INTRODUCTION

For the development of future high speed air craft, including commercial transports several technologies used, one of which is laminar flow control. So first we have to know what is flow control, laminar flow and then laminar flow control

Flow Control

Subtle manipulation of aircraft aerodynamics, principally the wing and fuselage boundary layers, can be used to increase performance and provide control. From laminar flow control, which seeks to reduce drag by maintaining extensive runs of laminar flow, to vortex flow control (through blowing or small vortex generators), and more recent concepts using MEMS devices or synthetic jets, the concept of controlling aerodynamic flows by making small changes in the right way is a major area of aerodynamic research. Although some of the more unusual concepts (including active control of turbulence) are far from practical realization, vortex control and hybrid laminar flow control are more likely possibilities.

Laminar flow Laminar flow, sometimes known as streamline flow, occurs when a fluid flows in parallel layers, with no disruption between the layers. At low velocities the fluid tends to flow without lateral mixing, and adjacent layers slide past one another like playing cards. There are no cross currents perpendicular to the direction of flow, nor eddies or swirls of fluids. In laminar flow the motion of the particles of fluid is very orderly with all particles moving in straight lines parallel to the pipe walls. In fluid dynamics, laminar flow is a flow regime characterized by high momentum diffusion and low momentum convection. When a fluid is flowing through a closed channel such as a pipe or between two flat plates, either of two types of flow may occur depending on the velocity of the fluid: laminar flow or turbulent flow. The type of flow occurring in a fluid in a channel is important in fluid dynamics problems.The dimensionless Reynolds number is an important parameter in the equations that describe whether flow conditions lead to laminar or turbulent flow. In the case of flow through a straight pipe with a circular cross-section, at a Reynolds number below the critical value of approximately 2040 fluid motion will ultimately be laminar, whereas at larger Reynolds number the flow can be turbulent. The Reynolds number delimiting laminar and turbulent flow depends on the particular flow geometry, and moreover, the transition from laminar flow to turbulence can be sensitive to disturbance levels and imperfections present in a given configuration. When the Reynolds number is much less than 1, Creeping motion or Stokes flow occurs. This is an extreme case of laminar flow where viscous (friction) effects are much greater than inertial forces. The common application of laminar flow would be in the smooth flow of a viscous liquid through a tube or pipe. In that case, the velocity of flow varies from zero at the walls to a maximum along the centerline of the vessel. The flow profile of laminar flow in a tube can be calculated by dividing the flow into thin cylindrical elements and applying the viscous force to them. For example, consider the flow of air over an aircraft wing. The boundary layer is a very thin sheet of air lying over the surface of the wing (and all other surfaces of the aircraft).

Because air has viscosity, this layer of air tends to adhere to the wing. As the wing moves forward through the air, the boundary layer at first flows smoothly over the streamlined shape of the airfoil. Here the flow is called laminar and the boundary layer is a laminar layer. Laminar Flow Control Laminar-flow control is a technology that offers the potential for significant improvement in drag coefficient which would provide improvements in aircraft fuel usage, range or endurance that far exceed any known single aeronautical technology. In principle, if 80 percent of wing is laminar, then overall drag could be reduced by 25 percent. The frictional force between the air and the aircraft surface, known as viscous drag, is much larger in a turbulent boundary layer than in a laminar one. The principal type of active laminar-flow control is removal of a small amount of the boundarylayer air by suction through porous materials, multiple narrow surface slots, or small perforations.Two major modifications were required, the first involving the standard underwing podded Allison J71 engines being removed and replaced by a pair of 9,490 lbf (42 kN) static thrust General Electric XJ79-GE-13 non-afterburning turbojets mounted in pods attached to the rear of the fuselage sides. Bleed air from the J79 engines was fed into a pair of underwing fairings, each of which housed a "bleed-burn" turbine which sucked the boundary layer air out through the wing slots. The X-21A test vehicles (55-0408 and 55-0410) also incorporated sophisticated laminar flow control systems built into a completely new wing of increased span and area, with a sweep reduced from 35 to 30. The wing had a multiple series of span-wise slots (800,000 in total through which turbulent boundary-layer was "sucked in," resulting in a smoother laminar flow. Theoretically, reduced drag, better fuel economy and longer range could be achieved. Active and passive laminar flow control Although much global research effort is currently directed at the reduction of turbulent skin friction, the drag reduction technique most likely to appear on the next generation of transport aircraft is Laminar Flow Control (LFC). This may be achieved by both passive

means (involving inert devices and including changes to wing shape and surface finish) and active means (usually involving some kind of energy transfer: suction/blowing; sound; heating/cooling). Although the principles of laminar flow control are well understood, there are two main reasons why the technology has not yet entered service: first, the practical difficulties of achieving good quality surfaces (i.e. sufficiently free from steps, gaps, wrinkles, dents, insect debris, etc) both off the production line and after a period of service largely associated with poor understanding and predictive capabilities for real surface effects; and second, the fact that LFC usuallyrequires significant changes to a proven and successful design philosophy based around turbulent boundary layer flow so that there can be a downside to LFC in terms of performance and technical risk. Research at City, in the Handley Page Laboratory, is therefore focussed on two aspects of LFC:first,the understanding and prediction of how practical surfaces and environments can influence (both positively and negatively) the extent of laminar flow; and second, how LFC is best aerodynamics/systems/structures)integratedwithexisti ng best practice in aeronautical design. Both of these topics involve multi-disciplinary research in terms of design disciplines and in terms of the balance between design, manufacture and operational considerations.

New Configuration Concepts Apart from evolutionary improvements in conventional aircraft, revolutionary changes are possible when the "rules" are changed. This is possible when the configuration concept itself is changed and when new roles or requirements are introduced. The following images give some idea of the range of concepts that have been studied over the past few years, some of which are currently being pursued by NASA and industry. Several technologies used to increase aircrafts performance

Blended Wing Body Blended Wing Body The BWB design is intended to improve airplane efficiency through a major change in the airframe configuration. The thick centerbody accommodates passengers and cargo without the extra wetted area and weight of a fuselage. Orginally designed as a very large aircraft with as many as 800 passengers, versions of the BWB has been designed with as few as 250 passengers and more conventional twin, podded engines. Boeing tests hybrid laminar flow control for 787-9

Future Technology and Aircraft Types When we think about what may appear in future aircraft designs, we might look at recent history. The look may be frightening. From first appearances, anyway, nothing has happened in the last 40 years! There are many causes of this apparent stagnation. The first is the enormous economic risk involved. Along with the investment risk, there is a liability risk which is of especially great concern to U.S.manufacturers of small aircraft. One might also argue that the commercial aircraft manufacturers are not doing too badly, so why argue with success and do something new? These issues are discussed in the previous section on the origins of aircraft. Because of the development of new technologies or processes, or because new roles and missions appear for aircraft, we expect that aircraft will indeed change. Most new aircraft will change in evolutionary ways, but more revolutionary ideas are possible too.

Boeing has begun flight testing a hybrid laminar flow control (HLFC) surface aboard one of its 787 test aircraft, aimed at cutting the drag of its 787-9 horizontal and vertical stabilisers. The HLFC modification is installed on test aircraft ZA003 in a limited area on the leading edge of the Boeing-built vertical stabiliser, one-quarter to one-half of the way up the fin, estimated to be positioned on the adjacent forward panels between ribs 3 and 7, and below the HF antenna.Boeing declined to comment on the tests. It is believed that Boeing aims to cut stabiliser drag by 1% for the upcoming -9 model, due for entry into service in late 2013. HLFC surfaces are designed to suck in the surface airflow, allowing the boundary layer to remain attached, moving the onset from laminar to turbulent flow further back along the surface, reducing overall drag. Testing on aircraft ZA003 began on 9 June in San Bernardino, California, after an extended period of maintenance lay-up. Boeing has already employed a natural laminar flow surface on the 787's engine nacelles, although the hybrid system - if implemented on the larger -9 would represent the first commercial

application of HLFC technology. Unlike the -8 horizontal stabiliser built by Alenia Aeronautica,the 787-9's tail will be built entirely by Boeing, as the airframer looks to reduce weight and improve manufacturability with an integral multispar box design that will see the spars and skins of the main stabiliser boxes being co-cured together. F-16XL Laminar Flow Research Aircraft F-16XL Laminar Flow Research Aircraft was used in the Cranked-ArrowWing Aerodynamics Project (CAWAP) to test boundary layer pressures and distribution. Two F-16XL aircraft were used by the Dryden Flight Research Center, Edwards, CA, in a NASA-wide program to improve laminar airflow on aircraft flying at sustained supersonic speeds. It was the first program to look at laminar flow on swept wings at speeds representative of those at which a high speed civil transport might fly. Technological data from the program will be available for the development of future high speed aircraft, including commercial transports. As such, it supported the NASA Office of Aero-Space Technology's goal of reducing travel time to Asia and Europe by 50 percent within 20 years. The initial research phase of the program at Dryden was flown in a single-seat F-16XL-1. This aircraft was later used at Dryden in a sonic boom research project with the SR-71 and in a CrankedArrow Wing Aerodynamics Project (CAWAP) to test boundary layer pressures and distribution. In 1997 Dryden replaced the aircraft's analog flight control system with a digital system and planned to use the aircraft as a testbed for autonomous systems to be employed in spacecraft. The aircraft at Dryden subsequently used for the supersonic laminar flow program was the two-seat F16XL-2, identical to its sistership except for the cockpit configuration. The two aircraft are the only F-16XL's built and were used by NASA because the unique delta wing design is representative of the type of wing that will probably be used on future supersonic cruise aircraft. Project Background A certain amount of air turbulence occurs on the surface of most aircraft wings, regardless of the shape and sizeof the wing. As air moves across an airfoil, it is changed by the frictional force between it and the airfoil's surface from a laminar (smooth) flow at the forward area to a more turbulent flow toward the trailing edge. The 'perfect" wing would demonstrate laminar airflow across the entire surface of the wing, with no sign of turbulence.

This turbulence affects flying performance by increasing aerodynamic drag and fuel consumption. NASA's single-seat F-16XL presents a unique look to an observer from above as it flies over the snowcovered southern Sierra Nevada Mountains of California. Research by NASA to improve laminar flow dates back to around 1930 when NASA's predecessor organization, the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics (NACA), photographed airflow turbulence in the variable density tunnel at its Langley Research Center in Hampton, VA. Smoke was ejected into the air stream and photographed as it showed visual signs of turbulence (disturbed rather than streamlined flow) on the upper wing surfaces. Early research such as this led to the eventual elimination of protruding rivet heads and other construction and design features that could create turbulence on high speed aircraft. Much laminar flow research is carried out with two basic types of experimental devices active and passive that are attached to the research aircraft's wing. These devices are commonly called "gloves." Active test sections contain tiny holes or slots through which most of the turbulent layer of air is siphoned off by an internal suction system built into the wing. This decreases drag and enhances aerodynamic lift by either eliminating the turbulent airflow or reducing its effect. Passive experimental devices also attach to or become a part of the research aircraft's wing, but do not use a suction system to remove the turbulent air. Through careful contouring of the wing's surface, some laminar flow can be achieved naturally. Both types of laminar flow devices obtain data from sensors and other instrumentation built into or attached to the wing to measure airflow characteristics (especially the region of transition from laminar to turbulent flow) and pressure distribution. Dryden has conducted laminar flow studies in past years with F-104, F-14, F-15, and F-111 highperformance aircraft, and also with a JetStar business-type aircraft. The projects with the F-16XL, however, were the first that sought to achieve a significant percentage of laminar flow over wings comparable to those of a high speed civil transport. These flight tests were conducted under supersonic flight conditions similar to those a transport would encounter.

X-21 Laminar Flow Control The X-21 program consisted of a pair of WB-66D's modified by Northrop to conduct Laminar Flow

Control wing studies. Laminar-flow control is a technology that offers the potential for improvements in aircraft fuel usage, range or endurance that far exceed any known single aeronautical technology. In principle, if 80% of wing is laminar, then overall drag could be reduced by 25%. The frictional force between the air and the aircraft surface, known as viscous drag, is much larger in a turbulent boundary layer than in a laminar one. The principal type of active laminar-flow control is removal of a small amount of the boundary-layer air by suction through porous materials, multiple narrow surface slots, or small perforations. The USAF Wright Air Development Division (WADD) proposed use of two WB-66D airplanes based on minimum cost, high degree of safety, and short development time. The Northrop Corporation, under sponsorship of the Air Force (with a monetary contribution from the Federal Aviation Administration), later modified these airplanes with slotted suction wings and designated them as experimental aircraft X-21A and X-21B. The B-66 fuselage was modified with a large hump on the top of the fuselage, with additional modifications to the wings, engines, laminar flow exhausts, and tail cone. Slots were incorporated in the wing's surface to inject air into the boundary layer, inducing nonturbulent laminar air-flow. Practical application of the concept proved unworkable, since rain, dirt, dust and other particulates clogged the slots. Northrop began flight research in April of 1963 at Edwards Air Force Base. Several problems arose early in the project that consumed significant periods for their solution. Principal among these were surface smoothness problems and an unexpected severity of a spanwise contamination problem. With respect to the smoothness problem, in spite of a concerted effort to design and build the slotted wings for the two airplanes to the close tolerances required, the At the end of the program, 38 flight attained laminar flow on a fairly large airplane over 95 percent of the area intended for laminarization.

resulting hardware was not good enough. Discontinuities in spanwise wing splices were large enough to cause premature transition to turbulent air flow. Putty, used to fair out these discontinuities, chipped during flight with resulting roughness large enough to trigger transition from laminar to turbulent flow. The combination of X-21 wing geometry, flight altitudes, and Mach numbers was such that local turbulence at the attachment line, e.g., from the fuselage or induced by insect accumulation, caused turbulent flow over much of the wing span. With the large-scale X-21 flight tests and further wind-tunnel tests, Northrop developed methods for avoidance of spanwise contamination. Another problem that was uncovered during the X-21 flight tests was associated with ice crystals in the atmosphere. Researchers noted that when the X-21 flew in or near visible cirrus clouds, laminar flow was lost but that upon emergence from the ice crystals, laminar flow was immediately regained. Northrop developed a theory to indicate when laminar flow would be lost as a function of atmospheric particle size and concentration. By October of 1965, attainment of "service experience comparable to an operational aircraft," one of the program's principal objectives, had not even been initiated because of the effort absorbed by the previous problems. To proceed with this initiative, the advisors to the Air Force recommended that a major wing modification would be needed before meaningful data on service maintenance could be obtained. This, unfortunately, was never done because of various considerations at high levels of the Air Force, probably predominantly the resource needs of hostilities in Vietnam. Much extremely valuable information, however, was obtained during the X-21 flight program, supported by wind-tunnel and analytical studies. Unfortunately, top management in government and industry remembered the difficulties and time required to reach this point more than they did the accomplishment