Numerical and laboratory experiments on a new wing-body-tail configuration

Numerical Investigation of the Aerodynamic Performance for an Alternative Wing–Body–Tail Configuration

“…There was an increase in lift for increasing δ, which was even more pronounced when the tail, referred to as the Kutta Edge (KE) was added, but comcomitant drag penalty led to an overall reduction of the lift-to-drag ratio L∕D in the KE configuration. In this respect, the conclusions of [7,8] did not entirely agree, but the error bars in [7] suggest that there was a significant amount of uncertainty for the experimental results.…”

“…The design appeared to work as proposed in wind tunnel tests [6], but there was no attempt to optimize the geometry of the various components, and no corresponding computational tests were performed. Thus, the three previous studies [6][7][8] have dealt with the characteristics of what we may term a baseline wing-body-tail configuration (WBT-0), with simply specified geometry and no special attention to separation control. Particle image velocimetry measurements were made for the WBT-0 at various aftbody deflection angles δ [6,7] and in [7] were compared with preliminary force balance measurements.…”

“…Because of the lumped measurement of forces, it was not possible to identify the specific contributions of the various aerodynamic surfaces to the experimental global force coefficient. A computational study [8] used the Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes equations (RANS) (in the commercial code STAR-CCM) to estimate the aerodynamic properties of the WBT-0. There was an increase in lift for increasing δ, which was even more pronounced when the tail, referred to as the Kutta Edge (KE) was added, but comcomitant drag penalty led to an overall reduction of the lift-to-drag ratio L∕D in the KE configuration.…”

“…The overall purpose of this study was to provide some insight into the differences between the previous experimental and numerical studies and to investigate a potential design space of the initially tested WBT configurations. This exploration of the design space was conducted by using 10 discrete WBT configurations (five δ with and without KE) for the WBT-0 at chord-based Reynolds number Re c 10 5 [6][7][8] and two LDBs at their specific design body lengthbased Reynolds number Re l (1.2 × 10 6 for F-57 LDB and 10 7 for Myring LDB).…”

Investigation of the effects of angle of attack and tail deflection angle on the controlling tail flow field

“…Smith et al performed a numerical study to determine the specific influence of wing, body, and tail to improve the aerodynamic performance of the configuration at the body deflection angles of 2, 4, 6, and 8°. It has been shown that tail multiple separations and reattachment points (seen in the CFD results) has a drag penalty in the existing configuration [26].…”