Our heavyweight helicopter equal in the world does not have
In Rostov started production of the most load-lifting rotary-wing car The Russian holding «Helicopt[...]
Field of Application and Its Limits
The analysis and visualization of the boundary layer resolution was developed at the 2D test-case of the flat plate and successfully transferred to 2^D and 3D airfoil. For this the boundary layer edge was identified at 99.9% of the free stream total pressure. The sensor is only active in this region and interfering effect such as a shock or separation can reduce the boundary layer and so the active region to only a few cells. Because of this the analysis in these regions can vary. Also special test-cases with interacting boundary layers as in high lift configurations are not tested yet. The error mechanisms were investigated in a large range of variations. For these the error estimation was parameterized and is provided for the normalized
|
Fig. 28 VFE-2, coarse grid, WJ2D model — critical points of separation and reattachment (red) (left) and qualitative separation structure visualisation (right) |
|
Fig. 29 VFE-2, coarse grid, WJ2D model — a detailed illustration of the critical points of separation with the output variable crit_sep (red), the separation of the primary vortex on the leading edge (left) and same small vortices near the trailing edge (right). |
|
Fig. 30 SFB-401, coarse grid, SAE model — illustration of the average grid inclination in the boundary layer in degree (left) and the maximum expansion ratio in the boundary layer (right) |
wall distance in the range of y+ = [0.01,5], the grid inclination in the range of a = [0, +/ — 70] and the wall normal grid expansion in the range of r = [1.1,2.0]. In the estimations the average inclination angle and the maximum expansion ratio were assumed as constant and only the greatest possible error is given.
