps has been published, with the literature consisting of three relatively comprehensive data sets presenting lift, drag, and pitching moment [4,[8][9][10][11], along with a handful of papers reporting more limited results [12][13][14].…”

Section: Gurney Flaps Applied To Delta Wingsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Gurney Flaps on Slender and Nonslender Delta Wings

Greenwell

2010

Journal of Aircraft

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A parametric low-speed wind-tunnel study has been undertaken of the effects of Gurney flap height on the aerodynamic characteristics of delta wings with sweep angles of 40, 60, and 70 . Flap effects on lift and drag are consistent with previous two-dimensional data when wing geometry is accounted for by using the change in zero-lift incidence rather than lift and using the relative flap area rather than flap height. Flap deployment primarily affects the attached-flow potential lift on delta wings, with vortex lift being almost unchanged. Induced-drag factors are considerably reduced as flap height is increased, but this is due to the use of flat-plate models with near-zero leadingedge suction. For control applications, pitch/lift ratios are similar to those for delta wings with conventional trailingedge flaps, but the trim-drag penalties are much higher. An aft shift in loading associated with Gurney flap deployment leads to large aft movements of the aerodynamic center, which significantly reduces control capability.pitching-moment coefficient at zero lift C N = normal force coefficient, N=qS C NP = potential flow component of normal force C NV = vortex lift component of normal force D = drag h = projected flap height (measured from lower surface) K P = potential lift factor, C L K V = vortex lift factor k = induced-drag factor, C D C D min AR=C 2 L L = lift q = dynamic pressure, 1 2 V 2 q = lift increase factor on flap height S = wing area S f = flap frontal area, hb t = wing thickness = angle of attack 0L = zero-lift angle of attack 0P = zero-lift angle of attack for potential lift component 0V = zero-lift angle of attack for vortex lift component = leading-edge sweep angle

show abstract

“…Other applications are centered on the force exerted on the airflow due to magnetohydrodynamic interaction (MHD) or electrohydrodynamic interaction (EHD). The EHD interaction (or ion wind) is suspected to be one of the mechanisms responsible for the high success of plasma actuators in preventing or delaying boundary layer separation [3], in enhancing jet mixing [4], in keeping the flow attached on turbine blades [5], or in controlling the vortices above a delta wing [6]. On the other hand, the MHD interaction could be useful in controlling the inlet flowfield [7,8], in suppressing boundary-layer separation [9], in imparting momentum to a gas [10,11], or in generating electrical power aboard a flight vehicle through a MHD generator [12,13].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%