The platform will undergo maintenance on Sep 14 at about 9:30 AM EST and will be unavailable for approximately 1 hour.
2017
DOI: 10.1299/jsmekanto.2017.23.105
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Wind-tunnel experiment of a friction drag reduction on an airfoil using uniform blowing

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

1
0

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(1 citation statement)
references
References 0 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Eto et al (2019) conducted a wind-tunnel experiment of UB at 0.14% free-stream velocity on an airfoil using air supply from an external compressor, i.e., active UB, and confirmed 20%-40% local friction drag reduction through a hot-wire measurement of velocity profiles and a quantitative assessment taking into account the pressure gradient. Although UB is generally known as an active control, Eto et al (2017) also attempted a passive blowing, which is driven by the pressure difference on a wing surface between suction and blowing region. They did not achieve an effective passive blowing due to the pressure loss mainly caused by the tubes and internal structure; however, they confirmed the feasibility of passive blowing and suggested structure of an airfoil to attain passive blowing with low pressure loss.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Eto et al (2019) conducted a wind-tunnel experiment of UB at 0.14% free-stream velocity on an airfoil using air supply from an external compressor, i.e., active UB, and confirmed 20%-40% local friction drag reduction through a hot-wire measurement of velocity profiles and a quantitative assessment taking into account the pressure gradient. Although UB is generally known as an active control, Eto et al (2017) also attempted a passive blowing, which is driven by the pressure difference on a wing surface between suction and blowing region. They did not achieve an effective passive blowing due to the pressure loss mainly caused by the tubes and internal structure; however, they confirmed the feasibility of passive blowing and suggested structure of an airfoil to attain passive blowing with low pressure loss.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%