See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/346108667

Numerical simulation of the wing performance on Onera M-6 Wing by adding

winglet using computational fluid dynamics

Conference Paper · November 2019

CITATIONS READS

0 1,013

6 authors, including:

Muhammad Yusvika
Universitas Sebelas Maret
6 PUBLICATIONS 45 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Muhammad Yusvika on 23 November 2020.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Numerical simulation of the wing performance on Onera M-6 Wing
by adding winglet using computational fluid dynamics

Pambayun Giri H1, Muhammad Yusvika1, Raymundus Lulus Lambang G.H2, Dominicus
Danardono Dwi Prija T2, Sukmaji Indro Cahyono2,*

1
Undegraduate School of Mechanical Engineering, Universitas Sebelas Maret, Jl. Ir. Sutami 36A,
Surakarta, 57126, Indonesia
2
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Sebelas Maret University, Jl. Ir. Sutami 36A, Surakarta
57126, Indonesia

*[email protected]

Abstract. Aeromodeling industry and research have been investigating the transonic flow over the
ONERA wing by experiments and computational analysis. The Onera m-6 wing is known as
definitive CFD validation for CFD simulation in external flow due to its simple geometry combined
with complexities of transonic flow (i.e., local supersonic flow, shocks, and turbulent boundary
layers’ separation). Hence, aerodynamics drag at cruise speed must be considered. Aerodynamics
drag force of a typical transport aircraft shows that lift-induced drag can amout as much as 40% of
total drag at cruise condition. One of the ways to reduce lift-induced drag is by using wingtip devices
called winglet. This device important to be implemented as an effort to improve aerodynamics
performance by reducing lift-induced drag by changing and fix vortex distribution at the wingtip.
The aim of this research is to simulate several models of winglets are applied to the Onera M-6 wing.
The numerical analysis method is used by CFD simulations to predict the aerodynamic of wing
performance and flow phenomena. The Onera m-6 wing with winglet geometry are modeled by
Fusion360. Commercial CFD software Ansys Fluent was used to predict the pressure, lift force,
drag force and visualizing changes of the airflow vector at the wingtip as an interpretation of the
aerodynamic performance. Boundary conditions for validation are air flow at transonic velocity
speed (M∞ = 0.84), compressible fluid, 3.06o angle of attack, and 11.72e + 6 Reynolds number. The
two difference models of winglet was varied and placed at tip of wing. The simulation result found
that the aerodynamics performance was increase due to the addition winglet by increasing lift
coefficient. The result shows an increase in the value of the lift coefficient of 4.5% and 7.2%.
Although it is known that the lift force increases, the increase in drag also occurs because the addition
of winglets extending the surface area and the friction factor. This result of the research can be a
reference for the airplane industry to improve the development of wing design in transonic speed.

1.Introduction

Research on transonic flow has been studied widely since 1930 [1]. Various research continues to be studied to
make aircraft that have capability to operate at high speed safely. In the 1970s ONERA aerodynamics department was
able to design conceptual aircraft wing for transonic operation. The first wing testing case of transonic flow was
carried out in 1977 [2]. Experiments analysis and numerical simulation methods have been performed to get the desire
result close to the actual phenomenon. At present, calculation with CFD analysis are able to provide accurate result.
Computational fluids dynamics (CFD) is modern technique to solve complex problem regarding fluid dynamics
through numerical simulation. The typical of shock wave on the upper surface of wing in the aerodynamics condition
becomes a challenge for transonic simulation. An understanding of boundary layer separation is important in designing
of aircraft. For examples of shock induced separation and other correlations with transonic flow that has high Reynolds
number show the main parameter involved. When the free stream Mach number is sufficiently high, a separation layer
is formed at the wing leading edge which will be shock induced and cause vortex flow over the wing. Based on
previous observation data, shock induced drag be able to be observed at Mach number around 0.8 or more [14]. In
addition, shock also occurs in the trailing edge of the wing. Meanwhile the Mach number or angle of attack is high,
the airflow through the symmetry plane reaches supersonic. While the back becomes subsonic. Therefore, when the
vortex moves into region with an adverse pressure gradient, vortex breakdown will occur proportional to increasing
pressure from the underside of the wing [4][15]. The explanation of vortex breakdown in this case is similar to
boundary layer separation. A total pressure loss will occur due to effect of viscous fluid at high shear stresses close to
the wall. Meanwhile, if the adverse pressure distribution is sufficiently strong, the locally flow will be reversed. For
the case of the boundary layer, separation occurs at the separation point increase rapidly as the wall thickness increases
[11][16].

Another phenomenon that can be examined from this case is wingtip vortices. Wingtip vortices are very important
phenomenon to be observed due to negative effect. Many studied have tried to understand and overcome wingtip
vortices by modifying tip geometry and applying vortex control devices. One way to reduce wingtip vortices is by
adding winglets to prevent flow on the upper surface from leaking over. The earliest research on winglets can be seen
in Whitcomb, it is known that the applicability of winglets can provide a lift induced drag reduction [5]. Aircraft
performance are also increase if the induced drag been able to be reduced by modification design of winglet at the
wingtip [6]. Heyson et al. [7] has conducted computational studies focused on the comparison of winglet shape to its
aerodynamics advantage. From the study it was found that winglets offer improved performance over tip extensions.
The investigation of Kravchenco [8] revealed that winglet can enhance the aerodynamics advantage, although must
be paid with cost to the addition of structure and shear stress friction drag. This research also showed that the enhance
obtained from winglets resulted in an increase bending moment stress at the wing root [8]. Numerical simulation by
Toor et al. [9] was found that winglet effectiveness will decrease with higher cant angle. Winglet performance also
increase up to optimum value for different sweep back angle and taper ratio. Highest value on lift to the drag ratio of
taper ratio is close to 7%. Investigation by Joel et al. [ 10] has observed to find an optimized blended winglet
configuration for the KC-135R aircraft. Its offering an enhance in endurance up to 5.62% and increase potential range
3.55%, then modification rake wingtip sweepback with 20 degrees have an improve of 8.32% and 3.55% respectively.
In general, the use of winglet on KC-135R aircraft can save about 8% fuel burn. Winglet also have capability to
improve take off parameter and stall speed by 20%.

This paper will observe the effect of applying wingtip devices on ONERA M6 wing for transonic aircraft. In order
to obtain quantitative data from this case, a numerical analysis was performed with computational fluid dynamics.
CFD simulations are able to provide accurate information to explain the phenomenon that is being faced. The study
will be divided into three stage. The first stage, conventional ONERA M6 wing without winglet. It is used as
validation for wing simulation without the addition of winglet. the other stage, the conventional winglet geometry of
winglets such as Blended and BMAX winglets are adopted and applied on ONERA M6 wing.
 Figure 1. Different winglet design 1. Blended, 2. BMAX [11]

The large amount of research on geometry of winglet in has shown researchers interest in this topic. Therefore, it
is a challenge to improve the performance of aircraft by reducing induced drag. moreover, research and observation
about transonic flow for commercial aircraft is still being developed to get the best enhancement. The ultimate goal is
to satisfying the need for fast transportation that is safe and energy efficiency. Several studies have been conducted
and presented in the form of literature / scientific journals. Hence, based on the literature that has been studied, it is
necessary to develop modification of wingtip devices to improve the aircraft performance.

2. Flow Description

Presently, the simulation has done using commercial CFD ANSYS software and fluent solver. Previously,
validation has done by comparing the results of simulation CFD ANSYS wing without winglet variations compared
to the published experimental data of ONERA M6 wing. Experimental data that are available for 0,2 span wise location
of the wing. The relative error about of 5% obtained indicates that the simulation results are feasible and acceptable
for numerical simulation. Modification of wingtip devices is duplicated the geometry of conventional winglets in
previous studies [10]. The model consists of only wing section with variation of winglets. Symmetry model is used
for simulation. The simulation of Computational Fluid Dynamics uses flow conditions detailed as shown in Table 1.
For specification of ONERA M6 wing will be defined as shown in Table 2 [1]. A planar and three dimensional
ONERA M-6 wing was modeled with specification below:
Table 1. Flow Conditions for This Case.

Angle of Attack (AOA) Mach Number Reynolds Number

3.06 0,8395 11.72E+06

Table 2. ONERA M-6 Wing Specification for semi-span.

Leading edge sweep 30 degrees

Trailing edge sweep 15.8 degrees

Span, b 1.1963 meters

Mean aerodynamic chord, c 0.64607 meters

Aspect ratio 3.8

Taper ratio 0.562

3. Computational Setup

3.1. Geometry

3D Model geometry of ONERA M6 wing and winglet variations was created using Fusion360. Figure 2 shows the
3D geometry ONERA M6 wing original and addition two conventional winglet.

(a) (b)

(b)
Figure 2. ONERA M6 Wing Fusion360 different wing designs a) original wing b) Blended (side and front view) c)
BMAX (side and front view)

Figure 3 bellow shows the form of enclosure of boundary domain for simulation. Consists of inlet, outlet,
symmetry, and wall far from the wing geometry.

Figure 3: Enclosure of wing for computational setup

3.2. Mesh

Meshing is an important step for computational problem, it must be considered to provide accurate data. A good
quality mesh can give better result which have good comparison against experimental or CFD result for validation.
Structured of mesh are shown in Figure 4. Table 3 shows mesh specification used in the simulation. Figure 2 shows
mesh detail in symmetry plane.

(a) (b)
 (c)

Figure 4: meshing of enclosure of three wing model a) Original wing b) Blended c) BMAX

Table 3: Mesh Specification

Type Number of Elements

Without winglet 2,919,374

Blended 4,598,221

BMAX 4,551,887

Figure 5: mesh in symmetry plane

3.3. Boundary Conditions

The numerical simulation is performed over a wing to solve the case by providing inlet and outlet boundary
condition. Boundary condition, operating parameters, and fluid properties are detailed in Table 4. Wing surface is
setting to wall type, near side will be setting to symmetry plane, and others (Inlet, outlet, far field) will be setting to
pressure far-field type. Meanwhile pressure, Mach Number, and velocity component will be specified for calculation.
Table 4: Boundary Condition and fluid properties

Parameters value
Wall velocity (v) V = 0 (m/s)
Pressure (P) P = 45.8290 psia

Mach Number M∞ = 0.8395

Angle of Incidence (α) α = 3.06 degrees
Viscosity 1.09329e-05 lbm/ft.s
Density Ideal gas

3.4. Solver and Turbulent Model

Numerical simulation of external flow aerodynamics has been carried out with commercial CFD ANSYS Fluent
19. Governing equation of this simulation is governed by continuity, momentum conservation (Navier-Stokes) and
energy Equations. Solution of this case is solved by transient and Reynold Averaged Navier-Stokes (RANS) equation
for turbulent model. This simulation also using Spalart-Allmaras to close the turbulent model of RANS. The Spalart-
Allmaras model if equation to solve kinematic Eddy-Viscosity. It has been used widely and developed for aerospace
applications. The mathematical formulation of the fourth equation model considered for the case is given as follow.

+ =0

+ =− + 2 −

+ + + − !=0

− = 2"# $

Continuity equation, Reynold Navier-Stokes Equation, Conservation of energy equation, and Spalart-Allmaras
turbulent model are shown respectively.

4. Verification and Validation of CFD Results

4.1. Verification

Result from numerical simulation by NASA from WIND® software are compared with author’s research for
verification of Cl and Cd from CFD results. Observation data by NASA were obtained from publications by Durrani
et al. as shown in the table 5 [11]. Table 6 display comparison of Cl and Cd result for various wingtip devices.
Table 5: CFD Comparison of NASA and Author Result

Cl Cd % Error Cl % Error Cd

NASA CFD 0.1410 0.0088

Original Wing 0.134980 0.008911 4.269504 % 1.261364 %

Table 6: Improvement of Aerodynamics Performance

Cl Cd % Increase in Cl % increase in Cd Cl/Cd ratio

Original wing 0.134980 0.008911 15.14723

Blended winglet 0.140060 0.009022 3.763520 1.245623 15.52393

BMAX winglet 0.143680 0.009184 6.445399 3.064682 15.64409

Figure 6 present the contours of pressure coefficient for three wings model and NASA CFD result. we can find
out the shock formation for each wing with wingtip model. Results of Coefficient Pressure distribution and formation
shock of simulation will be compared with NASA CFD visually [11]. Figure 7 present contour of Mach Number for
three wing model. furthermore, vorticity contour obtained for original wing, blended, and BMAX wing design.
Interpretation of the colors can be seen in figure 8.

(a) (b)
 (c) (d)

Figure 6: Cp contours with shock formation on the surface and symmetry of the ONERA M6 wing, a) Cp of NASA
CFD, b) Original ONERA M6 wing, c) Blended winglet, d) BMAX winglet

(a) (b)

(c)

Figure 7: Mach Number contours on the surface and symmetry of the ONERA M6 wing, a) Original ONERA M6
wing, b) Blended winglet, c) BMAX winglet
(a)

(b)
 (c)

Figure 8: Vorticity contours behind the ONERA M6 wing, a) Original ONERA M6 wing, b) Blended winglet, c)
BMAX winglet

4.2. Validation of CFD Results

The validation of the simulation results has been compared with the experimental data in previous studies [12]. A
polyline of Cp (Pressure coefficient) at the distance specified along span wise location will be compared with
experimental result. Calculation Cp are taken at points 0.2, 0.65, and 0.95 of semi span [13]. Figure 9, 10, and 11
display CFD result of Cp of experiment result and simulation result for each wing type.

(a)
 (b)

(c)

Figure 9: Validation of Cp with experimental data of original ONERA M6 wing, a) 0.22 semi-span, b) 0.65 semi-
span, c) 0.95 semi-span.

(a)
 (b)

(c)

Figure 10: Validation of Cp with experimental data of Blended winglet on ONERA M6 wing, a) 0.22 semi-span, b)
0.65 semi-span, c) 0.95 semi-span.

(a)
 (b)

(c)

Figure 11: Validation of Cp with experimental data of BMAX winglet ONERA M6 wing, a) 0.22 semi-span, b)
0.65 semi-span, c) 0.95 semi-span.

5. Conclusions

The research that has been done shows that the aerodynamics performance of the wing has increased after applying
wingtip devices. Validation of simulation result compared with NASA CFD simulation for Cl and Cd values as well
as validation with experimental data for Cp polyline shows acceptable values and agreement with the result. Hence,
validation and verification the simulation results show a good agreement. Variations are applied with the addition of
winglet. Simulation results after the addition of winglets show an increase in the value of Coefficient (Cl). Although
it cannot be denied that the addition of geometry also affects coefficient drag (Cd). The increase in the value of Cd is
due to the increase of wing area as a cause of increased drag by friction shear stresses. The pressure coefficient polyline
shows a curve close to the experimental value. Variations in winglet growth show patterns that can be explained
further as the effects of the transonic flow. In general, the addition of winglets increases aerodynamics performance
marked by an increase in the value of Cl/Cd.

Acknowledgments
This research was one outcome of the “PRODUK TEKNOLOGI YANG DISEMINASIKAN KE MASYARAKAT
“ program in 2019 funding year. The Work was also supported by DP2M DIKTI (Directorate of Research and Public
Service of Directorate General of Higher Education) Ministry of Research, Technology and Higher Education
Indonesia with contract number 1821.1UN27.21/PM/2019 and Vocational studies of mechanical engineering
department Sebelas Maret University.
 References

[1] M. U. Sohail and A. Islam, “Verification and Validation of Flow Over a 3D ONERA Wing using CFD
Approach,” J. Sp. Technol., vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 39–43, 2017.
[2] D. Destarac and A. Dumont, “ONERA M6 Wing Test-Case , Original and TMR Proposed test-case for
NASA-LRC Turbulent Modeling Re- source,” pp. 1–9, 2016.
[3] N. Durrani and N. Qin, “Comparison of RANS, DES and DDES Results for ONERA M-6 Wing at
Transonic Flow Speed Using an In-House Parallel Code,” no. January, pp. 1–13, 2011.
[4] J. Xu, D. Chen, Y. Song, S. Ji, and Y. Zhou, “Mean flow compressibility effects in transonic turbulence
modeling,” Aerosp. Sci. Technol., vol. 79, pp. 492–499, 2018.

[5] R.T. Whitcomb, A design approach and selected wind-tunnel results at high subsonic speeds for wing-tip
mounted winglets, NASA TN D-8260, NASA Lang-ley Research Center, 1976.
[6] Babigian R. Hayashibara S. 2009. Computational Study of the Vortex Wake Generated by a Three
Dimensiona l Wing with Dihedral, Taper, and Sweep. 27th AIAA Applied Aerodynamics Conference.
AAIA Paper 2004-4107-148.
[7] H.H. Heyson, G.D. Riebe, C.L. Fulton, Theoretical Parametric Study of the Rel-ative Advantages of
Winglets and Wing-Tip Extensions, vol.1020, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Scientific
and Technical Information Office, 1977.
[8] S. Kravchenco, The application of the wing tip lifting surfaces for practical aerodynamic, ICAS-96-4.6.4,
Sorrento, Italy, 1996, pp.1338–1349.
[9] Z. Toor, J. Masud, Part I: uncertainty analysis of various design parameters on winglet performance, AIAA
paper-2016-0556, AIAA SciTech, 54th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting, 2016.
[10] Joel F. Halpert, Daniel H. Prescott, Thomas R. Yechout, Michael Arndt, Aero-dynamic optimization and
evaluation of KC-135R winglets, raked wingtips, and a wingspan extension, AIAA paper-2010-57, 48th
AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting, 2010.
[11] Durrani, Naveed, Ning Qin, "Comparison of RANS, DES and DDES Results for ONERA M6 Wing at
Transonic Flow," AIAA Aerospace Science Meeting Including the New Horizon, vol. 49, 2011.
[12] (ORGANISATION DU TRAlTE DE L ’ ATLANTIQUE NORD ) AGARD Advisory Report No . 138
EXPERIMENTAL DATA BASE FOR COMPUTER PROGRAM ASSESSMENT REPORT OF THE
FLUID DYNAMICS PANEL WORKING GROUP 04, no. 138.
[13] E. Jonsson, L. Leifssony, and S. Koziel, “Aerodynamic optimization of wings by space mapping,” 51st
AIAA Aerosp. Sci. Meet. Incl. New Horizons Forum Aerosp. Expo. 2013, no. January, pp. 1–14, 2013.
[14] S. Shaw-Ward, “Effects of boundary layer forcing on wing-tip vortices,” no. September, 2015.
[15] A. Elsenaar, “Separation in transonic flow a shocking experience.”
[16] M. Giuni, “Formation and early development of wingtip vortices,” 2013.

View publication stats