See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/258246710

THE EFFECT OF LEADING EDGE TUBERCLE

GEOMETRY ON THE PERFORMANCE OF
DIFFERENT AIRFOILS

Conference Paper · June 2009

CITATIONS READS

10 1,708

3 authors:

Kristy Hansen Richard M. Kelso

Flinders University University of Adelaide
42 PUBLICATIONS 269 CITATIONS 163 PUBLICATIONS 1,591 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Bassam B Dally
University of Adelaide
211 PUBLICATIONS 2,938 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Wind Farm Noise View project

Understanding Flow Structure View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Kristy Hansen on 01 June 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 ExHFT-7
28 June – 03 July 2009, Krakow, Poland

THE EFFECT OF LEADING EDGE TUBERCLE GEOMETRY ON THE

PERFORMANCE OF DIFFERENT AIRFOILS

K. L. Hansen, R. M. Kelso and B. B. Dally

School of Mechanical Engineering
University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia

ABSTRACT. Results are presented of an experimental investigation on the effects of modification

to the leading edge geometry of two NACA airfoils with different aerodynamic characteristics. The
modification was inspired by the humpback whale flipper, which has rounded tubercles on its
leading edge resembling the shape of a sine curve. Force measurements on both modified and
unmodified 2-D airfoils show that tubercles are more beneficial for the NACA 65-021 airfoil than
the NACA 0021 airfoil. Also, for smaller amplitude tubercles, the modified NACA 65-021 airfoil
outperforms its unmodified equivalent for most angles of attack. Hydrogen-bubble visualisation was
used to identify characteristic features of the flow for airfoils with tubercles. It appears that the
velocity behind the troughs is greater than behind the tubercles themselves at the leading edge.
Downstream from the leading edge, the flow from behind the peaks seems to be entrained into this
region, giving rise to the formation of stream-wise vortices.

Keywords: tubercles, passive flow control, airfoil performance, delayed stall, enhanced lift

INTRODUCTION

Tubercles are leading-edge, rounded protuberances that alter the flow-field around an airfoil. The
presence of tubercles on the humpback whale flipper, for example, has been associated with the
tight turning manoeuvres that it is required to make as part of its feeding ecology [1]. It has been
postulated that tubercles give rise to the formation of stream-wise vortices, which enhance
momentum exchange within the boundary layer [1]. This can lead to improvements in foil
performance, such as delayed stall and higher maximum lift coefficient, allowing a smaller foil
surface to be utilised [2]. Hence, drag at the cruise condition and weight of the wing can be reduced.

A numerical study by Watts & Fish [3], which compared a NACA 634-021 airfoil with sinusoidally-
shaped tubercles to an unmodified airfoil, reported a 4.8% increase in lift, 10.9% reduction in
induced drag, and 17.6% increase in lift-to-drag ratio (L/D) at a 10-degree angle of attack. It was
concluded that tubercles have a negligible effect on drag at zero angle of attack but may incur an
11% increase in form drag at a 10-degree angle of attack.

An experimental investigation undertaken by Miklosovic et al. [4] compared the lift and drag of
idealised scale models (NACA 0020) of the humpback whale flipper with and without tubercles.
Their results showed 40% increase in the stall angle, 6% increase in the total maximum lift
coefficient and a decrease in drag in the post-stall regime. The lift-to-drag ratio was larger for the
airfoil with tubercles for all angles except 10°≤ α ≤12°. Stein and Murray [5] conducted experiments

Corresponding author: Kristy Hansen

Phone: + (618) 8303-3847, Fax: + (618) 8303-4367
E-mail address: khansen@mecheng.adelaide.edu.au
7th World Conference on Experimental Heat Transfer, Fluid Mechanics and Thermodynamics 28 June – 03 July 2009, Krakow, Poland

for 0°≤ α ≤12°, using a two-dimensional airfoil with sinusoidal tubercles having amplitude and
spacing equal to the average values for the humpback whale. Their results revealed that the modified
airfoil experiences reduced lift and increased drag compared to the unmodified airfoil. Another
study by Murray et al. [6], found that aerodynamic performance of a 3D foil with tubercles could be
improved by increasing the sweep angle.

An investigation by Johari et al. [7] compared the effect of changing the spacing and amplitude of
sinusoidal tubercles on a nominally two-dimensional NACA 634-021 airfoil without sweep or taper.
They concluded that airfoils with tubercles achieve a lower stall angle and lower maximum lift
coefficient, CLmax, than their unmodified equivalent, which is consistent with the findings in [5].
However, improvements were noted in the post-stall regime in which the airfoils with tubercles had
lift coefficients as much as 50% greater than the unmodified airfoil [7]. They also found that the
smallest amplitude and shortest wavelength tubercles performed best in terms of stall angle and
CLmax. It was also concluded that varying the amplitude has more effect on airfoil performance than
changing the wavelength of the tubercles. Tuft experiments [7] showed that separation originates in
the troughs between the tubercles and that the flow remains attached at the tubercle peaks. Despite
indications of an earlier separation at lower angles of attack for airfoils with tubercles, at post-stall
angles, the flow over the tubercle peaks was still attached when the flow over the unmodified airfoil
had completely separated.

A dye visualisation study [8] of the same airfoils found that separation regions behind the troughs
appear to be bi-periodic, in that adjacent troughs have the same pattern as their second neighbour.
This behaviour was attributed to the fluctuating flow field at the trailing edge of the airfoil. The
presence of tubercles creates span-wise flow as a result of the varying leading-edge sweep and this
was reported to give rise to the formation of counter-rotating stream-wise vortices. Custodio [8]
postulates that these counter-rotating vortices generate vortex lift similar to that observed on a delta
wing. However, Nierop et al. [9] claim that it is not possible for the tubercles to act as vortex
generators since the wavelength and amplitude are much larger that the boundary layer thickness.
They propose the explanation that the greater downwash behind the tubercles compared to the
troughs leads to a reduction in the effective angle of attack and thus delayed stall in this region.

The purpose of the experimental investigation reported here is to quantify the aerodynamic benefits
of sinusoidal tubercles for two different airfoils at low Reynolds numbers. The airfoils investigated
here have different chord-wise positions of maximum thickness and are designed for different flow
regimes. The study also aims to examine the effect of the tubercle’s amplitude and wavelength on
the performance of the airfoil and to identify characteristic flow patterns for airfoils with tubercles.

EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE

Tubercle configurations were modelled for two types of airfoil: NACA 0021 and NACA 65-021. The
airfoils were machined from aluminium and anodised in matte black to ensure optimum visualisation
of hydrogen bubbles. All airfoils have a mean chord of c = 70mm and span of s = 495mm, giving a
plan-form area of S = 0.035m2. Sinusoidal tubercle configurations are illustrated in Figure 1 and the
dimensions are summarised in Table 1. The values used here for amplitude and wavelength are close to
estimates taken from data of an actual whale flipper [1]. Drag and lift forces for eight different airfoils
were measured in a wind tunnel. Flow visualisation using the hydrogen-bubble technique was also
performed to observe the flow field around the airfoil and to highlight flow separation regions and
vortex formation.
7th World Conference on Experimental Heat Transfer, Fluid Mechanics and Thermodynamics 28 June – 03 July 2009, Krakow, Poland

Table 1
Tubercle configurations and adopted terminology

0021 airfoils 65-021 airfoils

Configuration Label Configuration Label
0021 unmodified airfoil 0021 unmod 65-021 unmodified airfoil 65021 unmod
Amplitude 4mm (0.06c)
A4W15 - -
Wavelength 15mm (0.21c)
Amplitude 4mm (0.06c) Amplitude 4mm (0.06c)
A4W30 6 A4W30
Wavelength 30mm (0.43c) Wavelength 30mm (0.43c)
Amplitude 4mm (0.06c)
A4W60 - -
Wavelength 60mm (0.86c)
Amplitude 8mm (0.11c) Amplitude 8mm (0.11c)
A8W30 6 A8W30
Wavelength 30mm (0.43c) Wavelength 30mm (0.43c)

(a) (b)

Wavelength

Amplitude, A

Figure 1. Section view of airfoil with tubercles (a) 3D view, (b) Plan view with characteristic dimensions

Force measurements

Force experiments were undertaken in the open section of the wind tunnel at the University of
Adelaide, which has a 0.5m square cross-section and a turbulence intensity of ~0.8%. Maximum
blockage occurs at α = 30º and is calculated to be 7% and thus small enough to be ignored in this
investigation. The free-stream velocity was measured using a Pitot tube and the sampling rate was
1000 Hz. The data were averaged over one minute and collected via a National Instruments USB-
6008/6009 data acquisition device. The Reynolds number based on the free-stream velocity of U∞ =
25m/s and mean chord length was 120,000. The working section was bolted to the exit of the wind
tunnel (Figure 2) and the top of the airfoil was located very close (5mm) to the ceiling of the duct to
minimise three-dimensional effects. The foundation of the load cell consisted of a heavy steel base-
plate to inhibit the effects of floor vibration and a stiff frame to minimise vibrational disturbances
generated by the airflow (Figure 3). These vibrations could potentially cause inaccuracies in the
measurements. The angle of attack for the airfoil was set using a Vertex rotary table with an estimated
uncertainty of ±0.2 degrees. Lift, drag and moment measurements were conducted using a 6-
component load cell from JR3 with external digital electronics. This was fixed to a rotary table and
rotated together with the airfoil. Care was taken to ensure the airfoil was mounted as accurately as
possible with regard to the free-stream flow. System calibrations showed that the load cell accuracy is
within ± 1%.
Working section

Airfoil

U∞
Load cell
Rotating table

Base plate Stiff frame

Figure 2. Sketch of experimental set-up Figure 3. Load cell arrangement

7th World Conference on Experimental Heat Transfer, Fluid Mechanics and Thermodynamics 28 June – 03 July 2009, Krakow, Poland

The sampling period of the analogue-to-digital converter was 16ms, which ensured that at least 1000
samples were collected for each angle of attack. Due to the unsteady nature of the flow at post-stall
angles, the number of collected samples was increased to 3000 for these cases.

Three sets of measurements were taken for each airfoil for the range of angles –4 º ≤ α ≤ 30 º. The
average results for the lift, drag and moment coefficients for the tested airfoils were then plotted and
compared. The NACA 0021 and NACA 65-021 airfoils were analysed separately due to their different
characteristics but the relative influence of the tubercles for the two airfoils was compared.

Hydrogen bubble visualisation

Hydrogen bubble visualisation was carried out in a 0.5m-square working section of a closed-return
water channel of the University of Adelaide. The water tunnel velocity was selected to give optimum
flow conditions for visualisation with the hydrogen bubble method. Thus velocities of U∞= 70mm/s
and 84mm/s were utilised, corresponding to Re = 4370 and 5250 respectively. A low current was
passed through a sinusoidally-kinked platinum wire with diameter of 40µm, used to generate streak-
lines. The flow was illuminated using a thin light sheet and digitally recorded via a SONY Mini-DV
video camera, which was connected to a laptop computer. Footage was recorded from different
orientations to highlight specific features. The side view shows the separation point; the top view
shows variations in streak-line spacing alluding to local pressure and velocity variations and the angled
top view enables identification of vortex structures. In all cases, the flow was visualised as close as
possible to the mid-span location to minimise 3-D effects.

DATA ANALYSIS

For each airfoil, at each angle of attack (α), the chord-wise (FC) and normal (FN) forces were measured
along with the moment about the span-wise axis, MZ and converted to lift, drag and pitching moment.
These were non-dimensionalised, giving the coefficients of lift and drag based on the dynamic pressure
and plan-form area and pitching moment, based on the dynamic pressure, plan-form area and chord.
Values of CL, CD and CM for NACA 0021 are compared to published data [10]. Unfortunately, no data
at the Re number of interest was found for the NACA 65-021 airfoil to compare with the results.

RESULTS
Force measurements

Lift coefficient (CL). The lift coefficients are plotted against the angle of attack for the NACA 0021
airfoils in Figure 4. From the figure it is clear the airfoils with tubercles have lower CLmax values than
the unmodified airfoil. However, the stall characteristics are much less abrupt. In comparison with

Figure 4. Lift Coefficient vs. Angle of Attack for Figure 5. Lift Coefficient vs. Angle of Attack for
NACA 0021 NACA 65-021
7th World Conference on Experimental Heat Transfer, Fluid Mechanics and Thermodynamics 28 June – 03 July 2009, Krakow, Poland

the unmodified airfoil, the drop in CL after stall (∆CL) is considerably less for the A8W30 airfoil
with ∆CL = 17% as opposed to ∆CL = 68% for the unmodified airfoil. An interesting point is that
there is a slight increase in the slope, ∂C L ∂α at around α = 4 º, which is also evident in Miklosovic
& Murray [11] and is perhaps a blockage effect.

Figure 5 indicates that the NACA 65-021 airfoils with tubercles achieve higher relative values of CL
for the majority of attack angles investigated in this study. Also, the lift characteristics are generally
smoother for the modified airfoils. It can also be observed that for small angles of attack the NACA
65-021 airfoil generates a negative lift (for 0 < α < 4), which is attributed to an unexpected early
separation of the laminar boundary layer on one side of the airfoil. This phenomenon is not
observed, however, at larger angles of attack. This behaviour will be the subject of further
investigation.

By increasing the amplitude of the tubercles, a smoother stall characteristic can be achieved but
there is an associated penalty of a drop in CL max and a decrease in maximum stall angle. This can be
seen in both Figure 4 and 5, where the post-stall CL is higher for the A8W30 and 6 A8W30 airfoils
in comparison to the A4W30 and 6 A4W30 airfoils. For both airfoils, the smaller amplitude
tubercles achieve a larger CLmax and a higher maximum stall angle than the larger amplitude
tubercles. It can be observed that the NACA 65-021 airfoil with smaller amplitude tubercles
surpasses the unmodified airfoil in terms of performance, with its CL value 3% and 17% higher for
α = 13º and 14º, respectively. This indicates that there may be an optimum tubercle configuration
for a particular airfoil and/or tubercles are more beneficial for certain airfoils.

It can be seen in Figure 4 that the wavelength of the tubercles noticeably influences the performance
of the airfoil. As the wavelength is reduced, the stall angle increases and for the A4W15 airfoil, this
angle is equal to that of the unmodified airfoil (i.e. αstall = 12º). This result is in contradiction with
other studies [7,9], which found that the varying the wavelength has negligible effects. In addition,
the post-stall CL is greater for the A4W15 airfoil compared to the other tubercle configurations,
which illustrates that reducing the wavelength is beneficial for both the pre-stall and post-stall
regimes. The effect of reducing the wavelength appears to be more advantageous than varying the
amplitude, in terms of achieving both a higher CL max and favourable post-stall characteristics.

Drag coefficient (CD). The results in Figures 6 and 7 indicate that at low angles of attack (i.e. α < 8º),
tubercles have a minimal effect on CD for both airfoils. As the stall angle is approached, the
tubercles act to increase the drag and thus reduce the extent of the drag bucket. At post-stall angles,
tubercles achieve a favourable effect for all airfoils in terms of drag.

Figure 6. Drag Coefficient vs. Angle of Attack Figure 7. Drag Coefficient vs. Angle of Attack
for NACA 0021 for NACA 65-021
7th World Conference on Experimental Heat Transfer, Fluid Mechanics and Thermodynamics 28 June – 03 July 2009, Krakow, Poland

Figure 8. Lift-to-Drag Ratio vs. Angle of Figure 9. Lift-to-Drag Ratio vs. Angle of
Attack for NACA 0021 Attack for NACA 65-021
A lower drag is observed in the range 8º ≤ α ≤15º for the NACA 0021 airfoil having tubercles with
smaller amplitude. For α < 8 º, there is small difference in the drag characteristics and for α > 15º,
the airfoil with larger tubercles exhibits a lower CD. The NACA 65-021 airfoil shows a similar trend,
although the range of lower CD occurs at 8 º≤ α ≤17º. Outside this range there is little difference in
tubercle performance.

A comparison between tubercle wavelength configurations reveals that a smaller wavelength produces
a significantly lower drag in the range 8 º ≤ α ≤15º. In fact, for the angles excluding α = 10-12º, the
A4W15 airfoil displays enhanced CD performance when compared to the unmodified airfoil. At α >
15º, the larger wavelength configuration yields a slightly lower CD.

Lift-to-drag (L/D) ratio. Figures 8 and 9 highlight the drag costs in producing lift, providing a measure
of aerodynamic efficiency. It is observed that for both airfoils, incorporating tubercles gives a higher
L/D ratio after stall. However, at lower angles of attack the unmodified airfoil is generally more
efficient. The peak L/D ratio of 20.5 occurs at α = 8º for the unmodified NACA 0021 airfoil and it
is 17% higher than the peak value for the A4W15, which represents the best tubercle configuration.
After stall, the A4W15 airfoil demonstrates L/D ratios up to 70% higher than the unmodified airfoil.

For the NACA 65-021 airfoils, better L/D performance is noted in the range α < 8º and α > 14º for
both airfoils with tubercles, compared to the unmodified airfoil. In general, smaller amplitude
tubercles achieve a higher L/D than larger amplitude tubercles, especially in the range of 10º≤ α
≤15º. The peak L/D ratio for the unmodified airfoil of 15.9 also occurs at α = 8º, and is 23% higher
than that for the 6 A4W30 airfoil. In the post-stall regime, the 6 A4W30 airfoil has L/D ratios up to
37% higher.

Pitching moment coefficient (CM). The pitching moment coefficient, CM relative to the quarter-chord
position is plotted in Figures 10 and 11. The measured CM displays more fluctuations than the data
curve, however the overall trend is consistent. For small angles of attack (α < 4º), there is little
difference in CM between the unmodified airfoil and models with tubercles for the NACA 0021. At
these angles, all airfoils experience a nose-up pitching moment.

Where as the unmodified airfoil drops to a negative CM at α = 6º, the models with small wavelength
or large amplitude tubercles remain positive. At stall, the unmodified airfoil rises to its maximum
positive value but this rise is less pronounced for all airfoils with tubercles. In the post-stall region,
the majority of airfoils with tubercles have a less-negative CM, which is an advantageous
characteristic. Overall, changes in CM are less abrupt for airfoils with tubercles.
7th World Conference on Experimental Heat Transfer, Fluid Mechanics and Thermodynamics 28 June – 03 July 2009, Krakow, Poland

Figure 10. Pitching Moment Coefficient vs. Angle Figure 11. Pitching Moment Coefficient vs. Angle
of Attack for NACA 0021 of Attack for NACA 0021

(b) (d)
(a)

(c)

Figure 12. Hydrogen bubble visualisation (a) angled top view showing stream-wise vortices, (b) side view in
plane of trough (c) side view in plane of peak and (d) top view depicting regions of acceleration. Dashed lines
show the outline of the leading edge

Hydrogen bubble visualisation

Flow visualisation shows that stream-wise vortices form on either side of the troughs between
tubercles, downstream of the leading edge (Figure 12(a)). It is also evident that the flow separates
behind the tubercle troughs earlier than it separates behind the peaks. This can be seen in Figures 12(b)
and 12(c), which show that the wake is wider behind the trough. Figures 12(a) and 12(d) suggests that
the flow is accelerated in the troughs at the leading edge. This is indicated by the convergence of
streak-lines in these regions. The influence of the stream-wise vortices can be seen in the convergence
of streak-lines towards the tubercles. At the surface, the flow is expected to diverge away from the
tubercles.

DISCUSSION

The mechanism by which tubercles alter the flow characteristics over airfoils is still not well
understood. From the results presented here and also in [8] it is clear that tubercles give rise to the
formation of stream-wise vortices. The acceleration of the flow in the troughs between tubercles is
likely to lead to a region of low pressure in the troughs at the leading edge, which is consistent with
[3]. The flow from behind the peaks seems to be entrained towards this apparent low-pressure
region, giving rise to a pair of counter-rotating vortices behind each trough. It is unclear as to
whether these vortices induce a type of vortex lift as suggested in the literature [7,8,11] or if they
 7th World Conference on Experimental Heat Transfer, Fluid Mechanics and Thermodynamics 28 June – 03 July 2009, Krakow, Poland

increase the extent of flow attachment, thus delaying stall, through an augmented rate of momentum
exchange within the boundary layer. According to Miklosovic et al. [11], the unsteadiness observed
close to stall and in post-stall conditions showed signs of vortex-dominated flow. However, this was
contradicted by the fact that the characteristic simultaneous increase of CL max and CD min did not
occur [11]. It has been argued by van Nierop et al. [9] that it is implausible for tubercles to behave
as vortex generators since their wavelength and amplitude are much larger than the boundary layer
thickness and that instead, they alter the pressure distribution on the wing, increasing the extent of
flow attachment. Despite this viewpoint, there seems to be a strong analogy between tubercles and
counter-rotating vortex generators as described in [12].

In this study, it was observed that when the position of maximum thickness is further aft, increasing
the extent of laminar flow, tubercles can be more beneficial. Since there is a more efficient
exchange of momentum in a turbulent boundary layer [13], it is inferred that tubercles are more
effective for a laminar boundary layer for which momentum exchange is poor. In regards to the
smallest wavelength and amplitude being the most beneficial tubercle configuration, it is expected
that associated stream-wise vortices are smaller, leading to a relatively lower form drag component.
Additionally, since more vortices are generated per unit length of span for the smaller wavelength
tubercles, this may result in greater momentum exchange.

CONCLUSIONS

The results for the NACA 0021 airfoil indicate that in the pre-stall regime there is marginal
advantage in employing tubercles. At post-stall conditions, however, a large improvement in lift-to-
drag ratio can be achieved and much smoother stall characteristics are observed. These results are
consistent with results from [7]. The most beneficial configuration of the tubercles proves to be
those with the smallest amplitude and narrowest wavelength. Results for the NACA 65-021 show
that the position of maximum thickness has a noticeable effect on the performance of the tubercles.
For this airfoil, tubercles maintain a higher lift-to-drag ratio for the majority of angles of attack,
except near stall. For both airfoils, tubercles act to smooth out the pitching moment characteristics
of the airfoil.

REFERENCES
1. Fish, F.E. and Battle, J.M., Hydrodynamic design of the humpback whale flipper, J. Morp., 225:51-60, 1995.
2. Katz, J., Plotkin, A., Low Speed Aerodynamics, Cambridge University Press, 2001.
3. Watts, P. and Fish, F.E., The Influence of Passive, Leading Edge Tubercles on Wing Performance, Proc. of
Unmanned Untethered Submersible Technology (UUST), Durham, NH, August, 2001.
4. Miklosovic, D. S., Murray, M. M., Howle, L. E., and Fish, F. E., Leading Edge Tubercles Delay Stall on
Humpback Whale Flippers, Phys. Fluids 16(5): L39-L42, 2004.
5. Stein, B. & Murray, M.M., Stall mechanism analysis of humpback whale flipper models, Proc. of Unmanned
Untethered Submersible Technology (UUST), Durham, NH, August 2005.
6. Murray, M.M., Miklosovic D.S., Fish, F.E., Howle, L.E., Effects of leading edge tubercles on a representative
whale flipper model at various sweep angles, Proc.of Unmanned Untethered Submersible Technology (UUST),
Durham, NH, August 2005.
7. Johari, H., Henoch, C., Custodia, D. & Levshin, A., Effects of leading edge protuberances on airfoil performance,
AIAA Journal, 45:11, November 2007.
8. Custodio, D., The effect of humpback whale-like leading edge protuberances on hydrofoil performance, Thesis
submitted to Worcester Polytechnic Institute, December 2007.
9. van Niorop, E., Alben, S & Brenner, M.P., How bumps on whale flippers delay stall: an aerodynamic model,
Physical review letters, PRL 100, 054502, February 2008.
10. Sheldahl, R. E. & Klimas, P. C., Aerodynamic Characteristics of Seven Airfoil Sections Through 180 Degrees
Angle of Attack for Use in Aerodynamic Analysis of Vertical Axis Wind Turbines, SAND80-2114, Sandia
National Laboratories, Albuquerque, New Mexico, March 1981.
11. Miklosovic, D.S. & Murray, M.M., Experimental evaluation of sinusoidal leading edges, J. Aircraft, 44:1404–
1407, 2007.
12. Kermode, A.C., Mechanics of Flight, Pitman Publishing Ltd., London, 1972, pp. 350-352.
13. Marchaj, C.A., Aero-Hydrodynamics of Sailing, Granada Publishing Ltd., Great Britain, 1979.

View publication stats