Unsteady shock motion on a NACA0012 aerofoil at low reduced frequencies

Using transonic blowdown windtunnel experiments, the 2D unsteady shock motion on a NACA0012 aerofoil is examined at various frequencies typical for helicopter blades in forward flight. The aerofoil is subjected to freestream velocities oscillating periodically between M = 0.66 and M = 0.77. Unsteady pressure traces and schlieren images are analyzed over a range of low reduced frequencies to provide information on shock location and strength throughout the cycle. Unsteady effects were noticeable even at very low reduced frequencies (down to O(0.01). However, through the range of frequencies investigated, and within experimental error, the unsteady shock location showed no discernible lag compared to the quasi-steady behaviour. On the other hand, significant variations were observed in shock strengths with the upstream running part of the cycle (decreasing Mach number) displaying considerably stronger shocks than during the accelerating part of the cycle. It could be shown that this variation in shock strength is primarily caused by the shock motion modifying the relative shock Mach number. As a result is was possible to use the quasi-steady results to predict the unsteady shock behaviour at the frequencies investigated here (below 0(0.1)).

Unsteady shock motion on a NACA0012 aerofoil at low reduced frequencies

Using transonic blowdown windtunnel experiments, the 2D unsteady shock motion on a NACA0012 aerofoil is examined at various frequencies typical for helicopter blades in forward flight. The aerofoil is subjected to freestream velocities oscillating periodically between M = 0.66 and M = 0.77. Unsteady pressure traces and schlieren images are analyzed over a range of low reduced frequencies to provide information on shock location and strength throughout the cycle. Unsteady effects were noticeable even at very low reduced frequencies (down to O(0.01). However, through the range of frequencies investigated, and within experimental error, the unsteady shock location showed no discernible lag compared to the quasi-steady behaviour. On the other hand, significant variations were observed in shock strengths with the upstream running part of the cycle (decreasing Mach number) displaying considerably stronger shocks than during the accelerating part of the cycle. It could be shown that this variation in shock strength is primarily caused by the shock motion modifying the relative shock Mach number. As a result is was possible to use the quasi-steady results to predict the unsteady shock behaviour at the frequencies investigated here (below 0(0.1)).