CFD Investigation Of Flow Over Grooved Surface

The present study investigated the effect of rectangular groove structures on flow behavior by comparing them with a plain surface using CFD analysis in ANSYS Workbench. From the results obtained through pressure, velocity, and turbulence analysis, it is observed that the rectangular grooved surface increases pressure drop and turbulence intensity across all standoff distances. Although slight variations in velocity were noted, they were not sufficient to compensate for the increased energy losses caused by flow disturbances and recirculation within the grooves. In contrast, the plain surface demonstrated smoother flow characteristics, lower turbulence, and reduced pressure losses, indicating better aerodynamic efficiency. Therefore, the proposed rectangular groove design, under the given conditions, does not contribute to drag reduction and instead leads to higher flow resistance. However, this study establishes a foundation for future research, where different groove geometries such as triangular, circular, or optimized riblet structures can be implemented and analyzed. With proper design and scaling, such surface modifications have the potential to control boundary layer behavior and delay flow separation, which is highly beneficial in aerodynamic applications like aircraft surfaces. Thus, while the current configuration did not yield performance improvement, it provides valuable insight and a basis for further investigation into groove-based passive flow control techniques.

[1] P. R. Ashill, J. L. Fulker, and K. C. Hackett, “A review of recent developments in flow control,” Aeronaut. J., vol. 109, no. 1095, pp. 205–232, May 2005, doi: 10.1017/S0001924000005200. [2] A. M. Halawa, B. Elhadidi, and S. Yoshida, “Aerodynamic Performance Enhancement Using Active Flow Control on DU96-W-180 Wind Turbine Airfoil,” Evergreen, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 16–24, Mar. 2018, doi: 10.5109/1929723. [3] M. Desalvo, E. Whalen, and A. Glezer, “High-Lift Enhancement Using Active Flow Control,” in 6th AIAA Flow Control Conference, New Orleans, Louisiana: American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Jun. 2012. doi: 10.2514/6.2012-3245. [4] Y. Yadlin and A. Shmilovich, “Lift Enhancement for Upper Surface Blowing Airplanes,” in 31st AIAA Applied Aerodynamics Conference, San Diego, CA: American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Jun. 2013. doi: 10.2514/6.2013-2796. [5] M. DeSalvo, E. Whalen, and A. Glezer, “High-Lift Performance Enhancement Using Active Flow Control,” AIAA J., vol. 58, no. 10, pp. 4228–4242, Oct. 2020, doi: 10.2514/1.J059143. [6] A. M. Halawa, B. Elhadidi, and S. Yoshida, “Aerodynamic Performance Enhancement Using Active Flow Control on DU96-W-180 Wind Turbine Airfoil,” Evergreen, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 16–24, Mar. 2018, doi: 10.5109/1929723. [7] J. Zhang, K. Xu, Y. Yang, Y. Ren, P. Patel, and G. Zha, “Aircraft Control Surfaces Using Co-flow Jet Active Flow Control Airfoil,” in 2018 Applied Aerodynamics Conference, Atlanta, Georgia: American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Jun. 2018. doi: 10.2514/6.2018-3067. [8] D. Communier, R. M. Botez, and T. Wong, “Experimental validation of a new morphing trailing edge system using Price – Païdoussis wind tunnel tests,” Chin. J. Aeronaut., vol. 32, no. 6, pp. 1353–1366, Jun. 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.cja.2019.03.016. [9] E. Kaygan and C. Ulusoy, “Effectiveness of Twist Morphing Wing on Aerodynamic Performance and Control of an Aircraft,” J. Aviat., vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 77–86, Dec. 2018, doi: 10.30518/jav.482507. [10]            T. Xiao, Z. Zhu, S. Deng, F. Gui, Z. Li, and Z. Zhou, “Effects of nozzle geometry and active blowing on lift enhancement for upper surface blowing configuration,” Aerosp. Sci. Technol., vol. 111, p. 106536, Apr. 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.ast.2021.106536.