8.

ANKARA INTERNATIONAL AEROSPACE CONFERENCE AIAC-2015-010

10-12 September 2015 - METU, Ankara TURKEY

A COMPARATIVE AERODYNAMIC STUDY ON CASCADE VANES FOR THE COLD STREAM

TYPE CASCADE REVERSER USING COMPUTATIONAL FLUID DYNAMICS (CFD)
Tekin Aksu1, Firat Kiyici2, Ozan Can Kocaman3, Bertan Ozkan4, Stk UsLu5
TOBB University of Economics and Technology
Ankara, Turkey

ABSTRACT
Commercial aircrafts continue becoming more powerful and heavier and they need more powerful
engines such as Ultra High Bypass Ratio Turbofan Engines. Aircraft brakes are sufficient but thrust
reversers provide safe and easy landing for wet, cold and snow covered landings. Basically, cold
stream cascade type thrust reversers, reverses the flow of the cold stream in turbofan engines and
creates thrust in opposite direction. It is expected that thrust reversers will be used as standard feature
for future years in commercial airplanes. Cold stream cascade type thrust reverser systems provide
many advantages in difficult landings. The main purpose of this paper is to investigate design
enhancements by using computational fluid dynamics (CFD). In the present work, several different
cascade vanes are computed for geometry optimization. Minimizing flow separation and aerodynamic
performance enhancements are the main objectives for optimization of the cascade vanes with
respect to reverse velocity versus jet velocity ( ) and discharge coefficient . Cascade angle
and shapes are varied for maximizing reverse thrust and at the same time drag force and instant
shock waves are diminished. Optimum cascade vane profile, vane chord (c), horizontal vane spacing
(s) and number of vanes (n) are presented.
INTRODUCTION
In the beginning of the 1950s, researches have been performed to enhance a thrust reverser systems
for landing at the NACA Lewis Laboratory and to observe its performance characteristics, as
presented in the literature [Povolny et al.1957]. Also, experimental studies were performed to compare
thrust reverser parameters [Dietrich, 1975] and also effects were investigated for commercial aircrafts
to clarify its feasibility [Yetter, 1995; Johns, 2000]. Furthermore, NASA released a study report about
six new thrust reverser concepts for very high bypass ratio engines that were used in commercial
transport aircrafts [Asbury, 2000] and there were different studies that contain external flow around
commercial aircrafts [Chuck 2001; Trapp 2003]. Thrust reversers are providing us great deceleration
from high speed in addition to break system; it can be called as secondary deceleration. The most
crucial part of the cold stream type cascade reversers is cascade vane configuration. The vanes
directly affect the flow path and streamlines that clearly generate the required reverse thrust. In order
to explain cold stream type cascade reversers in detail, Cold stream type cascade vanes are identified
as a movable cowl that translate with cascade vanes and a blockage to conduct flow simultaneously to
force the air which is taken throughout the fan directly to cascade vane nozzles [Lord, 2000]. Thrust
reversers allow safe landing for bad weather and ground conditions. According to airlines, thrust
reversers add an extra margin of safety and most of them consider thrust reverser as to achieve the
needed safe landing [Yetter, 1995]. Typically, landing distance is shortened by thrust reverser
operation between 100 150 meters in dry runway and its effect is shown in Figure 1. But especially
in icy runways this landing distance is shortened by two thirds as seen in Figure 2.

1
Graduate student in Mech. Eng. at TOBB ETU, tekinaksu@etu.edu.tr
2
Undergraduate student in Mech. Eng. at TOBB ETU, st101501010@etu.edu.tr
3
Undergraduate student in Mech. Eng. at TOBB ETU, st101501059@etu.edu.tr
4
Graduate student in Mech. Eng. at TOBB ETU, bertanozkan@etu.edu.tr
5
Assist. Prof. Dr. in Mech. Eng. at TOBB ETU, suslu@etu.edu.tr
AIAC-2015-010 Aksu, Kiyici, Kocaman, Ozkan, UsLu

Figure 1. Effect of thrust reverser between work done and landing run in dry runways. [Jeffrey, 1995]

Figure 2. Effect of thrust reverser between work done and landing run in wet runways. [Jeffrey, 1995]
Cascade vanes are main part of the reverser; flow separations and inefficiencies are directly
connected to cascade vane geometry. Schematic sketch of cold stream type cascade reverser is
presented in Figure 3. Deployed and stowed situations of thrust reversers are displayed in Figure 4.

Figure 3. Sketch of a typical cascade thrust reverser [Asbury, 2000]

2
Ankara International Aerospace Conference
AIAC-2015-010 Aksu, Kiyici, Kocaman, Ozkan, UsLu

Figure 4. Sketch of a typical cascade thrust reverser plane view [Asbury, 2000]

Thrust reverser cascades are analyzed using CFD to show how aerodynamic design can be improved.
The aerodynamic performance around cascades and fan duct within blockage, have been studied.
Performance enhancement is carried out with an iterative study. The total reverse thrust is significantly
improved; flow separations and shocks are minimized.

NUMERICAL MODELLING
Two dimensional, compressible, steady-state, turbulent CFD simulations are performed in the present
work. According to Halls study, second-order upwind differencing scheme is used for numerical
discretization [Hall, 2006]. Turbulence model study is performed as Realizable k-, and Shear Stress
Transport (SST) k- models are used as turbulence model in Coupled Reynolds Averaged Navier-
Stokes equations (RANS). [Wilcox, 2006]
RANS Equations
RANS equations are stated below as;
Coupled RANS;

[ ] (1)

Where,

[ ] [ ]

(2)
[ ]

Where is the density of the fluid, v is velocity of the fluid, E is total energy per unit mass, p is
pressure of the fluid, T is the viscous stress tensor, is the heat flux vector, is the grid velocity
vector. Total energy is related to the total enthalphy with;

(3)

Where,
| | (4)

And the vector of body forces are:

(5)

3
Ankara International Aerospace Conference
AIAC-2015-010 Aksu, Kiyici, Kocaman, Ozkan, UsLu

Eddy viscosity models have been used in this paper. Eddy viscosity models uses Boussinesq
approximation. In Boussinesq approximation Reynolds stres tensors are moddeled as a function of
mean flow quantities;
(6)

Where S is the strain tensor :

(7)

Realizable k- Turbulence Model

In realizable k- turbulence model, Boussinesq approach is also applied to Reynolds Averaged Navier
Stokes Equations. The Turbulence kinetic energy is calculated with a different transport equation;

( ) [ ] (8)

And the parameter is calculated with:

( ) (9)

[ ]

Where is the curvature correction factor. Turbulent viscosity is calculated as;

(10)

With model coefficients = 1.9 , = 1.0 , = 1.2

Menters k- SST Turbulence Model

Similar to Standard k- Turbulence Model, the k parameter is calculated with Transport Equation;

[ ] (11)

And the value is calculated with its transport equation;

[ ] (12)

Where, is the cross-derivative term. Turbulent viscosity is calculated with the same equation in
Standard k- model.
Discharge Coefficient
Discharge coefficient ( ), which is used in order to quantify the flow losses, defined as reflecting the
ratio of actual mass flow to ideal mass flow;

4
Ankara International Aerospace Conference
AIAC-2015-010 Aksu, Kiyici, Kocaman, Ozkan, UsLu

(19)

Where is the flow total pressure at cascade inlet; is the static pressure at cascade outlet, is the
normalized entrance area of the gap between cascades; is the actual mass flow.
METHODOLOGY
After CFD simulations, modifications have been made for improving aerodynamic performance and
diminishing high pressure areas in vane sections. Thrust reverser performance is investigated using a
free stream flow Mach number of 0.2 and temperature and pressure of 288K and 101325 Pa
respectively. It was assumed that engine is working on %60 of its power while landing.
The STAR-CCM+, CFD solver is used for computations. Computational mesh is created in ICEM CFD.
Mesh independent results were obtained with coarse, medium and fine meshes, which are 250 000, 1
000 000 and 4 000 000 respectively. According to discharge coefficients, comparison study between
all cascade types is investigated. Computational domain, presented in Figure 5 and a close up view of
the computational grid is shown in Figure 6.

Figure 5. Computational Domain

Figure 6. Computational Grid and Close Up View Near Cascades

For the investigation of mesh study and behaviors of different turbulence models, line probe has been
constructed just after the cascade vanes and velocity components in reverse thrust direction and main
flow direction have been determined and visualized with several plots in Figures. Computations have
been performed with the coordinate system in Figure 7. For design expectations, discharge coefficient,
and its component in reverse thrust direction have been used. Minimum design point for discharge
coefficient has been performed as 0.85 with this point, cascades vanes are enhanced in aerodynamic
manner. Besides, magnitude of discharge coefficient, ratio of the reverse thrust direction of velocity
component versus jet velocity, that can be expressed as the velocity without thrust reverser, are

5
Ankara International Aerospace Conference
AIAC-2015-010 Aksu, Kiyici, Kocaman, Ozkan, UsLu

conducted into optimization and cascade vanes that have maximum reverse velocity ratio ( ),
have chosen as the final design.
Vertical
Velocity
Component

Reverse
Line Free-Stream
Probe Component

Figure 7. Illustration of Coordinate Definition on Computational Domain

RESULTS
This study has been investigated in three parts, which are mesh study, comparison of discharge
coefficient in flow direction and with different turbulence models.
Mesh Study
First of all, mesh study has been performed with three different mesh sizes that have been implied in
methodology section. Due to small differences, between medium and fine mesh, and to avoid CPU
time medium mesh is chosen for whole computations. Mesh sizes have been discussed in terms of
velocity component in reverse thrust direction with main flow direction by using k- SST turbulence
model. Mesh comparison for velocity components can be seen in Figure 8 and Figure 9.

Velocity Component() versus Mesh Study

80
Velocity Component () [m/s]

70
60
50
40
M1
30
M2
20 M3
10
0
-10
0 20 40 60 80 100
Percentage of Line Probe

Figure 8. Mesh Study in Velocity Component( )

6
Ankara International Aerospace Conference
AIAC-2015-010 Aksu, Kiyici, Kocaman, Ozkan, UsLu

Velocity Component() versus Mesh Study

15
5
Velocity Component () [m/s] -5
-15
-25
-35
-45
-55 M1
-65 M2
-75
-85 M3
-95
-105
-115
-125
0 20 40 60 80 100
Percentage of Line Probe

Figure 9. Mesh Study versus Velocity Component( )

Discharge Coefficient
The results have been discussed and expressed in terms of cascade vane chord (c) to horizontal vane
spacing (s) with number of vanes. For aerodynamic enhancement nine different c/s ratios are
analyzed with different number of vanes with respect to different aerodynamic shapes. Final design
has been investigated in terms of discharge coefficient and ( ). First, comparisons of discharge
coefficients have been determined. Second, aerodynamic enhancements have been performed for
cascade geometries.
Nine different c/s ratios, which can be clarified as 0.466, 0.6, 0.7, 0.9, 0.95, 1, 1.036, 1.45 and 1.5,
have been studied with three different vane numbers, 9, 12 and 13. Final design has chosen as 13
vanes with c/s 0.9 that has maximum ( ) value with decent discharge coefficient. Discharge
coefficient and ( ) has been plotted in Figure 10. Furthermore, this domain has been analyzed
without cascades for the investigation of improvement in aerodynamically; Mach contours and
streamlines are shown in Figure 11 and Figure 12.

U/Ujet Cd
0.80 1.00
Discharge Coefficient (Cd)

0.70
0.60 0.90
0.50
U/Ujet

0.40 0.80
0.30
0.20 0.70
0.10
0.00 0.60
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23
Case Number

Figure 10. Discharge Coefficient & Graph versus different cases

7
Ankara International Aerospace Conference
AIAC-2015-010 Aksu, Kiyici, Kocaman, Ozkan, UsLu

For final design point maximum value, which are obtained from CFD simulations, is 0.75. Also,
secondary design point is discharge coefficient that is stated above as 0.85 for all designs. To sum up,
for final design our discharge coefficient is 0.91 and value is 0.75. This design is shown in
Figure 10 in black circle.

a b

Figure 11. Mach Contours for without Cascades (a) & Final Design with Cascades (b)

a b

Figure 12. Streamlines for without Cascades (a) & Final Design with Cascades (b)
As seen in Figure 11 and 12, reverse flow field is obtained with help of the cascades. Also, initial and
final design comparisons are shown below. In Figure 13, it is obviously seen that cold stream is more
directed to reverse direction of the free stream flow and thus, it provides more reverse thrust if it is
compared with the initial design. In Figure 14, Initial and final cascade shapes are represented.

a b

Figure 13. Mach Contours for Initial (a) & Final Design (b)

8
Ankara International Aerospace Conference
AIAC-2015-010 Aksu, Kiyici, Kocaman, Ozkan, UsLu

Figure 14. Geometric Representation of Initial (a) & Final Cascades (b)
Turbulence Model Study
In addition, turbulence modeling is studied with realizable k- and SST k-; emphasized in terms of
velocity components. It can concluded as, two turbulence models have caught same trend.

Velocity Component() versus Turbulence Models

10
Velocity Component () [m/s]

-10

-30

-50

-70 Realizable k-
SST k-
-90

-110

-130
0 20 40 60 80 100
Percentage of Line Probe

Figure 14. Turbulence Model Study versus Velocity Component( )

Velocity Component() versus Turbulence Models

82.5
72.5
Velocity Component () [m/s]

62.5
52.5
42.5
32.5 Realizable k-

22.5 SST k-

12.5
2.5
-7.5
0 20 40 60 80 100
Percentage of Line Probe

Figure 15. Turbulence Model Study versus Velocity Component( )

9
Ankara International Aerospace Conference
AIAC-2015-010 Aksu, Kiyici, Kocaman, Ozkan, UsLu

CONCLUSION
In this study, a cold stream type cascade thrust reverser is designed and optimized. Also, this work
contains mesh and turbulence model studies. According to mesh independence studies, there is
approximately one percent difference between medium and fine mesh results. Even though mesh
independence study have given satisfactory results for k- SST turbulence model, it has performed for
Realizable k- turbulence model and it has given similar results as shown in Figure 8 and Figure 9.
Furthermore, SST and Realizable k- turbulence models are compared. Line Probe is used to evaluate
the differences among turbulence models and between 60 and 80 percentage of the line probe results
differ from each other. According to the theoretical knowledge and experiences, the difference is a
result of the flow separation prediction around the wall. SST has better flow separation prediction
capabilities than Realizable k- and thus k- SST provides more accurate results. After twenty three
different cascade models, Cd is improved from 0.76 to 0.91 and for it has been improved from
0.08 to 0.75.
The thrust reverser that is shown in present paper was rewarded with first ranked in AIAA
Undergraduate Team Engine Design competition. For further studies three dimensional CFD studies
will be performed.
References
Povolny, J. H., Steffen, F. W. and McArdle, J. G., 1957. Summary of scale-model thrust-reverser
investigation. NACA Report 1314.
Dietrich, D. A., 1975. Effect on fan flow characteristics of length and axial location of a cascade thrust
reverser. NASA Center for Aerospace Information (CASI). NASA-TM-X-3247; E-8223, 19750601.
Yetter J. A., Why Do Airlines Want and Use Thrust Reversers, A Compilation of Airline Industry
Responses to a Survey Regarding the Use of Thrust Reversers on Commercial Transport Airplanes,
Tech. Rep.TM-109158, Langley Research Center, Hampton, Virginia, January 1995.
Johns, C. J., 2000. Solution of an engine inlet compatibility problem during C-17 low cost N/EAT
nacelle thrust reverser development. AIAA-2000-5579. 2000 World Aviation Conference, San Diego,
CA, Oct. 10-12.
Chuck, C. 2001. Computational Procedures for Complex Tree-Dimensional Geometries Including
Thrust Reverser Effluxes and APUs. 37th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference and
Exhibit. 8-11. AIAA 2001- 3747.
Trapp, L. And Oliveira, G., 2003. Aircraft Thrust Reverser Cascade Configuration Evaluation Through
CFD. AIAA- 2003-723. 41st Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, Reno, Nevada, Jan. 6-9.
Lord W K, MacMartin P G and Tillman T G. Flow control opportunities in gas turbine engines. AIAA
2000 2234, 2000
Asbury, S.C., Yetter, J.A. Static performance of six innovative thrust reverser concepts for subsonic
transport applications, NASA/TM- 2000-210300, July 2000.
S. Hall, R.K. Cooper, E. Benard, S. Raghunathan, Fluidic Flow Control in a Natural Blockage Thrust
Reverser, AIAA 2006-3513, 2006
Wilcox, D. C., Turbulence Modeling for CFD, 3rd edition, DCW Industries, Inc., La Canada CA, 2006.

10
Ankara International Aerospace Conference