Use of Boundary Layer Transition Detection to Validate Full-Scale Flight Performance Predictions

Full-scale flight performance predictions can be made using CFD or a combination of CFD and analytical skin-friction predictions. However, no matter what method is used to obtain full-scale flight performance predictions knowledge of the boundary layer state is critical. The implementation of CFD codes solving the Navier-Stokes equations to obtain these predictions is still a time consuming, expensive process. In addition, to ultimately obtain accurate performance predictions the transition location must be fixed in the CFD model. An example, using the M2.4-7A geometry, of the change in Navier-Stokes solution with changes in transition and in turbulence model will be shown. Oil flow visualization using the M2.4-7A 4.0% scale model in the 14'x22' wind tunnel shows that fixing transition at 10% x/c in the CFD model best captures the flow physics of the wing flow field. A less costly method of obtaining full-scale performance predictions is the use of non-linear Euler codes or linear CFD codes, such as panel methods, combined with analytical skin-friction predictions. Again, knowledge of the boundary layer state is critical to the accurate determination of full-scale flight performance. Boundary layer transition detection has been performed at 0.3 and 0.9 Mach numbers over an extensive Reynolds number range using the 2.2% scale Reference H model in the NTF. A temperature sensitive paint system was used to determine the boundary layer state for these conditions. Data was obtained for three configurations: the baseline, undeflected flaps configuration; the transonic cruise configuration; and, the high-lift configuration. It was determined that at low Reynolds number conditions, in the 8 to 10 million Reynolds number range, the baseline configuration has extensive regions of laminar flow, in fact significantly more than analytical skin-friction methods predict. This configuration is fully turbulent at about 30 million Reynolds number for both 0.3 and 0.9, Mach numbers. Both the transonic cruise and the high-lift configurations were fully turbulent aft of the leading-edge flap hingeline at all Reynolds numbers.