Flowfield Investigation at

Eric W. M. Roosenboom
e-mail: eric.roosenboom@dlr.de
Andreas Schrder
e-mail: andreas.schroeder@dlr.de
Department of Experimental Methods,
Deutsches Zentrum fr Luft- und Raumfahrt
(DLR),
Institute of Aerodynamics and Flow Technology,
Bunsenstrasse 10,
37073 Gttingen, Germany
Propeller Thrust Reverse
The flow phenomena in the slipstream around an eight-bladed propeller at thrust reverse
conditions are analyzed using double stereoscopic particle image velocimetry in the
Airbus Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Facility in Bremen, Germany. Several planes are scanned
using a traversing system, as well as measurements at several phase angles. In the
present paper only properties in the propeller symmetry plane will be compared. The fluid
mechanical properties for two different propeller blade pitch angle settings are investi-
gated and compared for their ability to deliver a negative thrust. The first setting has
identical blade pitch angles for all propeller blades; the second setting has alternating
blade pitch angles. It is concluded that the latter setting provides better aerodynamic flow
properties. DOI: 10.1115/1.4001677

1 Introduction runway length. On turbofan aircraft the flow direction needs to be

The development of turbofan propulsion has long dominated
the aerospace industry. In current times one has to seriously keep
in mind the supply of fossil fuels. Turboprops with their low fuel
consumption are again considered as competitive alternatives for
the propulsion of airplanes. One drawback of the diminished in-
terest in aeronautical propeller research has its effect on available
information, in spite of progress being made in naval research.
But marine propeller investigations focus mainly on naval phe-
nomena and are nearly always performed in cavitation tunnels
1,2. Additionally, marine propeller wake measurements are
dominated by hull-propeller interactions 3,4, as opposed to the
propeller wing interactions for aeronautical applications. Although
essential general propeller phenomena tip vortices and wake evo-
lution are highlighted in these cases, they differ significantly
from aeronautical applications. Recent experiments dedicated to
unsteady aeronautical applications remain minimal. Numerical
predictions of complex propeller flows exist but due to the com-
plexity of propeller flow three-dimensionality and unsteadiness
simplifications in the calculations have to be made such as mod-
eling the propeller as an actuator disk and neglecting viscosity 5.
Other problems are the distinction between numerical dissipation
and turbulence decay, i.e., turbulence modeling 6, difficulties in
wake modeling 7, and the computational costs of performing 3D
unsteady propeller calculations.
There is a need to gain knowledge on this type of unsteady
nature of propeller flow. Lacking any visual information on this
phenomenon and the inability of numerical predictions to calcu-
late a periodically unsteady flow dominated by large regions of
separation, the current experimental investigation focuses on the
flow phenomena at the application of thrust reverse on a propeller
equipped half-model. Particle image velocimetry PIV is very
suitable for providing instantaneous and averaged velocity and
velocity-derived quantities field data and giving insight in the
flow phenomena occurring in these particular flows 8. Moreover,
PIV has matured over the years to the point that it can be readily
used in industrial wind tunnels 9. Experimental velocity infor-
mation around the propeller at thrust reverse also allows an iden-
tification of the unsteady behavior of this type of flow.
2 Propeller Thrust Reverse
During the landing procedure thrust reverse is applied in order
to enforce a deceleration of the aircraft and a shortening of the
changed; for turboprop aircraft it is sufficient to produce drag,
which effectively reduces any forward thrust. For varying pitch
propeller aircraft thrust reverse can be achieved by simultaneously
decreasing the blade pitch angles of the propeller blades. Without
going into detail, it was found that with a uniform decrease in
propeller blade pitch angles the propeller rotational speed peaked
at zero thrust. An alternative procedure has been proposed in order
to reduce this peak. During this alternative procedure the propeller
blade pitch angles are decreased in two phases. First one set of
blades is maneuvered to a negative thrust, while the other set still
produces a minimal thrust. The propeller blade pitch angles of this
second set of blades are then also put to a negative thrust. The
propellers are thus equipped with alternating different blade pitch
angles. The focus of the current investigation is on the flowfield
phenomena at a negative thrust.
The nature of the flow around a propeller is unsteady and the
flow conditions at thrust reverse settings are even more complex
due to separated regions and strong shear layers in the propeller
slipstream. A measurement campaign was conducted in order to
investigate the flow velocity at thrust reverse. A general sketch of
the forces and velocities is depicted in Fig. 1. Two propeller set-
tings with different pitch angles will be compared at an equal
freestream velocity and equal rotational speeds. The advance
angle and advance ratio are, thus, similar for both settings. One
propeller setting is a propeller equipped with an equal pitch angle
distribution for all blades, 1a standard setting hereafter called
Setting 1. A more exotic setting is chosen for the second propeller
setting; the blades are set with alternating pitch angles differential
blade pitch angle setting, 2 and 3 hereafter called Setting 2.
The following condition holds for the alternating pitch angles:
1 = 21 2 + 3. The perceived relative angle of attack of the
blades for the second setting will thus also fluctuate due to the
alternating blade pitch angles and increase the radial and azi-
muthal velocities. In average both propeller settings will deliver
the same amount of negative thrust because the mean relative
angle of attack is similar for both settings. All blade pitch angles
in Settings 1 and 2 are such that they produce a negative thrust.
Setting 2 will induce a difference in pitch, e.g., the propeller
slip, which is defined as the difference between the geometric
pitch and the effective pitch. The geometric pitch, the distance the
propeller would advance theoretically in a solid medium, is de-
fined as follows 10:

pg = 2 4 R tan 0.75
3
1
Contributed by the Fluids Engineering Division of ASME for publication in the
JOURNAL OF FLUIDS ENGINEERING. Manuscript received July 28, 2009; final manuscript
received January 28, 2010; published online May 19, 2010. Assoc. Editor: Olivier The effective pitch of a propeller is the distance the propeller
Coutier-Delgosha. actually advances 10, and is given by

Journal of Fluids Engineering Copyright 2010 by ASME JUNE 2010, Vol. 132 / 061101-1

Downloaded From: http://fluidsengineering.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jfega4/27421/ on 06/19/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/ab


Fig. 1 Velocity perceived by propeller blade, and related
forces at propeller thrust reverse. Note: Not to scale and nega-
tive lift and thrust vectors are drawn in their acting directions.
U rotation, traversing, and flow are given in Fig. 3. A traversing
pe = 2 system was used for both the laser and camera support in order to
np
For the given measurement conditions the effective pitch is equal
and constant for both settings, since the freestream velocity and
the rotational speed are fixed. The geometric pitch, however, is
different. At Setting 1, for equal blade pitch angles, this is con-
stant. At Setting 2 the geometric pitch is alternating due to the
alternating blade pitch angles. This means that at Setting 2 the
propeller slip is also varying per blade passage. In the following
the flowfield phenomena at a negative thrust for both settings will
be investigated using stereoscopic PIV SPIV.
3 Experimental Setup
3.1 Measurement Conditions. All experiments are carried
out with an equal freestream velocity U = 48 m / s and equal
propeller rotational speed. Along with the appropriate blade pitch
angle, these settings are able to provide a negative thrust, i.e.,
thrust reverse. The camera systems were aligned such that the
first stereoscopic system was able to view the flow upstream of
the propeller, while the second system was aligned to view the
flow directly downstream of the propeller plane. Both fields of
view of the camera systems are perpendicular to the wing and
parallel to the wind tunnel floor and ceiling. A traversing system
was used in order to scan parts of the propeller slipstream in
spanwise directions between the propeller symmetry plane and the
outer tip radius of the outboard propeller.
In order to investigate the unsteady behavior of the propeller
flow the measurements were conducted in a phase-locked sense,
where the trigger signal is obtained from a transistor-transistor-
logic TTL-signal of each propeller revolution. Combined with
the information in the scanned planes, this will give direct feed-
back of azimuthal and radial changes in the propeller flow. It is
noted, however, that the information in the scanned slices will be
left out of the discussion in the current paper. Five measurements
were performed for the first setting. Additional phase-locked mea-
surements were performed at the second setting, with a phase
angle increment of approximately 9 deg. The phase-locked mea-
surements allow making a distinction between periodic and ape-
riodic events in average and rms velocity fields and their contri-
bution to or influence on the flow conditions at a reverse thrust.
At all measurement points phase-locked and scanning 200 im-
ages were recorded simultaneously upstream and downstream of
the propeller.
3.2 Wind Tunnel. The stereoscopic PIV measurements were
performed in the Low-Speed Wind Tunnel LSWT Facility of
Airbus in Bremen Germany. A schematic overview of the wind
tunnel is presented in Fig. 2. The wind tunnel is an open type
061101-2 / Vol. 132, JUNE 2010
Downloaded From: http://fluidsengineering.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jfega4/27421/ on 06/19/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/ab
Fig. 2 Wind tunnel layout
Eiffel wind tunnel suction type with a closed cross section with
an area of 2.1 2.1 m2 and a contraction ratio of 4.82:1. The
length of the test-section is 4.45 m. The model with a schematic
view of the laser light sheet, camera access, and directions of
be able to simultaneously move the laser light sheet and cameras
relative to the model with equal imaging distances.
3.3 PIV Equipment. Special considerations are necessary for
the application of stereoscopic particle image velocimetry in in-
dustrial facilities 9 due to complex and/or curved models. A
special mixture of acrylic paint and Rhodamine B is applied on
the wind tunnel model to absorb laser light, which greatly reduces
the amount of reflected light. Several areas in the wind tunnel
were covered with black self-adhesive foils in order to reduce
background illumination. The area under investigation was the
flow in the symmetry plane upstream and downstream of the pro-
peller, requiring the cameras to be placed underneath the wind
tunnel floor. The laser light sheet had to enter horizontally into the
wind tunnel in order to illuminate the particles in the slipstream,
yielding scattering close to 90 deg.
The seeding particles were illuminated with two double cavity
BigSky CFR 200 Nd:YAG yttrium aluminum garnet lasers,
which achieved a combined output of 360 mJ/pulse. The seeding
particles itself were generated with two aerosol generators PIV-
TEC GmbH being placed at the intake of the wind tunnel Fig.
2. These aerosol generators produce nearly monodisperse par-
ticles with an average diameter of 1 m. An image of the setup of
the laser, the laser optics, and the traverse is presented in Fig. 4.
The four PCO Sensicam charge-coupled device CCD-cameras
1280 1040 pixel2 / camera, in two angular stereoscopic setups,
were connected to another traverse underneath the wind tunnel
floor. The distorted focus is corrected by applying two-axis Sche-
impflug adapters on all cameras. Details of the double stereo-
scopic camera setup are depicted in Fig. 5. Cameras 1 and 2
stereoscopic system 1 observe the flow downstream of the pro-
peller; Cameras 3 and 4 stereoscopic system 2 observe the flow
Fig. 3 Propeller half-model in the wind tunnel
Transactions of the ASME

Fig. 4 Laser, optics, and traverse outside the wind tunnel
test-section
upstream of the propeller. Although not clearly visible the beam
on which all cameras are mounted is slightly tilted in order to be
able to view just over the wing of the half-model. During the
measurements both traverses were operated simultaneously and
moved in equal amounts. This facilitates an appropriate means of
performing the measurements at several slices, since one calibra-
tion is suitable for the full measurement range.
3.4 PIV Processing. Any slight deviation between two im-
ages of one stereoscopic view that might occur can be corrected
for by applying a disparity correction method 11. Two corre-
sponding particle images, illuminated at the same time, of two
cameras of one stereoscopic view are cross-correlated and yield
a displacement field, which in turn can be used to correct the
mapping of both images to subpixel accuracy. The resulting par-
ticle images are analyzed with PIVVIEW 2.4 PIVTEC and DLRs
in-house developed PIV analysis software package. This package
is capable of performing multigrid correlations with image defor-
mation, which can tackle the dynamic range of the particle dis-
placement of about 14 pixels during the experiments. The settings
of the analysis: a final interrogation window size of 32
32 pixel2, with a step size of 16 pixels i.e., 50% window over-
lap and an initial window size of 96 96 pixel2. The final reso-
lution is 2.3 2.3 mm2. The subpixel accuracy is about 0.1 pixel
on instantaneous results. The absolute accuracy is then of the or-
der of about 1% in a single result. Comments on the systematic
error are, however, obscured by the fact that peak-locking was
partially present in the results. This will be explained in detail
Fig. 5 Detail of double stereoscopic camera setup, under-
neath the wind tunnel floor. Cameras 1 and 2 stereo system 1
observe the flow downstream of the propeller; Cameras 3 and 4
stereo system 2 observe the flow upstream of the propeller.
Journal of Fluids Engineering
Downloaded From: http://fluidsengineering.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jfega4/27421/ on 06/19/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/ab
Fig. 6 Histogram of U-velocities showing the effect of phase-
only filter; a phase-only filter emphasizes peak-locking no
median and Gaussian filter applied; b peak-locking reduced
without application phase-only filter and after application of
median and Gaussian filters
next, as well as the method for reducing the peak-locking in our
results.
4 Results
4.1 Preprocessing of Data. The acquired particle images re-
quire preprocessing for a proper determination of the correlation
peak and the resultant velocity vectors. A minimum background
image minimum gray intensity level at each pixel over a whole
data set is subtracted from the individual snapshots. In addition
areas where no valid information can be obtained, due to the
presence of the propeller model or significant reflections, are
masked. Although Rhodamine was applied, not all reflections
could be eliminated.
A new source of peak-locking is identified. As has been dis-
cussed extensively in literature the main source of peak-locking is
normally identified when the particle image diameter is too small
12. It can, however, be resolved by artificially increasing the
particle image diameter by defocusing the images. This new
source of peak-locking is also related to small particles but they
originate from the profile of the laser light sheet. The laser light
sheet intensity differs in depth inside the measurement area and
deviates from an ideal top-hat profile. Particles at the border of
this light sheet are hence illuminated at lower intensities and are
represented only at single pixels the centers of particle images at
the CCD chip. Various particle image sizes are present, while the
brighter ones are of reasonable pixel size 3 pixel diameter and
the less intense ones are only 1 pixel. This new source is empha-
sized by the symmetric phase-only filter 13. This filter behaves
likes a high-pass filter, which accentuates the phase information in
the fast-Fourier transform FFT and produces sharp correlation
peaks. It is believed that the low-intensity particles that are dis-
cretized too small are overestimated by the phase-only filtering,
which uses a normalization function for the weighting, and actu-
ally neglects size, intensity, and shape of the object. As a conse-
quence it is opted that even sharper correlation peaks occur, which
increase the sensitivity toward peak-locking. The true origin of the
observed effect is, however, unclear and further research has to be
developed in order to investigate the effect and extents of particle
mapping as this phenomenon may very well occur unnoticed in
other facilities. Also the specific reasons why the symmetric
phase-only filter would emphasize such phenomena require fur-
ther analysis.
Figure 6 presents the histogram distribution of the U-velocity
component. Clearly visible in Fig. 6a is the extensive amount of
peak-locking due to the phase-only filter. An effective way of
reducing, or even eliminating, the peak-locking can be obtained
by applying a median and Gaussian 3 3 kernel filters and omit-
ting the phase-only filter. These act as low-pass filters effectively
deblurring the particle images and emphasize the effect of the
intensity information of all the particles. Based on these findings
only the median and Gaussian filters have been applied as prepro-
cessing steps to the particle images.
JUNE 2010, Vol. 132 / 061101-3

Fig. 7 Field of view magnitude of velocity is displayed dur-
ing measurements, with respect to wind tunnel model. Note
that the axes are nonuniformly scaled to increase visibility,
flow is from right to left.
4.2 Velocity and Vorticity Effects. The flowfield patterns at
the different blade pitch angles of the propeller will be compared
in order to illustrate their behavior at negative thrust settings. An
overview of the information obtained during the measurements is
presented in Fig. 7, where the magnitude of velocity is shown all
results at the same phase angle and same conditions. As can be
seen, two planes were omitted while performing the measure-
ments, due to large and significant reflections from the laser light
sheet on the nacelle. The reflections in the other planes influenced
the particle images to lesser extent and could be masked.
4.2.1 Magnitude of Velocity. The magnitudes of the velocity
field for the two settings are represented in Figs. 8a and 8b,
respectively. A comparison of the velocity field upstream of the
propeller reveals no particular differences, except that the stagna-
tion region, just below the propeller tip, at Setting 2 is slightly
larger. Anyhow, both inflow conditions still show similarities in
the deceleration of flow upstream of the propeller. With the infor-
mation obtained by PIV in the flow downstream it is possible to
identify the following differences: Individual blade passages are
clearly identified above the nacelle for Setting 1 whereas for Set-
ting 2 each of two subsequent blade passages seems to merge in
this region. Since no significant features appear in the inflow con-
ditions the focus of the further analysis is being put on the infor-
Fig. 8 Magnitude of velocity at the two settings in outboard propeller symmetry plane
061101-4 / Vol. 132, JUNE 2010
Downloaded From: http://fluidsengineering.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jfega4/27421/ on 06/19/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/ab
mation downstream of the propeller.
The features for the three velocity components at the two blade
pitch angle settings are presented in Fig. 9 flow direction is from
left to right. The comparison of the averaged velocity compo-
nents shows that the flow pattern downstream of the propeller is
different for the two cases. The shear layer thickness for Setting 1
becomes larger after the first region of backflow. The region of
backflow in the U-velocity at Setting 1 is divided into two distinct
regions; the region of backflow for Setting 2 is more uniform with
lower overall values. The shear layer for Setting 2 remains more
or less constant. Downstream of the propeller the V-velocity
shows different features in the tip region and the nacelle region.
The V-velocity, the out-of-plane component of the velocity, for
both settings, Figs. 9b and 9e, shows an interesting feature
where the flow in the nacelle region swirls opposite to the rotation
of the propeller. This is due to the local negative angle of attack,
necessary to achieve a negative thrust, and thus affects the
through-flow of the freestream velocity. In the tip region, how-
ever, the V-velocity is in the direction of rotation. In the nacelle
region the individual blade passages are clearly identified and are
separated equidistant, an identification of a periodic passage for
each single blade at the equal blade pitch angle setting Setting 1.
At Setting 2 the blade passages of two subsequent blades are more
or less merged together, a result of the alternating effective pitch
of the propeller blades. The alternating pitch will cause a com-
pression of two subsequent blade passages. In the tip region an-
other effect is present, where at Setting 2 the V-velocity seems to
diffuse sooner and in a larger region. The vertical flow component
W-velocity is again comparable for the two cases. The
W-velocity is equally distributed for negative and positive values
for both settings. But, in comparison with Setting 2, the values are
higher for Setting 1. This is an indication that for Setting 1 the
entrainment into the nacelle region is larger and therefore also the
turbulent fluctuations are expected to be larger for Setting 1. In the
nacelle region no particular events are present for the W-velocity.
4.2.2 Differences in Magnitude of Velocity. The amount of
negative thrust is equal for both settings, as was indicated by
parallel force measurements. The flow features are, however, dif-
ferent as was observed in the magnitude of velocity distributions.
In Fig. 10 two different methods of displaying this difference are
presented for the same phase angle. Figure 10a is the plain
difference of the magnitude of velocity at Setting 2 between the
magnitudes of velocity at Setting 1; see Eq. 3.
Vdiff = u21 + v21 + w21 u22 + v22 + w22
3
The differences in the magnitude of velocity are mainly due to the
effect of varying pitch. Although perhaps not totally clear in the
Transactions of the ASME
 Fig. 9 Comparison of averaged velocity components at the two settings in outboard propeller symmetry plane

figure the mean value is just slightly larger than 0, indicating that
there is no big difference in net flux. Thereby implying that the net
forces should be comparable as well.
Figure 10b shows the magnitude of the difference of the in-
dividual velocity components. This representation can be regarded
as comparable to the standard deviation of the individual velocity
components; see also Eq. 4.
M diff = u1 u22 + v1 v22 + w1 w22 4 on the flowfield can be more clearly identified by the in-plane
This representation emphasizes the differences due to alternating
propeller slip. Setting 1 implies an equidistant distribution in the
tip region equal distribution of geometric pitch. At Setting 2 the
geometric pitch difference only affects every other vortex, due to
the alternating pitch distance. Hence, the contribution in the tip
region is mainly due to Setting 1. In a similar fashion the differ-
ences in the blade root section, the merging effect, can be ex-
plained.
4.2.3 Vorticity. The effect of the alternating blade pitch angles
vorticity. Figure 11a shows the vorticity contours for Setting 1.
The individual blade passages are clearly recognized in the na-

Fig. 10 Differences in velocity of both settings Fig. 11 Vorticity downstream of propeller for both settings

Journal of Fluids Engineering JUNE 2010, Vol. 132 / 061101-5

Downloaded From: http://fluidsengineering.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jfega4/27421/ on 06/19/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/ab

 Fig. 12 Vorticity top and turbulence bottom generation for Setting 1 at subsequent phases in the tip region the upper
part in Fig. 11a; a vorticity, phase angle 0 deg, b vorticity, phase angle 18 deg, c vorticity, phase angle 36 deg; d
TKE, phase angle 0 deg, e TKE, phase angle 18 deg, and f TKE, phase angle 36 deg
celle region. Again it is confirmed that at Setting 2 the vortices in
the nacelle region are merged. For Setting 1, the tip vortices in-
teract with each other and the shear layer instability causing ran-
dom meandering of the vortex position. While the average vortic-
ity regions of two subsequent passages merge reasonably fast,
they burst and decay downstream into a larger cloud creating a
large turbulent region. At Setting 2, Fig. 11b, the blade passages
merge in the nacelle region, and the significant tip vortices do not
interact and remain coherent for several blade passages and are
produced only every second blade passage. As a result of the
lower entrainment as was indicated by the W-velocity the vorti-
ces stay in the shear layer and are just convected and dissipated
downstream. The tip vortices also show different effects where for
Setting 1 the tip vortices are separated at a larger distance than for
Setting 2. This result implies that the aerodynamic flow conditions
behind the propeller for Setting 2 will be better more stable,
since the flow is less turbulent i.e., less separation as for Setting
1, and Setting 2 is therefore favored over Setting 1.
4.3 Phase Evolution of Vorticity and Turbulence. In order
to establish whether the vortices and energy production remain
uniform for other phases it is necessary to visualize the develop-
ment of vorticity and turbulence level during several phases of the
vortices and energy production. Due to the alternating pitch dis-
tance blade-to-blade information of two consecutive blade pas-
sages is required. The phase angle difference was therefore 9 deg,
and the evolution is followed beyond 45 deg. The key blade used
to trigger to PIV equipment was rotated 46.25 deg in propeller
rotation direction. The turbulent kinetic energy TKE, as defined
in Eq. 5, can be used as a measure for the magnitude of turbu-
lence, and its contours define the development of turbulence
within the flow
TKE = 0.5uu + vv + ww 5 region for Setting 1 indicated by the W-velocity will increase the
The vortex expansion and the associated measure of turbulence
TKE in the tip region, for Setting 1, are revealed in Fig. 12. The
tip vortices are separated at a relatively short distance, as can be
seen for the phase angle of 36 deg, Fig. 12c. After just a few
blade passages these vortices merge and then eventually expand,
where their intensity is smeared over the expansion for increasing
phase angles, decreasing the overall value of the vorticity. It
seems that the merging of the vortices and the expansion are two
separate processes. There is no connection between the merging
region and the separated region. One other particular event is that
the positions of the first vortices and increased turbulence blobs
061101-6 / Vol. 132, JUNE 2010
Downloaded From: http://fluidsengineering.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jfega4/27421/ on 06/19/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/ab
coincide, but when the smeared averaged vorticity expands turbu-
lence is produced slightly after this position. The random mean-
dering of vortex cores is associated with the turbulence production
term uw, which rules the entrainment and shear layer
development.
Figure 13 elucidates the confinement of the vorticity and turbu-
lence at several phases for Setting 2 in the tip region. Again, the
vorticity and the turbulence in the tip region are shown. Note that
in order to present information of the alternating blade pitch
angles the difference between the individual phase angles is twice
as in Fig. 12. As mentioned before for Setting 2, the tip vortices
do not merge. This is supported by the fact that the separating
distances between these tip vortices remain constant. Also, the tip
vortices are being shed as at a normal i.e., positive thrust
producing case. For the alternating blade pitch angle setting the
vorticity centers and the turbulence coincide exactly. So no extra
turbulence is created due to separation. At the alternating blade
pitch angles the vortices remain confined and the energy level also
does not expand. This setting is therefore preferred since the flow
properties are leveled.
The confinement of the vortices and turbulence for Setting 2 on
one hand and the expansion of the vortices for Setting 1 on the
other are also supported by the difference in the respective shear
layers. The shear layers are readily visualized in the U-velocities
in Figs. 9a and 9d. For Setting 1, Fig. 9a, only after one
blade passage the shear layer shows instability and becomes
larger. This shear layer is very susceptible for turbulent fluctua-
tions. Also a region of backflow appears after one blade passage.
This shear layer will also increase any turbulent dissipation as
identified in Fig. 12. The shear layer for Setting 2, Fig. 9d, is
slightly wider but remains intact and is able to withstand the tur-
bulent excitations. Also, the larger entrainment into the nacelle
turbulence production. The turbulence for Setting 2 is just con-
vected downstream. Since the flowfield for Setting 2 appears more
stable, it is opted that, although the blades are nonuniformly
loaded, less aerodynamic distortions will be present at the wing
and this setting is therefore favored.
5 Conclusions
An investigation of the flow phenomena at thrust reverse has
been successfully performed by means of stereoscopic particle
image velocimetry. Equal blade pitch angles at thrust reverse can
induce a peak of the rotational speed of the propeller blades. An
Transactions of the ASME
 Fig. 13 Vorticity top and turbulence bottom generation for Setting 2 at subsequent phases in the tip region the upper
part in Fig. 11b; a vorticity, phase angle 0 deg, b vorticity, phase angle 36 deg, c vorticity, phase angle 72 deg; d
TKE, phase angle 0 deg, e TKE, phase angle 36 deg, and f TKE, phase angle 72 deg

alternative option is to lower the blade pitch angles in two differ- L negative lift
ent sets. This option operates with alternating blade pitch angles. M diff difference in velocity components at Settings 1
This reduces the peak during thrust reverse. The current investi- and 2
gation explores the aerodynamic flow properties downstream of n p rotational speed
the propeller disk. A half-model is equipped with two counter- pe effective pitch
rotating eight-bladed propellers. The flow in one half diameter of pg geometric pitch
the outboard propeller region was visualized with a double stereo- Q torque force
scopic PIV setup. Several slices were measured by simultaneously r / R normalized propeller radius
traversing the laser light sheet and the cameras in spanwise direc- R propeller radius
tion. The two SPIV systems were aligned within the same plane T negative thrust
for viewing both downstream and upstream of the propeller. Initial U velocity in the x-direction
analysis has indicated that a new source of peak-locking might be u velocity fluctuation in the x-direction
introduced by the combination of low-intensity particles and the u1 velocity in the x-direction, Setting 1
application of the phase-only symmetric filter. Further research is
u2 velocity in the x-direction, Setting 2
needed to investigate the effect of imaging particles with varying
U freestream velocity
intensity and diameter. Two settings of an equal value of negative
V velocity in the y-direction
thrust thrust reverse were compared. The first setting employs
an equal blade pitch angle distribution; at the second setting the v velocity fluctuation in the y-direction
propeller blades are equipped with alternating blade pitch angles v1 velocity in the y-direction, Setting 1
and hence a varying local angle of attack. Both settings induce a v2 velocity in the y-direction, Setting 2
complex flow around the propeller blades. No particular events Vdiff difference in the magnitude of velocities at
were present in the upstream flow conditions. In order to achieve Settings 1 and 2
a negative thrust, the local angle of attack of the blades has to be VR relative velocity
negative. As a result the out-of-plane velocity behind the propeller Vt velocity due to rotation
is opposed to the direction of rotation of the propeller. Different W velocity in the z-direction
effects occur for the two settings: The blade wakes in the nacelle w velocity fluctuation in the z-direction
region of the alternating equipped propeller merge, whereas the w1 velocity in the z-direction, Setting 1
tip vortices merge for the equal blade pitch angle setting. At the w2 velocity in the z-direction, Setting 2
equal blade pitch angle setting the tip vortices merge and produce
strong turbulent fluctuations, and the vortices for the varying Greek Symbols
blade pitch angles are merely convected downstream and dissipate L local angle of attack negative
within the shear layer. It can be concluded that the alternating 0.75 blade pitch angle at 75% of the propeller
blade pitch setting causes a different flowfield at propeller thrust radius
reverse. 1 mean blade pitch angle of 2 and 3
2 blade pitch angle
Acknowledgment 3 blade pitch angle
advance angle
The measurement campaign was performed on close collabora- angular velocity
tion project work on behalf of Airbus. This project was conducted y out-of-plane component of vorticity
within the German IHK-HICON research program and is funded
by the German Ministry for Economics and Labor.
References
Nomenclature 1 Cotroni, A., Di Felice, F., Romano, G. P., and Elefante, M., 2000, Investiga-
tion of the Near Wake of a Propeller Using Particle Image Velocimetry, Exp.
D drag Fluids, 297, pp. S227S236.
FR total force 2 Lee, S. J., Paik, B. G., Yoon, J. H., and Lee, C. M., 2004, Three-Component

Journal of Fluids Engineering JUNE 2010, Vol. 132 / 061101-7

Downloaded From: http://fluidsengineering.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jfega4/27421/ on 06/19/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/ab

 Velocity Field Measurements of Propeller Wake Using a Stereoscopic PIV
Technique, Exp. Fluids, 36, pp. 575585.
3 Paik, B. G., Lee, C. M., and Lee, S. J., 2004, PIV Analysis of Flow Around
a Container Ship Model With a Rotating Propeller, Exp. Fluids, 36, pp.
833846.
4 Calgano, G., Di Felice, F., Felli, M., and Pereira, F., 2002, Propeller Wake
Analysis Behind a Ship by Stereo PIV, 24th Symposium on Naval Hydrody-
namics, Fukuoka, Japan.
5 Bousquet, J.-M., and Gardarein, P., 2003, Improvements on Computations of
High Speed Propeller Unsteady Aerodynamics, Aerosp. Sci. Technol., 7, pp.
465472.
6 Stuermer, A., and Rakowitz, M., 2005, Unsteady Simulation of a Transport
Aircraft Using MEGAFLOW, Applied Vehicle Technology Panel AVT
Symposium on Flow Induced Unsteady Loads and the Impact on Military
Applications, Budapest, Hungary, Paper No. RTO-MP-AVT-123.
7 Chiaramonte, J.-Y., Favier, D., Maresca, C., and Agnes, A., 1991, Unsteady
061101-8 / Vol. 132, JUNE 2010
Downloaded From: http://fluidsengineering.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jfega4/27421/ on 06/19/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/ab
Interactional Effects Between a Propeller and a Fixed Wing, Ninth Applied
Aerodynamics Conference, Baltimore, MD, AIAA Paper No. 91-3231.
8 Roosenboom, E. W. M., Heider, A., and Schrder, A., 2009, Investigation of
the Propeller Slipstream With Particle Image Velocimetry, J. Aircr., 462,
pp. 442449.
9 Stanislas, M., Kompenhans, J., and Westerweel, J., eds., 2000, Particle Image
Velocimetry: Progress Towards Industrial Application, Kluwer Academic, Dor-
drecht.
10 Ruijgrok, G. J. J., 1996, Elements of Airplane Performance, Delft University
Press, Delft, The Netherlands.
11 Wieneke, B., 2005, Stereo-PIV Using Self-Calibration on Particle Images,
Exp. Fluids, 39, pp. 267280.
12 Raffel, M., Willert, C. E., Wereley, S. T., and Kompenhans, J., 2007, Particle
Image Velocimetry: A Practical Guide, 2nd ed., Springer-Verlag, Berlin.
13 Wernet, M. P., 2005, Symmetric Phase Only Filtering: A New Paradigm for
DPIV Data Processing, Meas. Sci. Technol., 16, pp. 601618.
Transactions of the ASME