An Experimental Study of the

Laminar Flow Separation on a

Low-Reynolds-Number Airfoil
An experimental study was conducted to characterize the transient behavior of laminar
flow separation on a NASA low-speed GA (W)-1 airfoil at the chord Reynolds number of
70,000. In addition to measuring the surface pressure distribution around the airfoil, a
high-resolution particle image velocimetry (PIV) system was used to make detailed flow
field measurements to quantify the evolution of unsteady flow structures around the airfoil
at various angles of attack (AOAs). The surface pressure and PIV measurements clearly
Hui Hu revealed that the laminar boundary layer would separate from the airfoil surface, as the
Assistant Professor
e-mail: huhui@iastate.edu adverse pressure gradient over the airfoil upper surface became severe at AOAⱖ 8.0 deg.
The separated laminar boundary layer was found to rapidly transit to turbulence by
Zifeng Yang generating unsteady Kelvin–Helmholtz vortex structures. After turbulence transition, the
Graduate Student separated boundary layer was found to reattach to the airfoil surface as a turbulent
boundary layer when the adverse pressure gradient was adequate at AOA ⬍ 12.0 deg,
Department of Aerospace Engineering, resulting in the formation of a laminar separation bubble on the airfoil. The turbulence
Iowa State University, transition process of the separated laminar boundary layer was found to be accompanied
Ames, IA 50011 by a significant increase of Reynolds stress in the flow field. The reattached turbulent
boundary layer was much more energetic, thus more capable of advancing against an
adverse pressure gradient without flow separation, compared to the laminar boundary
layer upstream of the laminar separation bubble. The laminar separation bubble formed
on the airfoil upper surface was found to move upstream, approaching the airfoil leading
edge as the AOA increased. While the total length of the laminar separation bubble was
found to be almost unchanged (⬃20% of the airfoil chord length), the laminar portion of
the separation bubble was found to be slightly stretched, and the turbulent portion be-
came slightly shorter with the increasing AOA. After the formation of the separation
bubble on the airfoil, the increase rate of the airfoil lift coefficient was found to consid-
erably degrade, and the airfoil drag coefficient increased much faster with increasing
AOA. The separation bubble was found to burst suddenly, causing airfoil stall, when the
adverse pressure gradient became too significant at AOA ⬎ 12.0 deg.
关DOI: 10.1115/1.2907416兴

1 Introduction to a very thin region near the airfoil surface at high Reynolds
numbers, the predominance of viscous effects in low-Reynolds-
Low-Reynolds-number airfoil aerodynamics is important for
number applications would result in boundary layers rapidly
both military and civilian applications. These applications include
growing and easily separating from the surfaces of airfoils.
propellers, sailplanes, ultralight man-carrying/man-powered air-
It is well known that the boundary layers on low-Reynolds-
craft, high-altitude vehicles, wind turbines, unmanned aerial ve-
number airfoils remain laminar at the onset of the pressure recov-
hicles 共UAVs兲, and microAir vehicles 共MAVs兲. Nondimensional
ery unless artificially tripped. The behavior of the laminar bound-
chord Reynolds number 共ReC兲 is defined as the cruise speed mul- ary layers on low-Reynolds-number airfoils significantly affects
tiplied by the mean wing chord and divided by the kinematic the aerodynamic performances of the airfoils. Since laminar
viscosity of air. For the applications listed above, the combination boundary layers are unable to withstand any significant adverse
of small length scale and low flight velocities results in flight pressure gradient, laminar flow separation is usually found on
regimes with low wing-chord Reynolds number 共i.e., chord Rey- low-Reynolds-number airfoils. Postseparation behavior of laminar
nolds numbers, ReC, ranging from 10,000 to 500,000兲.The aero- boundary layers accounts for the deterioration in the aerodynamic
dynamic design methods and principles developed over the past performances of low-Reynolds-number airfoils. The deterioration
40 years have produced efficient airfoils for conventional, large- is exhibited by an increase in drag and decrease in lift. Extensive
scale, high-speed aircraft whose chord Reynolds numbers are usu- reviews about aerodynamics of low-Reynolds-number airfoils and
ally in the range of 106 – 109. It is well known that the aerody- the dependence of the laminar flow separation phenomena on the
namic performance of airfoils that are optimal for conventional, chord Reynolds numbers can be found at Tani 关1兴, Carmichael 关2兴,
large-scale and high-speed aircraft 共therefore, high chord Rey- Lissaman 关3兴, Mueller 关4兴 and Gad-el-Hak 关5兴. It has been sug-
nolds number兲 significantly degrades when used for low- gested that the separated laminar boundary layers would rapidly
Reynolds-number applications where the chord Reynolds numbers transit to turbulence, and then reattach to the airfoil surface as a
are several orders smaller. While conventional airfoil design prin- turbulent boundary layer when the adverse pressure gradient over
ciples usually either neglect viscous effects or restrict its influence the airfoil surface is adequate 关6兴. This would result in the forma-
tion of a laminar separation bubble, as schematically shown in
Fig. 1. As the adverse pressure gradient becomes more severe with
Contributed by the Fluids Engineering Division of ASME for publication in the
JOURNAL OF FLUIDS ENGINEERING. Manuscript received April 7, 2007; final manuscript
the increasing angle of attack, the separation bubble would sud-
received January 31, 2008; published online April 25, 2008. Assoc. Editor: Hamid denly burst, which will subsequently result in airfoil stall.
Johari. A good physical understanding is essential in order to control

Journal of Fluids Engineering Copyright © 2008 by ASME MAY 2008, Vol. 130 / 051101-1

Downloaded From: http://fluidsengineering.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jfega4/27312/ on 02/23/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/ab

 Fig. 2 GA„W…-1 airfoil geometry and pressure tap locations

2 Experimental Setup and the Studied Airfoil

The experiments were performed in a closed-circuit low-speed
Fig. 1 Schematic of a laminar separation bubble formed on a
wind tunnel located in the Aerospace Engineering Department of
low-Reynolds-number airfoil
Iowa State University. The tunnel has a test section with a 1.0
⫻ 1.0 ft2 共30⫻ 30 cm2兲 cross section and optically transparent
walls. The tunnel has a contraction section upstream of the test
the laminar flow separations and suppress the burst of the laminar section with honeycomb, screen structures, and cooling system
separation bubbles for better aerodynamic performances of low- installed ahead of the contraction section to provide uniform low
Reynolds-number airfoils. This requires a detailed knowledge turbulent incoming flow to enter the test section.
about transient behavior of the separated laminar boundary layers Figure 2 shows the schematic of the airfoil used in the present
and the evolution of laminar separation bubbles. Although exten- study: a GA 共W兲-1 airfoil 共also labeled as NASA LS共1兲-0417兲.
sive experimental studies have been conducted to investigate The GA 共W兲-1 has a maximum thickness of 17% of the chord
laminar flow separation, transition, and reattachment on low- length. Compared to standard NACA airfoils, the GA 共W兲-1 air-
Reynolds-number airfoils, the majority of those previous studies foil was especially designed for low-speed general aviation appli-
were carried out by using pointwise flow diagnostic techniques, cations with a large leading-edge radius in order to flatten the peak
such as hot-wire anemometry 关7–10兴, hot-film anemometry in pressure coefficient near the airfoil nose to discourage flow
关11,12兴 and laser Doppler velocimetry 关13–15兴 to conduct flow separation 关21兴. The chord length of the airfoil model is 101 mm,
velocity measurements at limited points of interest. A common i.e., C = 101 mm, for the present study. The flow velocity at the
shortcoming of such pointwise flow measurements is the incapa- inlet of the test section was set as U⬁ = 10.7 m / s, which corre-
bility of providing spatial correlation of the unsteady flow struc- sponds to a chord Reynolds number of Rec ⬇ 70,000.
tures to effectively reveal the transient behavior of the laminar The airfoil model is equipped with 43 pressure taps at its me-
flow separation. The availability of temporally synchronized and dian span with the spanwise length of the airfoil being 1.0 ft. The
spatially resolved flow field measurements is highly desirable in locations of the pressure taps are indicated in Fig. 2. The 43 pres-
order to elucidate underlying physics to improve our understand- sure taps were connected by plastic tubing to 43 channels of a
ing about the laminar boundary layer separation, transition, and pressure acquisition system 共Model DSA3217, Scanivalve Corp兲.
reattachment processes on low-Reynolds-number airfoils. Ad- The DSA3217 digital sensor arrays incorporate temperature com-
vanced flow diagnostic techniques, such as particle image veloci- pensated piezoresistive pressure sensors with a pneumatic calibra-
metry 共PIV兲, are capable of providing such information. tion valve, RAM, 16 bit A/D converter, and a microprocessor in a
Surprisingly, only very few experimental studies were recently compact self-contained module. The precision of the pressure ac-
conducted to provide temporally synchronized and spatially re- quisition system is ⫾0.2% of the full scale 共⫾10 in. H2O兲. Dur-
solved flow field measurements to quantify the transient behavior ing the experiment, each pressure transducer input was scanned at
of the laminar boundary layers on low-Reynolds-number airfoils 400 Hz for 20 s. The pressure coefficient distributions, C p = 共P
关16–19兴. Very little in the literature can be found to correlate
− P⬁兲 / 共 2 ␳U2⬁兲, around the airfoil at various angles of attack were
1
detailed flow field measurements with the airfoil surface pressure
measurements to investigate laminar flow separation, transition, measured by using the pressure acquisition system. The lift and
drag coefficients 共Cl = l / 共 2 ␳U2⬁C兲 and Cd = d / 共 2 ␳U2⬁C兲兲 of the 2D
1 1
and reattachment as well as the evolution of laminar separation
bubbles on low-Reynolds-number airfoils. In this study, we con- airfoil were determined by numerically integrating the pressure
ducted a detailed experimental study to characterize the transient distribution around the airfoil.
behavior of laminar flow separation, transition, and reattachment Figure 3 shows the schematic of the experimental setup used
on a low-Reynolds-number airfoil at ReC = 70,000. In addition to for the PIV measurement. The test airfoil was installed in the
mapping the surface pressure distribution around the airfoil with middle of the test section. A PIV system was used to make flow
pressure sensors, a high-resolution PIV system was used to make velocity field measurements along the chord at the middle span of
detailed flow field measurements to quantify the occurrence and the airfoil. The flow was seeded with ⬃1 ␮m oil droplets. Illumi-
behavior of laminar boundary layer separation, transition, and re- nation was provided by a double-pulsed Nd:YAG 共yttrium alumi-
attachment on the low-Reynolds-number airfoil. The detailed flow num garnet兲 laser 共NewWave Gemini 200兲 adjusted on the second
field measurements were correlated with the surface pressure mea- harmonic and emitting two laser pulses of 200 mJ at a wavelength
surements to elucidate the underlying physics associated with the of 532 nm with a repetition rate of 10 Hz. The laser beam was
separation, transition, and reattachment processes of the laminar shaped into a sheet by a set of mirrors, spherical and cylindrical
boundary layer. To the best knowledge of the authors, this is the lenses. The thickness of the laser sheet in the measurement region
first effort of its nature. The primary objective of the present study is about 0.5 mm. A high-resolution 12 bit 共1376⫻ 1040 pixels兲
is to gain further insight into the fundamental physics of laminar charge-coupled device 共CCD兲 camera was used for PIV image
flow separation, transition, and reattachment as well as the evolu- acquisition with the axis of the camera perpendicular to the laser
tion of laminar separation bubble formed on low-Reynolds- sheet. The CCD camera and the double-pulsed Nd:YAG lasers
number airfoils. In addition, the quantitative surface pressure and were connected to a workstation 共host computer兲 via a Digital
flow field measurements will be used as the database for the vali- Delay Generator 共Berkeley Nucleonics, Model 565兲, which con-
dation of computational fluid dynamics 共CFD兲 simulations of such trolled the timing of the laser illumination and the image acquisi-
complex flow phenomena for the optimum design of low- tion. In the present study, a careful pretest, which includes testing
Reynolds-number airfoils 关20兴. different seeding methods, applying different paints to the airfoil

051101-2 / Vol. 130, MAY 2008 Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://fluidsengineering.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jfega4/27312/ on 02/23/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/ab

 Fig. 3 Schematic of the experimental setup for the PIV measurements

model as well as adjusting laser excitation energy level, camera change with the increasing angle of attack 共up to 12.0 deg兲, the
positions, and optic lens arrangements, was conducted in order to surface pressure distribution on the upper surface of the airfoil
minimize the reflection from the airfoil surface for the near wall was found to significantly vary at different angles of attack. As the
PIV measurements. angle of attack 共AOA兲 was relatively small 共i.e., AOA⬍ 8.0 deg兲,
Instantaneous PIV velocity vectors were obtained by a frame to the surface pressure coefficient profiles along the airfoil upper
frame cross-correlation technique involving successive frames of surface were found to rapidly reach their negative peaks at loca-
patterns of particle images in an interrogation window of 32 tions quite near to the airfoil leading edge, then the surface pres-
⫻ 32 pixels. An effective overlap of 50% was employed for PIV sure gradually and smoothly recovered over the upper surface of
image processing. After the instantaneous velocity vectors 共ui , vi兲 the airfoil up to the airfoil trailing edge. As the AOA increases to
were determined, the spanwise vorticity 共␻z兲 could be derived. 8.0ⱕ AOA⬍ 12.0 deg, a distinctive characteristic of the surface
The time-averaged quantities such as mean velocity 共U , V兲, turbu- pressure coefficient profiles is the existence of a region of nearly
lent velocity fluctuations 共u⬘ , v⬘兲, normalized Reynolds stress 共¯␶ constant pressure 共i.e., pressure plateau region兲 at X / C
= −u⬘v⬘ / U2⬁兲, and normalized turbulent kinetic energy 共TKE ⬇ 0.05– 0.25. Sudden increase in surface pressure coefficient was
found following the pressure plateau region. Further downstream,
= 0.5ⴱ 共u⬘2 + v⬘2兲 / U2⬁兲 were obtained from a cinema sequence of the surface pressure was found to gradually and smoothly recover,
400 frames of instantaneous velocity fields. The measurement un- which is similar as those cases with relatively low AOAs. Such a
certainty level for the velocity vectors is estimated to be within characteristic of the surface pressure profiles is actually closely
2% and 5% for the turbulent velocity fluctuations 共u⬘ , v⬘兲, Rey- related to laminar flow separation and the formation of laminar
nolds stress, and turbulent kinetic energy calculations. The uncer- separation bubbles on low-Reynolds-number airfoils.
tainty level of the spanwise vorticity data is expected to be within As schematically illustrated in Fig. 5, Russell 关22兴 suggested a
10.0%. It should be noted that the surface pressure mapping and theoretic model to characterize the laminar separation bubbles
PIV measurements are designed to acquire statistical data instead formed on low-Reynolds-number airfoils. Based on the theoretic
of time-resolved measurements due the limited sampling rates of model of Russell 关22兴, the critic points 共the separation, transition,
the surface pressure mapping and PIV measurements. and reattachment points兲 of a laminar separation bubble formed
on a low-Reynolds-number airfoil can be determined from the
3 Experimental Results and Discussions
surface pressure measurements. The separation point refers to the
3.1 Measured Surface Pressure Distribution Around the location from where the laminar boundary layer separates from
Airfoil. Figure 4 shows the measured surface pressure coefficient the airfoil surface. The transition point refers to the onsite point at
distributions around the GA 共W兲-1 airfoil as the angle of attack where the separated laminar boundary layer begins to transit to
changes from 6.0 deg to 14.0 deg. While the surface pressure dis- turbulence. The reattachment point refers to the location where the
tribution on the lower surface of the airfoil does not notably separated boundary layer reattaches to the airfoil surface after
transition. As suggested by Russell 关22兴, a laminar separation
bubble formed on a low-Reynolds-number airfoil includes two
portions: a laminar portion and a turbulent portion. The location of
the pressure plateau is coincident with that of the laminar portion
of the separation bubble. The starting point of the pressure plateau
indicates the location where the laminar boundary layer separates
from the airfoil surface 共i.e., the separation point兲. Since the tran-
sition of the separated laminar boundary layer to turbulence will
result in a rapid pressure rise brought about by fluid entrainment,
the termination of the pressure plateau can be used to locate the
transition point, at where the transition of the separated laminar
boundary layer to turbulence begins to occur. The pressure rise
due to the turbulence transition often overshoots the invisicid
pressure that exists at the reattachment location. Therefore, the
location of the point of equality between the actual and inviscid
surface pressure marks the location of reattachment 共i.e., the reat-
tachment point兲.
Fig. 4 Surface pressure distribution profiles around the airfoil Following the work of Russell 关22兴, the locations of the critic

Journal of Fluids Engineering MAY 2008, Vol. 130 / 051101-3

Downloaded From: http://fluidsengineering.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jfega4/27312/ on 02/23/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/ab

 Fig. 5 Pressure distribution on an airfoil with laminar separation bubble „Russell †22‡…

points 共the separation, transition, and reattachment points兲 of point and the reattachment point. From the experimental results
laminar separation bubbles at different AOAs were estimated given in Fig. 6, it can be seen that, while the length of the laminar
based on the measured airfoil surface pressure profiles given in portion of the separation bubble was found to slightly increase as
Fig. 4. A summation of the locations of separation, transition, and the AOA increases, the turbulent portion became slightly shorter
reattachment points on the GA共W兲-1 airfoil at different AOAs is with the increasing AOA.
given in Fig. 6. The uncertainties of the estimated locations of the As the AOA became greater than 12.0 deg, the magnitude of
critical points is about 2.0% of chord length due to the limited the negative pressure coefficient peak near the airfoil leading edge
numbers of the pressure taps available in the region, which are was found to significantly decrease. As shown in Fig. 4, the sur-
shown in the figure as the error bars. As the AOA increases, the face pressure over most of the airfoil upper surface was found to
laminar separation bubble was found to move upstream to ap- be nearly constant. Such a surface pressure distribution indicates
proach the airfoil leading edge. The total length of the separation that airfoil is in stalled state 关23–25兴, which is confirmed from the
bubble 共i.e., the distance between the separation and reattachment PIV measurements given in Fig 7.
points兲, which is about 20% of the chord length, was found to be
almost unchanged regardless of the angles of attack. Following 3.2 PIV Measurement Results. While the surface pressure
the terminology used by Horton 关6兴, the length of the laminar measurements can be used to quantify the global characteristics of
portion of the separation bubble is defined as the distance between the laminar separation bubble formed on the low-Reynolds-
the separation point and the transition point, and the turbulent number airfoil, quantitative flow field measurements taken by us-
portion length corresponds to the distance between the transition ing a high-resolution PIV system can reveal much more details

Fig. 6 The estimated locations of the separation points, transition points,

and reattachment points at various AOAs

051101-4 / Vol. 130, MAY 2008 Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://fluidsengineering.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jfega4/27312/ on 02/23/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/ab

 Fig. 7 PIV measurement results at various AOAs

about the transient behavior of laminar flow separation and the level to reveal the transient behavior of the laminar flow separa-
evolution of a laminar separation bubble formed on the airfoil. In tion process near the nose of the airfoil with a measurement win-
the present study, PIV measurements were conducted at three spa- dow size of about 40⫻ 20 mm2, and a superfine level to elucidate
tial resolution levels: a coarse level to visualize the global features the details about the turbulence transition and the reattachment of
of the flow structures around the airfoil at various AOAs with the the separated boundary layer to the airfoil surface at the rear por-
measurement window size being about 160⫻ 120 mm2, a refined tion of the separation bubble with a measurement window size of

Journal of Fluids Engineering MAY 2008, Vol. 130 / 051101-5

Downloaded From: http://fluidsengineering.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jfega4/27312/ on 02/23/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/ab

 (a) (b)

(c) (d)

Fig. 8 PIV measurements near the airfoil leading edge with AOA= 6.0 deg; „a… instantaneous velocity vectors; „b… instan-
taneous vorticity distribution; „c… ensemble-averaged velocity vectors; and „d… streamlines of the mean flow

about 16⫻ 10 mm2. The time interval between the double pulsed with velocity deficits兲 downstream of the airfoil. The small wake
laser illumination for the PIV measurements was set as ⌬t region downstream of the airfoil indicates a small aerodynamic
= 40.0 ␮s, 14.0 ␮s, and 4.0 ␮s, respectively. The effective resolu- drag force acting on the airfoil, which is confirmed from the drag
tions of the PIV measurements 共i.e., grid sizes兲 were ⌬ / C coefficient measurement results given in Fig. 12.
= 0.018, 0.0045, and 0.0018, respectively. As the AOA increases to 8.0– 11.0 deg, the surface pressure
Figure 7 shows the PIV measurement results at the coarse res- measurement results given in Fig. 4 indicate that a laminar sepa-
olution level. As clearly revealed by the ensemble-averaged ve- ration bubble would be generated on the upper surface of the
locity distribution and the streamlines of the mean flow around the airfoil. However, since the height of the separation bubble is very
airfoil, incoming flow streams faithfully follow the streamlined small 共only ⬃1.0% of the chord length based on the refined PIV
profile of the airfoil when the AOA is relatively small 共i.e., measurement results shown in Figs. 9 and Fig. 10兲, the laminar
AOA⬍ 8.0 deg兲. No flow separation was found on the airfoil up- separation bubble cannot be clearly revealed from the PIV mea-
per surface when the adverse pressure gradient is rather mild at surement results shown in Fig. 7共B兲 due to the limited spatial
relatively small AOAs. Since the flow streams can firmly attach to resolution of the PIV measurements 共i.e., ⌬ / C ⬇ 0.018兲. It has
the airfoil surface, they smoothly leave the airfoil at the trailing been suggested that the separated laminar boundary layer would
edge, which results in a very small wake region 共i.e., the region firmly reattach to the airfoil upper surface at the downstream of

(a) (b)

(c) (d)

Fig. 9 PIV measurements near the airfoil leading edge with AOA= 10.0 deg; „a… instantaneous velocity vectors; „b… instan-
taneous vorticity distribution; „c… ensemble-averaged velocity vectors; and „d… streamlines of the mean flow

051101-6 / Vol. 130, MAY 2008 Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://fluidsengineering.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jfega4/27312/ on 02/23/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/ab

 (a) (b)

(c) (d)

(e) (f)

Fig. 10 PIV measurement results at the rear portion of the separation bubble with AOA= 10.0 deg; „a… instantaneous
velocity field; „b… instantaneous vorticity distribution; „c… ensemble-averaged velocity field; „d… streamlines of the mean
flow; „e… normalized Reynolds stress distribution; and „f… normalized turbulent kinetic energy distribution

the reattachment point all the way to the airfoil trailing edge further details about the transient behavior of the laminar flow
关6,22,23兴. The mean velocity vectors and streamlines of the mean separation and evolution of the separation bubble formed on the
flow shown in Fig. 7共B兲 reveal that incoming flow streams low-Reynolds-number airfoil cannot be clearly seen due to the
smoothly leave the airfoil at the trailing edge at AOA= 10.0 deg, limited spatial resolution of the PIV measurements. In order to
which confirms the reattachment of the separated boundary layer provide further insights to elucidate underlying physics associated
to the airfoil upper surface downstream of the laminar separation with the laminar flow separation process on low-Reynolds-
bubble. As a result of the reattachment of the separated boundary number airfoils, refined PIV measurements near the nose of the
layer, the wake region downstream of the airfoil was found to be airfoil with much higher spatial resolution 共⌬ / C ⬇ 0.0045兲 were
reasonably small even though a separated bubble was already made. The measurement results are shown in Figs. 8, 9, and 11
formed on the airfoil upper surface. Compared to those cases at with the AOA being 6.0 deg, 10.0 deg, and 12.0 deg, respectively.
smaller AOAs 共such as the case shown in Figs. 7共A兲 with AOA The laminar boundary layer around the airfoil was clearly visu-
= 6.0 deg兲, the size of the wake region for the cases with the alized as a thin vortex layer affixing to the airfoil upper surface in
separation bubbles generated on the airfoil upper surface becomes the typical instantaneous velocity field and the corresponding vor-
slightly larger, indicating a slightly increased aerodynamic drag ticity distribution shown in Fig. 8. The laminar boundary layer
force acting on the airfoil, which is confirmed from the airfoil
was found to be firmly attached to the airfoil surface when the
drag coefficient measurement results given in Fig. 12.
adverse pressure gradient over the airfoil upper surface is rather
The adverse pressure gradient over the upper surface of the
airfoil becomes more and more severe as the AOA increases. The mild at relatively small AOA 共i.e., AOA⬍ 8.0 deg兲. The
surface pressure measurement results given in Fig. 4 indicate that ensemble-averaged velocity field and the streamlines of the mean
the separation bubble would burst, eventually causing airfoil stall flow also confirmed that the incoming fluid streams would
when the AOA becomes greater than 12.0 deg. The large-scale smoothly flow to follow the streamlined profile of the airfoil when
flow separation over almost the entire upper surface of the airfoil the AOA is relatively small.
due to the burst of the laminar separation bubble is visualized As indicated by the surface pressure measurement results de-
clearly and quantitatively from the PIV measurement results given scribed above, a laminar separation bubble would be generated on
in Fig. 7共C兲. The large-scale flow separation on the airfoil upper the airfoil when the AOA became relatively high 共i.e., AOA
surface resulted in the formation of a very large recirculation ⬇ 8.0– 12.0 deg兲. The typical instantaneous velocity field and the
bubble in the wake the airfoil. As a result, the size of the wake corresponding vorticity distribution given in Fig. 9 clearly show
region 共i.e., the region with velocity deficit兲 downstream the air- that the laminar boundary layer 共i.e., the thin vortex layer over the
foil was found to dramatically increase, which indicates a signifi- airfoil upper surface兲 would be “taking off” from the airfoil upper
cant increase of the aerodynamic drag force acting on the airfoil, surface at first, and then “landing” on the airfoil upper surface
again quantitatively confirmed for the measured drag coefficient again further downstream. The separation of the laminar boundary
data given in Fig. 12. layer from the airfoil upper surface and the reattachment of the
Although the PIV measurement results given in Fig. 7 clearly separated boundary layer can be much more clearly seen from the
reveal the global features of the flow structures around the airfoil, ensemble-averaged velocity field and the corresponding mean

Journal of Fluids Engineering MAY 2008, Vol. 130 / 051101-7

Downloaded From: http://fluidsengineering.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jfega4/27312/ on 02/23/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/ab

 (a) (b)

(c) (d)

Fig. 11 PIV measurements near the airfoil leading edge with AOA= 12.0 deg; „a… instantaneous velocity vectors; „b… instan-
taneous vorticity distribution; „c… ensemble-averaged velocity vectors; and „d… streamlines of the mean flow

flow streamlines. Based on the PIV measurement results shown in Reynolds stress 共−u⬘v⬘ / U2⬁兲 near the rear portion of the laminar
Fig. 9, the location of the separation point 共i.e., from where the separation bubble. It can be clearly seen that the transition process
laminar boundary layer begins to separate from the airfoil surface兲 of the laminar boundary layer is accompanied by the significant
was found to be in the neighborhood of X / C ⬇ 0.08, which agrees increase of Reynolds stress in the flow field. It should be noted
with the starting point of the “pressure plateau” of the measured that only the contour lines of the normalized Reynolds stress
surface pressure distribution at 10.0 deg AOA. The reattachment above a critical value of 0.001 are shown in the Fig. 10共e兲. This
point 共i.e., at where the separated boundary layer reattaches to the critical value has been chosen in the literature to locate the onset
airfoil surface兲 was found to be in the neighborhood of X / C of the turbulent transition in separated shear layers 关10,17,19兴.
⬇ 0.28, which also agrees well with the estimated location of the Following the work of Ol et al. 关17兴, the transition onset position
reattachment point based on the surface pressure measurements. was estimated as the streamwise location where the normalized
The laminar separation bubble, which sits in the region between Reynolds stress first reaches a value of 0.001. The transition onset
the separation point and the reattachment point, is clearly visual- position at 10.0 deg AOA was found to be located in the neigh-
ized from the PIV measurement results. While the length of the borhood of X / C ⬇ 0.21 based on the measured Reynolds stress
separation bubble is about 20% of the chord length, the height of distribution shown in Fig. 10共e兲. The estimated location was found
the laminar separation bubble is found to be only about 1% of the to agree well with the estimation of the transition point given in
chord length. Fig. 5, which is based on the surface pressure measurements.
In order to provide further insight into the fundamental physics
The measured turbulent kinetic energy 共TKE= 0.5ⴱ 共u⬘2
associated with the turbulent transition and reattachment of the
separated laminar boundary layer, PIV measurements with super- + v⬘2兲 / U2⬁兲 distribution at the rear part of the laminar separation
fine spatial resolution 共⌬ / C ⬇ 0.0018兲 were made at the rear por- bubble is given in Fig. 10共f兲. It can be clearly seen that the regions
tion of the laminar separation bubble. The measurement results with higher TKE was found to be confined in a thin layer in the
are shown in Fig. 10 with the airfoil AOA being 10.0 deg. upstream of the transition point due to the laminar nature of the
The PIV measurement results given in Fig. 9 clearly show that separated laminar boundary layer. The contour lines of the regions
the laminar boundary layer would separate from the airfoil upper with higher TKE were found to rapidly diverge after the separated
surface at X / C ⬇ 0.08 due to the severe adverse pressure gradient laminar boundary layer began to transit to turbulence 共i.e., down-
at 10.0 deg AOA. The instantaneous velocity field and corre- stream of the transition point兲. The measured TKE distribution
sponding vorticity distribution given in Fig. 10 reveal that the also shows that the regions with higher TKE can be quite close to
separated laminar boundary layer behaved more like a free shear the airfoil surface wall downstream of the reattachment point 共i.e.,
layer after separation, which is highly unstable; therefore, rolling downstream of location X / C ⬇ 0.28兲. This confirms that the reat-
up of unsteady vortex structures due to the Kelvin–Helmholtz tached turbulent boundary layer can entrain more high-speed fluid
instabilities and transition to turbulent flow would be readily re- from outside to the near wall region to make the near wall flow
alized. After the separated laminar boundary layer transits to tur- much more energetic compared to the laminar boundary layer
bulent flow, the increased entrainment of the turbulent flow made upstream of the laminar separation bubble. Therefore, the turbu-
the separated boundary layer reattach to the airfoil upper surface lent boundary layer is much more capable of advancing against an
as a turbulent boundary layer, which consequently resulted in the adverse pressure gradient without flow separation. As a result, the
formation of a laminar separation bubble on the airfoil. The reat- reattached turbulent boundary layer can stay attached to the airfoil
tachment of the separated boundary layer to the airfoil upper sur- surface from the reattachment point to the trailing edge of the
face and consequent formation of the laminar separation bubble airfoil, which was confirmed in the PIV measurement results
can be more clearly seen from the ensemble-averaged velocity given above.
field and the streamlines of the mean flow shown in Figs. 10共c兲 As the AOA increases to 12.0 deg and higher, the adverse pres-
and 10共d兲. sure gradient over the upper surface of the airfoil becomes much
Figure 10共e兲 shows the distribution of the measured normalized more significant, and the separation bubble was found to eventu-

051101-8 / Vol. 130, MAY 2008 Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://fluidsengineering.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jfega4/27312/ on 02/23/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/ab

 (a)

(b)

Fig. 12 The measured airfoil lift and drag coefficients; „a… airfoil lift and
drag coefficients vs. angle of attack; and „b… lift-drag polar dot

ally burst. As clearly revealed in the instantaneous PIV measure- way from the airfoil leading edge to the trailing edge when the
ment results given in Fig. 11, the laminar boundary layer was adverse pressure gradient over the upper surface of the airfoil is
found to separate from the upper surface of the airfoil very near to rather mild at relatively small AOA 共i.e., AOA艋 6.0 deg兲. There-
the airfoil leading edge due to the significant adverse pressure fore, the airfoil drag coefficient of the airfoil was found to be very
gradient. Although the separated laminar boundary layer was still small. The airfoil lift coefficient of the airfoil was found to in-
found to rapidly transit to turbulence by rolling up unsteady vor- crease almost linearly with the increasing AOA. The increase rate
tex structures due to the Kelvin–Helmholtz instabilities, the sepa- of the airfoil lift coefficient was found to be almost the same as
rated boundary layer could not reattach to the airfoil upper surface the prediction based on thin airfoil theory 共i.e., dCl / d␣ = 2␲兲 at
anymore due to the much more significant adverse pressure gra- relatively small AOA when no laminar separation bubble was
dient when the AOA became 12 deg and higher. Large-scale flow formed on the airfoil.
separation was found to take place over almost entire airfoil upper The adverse pressure gradient on the airfoil upper surface be-
surface, and the airfoil completely stalled. The airfoil stall is comes more and more severe as the AOA increases. Since the
clearly visualized from the PIV measurement results. laminar boundary layer on the airfoil is unable to withstand the
3.3 Lift and Drag Coefficients of the Airfoil. The lift and severe adverse pressure gradient 关2,3兴, it will separate from the
drag coefficients of the airfoil at various AOA were determined by airfoil upper surface, the and laminar flow separation occurs as the
numerically integrating the measured surface pressure distribution AOA relatively becomes large 共i.e., AOAⱖ 8 deg for the present
around the 2D airfoil model used in the present study. Figure 12 study兲. The laminar flow separation is evident as the pressure
shows the profiles of the measured lift and drag coefficients as the plateau in the measured surface pressure distributions and clearly
functions of the AOA and a lift-drag polar plot. For reference, the visualized in the PIV measurement results given above. The sepa-
predicted increase rate of the airfoil lift coefficient 共i.e., dCl / d␣ rated laminar boundary layer was found to be able to reattach to
= 2␲兲 based on thin airfoil theory 关26兴 is also shown in the figure. the upper surface of the airfoil as a turbulent boundary layer after
As revealed from the measured surface pressure distributions turbulence transition at adequate AOAs 共i.e., 8.0 deg艋 AOA
and PIV measurement results discussed above, the laminar bound- ⬍ 12.0 deg兲. This results in the formation of a laminar separation
ary layer was found to firmly attach to the airfoil surface all the bubble on the airfoil upper surface. The airfoil lift coefficient was

Journal of Fluids Engineering MAY 2008, Vol. 130 / 051101-9

Downloaded From: http://fluidsengineering.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jfega4/27312/ on 02/23/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/ab

 found to keep on increasing with the AOA. However, the increase The lift coefficient of the airfoil was found to linearly increase
rate of the airfoil lift coefficient was found to considerably de- with the increasing AOA when the AOA is relatively small, while
grade due to the formation of a laminar separation bubble. The the drag coefficient of the airfoil was found to be very small. After
drag coefficient of the airfoil was found to increase faster with the the formation of the laminar separation bubble on the airfoil at
increasing AOA when the laminar separation bubble was formed AOAⱖ 8.0 deg, the increase rate of the airfoil lift coefficient was
on the airfoil. The adverse gradient over the airfoil upper surface found to considerably degrade and the airfoil drag coefficient was
became so significant at AOAⱖ 12.0 deg that the laminar separa- found to increase much faster with increasing AOA. As the AOA
tion bubble was found to burst. The separated laminar boundary became much higher 共i.e., AOAⱖ 12.0 deg兲, where the separation
layer was not able to reattach to the airfoil upper surface anymore. bubble was found to burst to cause airfoil stall, the lift coefficient
As visualized in the PIV measurements given above, large-scale of the airfoil was found to dramatically drop, and the airfoil drag
flow separation was found to take place over almost the entire coefficient was found to significantly increase.
airfoil upper surface, and the airfoil was found to completely stall.
As a result, the lift coefficient of the airfoil was found to dramati-
cally drop and the drag coefficient was found to significantly in-
crease with the increasing AOA.
Acknowledgment
4 Conclusion
The authors want to thank Mr. Bill Rickard, Mr. De Huang, and
An experimental investigation was carried out to study the tran- Mr. Masatoshi Tamai of Iowa State University for their help in
sient behavior of the laminar flow separation on a NASA low- conducting the experiments. The support of National Science
speed GA 共W兲-1 airfoil at the chord Reynolds number of ReC Foundation CAREER program under Award No. CTS-0545918 is
= 70,000. In addition to conducting surface pressure distribution gratefully acknowledged.
mapping around the airfoil, a high-resolution PIV system was
used to make detailed flow field measurements to quantify the
occurrence and behavior of laminar boundary layer separation,
transition, and reattachment at various AOAs. The detailed flow
field measurements were correlated with the surface pressure mea- References
surements to elucidate the underlying physics associated with the 关1兴 Tani, I., 1964, “Low Speed Flows Involving Bubble Separations,” Prog. Aero-
separation, transition, and reattachment processes of the laminar naut. Sci., Vol. 5, pp. 70–103.
boundary layer on the low-Reynolds-number airfoil. 关2兴 Carmichael, B. H., 1981, “Low Reynolds Number Airfoil Survey,” NASA
CR-165803, Vol. 1.
The surface pressure mapping and detailed PIV measurements
关3兴 Lissaman, P. B. S., 1983, “Low-Reynolds-Number Airfoils,” Annu. Rev. Fluid
clearly revealed that the laminar boundary layer would stay firmly Mech., 15, pp. 223–239.
attached to the airfoil surface as the adverse pressure gradient over 关4兴 J. T. Mueller, ed., 2001, Fixed and Flapping Wing Aerodynamics for Micro Air
the airfoil upper surface was rather mild at relatively small AOA Vehicle Applications, Progress in Astronautics and Aeronautics, Vol. 195,
共i.e., AOA⬍ 8.0 deg兲. As the AOA became greater than 8.0 deg, AIAA.
关5兴 Gad-el-Hak, M., 2001, “Micro-Air-Vehicles: Can They be Controlled Better,”
the increased adverse pressure gradient caused the laminar bound- J. Aircr., 38共3兲, pp. 419–429.
ary layer to separate from the airfoil upper surface. The separated 关6兴 Horton, H. P., 1968, Laminar Separation in Two and Three-Dimensional In-
laminar boundary layer was found to rapidly transit to turbulent compressible Flow, Ph.D. thesis, University of London.
flow by generating unsteady Kelvin–Helmholtz vortex structures. 关7兴 Hatman, A., and Wang, T., 1999, “A Prediction Model for Separated Flow
Transition,” ASME J. Turbomach., 121, pp. 594–602.
When the adverse pressure gradient was adequate 共i.e., AOA 关8兴 Johnson, M. W., 1994, “A Bypass Transition Model for Boundary Layers,”
⬍ 12.0 deg兲, the separated laminar boundary layer was found to ASME J. Turbomach., 116, pp. 759–764.
be able to reattach to the upper surface of the airfoil as a turbulent 关9兴 Solomon, W. J., Walker, G. J., and Gostelow, J. P., 1996, “Transition Length
boundary layer. As a result, a laminar separation bubble was Prediction for Flows With Rapidly Changing Pressure Gradients,” ASME J.
Turbomach., 118, pp. 744–751.
formed on the airfoil. The length of the laminar separation bubble 关10兴 Volino, R. J., and Hultgren, L. S., 2001, “Measurements in Separated and
was found to be about 20% of the airfoil chord length and its Transitional Boundary Layers Under Low-Pressure Turbine Airfoil Condi-
height only about 1% of the chord length. While the total length of tions,” ASME J. Turbomach., 123, pp. 189–197.
the laminar separation bubble was found to be almost unchanged 关11兴 Haueisen, V., Henneke, D. K., and Schröder, T., 1997, “Measurements With
Surface Mounted Hot Film Sensors on Boundary Layer Transition in Wake
regardless the AOA, the length of the laminar portion of the sepa- Disturbed Flow,” AGARD CP-598.
ration bubble was found to slightly increase, and the turbulent 关12兴 Zhong, S., Kittichaikarn, C., Hodson, H. P., and Ireland, P. T., 2000, “Visual-
portion became slightly shorter with the increasing AOA. The ization of Turbulent Spots Under the Influence of Adverse Pressure Gradients,”
separation bubble was found to move upstream to approach airfoil Exp. Fluids, 28, pp. 385–393.
关13兴 FItzgerald, E. J., and Mueller, T. J., 1990, “Measurements in a Separation
leading edge as the AOA increased. The laminar separation bubble Bubble on an Airfoil Using Laser Velocimetry,” AIAA J., 28共4兲, pp. 584–592.
was found to burst, causing airfoil stall, when the adverse pressure 关14兴 Brendel, M., and Mueller, T. J., 1987, “Boundary Layer Measurements on an
gradient became very significant at AOAⱖ 12.0 deg. Airfoil at Low Reynolds Numbers,” AIAA Paper No. 87-0495.
The detailed PIV measurements elucidated many details about 关15兴 O’Meara, M. M., and Mueller, T. J., 1987, “Laminar Separation Bubble Char-
acteristics on an Airfoil at Low Reynolds Numbers,” AIAA J., 25共8兲, pp.
the transient behavior of the laminar boundary layer separation, 1033–1041.
transition, and reattachment on the low-Reynolds-number airfoil. 关16兴 Lang, M., Rist, U., and Wagner, S., 2004, “Investigations on Controlled Tran-
The transition process of the separated laminar boundary layer sition Development in a Laminar Separation Bubble by Means of LDA and
was found to be accompanied by the significant increase of Rey- PIV,” Exp. Fluids, 36, pp. 43–52.
关17兴 Ol, M. V., Hanff, E., McAuliffe, B., Scholz, U., and Kaehler, C., 2005, “Com-
nolds stress in the flow field. The measured TKE distributions parison of Laminar Separation Bubble Measurements on a Low Reynolds
clearly revealed that the reattached turbulent boundary layer was Number Airfoil in Three Facilities,” 35th AIAA Fluid Dynamics Conference
much more energetic, thus more capable of advancing against an and Exhibit, Toronto, Ontario, June 6–9, AIAA Paper 2005-5149.
adverse pressure gradient without flow separation, compared to 关18兴 Raffel, M., Favier, D., Berton, E., Rondot, C., Nsimba, M., and Geissler, M.,
2006 “Micro-PIV and ELDV Wind Tunnel Investigations of the Laminar Sepa-
the laminar boundary layer upstream the separation bubble. As a ration Bubble Above a Helicopter Blade Tip,” Meas. Sci. Technol., 17, pp.
result, the reattached turbulent boundary layer was found to stay 1652–1658.
firmly attached to the airfoil surface from the reattachment point 关19兴 Burgmann, S., Brücker, S., Schröder, W., 2006, “Scanning PIV Measurements
to the trailing edge of the airfoil. The critic points 共i.e., separation, of a Laminar Separation Bubble,” Exp. Fluids, 41, pp. 319–326.
关20兴 Gao, H., Hu, H., and Wang, Z. J., 2008, “Computational Study of Unsteady
transition, and reattachment points兲 of the separation bubble iden- Flows Around Dragonfly and Smooth Airfoils at Low Reynolds Numbers,”
tified from the PIV measurements were found to agree well with 46th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, Reno, NV, Jan. 7–10,
those estimated based on the surface pressure measurements. AIAA Paper No. 2008-0385.

051101-10 / Vol. 130, MAY 2008 Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://fluidsengineering.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jfega4/27312/ on 02/23/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/ab

 关21兴 McGee, R. J., and Beasley, W. D., 1973, “Low-Speed Aerodynamics Charac- Reynolds Number Airfoil Applications,” J. Aircr., 31共4兲, pp. 761–766.
teristics of a 17-Percent-Thick Airfoil Section Designed for General Aviation 关24兴 Yaruseych, S., Sullivan, P. E., and Kawall, J. G., 2006, “Coherent Structure in
Applications,” NASA TN D-7428. an Airfoil Boundary Layer and Wake at Low Reynolds Numbers,” Phys. Flu-
关22兴 Russell, J., 1979, “Length and Bursting of Separation Bubbles: A Physical ids, 18, 044101.
关25兴 Lin, J. C. M., and Pulley, L. L., 1996, “Low-Reynolds-Number Separation on
Interpretation,” Science and Technology of Low Speed Motorless Flight,
an Airfoil,” AIAA J., 34共8兲, pp. 1570–1577.
NASA Conference Publication 2085, Part 1. 关26兴 Anderson, J. D., 2005, Fundamentals of Aerodynamics, 4th ed., McGraw-Hill
关23兴 Shum, Y. K., and Marsden, D. J., 1994, “Separation Bubble Model for Low Higher Education, New York.

Journal of Fluids Engineering MAY 2008, Vol. 130 / 051101-11

Downloaded From: http://fluidsengineering.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jfega4/27312/ on 02/23/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/ab