Summary of the 2004 Computational Fluid Dynamics Validation Workshop on Synthetic Jets

A computational-fluid-dynamics (CFD) validation workshop for synthetic jets and turbulent separation control (CFDVAL2004) was held in Williamsburg, Virginia, in March 2004. Three cases were investigated: a synthetic jet into quiescent air, a synthetic jet into a turbulent boundary-layer crossflow, and the flow over a hump model with no-flow-control, steady suction, and oscillatory control. This is a summary of the CFD results from the workshop. Although some detailed results are shown, the CFD state of the art for predicting these types of flows is mostly evaluated from a general point of view. Overall, for synthetic jets, CFD can only qualitatively predict the flow physics, but there is some uncertainty regarding how to best model the unsteady boundary conditions from the experiment consistently. As a result, there is wide variation among CFD results. For the hump flow, CFD is capable of predicting many of the particulars of this flow, provided that it accounts for tunnel blockage, but it consistently overpredicts the length of the separated region compared to the experimental results.

[1]  Sally A. Viken,et al.  Flow Control Analysis on the Hump Model with RANS Tools , 2003 .

[2]  Christopher L. Rumsey,et al.  Reynolds-Averaged Navier-Stokes Analysis of Zero Efflux Flow Control over a Hump Model , 2006 .

[3]  R. Mittal,et al.  Interaction of a Synthetic Jet with a Flat Plate Boundary Layer , 2001 .

[4]  Raymond P. LeBeau,et al.  OPTIMIZATION OF BLOWING AND SUCTION CONTROL ON NACA 0012 AIRFOIL USING GENETIC ALGORITHM , 2004 .

[5]  Israel J Wygnanski,et al.  The control of flow separation by periodic excitation , 2000 .

[6]  D. Smith,et al.  Interaction of a Synthetic Jet with a Crossflow Boundary Layer , 2002 .

[7]  Anthony E. Washburn,et al.  A Separation Control CFD Validation Test Case. Part 1; Baseline and Steady Suction , 2004 .

[8]  M. Amitay,et al.  Aerodynamic Flow Control over an Unconventional Airfoil Using Synthetic Jet Actuators , 2001 .

[9]  Nail K. Yamaleev,et al.  A Reduced-Order Model for Efficient Simulation of Synthetic Jet Actuators , 2005 .

[10]  Chung-Sheng Yao,et al.  Synthetic Jet Flow Field Database for CFD Validation , 2004 .

[11]  Q. Gallas,et al.  Scaling of pressure drop for oscillatory flow through a slot , 2007 .

[12]  Jing Cui,et al.  Flow Control with Synthetic and Pulsed Jets: Applications to Virtual Aeroshaping, Thrust -Vectoring, and Control of Separation and Cavity Oscillations , 2004 .

[13]  Raymond P. LeBeau,et al.  Optimization of Airfoil Flow Control Using a Genetic Algorithm with Diversity Control , 2007 .

[14]  Rajat Mittal,et al.  Study of Three-Dimensional Synthetic Jet Flowfields Using Direct-Numerical Simulation , 2004 .

[15]  D. Greenblatt.  Dual Location Separation Control on a Semispan Wing , 2007 .

[16]  Christopher L. Rumsey,et al.  Time-Accurate Computations of Isolated Circular Synthetic Jets in Crossflow , 2005 .

[17]  I. Wygnanski,et al.  Delay of Airfoil Stall by Periodic Excitation , 1996 .

[18]  Keith B. Paschal,et al.  A Separation Control CFD Validation Test Case Part 2. Zero Efflux Oscillatory Blowing , 2005 .

[19]  A. Glezer,et al.  The formation and evolution of synthetic jets , 1998 .

[20]  J. Soria,et al.  PIV measurements of a zero-net-mass-flux jet in cross flow , 2002 .

[21]  Rémi Manceau,et al.  Current trends in modelling research for turbulent aerodynamic flows , 2007, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences.

[22]  D. Greenblatt,et al.  Influence of Finite Span and Sweep on Active Flow Control Efficacy , 2007 .