Skip to main content

Evaluation of Alternative Altitude Scaling Methods for Thermal Ice Protection System in NASA Icing Research Tunnel

20170007301 · NASA · 2017

Public domain · NASATechnical Reports

Overview

A test was conducted at NASA Icing Research Tunnel to evaluate altitude scaling methods for thermal ice protection system. Two scaling methods based on Weber number were compared against a method based on the Reynolds number. The results generally agreed with the previous set of tests conducted in…

Publisher
NASA
Document
20170007301
Year
2017
Pages
24

Document

National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Evaluation of Alternative Altitude Scaling

Methods for Thermal Ice Protection System

in NASA Icing Research Tunnel

Sam Lee

Vantage Partners, LLC

Harold E. Addy, Jr. , retired

Andy P. Broeren

NASA Glenn Research Center

David M. Orchard

National Research Council Canada www.nasa.gov 1 National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Outline

• Introduction

• Experimental Methods

• Results and Discussion

• Conclusion

www.nasa.gov 2 National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Introduction

Motivation for Study

• Most thermal Ice Protection System (IPS) development and

testing done in atmospheric icing tunnels that cannot

simulate altitude effects.

• Altitude s caling is required to test IPS in atmospheric wind

tunnels.

• Re - based scaling methods with empirical corrections

typically used.

• A more robust scaling methods desired for development of

current and future generation aircraft

• Joint NASA and NRCC research program conducted to

study the issue.

www.nasa.gov 3 National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Introduction

NRC AIWT Tests (2012, 2014, 2015)

• 18” chord NACA 0018 model with simple heated air IPS

• Re - based scaling method found to be inadequate

• Airfoil surface temperatures well matched between

altitude and ground conditions .

• Accreted ice mass much larger than reference

• Ice formed farther downstream than reference

• Visual evidence of water re - entrainment into air flow.

• Two Weber number based method for scaling investigated .

• One method matched We (water density based)

DW

• Other method matched We (air density based) and

DA m /m (defined as Pi3).

w e www.nasa.gov National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Introduction

AIWT Tests (2012, 2014, 2015 )

• We - based scaling methods produced ice accretions much

closer in size and location to altitude reference conditions than

Re - based scaling method.

• Provided means of altitude scaling based on primary physics

and not empirical corrections.

Reference Re Scaling WePi3 Scaling

www.nasa.gov National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Introduction

2016 IRT Test

• Compared different scaling methods with a much larger

business jet airfoil model.

• Ice protection system more similar to what is used on

commercial aircraft.

• IRT cannot simulate altitude conditions.

• Results of different scaling methods can be compared to one

another and trends compared to AIWT results.

www.nasa.gov National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Experimental Procedure

• Test conducted in Icing

Research Tunnel at NASA

Glenn Research Center.

• 60 in. chord model

representative of modern

business jet.

• Piccolo tube IPS.

• Built for 2006 Wichita State

University IPS analysis and

modelling study.

• Extensively instrumented with

temperature and pressure

sensors.

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 x (in) www.nasa.gov 7 National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Experimental Procedure

• Surface temperatures (32 TCs)

• 4 TCs in piccolo tubes (Inlet T)

• 4 TCs in diffuser liner (Outlet T)

www.nasa.gov 8 National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Reference Conditions

Altitude V a T T LWC MVD

s t

Flight Phase

(ft) (kts) (deg) (deg C) (deg C) ( m m)

(g/m )

Descent 10000 180 -1 -14.2 -10 0.35 19.1

Cold Hold 15000 180 3 -20.1 -15.8 0.24 17.5

Warm Hold 15000 180 3 -8.6 -4.3 0.49 17.4

www.nasa.gov 9 National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Scaling Parameters

Scaling Parameters Held Constant

Scaling Method

Re Re m K T

2r w 0 r

WePi3 WeDA Pi3 K T

0 r

WeDW WeDW m K T

w 0 r

• Required 2 step process to obtain scaled conditions

• Run at Re - scaled conditions to obtain L.E. temperatures.

• Run at We - scaled conditions with IPS adjusted to match the

L.E. temperatures obtained at Re - scaled conditions.

www.nasa.gov 10 National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Descent Scenario

T m s w Re LWC WeDW MVD Ice Mass Scale 2r Alt (ft) V (kts) WeDA Pi3 2 3 6 ( m m) (g) Method (deg C) (g/m ) (x10 ) (g/m s) (x10 ) Referenc 10000 180 -14.2 0.35 19.1 17.6 0.224 5814 1.6 6.21 N/A Re 1066 133 -12.7 0.48 22.8 17.6 0.224 4315 2.24 3.38 20 WePi3 1439 159 -13.5 0.35 19.4 14.4 0.265 5814 1.62 4.84 8.5 WeDW 1782 180 -14.2 0.34 21.6 17.6 0.297 7769 1.88 6.21 12.7

Re Scaling WePi3 Scaling WeDW Scaling

www.nasa.gov 11 National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Descent Scenario

LE Surface Temperature Re Dry Re Wet WePi3 Dry WePi3 Wet WeDW Dry WeDW Wet T (deg C) -10 -0.15 -0.10 -0.05 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 s/c www.nasa.gov 12 National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Descent Scenario

Heated Air Energy Input Heated Air Temp.

8 Re Re WePi3 WePi3 80 WeDW WeDW ) T (deg C) qdot (W/in Inlet Dry Outlet Dry Inlet Wet Outlet Wet Dry Wet www.nasa.gov 13 National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Cold Hold Scenario

T m LWC WeDW Re s w MVD Scale Ice Mass 2r Alt (ft) V (kts) Pi3 WeDA 2 3 6 ( m m) Method (g) (deg C) (g/m ) (x10 ) (g/m s) (x10 ) Reference 15000 185 -20.1 0.31 14.6 13.4 0.193 5147 1.06 6.54 N/A Re 976 109 -16.4 0.52 20.1 13.4 0.193 3065 1.87 2.27 54.2 WePi3 1495 149 -16 0.28 16.9 9.5 0.253 5147 1.06 4.22 5.0 WeDW 2087 185 -15.7 0.27 18.9 13.3 0.31 8346 1.37 6.54 16.4*

Re Scaling WePi3 Scaling WeDW Scaling

www.nasa.gov 14 National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Cold Hold Scenario

LE Surface Temperature Re Dry Re Wet WePi3 Dry WePi3 Wet WeDW Dry WeDW Wet T (deg C) -0.15 -0.10 -0.05 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 s/c www.nasa.gov 15 National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Cold Hold Scenario

Heated Air Temp. Heated Air Energy Input Re Re WePi3 WePi3 WeDW WeDW ) T (deg C) qdot (W/in Dry Wet Inlet Dry Outlet Dry Inlet Wet Outlet Wet www.nasa.gov 16 National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Warm Hold Scenario

T m Re LWC WeDW s w 2r Scale MVD Ice Mass WeDA V (kts) Alt (ft) Pi3 3 6 Method ( m m) (g) (deg C) (g/m s) (g/m ) (x10 ) (x10 ) Reference 15000 185 -8.6 0.39 18.3 20.0 0.186 4922 1.74 6.55 N/A Re 1336 109 -6.3 0.66 25.4 20.0 0.186 2923 3.09 2.26 207.5 WePi3 1814 147 -7.3 0.36 19.6 13.6 0.241 4922 1.74 4.12 64.5 WeDW 2454 184 -8.6 0.37 22 20.0 0.299 8005 2.24 6.55 138.8

Re Scaling WePi3 Scaling WeDW Scaling

www.nasa.gov 17 National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Warm Hold Scenario

LE Surface Temperature Re Dry Re Wet WePi3 Dry WePi3 Wet WeDW Dry WeDW Wet T (deg C) -0.15 -0.10 -0.05 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 s/c www.nasa.gov 18 National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Warm Hold Scenario

Heated Air Temp. Heated Air Energy Input 120 10 Re Re WePi3 WePi3 80 WeDW WeDW ) T (deg C) qdot (W/in Inlet Dry Outlet Dry Inlet Wet Outlet Wet Dry Wet www.nasa.gov 19 National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Conclusion

• Test conducted at NASA Icing Research Tunnel to evaluate

new altitude scaling methods for thermal ice protection

systems.

• Two Weber number - based scaled methods developed during

a series of joint NASA and NRCC tests at AIWT.

• Results from IRT generally agreed with and supported the

results from previous tests in NRCC.

• We - based scaling methods resulted in smaller ice accretion

that formed farther upstream than the Re - based scaling

methods.

• Additional tests required in altitude capable tunnels using full -

scale models to better define the limits of physical

relationships used to develop these scaling methods.

www.nasa.gov 20 National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Extra Slides

www.nasa.gov 21 National Aeronautics and Space Administration

WSU Warm Hold Scenario

T m s w LWC WeDW Re MVD Scale Ice Mass 2r Alt (ft) V (kts) Pi3 WeDA 3 6 (deg C) ( m m) Method (g) (g/m ) (x10 ) (g/m s) (x10 ) Reference 15000 205 -9.4 0.5 20 31.1 0.205 6065 1.73 8.04 N/A Re 1312 126 -6.3 0.82 27.2 31.1 0.205 3769 2.98 3.01 236.5 WePi3 1835 164 -7.6 0.43 24 21.0 0.264 6065 1.73 5.13 68.9 WeDW 2446 205 -9.2 0.5 22.4 31.1 0.324 9715 2.23 8.04 266.2 1191 115 -9.4 0.87 29 30.8 0.192 3229 3.03 2.53 483.3 WSU Model Re WePi3 y (in) WeDW WSU -2 -4 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 x (in) www.nasa.gov 22 National Aeronautics and Space Administration

WSU Warm Hold Scenario

Re Scaling

WePi3 Scaling

WSU Scaling

WeDW Scaling

www.nasa.gov 23 National Aeronautics and Space Administration

WSU Warm Hold Scenario

Heated Air Temp.

Re 140 LE Surface Temp.

WePi3 WeDW WSU Re Dry Re Wet WePi3 Dry T (deg C) WePi3 Wet WeDW Dry WeDW Wet WSU Dry WSU Wet Inlet Dry Outlet Dry Inlet Wet Outlet Wet T (deg C) Heated Air Energy Input Re WePi3 WeDW -0.15 -0.10 -0.05 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 WSU ) s/c qdot (W/in Dry Wet www.nasa.gov 24

Source & rights

Source: ntrs.nasa.gov. Public-domain U.S. Government work (17 USC §105) — freely reproducible.

Permanent URL — we don’t break links.

Report a problem or request removal

Document details

Doc number
20170007301
Publisher
NASA
Year
2017
Pages
24
File size
986 KB