Scribd
Upload
265 views

Effect of NCR On VLM and LLT in XFLR5

The document compares the effect of varying the number of chordwise panels (Ncr) on viscous lift-line theory (VLM) and lifting line theory (LLT) solutions in XFLR5. It finds that while lift (CL) is unaffected by Ncr in VLM, drag (CD) and coefficients like CL/CD are affected as CD incorporates 2D viscous results. LLT solutions for CL, CD and other coefficients are impacted by Ncr as both incorporate 2D viscous results. The conclusion is that for a low Reynolds number case with separation, using VLM ignores separation effects on lift, treating the problem as high Reynolds instead of accounting for viscous effects like LLT.

Uploaded by

Mohammad Alhussaini
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
265 views

Effect of NCR On VLM and LLT in XFLR5

The document compares the effect of varying the number of chordwise panels (Ncr) on viscous lift-line theory (VLM) and lifting line theory (LLT) solutions in XFLR5. It finds that while lift (CL) is unaffected by Ncr in VLM, drag (CD) and coefficients like CL/CD are affected as CD incorporates 2D viscous results. LLT solutions for CL, CD and other coefficients are impacted by Ncr as both incorporate 2D viscous results. The conclusion is that for a low Reynolds number case with separation, using VLM ignores separation effects on lift, treating the problem as high Reynolds instead of accounting for viscous effects like LLT.

Uploaded by

Mohammad Alhussaini
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 4

Effect of Ncr on VLM and LLT in XFLR5

An S5010 airfoil was solved twice by setting Ncr = 9 and Ncr = 4. The effect of
Ncr on CL and CD in 3D is observed.
Wing: AR = 10, Re = 70,000

Alpha-CL
1.2

0.8

0.6
CL

LLT N4
LLT N9
0.4 VLM N4
VLM N9
0.2

0
0 5 10 15 20
Alpha

CL Effect
• Ncr has no effect on VLM, VLM calculates inviscid CL but LLT does take 2D
viscous CL into account.
• Note that VLM doesn’t calculate stall but it stops when it reaches a local CL
in the solution that doesn’t have a corresponding one in 2D to interpolate CD
from.
CD-CL
1.2

0.8

0.6
CL

LLT N4
LLT N9
0.4 VLM N4
VLM N9
0.2

0
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2
CD

CD Effect
• Both VLM and LLT are affected by Ncr and by 2D viscous results in general.
• CD is the same in both methods vs CL, for the same Ncr but this doesn’t mean
that it is the same vs Alpha since Alpha-CL curves are different
Alpha vs CL3/2/CD

20
18 LLT N4

16 LLT N9
VLM N4
14
VLM N9
12
CL3/2/CD

10
8
6
4
2
0
0 5 10 15 20
Alpha

• Although both VLM curves have same CL but they have different CD since Ncr
affects CD, so the power coefficient curves are different.
Alpha-Cm
0.1

0.05

0
0 5 10 15 20
-0.05
LLT N4
Cm

-0.1 LLT N9
VLM N4
-0.15
VLM N9
-0.2

-0.25

-0.3
Alpha

• Cm in VLM is inviscid and is not affected by Ncr as in CL

Conclusion
VLM:
• CL is inviscid, CD is viscous from 2D solution
• Stall is not estimated. The solution just stops when local CL reaches max in
any span position.
LLT:
• CL and CD are both viscous.
• Stall is approximated in some way using 2D solution.
So, in a Low Re case with separation bubble present, using the VLM is equivalent of
ignoring separation bubble effect on CL and treating the problem as a high Re. Thus,
I believe that the error of LLT not taking sweep effect into account is much smaller
than treating the CL as inviscid in VLM

You might also like