Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Propeller Geometry - Blade airfoil sections are input in flat (planar) sections rather than radial sections #104

Closed
surajrkashyap opened this issue Oct 4, 2023 · 1 comment

Comments

@surajrkashyap
Copy link

surajrkashyap commented Oct 4, 2023

On a propeller, when I input the expanded airfoil sections at different radial positions the final geometry does not appear to be converted back from the expanded sections (so the sections seem planar rather than radial sections concentric to the propeller axis). I am attaching a comparison below of the blade CAD and the Paraview ouput from FLOWUnsteady (not to scale). Am I missing anything obvious? Thanks for taking a look!

propeller_screenshot

PS. This is a marine propeller. I noticed that the validation references (E. J. Alvarez & A. Ning (2020), "High-Fidelity Modeling of Multirotor Aerodynamic Interactions for Aircraft Design," AIAA Journal.) mention a similar marine propeller (INSEAN 779a). Was there any workaround used for the geometry?

@EdoAlvarezR
Copy link
Collaborator

Hi!

The blade definition assumes that the user will input airfoil section from the Cartesian reference system rather than a streamtube (or meridonial) reference plane. FLOWUnsteady was developed for aircraft rotor/propellers and wind turbines, which typically have a low solidity distribution away from the root, however, the numerical method should work relatively well for marine applications.

I'm sure others would appreciate you developing the capabilities of defining the blade from those streamtube reference planes!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants