0 Bewertungen0% fanden dieses Dokument nützlich (0 Abstimmungen)

29 Ansichten8 SeitenDrag reduction is an interesting and important practical problem with wide range of engineering applications. D-Shape is a representative model for various bluff bodies and its drag influences the performance of the particular body. Drag reduction on D-Shape model with various roughness and forebody effects is the subject of this research. A standard D-Shape model with and without Roughness is compared with modified forebody D-Shape configuration for different dimensions. The study has been done in computational fluid dynamics by modeling standard D-Shape model with and without roughness and modified forebody D-Shape configuration. The models are analyzed in CFD using k – ε turbulence and LES model. Drag coefficient, Pressure coefficient around the model are the parameters considered. Results show that drag has been reduced more than 10% by infusing the roughness or by modifying the forebody. The main reason behind this is the flow field gets energized by the influence of surface roughness and the flow separation has been delayed due to the modified forebody. This leads to the drag reduction and it is evident from the pressure distribution over the investigated models.

Dec 11, 2015

© © All Rights Reserved

PDF, TXT oder online auf Scribd lesen

Drag reduction is an interesting and important practical problem with wide range of engineering applications. D-Shape is a representative model for various bluff bodies and its drag influences the performance of the particular body. Drag reduction on D-Shape model with various roughness and forebody effects is the subject of this research. A standard D-Shape model with and without Roughness is compared with modified forebody D-Shape configuration for different dimensions. The study has been done in computational fluid dynamics by modeling standard D-Shape model with and without roughness and modified forebody D-Shape configuration. The models are analyzed in CFD using k – ε turbulence and LES model. Drag coefficient, Pressure coefficient around the model are the parameters considered. Results show that drag has been reduced more than 10% by infusing the roughness or by modifying the forebody. The main reason behind this is the flow field gets energized by the influence of surface roughness and the flow separation has been delayed due to the modified forebody. This leads to the drag reduction and it is evident from the pressure distribution over the investigated models.

© All Rights Reserved

Als PDF, TXT **herunterladen** oder online auf Scribd lesen

0 Bewertungen0% fanden dieses Dokument nützlich (0 Abstimmungen)

29 Ansichten8 SeitenDrag reduction is an interesting and important practical problem with wide range of engineering applications. D-Shape is a representative model for various bluff bodies and its drag influences the performance of the particular body. Drag reduction on D-Shape model with various roughness and forebody effects is the subject of this research. A standard D-Shape model with and without Roughness is compared with modified forebody D-Shape configuration for different dimensions. The study has been done in computational fluid dynamics by modeling standard D-Shape model with and without roughness and modified forebody D-Shape configuration. The models are analyzed in CFD using k – ε turbulence and LES model. Drag coefficient, Pressure coefficient around the model are the parameters considered. Results show that drag has been reduced more than 10% by infusing the roughness or by modifying the forebody. The main reason behind this is the flow field gets energized by the influence of surface roughness and the flow separation has been delayed due to the modified forebody. This leads to the drag reduction and it is evident from the pressure distribution over the investigated models.

© All Rights Reserved

Als PDF, TXT **herunterladen** oder online auf Scribd lesen

Sie sind auf Seite 1von 8

33 (2015)

Research India Publications; httpwww.ripublication.comijaer.htm

Reynolds Number

V. Suresh*, C. Senthilkumar*, S. Nadaraja Pillai**, S. Arunvinthan**

*Department of Aerospace Engineering, Madras Institute of Technology campus, Anna University,

Chennai-600 044. E-Mail Id: vsuresh@annauniv.edu

**Department of Aeronautical Engineering, J.J.College of Engg & Tech, Ammapettai, Trichy.

Abstract: Drag reduction is an interesting and important practical problem with wide range of

engineering applications. D-Shape is a representative model for various bluff bodies and its drag

influences the performance of the particular body. Drag reduction on D-Shape model with various

roughness and forebody effects is the subject of this research. A standard D-Shape model with and

without Roughness is compared with modified forebody D-Shape configuration for different

dimensions. The study has been done in computational fluid dynamics by modeling standard DShape model with and without roughness and modified forebody D-Shape configuration. The

models are analyzed in CFD using k turbulence and LES model. Drag coefficient, Pressure

coefficient around the model are the parameters considered. Results show that drag has been

reduced more than 10% by infusing the roughness or by modifying the forebody. The main reason

behind this is the flow field gets energized by the influence of surface roughness and the flow

separation has been delayed due to the modified forebody. This leads to the drag reduction and it is

evident from the pressure distribution over the investigated models.

Keywords: Bluff body, Roughness, Forebody Effect, Coefficient of Pressure, Coefficient of Drag.

INTRODUCTION

At high enough Reynolds number the flow past bluff bodies is characterized by large

wake and periodic, alternative vortex shedding. The separated shear layers from the sharp

corners feed Vorticity to the wake. These vortices are shed continuously downstream. The side

faces and rear face is subjected to low pressure, whereas the front face is subjected to high

positive pressure. With this flow pattern, the pressure drag coefficient assumes very large values.

This fact is particularly true for bluff bodies with noncircular cross-sections and sharp corners.

Hence reducing such drag by modifying the geometric parameter and improving the efficiency is

an interesting task.

Several investigations have been reported on drag reduction of bluff bodies over few

decades. E Radhakrishnan et al [2], studied that the effect of splitter plate on noncircular

cylinder, and found that by using backward splitter plate is more effective in drag reduction

rather forward splitter plate. Khalid M. Sowoud et al [3], studied the effect of fore body on drag

reduction of D-Shape model and found remarkable decrease in drag, however it requires

additional body to reduce the drag of main body. By placing such additional body upstream of

the flow leads to spend extra energy or structure to hold it and to do the task assigned.

Bandu N.Pamadi et al [4], investigated the effect of a pair of thin strakes on the windward

flat faced non circular cylinder in axial flow at subcritical Reynolds number produced substantial

changes in flow pattern, vortex shedding and drag coefficient. Kevin R. Cooper et al [5],

identified the fore body reduces drag main body and achieved considerable reduction in drag.

Koneig K. et al [6], studied that the effect of geometrical size and gap results in reduction in the

drag of bluff body at a considerable manner. A. Gatto et al [7], studied the effect of roughness

27110

International Journal of Applied Engineering Research, ISSN 0973-4562 Vol. 10 No.33 (2015)

Research India Publications; httpwww.ripublication.comijaer.htm

and turbulence of yawed cylinder was found to produce highly asymmetric, unsteady flow

results.

Flow over the circular cylinder with serrated roughness and the Dynamic Particle Image

Velocimetry (DPIV) measurements made by Kikuchi et al [8]. Wind pressure applied to a

cylindrical model with a smooth surface and serrated roughness was measured to determine the

wind flow field around a separation point. In this present research the effect of surface roughness

of different sizes and locations were studied in order to reduce the drag on D model without any

fore body or rear body which is then later compared with Modified Forebody D Shaped Model.

The method of roughness similar to Kikuchi et al [8] for circular cylinder is applied for the D

model in this research and various flow parameters are studied.

Robert.E.Breidenthals [9] work demonstrates that at Low Reynolds Number rounded

shape to the Forebody preserves the Leading Edge suction by attaching the Boundary Layer to

the Model and thereby helps reducing Drag. As it is evident that the rounded corners are

preferred over the sharp corners the modification of the Forebody is also done with the D-shape

Configuration. Experimental Results Reveals that the Drag on the Forebody has been greatly

reduced with the Forebody Modification and it helps reduces the Drag. However, the drag from

the base region on the backside of such bluff bodies is not so easily eliminated. Research

continues on the aerodynamics of bluff bodies, making this subject much more interesting and

complicated than that of streamlined objects. Our proposed idea for the Drag reduction on the

base region of the back side of such Bluff Bodies can be achieved by infusing the Roughness

over the Model.

COMPUTATIONALMODEL

Four computational domains were made for the study of standard D-Shaped model and

one model has been created for the analysis of modified forebody effects on the bluff Body. The

first model is D-Shape without the roughness and extended a distance of 10 times the length

upstream and 20 cylinder diameters in the downstream and cross-stream directions. The second,

third, fourth domain consisted of a D-Shape with 2%, 3% and 4% of surface roughness

respectively.

The final model was the modified forebody configuration having an extended arm

holding the D-shape forward end. The extended arm is parameterized as g holding the forward

D-Shape model having radius b1 and the entire extended arm is stationed at b2 of the bluff

body model.

27111

International Journal of Applied Engineering Research, ISSN 0973-4562 Vol. 10 No.33 (2015)

Research India Publications; httpwww.ripublication.comijaer.htm

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

Fig.2. D model with the various location of roughness is shown (a) D model without roughness (b) D

model with roughness till 50% model (c) D model with roughness beyond 50% model (d) D model with

roughness on 100% model

For the D-shape model, the measured drag coefficients CD at three different test velocities

15 m/s, 20 m/s, 25 m/s are 0.50235 , 0.49241 and 0.48643 respectively. The high drag coefficient

CD is mainly due to the positive pressure at the front face and the low pressure at the rear face.

27112

International Journal of Applied Engineering Research, ISSN 0973-4562 Vol. 10 No.33 (2015)

Research India Publications; httpwww.ripublication.comijaer.htm

Fig.5. Velocity distribution on D model till 50% roughness with 25 m/s velocity free stream

Fig.6. Velocity distribution on D model beyond 50% roughness with 25 m/s velocity free stream

27113

Research India Publications; httpwww.ripublication.comijaer.htm

Fig.7. Velocity distribution on D model with 100% roughness with 25 m/s velocity free stream

Fig. 3 6 shows the velocity distribution over the D model and with various roughness.

However in Fig. 3, the wake region is more when compared to the other models. The inference

from these figures of velocity distribution shows how much the flow separation is delayed. The

delay of flow separation is due to the influence of the roughness. Also the location of the

roughness influences further decrease in drag.

Table. 1 4 show the various drag values for the D model at 25 m/s. The decrease in drag is

evident from the row wise. From these figures it is seen that the optimum combinations occurred

at x/D is 4% resulting in CD of 0.37647, 0.28783, 0.24988 at velocities 15m/s, 20 m/s,25 m/s

respectively. The maximum drag reduction of 48% was achieved for the model with 100%

roughness. The other tested surface roughness resulted in drag reductions in the range of 2030%, which are quite low compared with the reduction at optimum conditions.

Drag Reduction over Modified Forebody Model

In the Modified Forebody D- Model, High pressure exists in the stagnation region near

the re-entrant corner, and infinitely negative pressure exists at the convex corner, where the fluid

velocity is infinite on the Modified Forebody model states that the Forebody Drag force is zero.

It is explained as that over the front surface of a Bluff Body. The low pressure at the convex

corners is called leading edge suction. The forces from these two pressures cancel each other;

the average pressure on the front face of the step is found to be exactly equal to the freestream

pressure! Thus the drag on a semi-infinite body in potential flow is zero

For the modified Forebody D-shape model, the drag coefficients CD are measured at three

different test velocities 25 m/s, 20 m/s, 75 m/s for varying shape modifications. We hereby coin

the term Characteristic Length L* and Localization Factor F* in this paper to help understanding

the Effects of the shape changes in the Forebody of the Bluff Body. The Characteristic Length

ratio L* is defined as the ratio of Length of the arm Extension to the point of intersection with

the Main Bluff Body Whereas the Localization Factor F* is denoted as b1/b2. The ratio can be

mathematically expressed as L*= g/b2.Those Models were tested at various Test velocities and at

varying shapes modifications to help understand its relation with the Drag reduction over the

Bluff Body.

27114

Research India Publications; httpwww.ripublication.comijaer.htm

Our Experimental Investigations reveal that the Modified Forebody D- Model performs

well at higher test velocities. Greater the test velocities lesser becomes the Drag value. It is

evident by considering a sample that the Modified Forebody Model of L*=0.25 experiences Drag

reduction from the value of 1.533 to 0.733. It clearly states that the drag has been greatly reduced

and its almost dropped down to half of its value at Lower test velocities. When we see the later

part of the Experimental Investigation we can clearly see that changing the b1/b2 ratio also helps

reducing the Drag. The influence of Localization Factor F* on the Drag Reduction is very

Minimal. The values are nearly close to each other and are infinitesimally very small changes.

The selection of Characteristic Length ratio L* and Localization factor F* purely depends on the

purpose of use. The high drag coefficient CD is mainly due to the positive pressure at the front

face and the low pressure at the rear face.

Table. 1 Modified Forebody D-Shape model and Coefficient of Drag (CD) at different Velocity and L* at F*=1

Arm

Coefficient Coefficien

Coefficient

Characteristi

Forebody

Localization

Extension

of Drag

t of Drag

of Drag (CD)

Cases

c Length

Dimension

Factor (F*)

(g)

(CD) at 25

(CD) at 50

at 75 m/s

Ratio (L*)

(b1)

m/s

m/s

(a)

0.25

50

12.5

1.533226

0.91191

0.700335

(b)

0.5

50

25

1.536845

0.909042

0.693369

(c)

0.75

50

37.5

1.56232

0.919312

0.698102

Table. 2 Modified Forebody D-Shape model and Coefficient of Drag (CD) atdifferent Velocity and L* at F*=0.75

Coefficient Coefficient

Coefficient

Localization

Characteristi

Forebody

Arm

of Drag

of Drag

of Drag (CD)

Cases

Factor

c Length

Dimension

Extension

(CD) at 25

(CD) at 50

at 75 m/s

( F*)

Ratio (L*)

(b1)

(g)

m/s

m/s

(a)

0.75

0.25

37.5

12.5

1.561464

0.930523

0.71501

(b)

0.75

0.5

37.5

25

1.570407

0.932838

0.715684

(c)

0.75

0.75

37.5

37.5

1.581351

0.937517

0.717561

(d)

0.75

37.5

50

1.594896

0.944891

0.72103

(e)

0.75

1.25

37.5

62.5

1.604964

0.952576

0.726907

(f)

0.75

1.5

37.5

75

1.614231

0.958627

0.732685

Table. 3 Modified Forebody D-Shape model and Coefficient of Drag (CD) atdifferent Velocity and L* at F*=0.625

Cases

Localization

Factor (F*)

Characteristic

Length Ratio

(L*)

Forebody

Dimension

(b1)

Arm

Extension

(g)

Coefficient

of Drag (CD)

at 25 m/s

Coefficient

of Drag (CD)

at 50 m/s

Coefficient of

Drag (CD) at

75 m/s

(a)

0.625

0.25

31.25

12.5

1.57391

0.938042

0.721061

(b)

0.625

0.5

31.25

25

1.57742

0.93827

0.719814

(c)

0.625

0.75

31.25

37.5

1.584085

0.941359

0.721415

(d)

0.625

31.25

50

1.588895

0.944672

0.722937

(e)

0.625

1.25

31.25

62.5

1.595575

0.948232

0.725739

(f)

0.625

1.5

31.25

75

1.59892

0.951286

0.728986

27115

Research India Publications; httpwww.ripublication.comijaer.htm

different Velocity with different L* at F*=0.5

Localization

Factor (F*)

Characteristic

Length Ratio

(L*)

Coefficient

of Drag (CD)

at 25 m/s

Coefficient

of Drag (CD)

at 50 m/s

Coefficient

of Drag (CD)

at 75 m/s

(a)

0.5

0.25

25

(b)

12.5

1.57892

0.940459

0.722578

0.5

0.5

(c)

25

25

1.581574

0.940041

0.720834

0.5

(d)

0.75

25

37.5

1.583442

0.941906

0.722881

0.5

25

50

1.588069

0.94323

0.722829

(e)

0.5

1.25

25

62.5

1.588826

0.944518

0.724577

(f)

0.5

1.5

25

75

1.590561

0.945881

0.725097

Cases

Forebody

Dimension

(b1)

Arm

Extension

(g)

different Velocity with different L* at F*=0.375

Localization

Factor (F*)

Characteristic

Length Ratio

(L*)

(a)

0.375

0.25

18.75

(b)

0.375

0.5

(c)

0.375

(d)

(e)

(f)

Cases

Forebody

Dimension

(b1)

Arm

Extension

(g)

Coefficient

of Drag (CD)

at 25 m/s

Coefficient

of Drag (CD)

at 50 m/s

Coefficient

of Drag (CD)

at 75 m/s

12.5

1.583162

0.942377

0.723833

18.75

25

1.582408

0.942316

0.723688

0.75

18.75

37.5

1.584589

0.943781

0.724382

0.375

18.75

50

1.584704

0.943021

0.723443

0.375

1.25

18.75

62.5

1.585235

0.943433

0.723591

0.375

1.5

18.75

75

1.583955

0.94234

0.723287

different Velocity with different L* at F*=0.25

Localization

Factor (F*)

Characteristic

Length Ratio

(L*)

(a)

0.25

0.25

12.5

(b)

0.25

0.5

(c)

0.25

(d)

(e)

(f)

Cases

Forebody

Dimension

(b1)

Arm

Extension

(g)

Coefficient

of Drag (CD)

at 25 m/s

Coefficient

of Drag (CD)

at 50 m/s

Coefficient

of Drag (CD)

at 75 m/s

12.5

1.584318

0.943256

0.724654

12.5

25

1.584287

0.942739

0.723977

0.75

12.5

37.5

1.584143

0.942639

0.723874

0.25

12.5

50

1.583255

0.942414

0.723171

0.25

1.25

12.5

62.5

1.584929

0.942972

0.724038

0.25

1.5

12.5

75

1.584406

0.944564

0.726887

CONCLUSION

Computational Fluid Dynamic analysis for the standard D model with and without

Roughness and Modified Forebody D model were studied and corresponding results are

discussed. The Experimental Results reveal that the modified Forebody model has the tendency

to reduce the Drag by preserving the Leading Edge Suction and by holding the Boundary layer

adhered to the Model. Varying Characteristic Length ratio L* and Localization Factor F* has

27116

Research India Publications; httpwww.ripublication.comijaer.htm

minimal Effect over the Drag reduction whereas the Velocity has a great impact on the Drag

reduction. Greater the Test velocities lesser is the Drag over the model. The Modified Forebody

can perform well at Greater velocities i.e. at High speeds than at Low speeds. Even though the

Modified Forebody reduces the Forebody drag the drag from the base region on the backside of

such bluff bodies is not easily eliminated. Hence we decided to infuse the roughness effect on

standard D-Model to reduce the drag from the base region i.e. the pressure drag. Experimental

Investigations were done over the standard D-Model with various roughness and the results has

been tabulated. The results reveal that increase in roughness percentage leads to decrease in drag

coefficient by reducing the so expected Pressure Drag. Also the roughness on 100% of the D

model is much efficient than the D model with front and rear 50% roughness. The physical

significance can be explained by the way of formation of wake region and the flow separation. It

may be assumed at this stage of research shows till 8% roughness the drag coefficient reduces

when compared to the smooth standard D model.

REFERENCES

1. Hoerner, S. F. 1965, Fluid Dynamic Drag.

2. Rathakrishnan.E, 1999, Effect of Splitter Plate on Bluff Body Drag, AIAA Journal,Vol. 37,

No.9, pp 1125-1126

3. Khalid M. Sowoud and Rathakrishnan.E, 1996 Front Body Effects on Drag and Flow field

of a Three-Dimensional Noncircular Cylinder, AIAA Journal, Vol. 31, No.7, pp1345-1347.

4. Bandu N.Pamadi and B.H. Laxmana Gowda, 1992,

Cross flow Aerodynamic

Characteristics of a Noncircular Cylinder with and without strakes AIAA Journal,

Vol.30,No.12, pp 2864-2870.

5. Kevin R. Cooper, 1988, The Use of a Forebody Plate to Reduce the Drag and to improve

the Aerodynamic Stability of a Cylinder of Square Cross-section Journal of Wind

Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, Vol.28, pp 271-280.

6. Koneig K. and Roshko A, 1985, " An Experimental Study of geometrical effects on the drag

and flow field of two bluff bodies separated by a gap, Journal of fluid mechanics, Vol.156,

pp 167-204.

7. A.Gatto, N. A. Ahamed,R.D. Archer, 1999, Roughness and Turbulence effects on the

Surface Pressure over Yawed Cylinders, AIAA Journal,Vol. 38, No.9, pp1765-1767

8. H.Kikuchi, Y.Tamura, Gideon van .Zijl, K.Hibi, S.Nadaraja Pillai, Lisa Alberti, 2007, Wind

pressures on cylindrical models with serrated roughness and flow fields 12th International

conference on Wind Engineering, Cairns, Australia, pp 1703 1710.

9. Robert E.Breidenthal, 2007, Essay Forebody Drag of Bluff Bodies, University of

Washington, 1419_Zill.17_785-826, pp 786-788.

27117

## Viel mehr als nur Dokumente.

Entdecken, was Scribd alles zu bieten hat, inklusive Bücher und Hörbücher von großen Verlagen.

Jederzeit kündbar.