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

net/publication/326624908

THE EFFECT OF ASPECT RATIO ON AERODYNAMIC PERFORMANCE AND

FLOW SEPARATION BEHAVIOR OF A MODEL WING COMPOSED FROM
DIFFERENT PROFILES

Conference Paper · July 2018

CITATIONS READS

0 5,038

2 authors, including:

Abdulhalim Aşkan
Erciyes Üniversitesi
5 PUBLICATIONS 7 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Abdulhalim Aşkan on 24 November 2020.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 JOURNAL OF ENERGY SYSTEMS
Volume x, Issue x

2602-2052 DOI: 10.30521/jes.xxxxxx Article Type

The effect of aspect ratio on aerodynamic performance and flow

separation behavior of a model wing composed from different profiles

Abdulhalim, Aşkan
Erciyes University, Kayseri, Turkey, [email protected], ORCID: 0000-0002-0205-3961
Selim, Tangöz
Erciyes University, Kayseri, Turkey,[email protected], ORCID:0000-0002-8284-1326

Arrived: dd.mm.yyyy Accepted: dd.mm.yyyy Published: dd.mm.yyyy

Abstract: In this study, the effect of aspect ratio on the aerodynamic performances and flow separation
behavior were investigated on a model wing made up four different profiles used to the wing of
the Boeing 737-Classic aircrafts. The experiments were carried out in a low-speed wind tunnel at
different angles of attack (AoA) ranging from -4° to 40° and at the 200,000 Reynolds number (Re)
on wing models having different aspect ratios (0.7-1.3).
It was observed from the experiments and numerical studies that the changing of the aspect ratio
affected the coefficients of drag and lift and flow separation on the surface. The highest CL/CD
ratio has been measured from the wing having AR=1.3 at AoA=7 0. Moreover, the airflow was
flowed as laminar in the areas near the middle of the wing until AoA=240. But, the flow was
disturbed at wing tip due to vortex. The separation bubbles have been seen at 24°-320 for all AR
values. In addition, the increase of angle of attack caused the bubbles form clearly for 1.1 and 1.3
AR values. Finally, it can be said that the increase in AR and in angle of attack have been
triggered flow separation.

Keywords: Different profiles, Low Reynolds number; Aspect ratio; Flow separation

Surname, FN, Surname, FN. Article title. Journal of Energy Systems YYYY; v: pp-pp,
Cite this paper as:
DOI: 10.30521/jes.xxxxxx

© 2018 Published by peer-reviewed open access scientific journal, JES at DergiPark (www.dergipark.gov.tr/jes)

Nomenclature
AoA Angle of attack
AR Aspect ratio
CD Drag coefficient
CL Lift coefficient
CLmax Maximum lift coefficient
CP Pressure coefficient
Re Reynolds numbers
x/c Location along the chord (mm/mm)
z/b Location along the span (%)

1
 JOURNAL OF ENERGY SYSTEMS

1. INTRODUCTION

A significant part of the accidents that occur on airplanes are triggered by different factors during
landing or take off and stall which are expressed as the inability of the aircraft to hold in air. The
reason for the occurrence of the stall event is that the airflow on the wing surface is undesirably
separated and the carrying force holding the aircraft in the air drops below the limits of the balance
weight of the airplane. The separation on the wing surface, which is the cause of the stall event, occurs
at low speeds and high angle of attacks. One of the most important factors influencing airflow
separation is the aerodynamic characteristics of the profiles forming the wing shape. The features of
the profiles, such as the hunchback and the thickness, affect the lift and drag force of the wing, and
therefore directly influence the stall character. Another important parameter that affects the air holding
of the aircraft is the aspect ratio of the wing. The wing aspect ratio, which represents the ratio of the
wing length to the average wing cord, affects the lift force and the drag force that creates resistance to
the movement of the wing. That is why it is an important parameter that determines the performance
of the wing and affects the stall character of the wing.

The goal of the performance of the wing aspect ratio is to reduce the stall speed by minimizing the
flow separation on the wing, thus reducing the accidents to a minimum by ensuring that the aircraft is
held in the air even at very low speeds. Many studies have been made in the literature for this purpose.
The effect of aspect ratio on wings aerodynamic performance was experimentally investigated by
Makoto Mizoguchi and Hajime Itoh [1] the range of 2.6x104 and 7.6x104 low Reynolds numbers on
rectangular wings. The aerodynamic coefficients measured in the experiments were compared with
visualized flow fields and analytical results and the following results were obtained. It was seen that at
low Reynolds numbers, the performance of the wings which have high aspect ratio were affected by
the separation bubbles formed at the leading edge of the wing. However, for wings with an aspect ratio
of 3.0 and above, qualitative properties did not change much. It has been observed that the
characteristics of the wings having an aspect ratio smaller than 3 are very different from those of the
above-mentioned large aspect ratio wings. Significant changes have been obtained especially in the
wings with an aspect ratio of 1 and less than 1. It was concluded that this aspect ratio effect was the
result of wing edge vortexes.

In their another study, Makoto Mizoguchi and colleagues [2] have showed the effect of aspect ratio on
wing performance and on the stall characteristics of the wings at the low Reynolds numbers
(Re=5.2x104) on the rectangular wings with experimental studies. The leading-edges and trailing-
edges of the wings were plain, so that the chord-wise cross-section of the model was rectangular. Each
wing model had a rectangular planform and flat side edges. The chord length and thickness of each
model were 90 mm and 1 mm, respectively. The aspect ratio ranges from 0.5 to 1.5 at intervals of 0.1
and the experiments were carried out in the low speed wind tunnel. Results; it has shown that the
wings having a low aspect ratio are very sensitive to the change of the aspect ratio. It has been
observed that as the aspect ratio decreases, the maximum transport coefficient (CL max) increases. It has
also been observed that slight changes in the aspect ratio of 1.0 to 1.3 have caused significant changes
in the aerodynamic characteristics of the wings. As the aspect ratio approaches 1.0, the stall angle had
also increased considerably.

Gabriel E. Torres and Thomas J. Mueller [3] investigated lift, drag, and pitching moment
characteristics of wings of low aspect ratio operating the range of 7x104 – 2x105 low Reynolds
numbers. As a part of this research the experts investigated the wings with aspect ratios between 0.5
and 2.0, four distinct planforms (rectangular, Zimmerman, inverse Zimmerman, and elliptical),
thickness-to-chord ratios of ≈2%, and 5-to-1 elliptical leading edges have been conducted at the wind
tunnel. Results have showed large nonlinearities in the lift curves, especially for aspect ratios below
1.25. Wings of such low aspect ratio were also found to have high values of maximum lift coefficient
and corresponding angle of attack. Wing planform was determined to have significant aerodynamic
effects. Wings of inverse Zimmerman planforms were found to be more efficient than other planforms

2
 JOURNAL OF ENERGY SYSTEMS

for aspect ratios below 1.0 and high angles of attack. For higher values of aspect ratio, elliptical
planforms were found to yield more favorable characteristics, especially at low to moderate angles.

Lance W. Traub [4] was conducted an analytical study to determine the impact of aspect ratio on the
efficiency of ClarkY and an SD7062 wings at low Reynolds numbers. The experiments were
conducted in low-speed 1 by 1 ft. open-return wind tunnel. Turbulence intensity of 0.5% has measured
and jet uniformity within 1% in the core. The analysis initially was implemented within the framework
of a constrained planform area and weight. It was seen that from the results without the inclusion of
airfoil pressure drag, wing efficiency increases essentially unbounded with aspect ratio. Also, the
results showed that including the effects of pressure drag yielded the appearance of distinct peaks in
L/D and CL3/2/CD, which migrated to lower aspect ratio as the airfoil efficiency dropped.

In the another experimental study on the effect of aspect ratio, Liu and Hsiao [5] were analyzed the
aerodynamic properties of the wing model having different aspect ratios in the range of 1.0 ≤ AR≤3.0
in critical Reynolds numbers (104 and 105). The results indicated that the high stall angle of attack and
vortex lift were clearly manifested owing to the nonlinear increasing in the lift curves as the aspect
ratio reaches less than 1.6. The results also concluded that the flow field of low-aspect ratio wing
could be divided into three types of flow characteristics. As angle of attack was less than 200, the tip
rolled up vortex was clear near the location of wingtip and grouped up as angle of attack increase
which caused the flow reattached and constructed the secondary flow structure. With angle of attack
up to 300, the flow reattachment was maintained; nevertheless, the vortex shedding was fade away and
gradually replaced by the large scale of a vertical flow.

Another study by Gavin K. Ananda and his colleagues [6] is concerned with examining the
aerodynamic characteristics of the wings at low Reynolds numbers. Experimental investigations of 10
flat and conical wings with aspect ratio ranging from 2 to 5 were carried out at Reynolds number
ranging from 50,000 to 150,000. Experiments were made in the wind tunnel and oil technique was
used for flow visualization. Wind tunnel results had showed that for all flat-plate wings no hysteresis
was observed. The stall angle of attack was taken as the angle of attack that corresponded to the
largest change in the moment coefficient. The corresponding C Lmax values for all wings were found to
lie between 0,55 and 0,7. Interestingly, the C Lmax results for the low to moderate aspect ratio wings
tested were observed to be minimally sensitive to variations in aspect ratio in comparison with low
aspect ratio wing (AR≤2) results from literature. It was also seen that in the flat-rectangular wings, the
location of the aerodynamic center changed significantly with the angle of attack. At the low angle of
attack, while the aerodynamic center near the quarter of the wing cord, at the high angle of attack (near
the stall angle) the aerodynamic center was seen to tend to approach the trailing edge of the wing.

The near-wake flow at mid-span of low-aspect-ratio rectangular wings (AR=1-2.5) at a chord-based

Reynolds number of Re = 8x104 is investigated experimentally by Adam C. DeVoria and Kamran
Mohseni [7]. The experiments carried out at the recirculating wind tunnel equipped with digital
particle image velocimetry to visualize flow. Time-averaged vorticity fields showed that as the aspect
ratio increased, the flow separation reached the leading edge of the wing at lower incidence. It was
seen that as the aspect ratio increased and the flow separation became more pronounced, the velocity
fluctuations associated with the rear edge shear layer also increased. For the reconnected flow to the
surface of the AR = 1.0 plate, the large values of the turbulent kinetic energy were bound to the
leading edge separation bubbles. Also, as the angle of attack increased, the vortices became narrower
and more aligned with the plate cord.

To determine the effect of aspect ratio on membrane wings and rigid flat test plates Zheng Zhang and
colleagues [8] carried out a series of experiments at low Reynolds numbers (Re <51,000) and various
aspect ratios (0.9-4.3). The membrane wings were fabricated from aluminum frames with silicone
rubber adhered to the surface. The cell size of three aluminum frames was 80% of the chord in width
and 80% in depth. A fourth frame consisted of 40x80 cell geometry. The chord was 7.62 cm, the ribs
were 0.32 cm and the thickness was 0.21 cm. the experiments performed at a low turbulence wind

3
 JOURNAL OF ENERGY SYSTEMS

tunnel. The results showed a higher lift curve slope, stall-zone lift and aerodynamic efficiency in the
wing of the membrane compared to solid flat plate. In the tested aspect ratio range, these three
parameters were approximately 15%, 10% and 12% higher, respectively, for the solid plate wing than
for the same measures. The properties induced by this membrane continue as the aspect ratio and
Reynolds number decrease.

Ignacio Andreu Angulo and Phillip J. Ansell [9] have investigated the effect of the aspect ratio on the
dynamic stall by comparing the performances of the NACA 0012 wing at different aspect ratios
(AR=3, 4, 5) with experimental measurements. The experiments were carried out on low speed wind
tunnel, at two different Reynolds numbers (Re= 4x105, 5x105) and reduced frequencies k=0.1, 0.05.
The sinusoidal motion profile consisted of an angle of attack range between 4 and 22 degrees. It was
found that the reduction of AR caused a reducing in the unsteady loading of the wing and delayed the
dynamic stall duration similar to that viewed for the static stall of the finite wings.

Many of the previous study [1-11] on aspect ratio have usually been carried out by changing the
dimensions of a certain profile or wing. In the current study, the effect of aspect ratio was investigated
by changing the length of a wing consisting of four different profiles. In this respect, the present study
is different from previous studies.

2. Experimental Setup and Test Procedures

The airfoils and wing combination of airfoil used for present study had rectangular planform and flat
side edges. The chord length of each model is 0.21m and the aspect ratio varies from 0.7 to 1.3 in
increments of 0.1. The models were made of gray Polylactic Acid Thermoplastic Polyester (PLA),
produced in a 3D printer and the rough surfaces were smoothed with very precision (2500 grit)
sandpaper. The aerodynamic coefficients of the wings were measured in a low-speed wind tunnel in
the Aerodynamics Research Laboratory at the Erciyes University Faculty of Aeronautics and
Astronautics (EU-FAA). A schematic of the tunnel is shown in Figure 1. The wind tunnel is an open-
circuit suction type and consists mainly of 8 parts. These are Flow Canal, Flow Regulator Sieve
Flanges, Shrinkage Cone, Test Area, Square - Circle Transition Duct, Spreader, Engine and Silencer.
The flow is straightened by two metal Sieve Flanges and passes through multiple settling screens in
the bell mouth. Then the flow gets through contracted a 6:1 area ratio and arrived in a test section
which have square 0.57 m by 0.57 m inlet and 0.59 m by 0.59 m outlet and of 1.08m length. The test
section is closed type.

The operating speed range of the wind tunnel is from 3 to 33 m/s (fan speed 150-1200 rpm) and has
high accuracy hotwire and automatic calibration unit. The flow turbulence intensity measured that was
lower than 0.1% at range of operating speed [12]. An anemometer with a pitot tube connected was
used to find the air velocity inside the wind tunnel that based on the chord length of the wing, which
corresponds to a speed of 2x105 Reynolds number. The lift and drag forces have been measured by 3-
axis force and torque meter (Load Cell). The models were supported by a strut to the load cell as
shown in Figure 2. The strut was attached to 1/4 of the wing cord from the leading edge along the
center line of the wing. The experiments were carried out at the angle of attack ranging from -4 to the
highest lift point. The angle sweep started at -4 deg. and the angle increased by 30 deg. with 4 deg.
increments. After 30 degrees (if the highest lift point exceeds 30 degrees), the increases of angle of
attack were 2 degrees. To fully detect max lift and maximum lift/drag points the angle was moved 1
deg. increments when necessary. After completing the sweep of increased angle of attack, each model
was returned to the initial angle at the same angle intervals. At each angle change, it was waited for 30
seconds to wing flicker disappear. Recording of force values was continued for 3 minutes. With the
loads from the load cell, the A/D Board records 10 values in an each second. Averages of the values
recorded for three minutes were taken for every angle of attack. Each test was performed 3 times and
the average of the 3 tests obtained were taken and compared with the numerical results.

4
 JOURNAL OF ENERGY SYSTEMS

Inlet Flange
Narrowing cone

Test Zone
Circle-Square connector

Diffuser

Engine
Silencer

Figure 1. The part of low speed wind tunnel.

Figure 2. Mounting of test model to the load cell

3. Numerical Setup and Validations

To estimate the approximate aerodynamic performance, the wing profiles, prior to wind tunnel
experiments, were first numerically investigated. ANSYS Fluent version 16.1 for simulation was used
with the “coupled” algorithm and the second-order upwind scheme to solve the steady-state Navier-
Stokes equation. In order to precisely estimate adverse pressure gradient flows in the flow field near
the surface of the model and the transition flow, the SST k-ω was chosen as the turbulence model
[13,14,15]. Each calculation consists of 1000 iterations. After approximately 600 iterations,
convergence was caught with a residue level of 10-4.

In this study, the aerodynamic performance of 7 wings, which consisted of four different profiles with
an aspect ratio ranging from 0.7 to 1.3, were investigated. The wing planforms are rectangular and
have a constant cord length of c=0.21 m. The specific features of the wing profile are shown in Table
1.To verify the accuracy of lift and drag forces of the wing models, the results compared with wind

5
 JOURNAL OF ENERGY SYSTEMS

tunnel experiments. Three dimensional mesh models were generated for the wings. The analysis
conditions were set to be the same as the wind tunnel experiments. The turbulence intensity is lower
than 1%, Reynolds number is 2x105, the temperature set to 300K and the pressure is 101,325 pa. For
grid independence; the tests were performed on different cell numbers respectively at 5x10 5, 1x106,
1,5x106, 2x106, 2,5x106 and 3x106. As can be seen from Figure, the elements mesh number of 2x10 6
was provided grid independence.

Table 1. The shapes and characteristics of the profiles

Maximum Maximum Position on

Views of Profiles on
Profile Image of Profile Thickness/Position Camber/Position Model Wing
Model Wing
(% of Chord) (% of Chord) (% of span)

b737a-il 15.4 / 19.6 0.2 / 5 0

b737b-il 12.5 / 29.7 0.8 / 10 33.3

b737c-il 10 / 39.9 1.5 / 20.4 66.6

b737d-il 10.8 / 40 1.6 / 20 100

Frame 001  01 Aug 2018  Internally created dataset Frame 001  01 Aug 2018  Internally created dataset

0.32 0.18

0.28 0.16

0.24 0.14
Drag Force [N]
Lift Force [N]

0.20 0.12

AR=0.7 AR=0.7
0.16 0.10
AR=0.8 AR=0.8
AR=0.9 AR=0.9
AR=1.0 AR=1.0
0.12 AR=1.1 0.08 AR=1.1
AR=1.2 AR=1.2
AR=1.3 AR=1.3

0.08 0.06
5.0E+05 1.0E+06 1.5E+06 2.0E+06 2.5E+06 3.0E+06 3.5E+06 5.0E+05 1.0E+06 1.5E+06 2.0E+06 2.5E+06 3.0E+06 3.5E+06
Mesh Elements Number Mesh Elements Number

Figure 3. The mesh elements numbers for grid independence (Lift force and Drag force).

This part summarizes the common observations and discusses crucial features of wind tunnel test
results and numerical analyses. In a series of angle of attack ranging from -4° to the highest lift point
(the angle varies depending on profile), a performance analysis of four different profiles and a
rectangular wing formed from these profiles was performed at low Reynolds number Re=2x10 5.
Significant characteristics such as maximum lift, lift/drag coefficient, lift curve inclination, and
airflow behaviors were discussed.

The results of numerical analyses have been validated with the data obtained from experimental tests
on the wing model for AR=0.7, AR=1.0 and AR=1.3. Figure 4 shows comparisons of lift and drag
coefficients obtained from numerical studies and from experimental tests versus angle of attack at
Re=2x105. As can see from the figure, for angles of attack between AoA= -4° and 16°, the numerical
results are almost the same as the experimental results. But, at AoA>16°, the differences in the lift and

6
 JOURNAL OF ENERGY SYSTEMS

drag coefficients become relatively large, and this differences can be explained by the complexity of
the flow structure at high angle of attack. When the figure is examined, it can be seen that the curves
of CL and CD show the expected trend with the increasing of the angle of attack. As a result, the curves
obtained the numerical studies are generally quite consistent with the experimental results.
Frame 001  01 Aug 2018  Internally created dataset Frame 001  01 Aug 2018  Internally created dataset

0.8
1.2
Experimental Results
Numerical Results
1.0
0.6

0.8

0.6

CD
0.4
CL

0.4

0.2
0.2
Experimental Results
Numerical Results
0.0
0 6 12 18 24 30 36 0
0 6 12 18 24 30 36
AoA (°)
AoA (°)
-0.2

Figure 4-a. Comparison of numerical and experimental results of C L and CD values for AR=0.7.
Frame 001  01 Aug 2018  Internally created dataset Frame 001  01 Aug 2018  Internally created dataset

0.8
1.2
Experimental Results
Numerical Results
1.0
0.6

0.8

0.6
CD

0.4
CL

0.4

0.2
0.2 Experimental Results
Numerical Results
0.0
0 6 12 18 24 30 36 0
0 6 12 18 24 30 36
AoA (°)
AoA (°)
-0.2

Figure 4-b. Comparison of numerical and experimental results of CL and CD values for AR=1.0
Frame 001  01 Aug 2018  Internally created dataset Frame 001  01 Aug 2018  Internally created dataset

0.8
1.2
Experimental Results
Numerical Results
1.0
0.6

0.8

0.6
CD

0.4
CL

0.4

0.2
0.2
Experimental Results
Numerical Results
0.0
0 6 12 18 24 30 36 0
0 6 12 18 24 30 36
AoA (°)
AoA (°)
-0.2

Figure 4-c. Comparison of numerical and experimental results of CL and CD values for AR=1.3

7
 JOURNAL OF ENERGY SYSTEMS

4. Results and Discussions

The CL/CD ratios versus angle of attack obtained from experiments for different aspect ratios are
shown in Figure 5. As you can see from Figure 5(a), the highest CL/CD ratio has been measured as
6.85 from the wing with AR=1.3 at AoA=7 0. Moreover, the highest values for all AR values have been
obtained at AoA=7 0-80. Above these angles, it can be seen that the C L/CD ratios are decreasing with
the increasing of angle for all AR values. At the AoA=7 0-80, which is angle obtained the highest CL/CD
ratios for all AR values, the lowest ratio have been measured as 4.35 from the wing with AR=0.7. As
shown in the figure, the increase in the AR values generally leads to a rise in the CL/CD ratio between
0 0
AoA=0
Frame 001  02 Aug 2018and AoA=30
 Internally created dataset . As can be seen that the results
Frame 001 are
02 Augcompatible with
2018  Internally created dataset literature studies [16,17].

8 1.2
AR=0.7
AR=0.8
AR=0.9 1.0
6 AR=1.0
AR=1.1
AR=1.2 0.8
AR=1.3
4
0.6
CL/CD

CL
AR=0.7
0.4 AR=0.8
2 AR=0.9
AR=1.0
0.2 AR=1.1
AR=1.2
0 AR=1.3
0 6 12 18 24 30 36
0.0
AoA (°) 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
CD
-2 -0.2
(a) (b)

Figure 5. CL/CD ratios versus angle of attack (a);CL values versus CD values (b) for different aspect ratios.

CL values versus CD values obtained from experiments at different aspect ratios are given in Figure
5(b). As you can see from the figure, high C L values are obtained at lower CD values for AR= 1.3, 1.2,
1.1 and 1.0. But, the CL values are tested at higher CD values for AR=0.9, 0.8 and 0.7. In there, as can
be said that the increase in AR values leads to an increase in the lift coefficient and a decrease in the
drag coefficient. The same results can be seen to some literature studies [18,19].

The distributions of pressure coefficients (CP) given with Eq. [1] versus x/c for different AoA and
different AR values at different positions on wing model (z/b= 5, 33.3, 66.6 and 95 %) are shown in
Table 2. When the angle of attack is 0 and 8 degrees, the pressure coefficient reaches the peak rapidly
near the leading edge, then, the coefficient decreases quickly along the upper surface for all wing
models. Up to the trailing edge of the wing models, the coefficient decreases smoothly and gradually
without any separation. This behavior looks like a typical behavior of the static pressure distribution
over the upper surface of an airfoil, as can be seen in some literature studies [20,21,22,23]. However,
some fluctuations can be seen on the curves for z/b= 5% and 95% due to the tip vortices.

When the angle of attack is 16 and 24 degrees for z/b= 33.3% and 66.6%, the pressure coefficient
decreases smoothly and gradually up to the trailing edge of the wing models without any separation.
But, when AoA is 16 degrees for z/b= 5% and 95%, the bubbles of separation are seen on the middle
and trailing edge of wing models having AR of 1.0 and 1.3 owing to the tip vortices. Moreover, it can
be seen that a minor bubble forms at leading edge of wing for z/b= 5%. In addition, when AoA is 24
degrees, the bubbles of separation are seen near the trailing edge of wing model having AR of 0.7.
When the angle of attack is 32 degrees, the bubbles of separation form at the middle and trailing edge
of wing models having AR of 0.7 and 1.0 for all positions. Moreover, the flow separation is seen along
the upper surface of the wing model having AR of 1.3.

8
 JOURNAL OF ENERGY SYSTEMS

Table 2-a. The distributions of pressure coefficients (CP) versus x/c for different AoA and different AR values (at
z/b=5%).

AR 0° 8° 16° 24° 32°

0.7

1.0

1.3

Table 2-b. The distributions of pressure coefficients (CP) versus x/c for different AoA and different AR values (at
z/b=33.3%).

AR 0° 8° 16° 24° 32°

0.7

1.0

1.3

(𝑃 − 𝑃∞ )
𝐶𝑝 = [1 ] (1)
2
∗ 𝜌∞ ∗ 𝑈∞
2

The P given in Eq. [1] is the static pressure at the point at which pressure coefficient is being
evaluated; P∞ is the static pressure in the freestream; ρ∞ is the freestream density and U∞ is the
freestream velocity of the fluid.

9
 JOURNAL OF ENERGY SYSTEMS

Table 2-c. The distributions of pressure coefficients (CP) versus x/c for different AoA and different AR values (at
z/b=66.6%).

AR 0° 8° 16° 24° 32°

0.7

1.0

1.3

Table 2-d. The distributions of pressure coefficients (CP) versus x/c for different AoA and different AR values (at
z/b=95%).

AR 0° 8° 16° 24° 32°

0.7

1.0

1.3

When the distributions of pressure coefficients at z/b= 5% compare with the values at z/b= 95% it can
be seen a minor bubble forms at leading edge for the positions at z/b= 5%. Profile a at z/b=5% has
more thickness leading edge than Profile d at z/b=95%, as can be seen from Table 1, so the thickness
leads to a minor bubble at leading edge. When the distributions of pressure coefficients at z/b= 33.3%
compare with the values at z/b= 66.6%, it can be said that the distributions of pressure coefficients has
not been affected by the changing of profile model.

The changes of velocity with streamline on the wing model for different AoA and different AR values
are given in Table 3. It is seen from the table that the velocity streamlines are flowed as laminar on the

10
 JOURNAL OF ENERGY SYSTEMS

wing model until AoA=20 0. But, the separation bubbles of flow are seen at 24° angle for all AR
values. Moreover, the bubbles are quite clear for 1.1 and 1.3 AR values, while the bubbles are less
obvious for the other AR values. When the streamlines are looked at high angle of attack, it can be
seen that the separation of flow is generally more obvious with the increasing of AR values. In
addition, it can be observed that the flow separations start in the middle of the upper surface of the
wing and in areas near of the trailing edge. Moreover, it can be seen the figures that the vortexes of
wing tip are became strong with the decreasing of AR values and the increasing of angle of attack.

Table 3. The changes of velocity with streamline on the wing model for different AoA and different AR values.

AR 8° 16° 20° 24° 30°

0.7

0.9

1.0

1.1

1.3

5. Conclusions

In this study, the effect of aspect ratio on the aerodynamic performances and flow separation behavior
were investigated on a model wing made up four different profiles. The experimental and numerical
studies were carried out at different angles of attack (AoA) ranging from -4° to 40° and at the 2x105
Re on wing models having different aspect ratios (0.7-1.3). The main results obtained from the studies
are presented below.

- The highest CL/CD ratio has been measured as 6.85 from the wing with AR=1.3 at AoA=7 0.
- The increase in AR leads to an increase in the lift coefficient and a decrease in the drag
coefficient
- The separation bubbles have formed at 24°-320 for all AR values.
- The increase in AR and in AoA triggered the flow separation.

11
 JOURNAL OF ENERGY SYSTEMS

REFERENCES

[1] Mizoguchi, M, Itoh, H. Effect of aspect ratio on aerodynamic characteristics at low Reynolds numbers.
AIAA Journal 2013; 51(7): 1631-1639. http://dx.doi.org/10.2514/1.J051915
[2] Mizoguchi, M, Kajikawa, YK, Itoh, H. Aerodynamic characteristics of low-aspect-ratio wings with
various aspect ratios in low Reynolds number flows. Transactions of The Japan Society for Aeronautical
and Space Sciences 2016; 59(2): 56–63. https://doi.org/10.2322/tjsass.59.56
[3] Torres, GE, Mueller, TJ. Low-aspect-ratio wing aerodynamics at low Reynolds numbers. AIAA Journal
2004; 42(5): 865-873. https://doi.org/10.2514/1.439
[4] Traub, LW. Aerodynamic impact of aspect ratio at low Reynolds number. Journal of Aircraft 2013;
50(2): 626–634. https://doi.org/10.2514/1.C031980
[5] Liu, YC, Hsiao, FB. Experimental investigation on critical Reynolds numbers aerodynamic properties of
low aspect ratios wings. Procedia Engineering 2014; 79: 76 – 85.doi: 10.1016/j.proeng.2014.06.313
[6] Ananda, GK, Sukumar, PP, Selig, MS. Measured aerodynamic characteristics of wings at low Reynolds
numbers. Aerospace Science and Technology 2015; 42: 392–406.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ast.2014.11.016
[7] DeVoria, AC, Mohseni, K. The effect of aspect ratio on the near-wake flow of rectangular wings. 54th
AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting, AIAA SciTech Forum, AIAA 2016-0857, January 2016, California,
pp. 1–10. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2016-0857
[8] Zhang, Z. Hubner, JP, Timpe, A, Ukeiley, L. Abudaram, Y. and Ifju, P. Effect of aspect ratio on flat -
plate membrane airfoils,” 50th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting including the New Horizons Forum
and Aerospace Exposition; AIAA 2012-1084, 9-12 January 2012, Tennesse, pp. 1–15.
https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2012-1084
[9] Angulo, IA, Ansell, PJ. Influence of aspect ratio on dynamic stall of a finite wing. AIAA Aerospace
Sciences Meeting, AIAA SciTech Forum, AIAA 2018-0546, Januar 2018, Florida, pp. 1–14.
https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2018-0546
[10] Okamoto, M. Azuma, A. Aerodynamic characteristics at low Reynolds number for wings of various
planforms. AIAA Journal 2011; 49(6): 1135–1150. https://doi.org/10.2514/1.J050071
[11] Shields, M, Mohseni, K. Effects of sideslip on the aerodynamics of low-aspect-ratio low-Reynolds-
number wings. AIAA Journal 2012; 50(1): 85-99. https://doi.org/10.2514/1.J051151
[12] Yilmaz, İ, Çam, Ö, Taştan, M, Karci, A. Experimental investigation of aerodynamic performance of
different wind turbine airfoils. Politeknik 2016; 9(4): 577–584. DOI:10.2339/2016.19.4 577-584
[13] Chen, PW, Bai, CJ, Wang, WC. Experimental and numerical studies of low aspect ratio wing at critical
Reynolds number. European Journal of Mechanics B/Fluids 2016; 59: 161-168.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.euromechflu.2016.06.005
[14] Menter, FR. Two-equation eddy-viscosity turbulence models for engineering applications. AIAA Journal
1994; 32(18): 1598-1605. https://doi.org/10.2514/3.12149
[15] Gabor, OŞ, Koreanschi, A, Botez, RM, Mamou, M, Mebarki, Y. Numerical simulation and wind tunnel
tests investigation and validation of a morphing wing-tip demonstrator aerodynamic performance.
Aerospace Science and Technology 2016; 53: 136-153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ast.2016.03.014
[16] Noughabi, AK, Tadjfar, M. Cross-wind ınfluence on low aspect ratio wings at low reynolds numbers.
Proceedings of the ASME 2013 Fluids Engineering Division Summer Meeting FEDSM 2013,
FEDSM2013-16523, 7-11July 2013, Nevada, pp. 1-9. DOI: 10.1115/FEDSM2013-16523
[17] Narayan, G, John, B. Effect of winglets induced tip vortex structure on the performance of subsonic
wings. Aerospace Science and Technology 2016; 58: 328-340. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ast.2016.08.031
[18] Chattot, JJ, Hafez, MM. Flow Past Large and Moderate Aspect RatioWings, Theoretical and Applied
Aerodynamics, USA: Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015.
[19] Kruyt, JW, Quicazán-Rubio, EM, van Heijst, GF, Altshuler, DL, Lentink, D. Hummingbird wing
efficacy depends on aspect ratio and compares with helicopter rotors. Journal of the Royal Society
Interface2014; 11: 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsif.2014.0585
[20] Lin, JCM, Pauley, LL. Low-Reynolds-number separation on an airfoil. AIAA Journal 1996; 34(8): 1570-
1577. https://doi.org/10.2514/3.13273
[21] Zhang, W, Zhang, Z, Chen, Z, Tang, Q. Main characteristics of suction control of flow separation of an
airfoil at low Reynolds numbers. European Journal of Mechanics B/Fluids 2017; 65: 88–97.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.euromechflu.2017.01.010
[22] Hu, H, Yang, Z. An experimental study of the laminar flow separation on a low-reynolds-number airfoil.
Journal of Fluids Engineering 2008; 130; 051101: 1-11. DOI: 10.1115/1.2907416
[23] Worasinchai, S, Ingram, G, Dominy, R. A low-Reynolds-number, high-angle-of-attack investigation of
wind turbine aerofoils. Proceedıngs Of The Instıtutıon Of Mechanıcal Engıneers Part A-Journal Of
Power And Energy 2011; 225(6): 748-763. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957650911405411

12

View publication stats