aerospace
Article
Aerodynamic Characteristics of a Ducted Fan Hovering and
Transition in Ground Effect
Yanxiong Zhao, Yun Tian * and Zhiqiang Wan
Citation: Zhao, Y.; Tian, Y.; Wan, Z.
Aerodynamic Characteristics of a
Ducted Fan Hovering and Transition
in Ground Effect. Aerospace 2022, 9,
572. https://doi.org/10.3390/
aerospace9100572
Academic Editor: Giuseppe
Pezzella
Received: 15 September 2022
Accepted: 28 September 2022
Published: 30 September 2022
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral
with regard to jurisdictional claims in
published maps and institutional affil-
iations.
Copyright: © 2022 by the authors.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
4.0/).
Aerospace 2022, 9, 572. https://doi.org/10.3390/aerospace9100572
School of Aeronautic Science and Engineering, Beihang University, Beijing 100191, China
* Correspondence: aircraft@buaa.edu.cn
Abstract: Ducted fans installed on vertical takeoff and landing vehicles experience significant ground
effect during takeoff and landing. The aerodynamic characteristics of a ducted fan hovering and
transitioning in the ground effect are studied using numerical simulations in this paper. The flowfields
are obtained by solving Reynolds Averaged Navier–Stokes equations with the Multiple Reference
Frame approach. When a ducted fan hovers in the ground effect, the blade thrust increases due to
the combined effect of the increase in the effective angle of attack of the blade and the increase in
ambient pressure; the duct thrust decreases due to the combined effect of the decrease in the effective
angle of attack of the duct and the increase in ambient pressure. Stall occurs at a certain advance ratio
and angle of attack when transitioning in the ground effect. The ground effect delays the occurrence
of stall at some advance ratios. The ground effect is hardly detectable at angles of attack less than
30◦ even if the height drops to 0.5 times the duct exit diameter. At this height and high angles of
attack, the different positions and influence regions of the ground vortex at different advance ratios
contribute to the different variation trends in the ducted fan performance.
Keywords: ducted fan; ground effect; vertical takeoff and landing; aerodynamics
1. Introduction
Ducted fans can generate more static thrust when compared to open propellers of
the same diameter and power loading [1]. In addition, the duct serves as a safety feature,
protecting both the rotating blades from damage by other objects as well as personnel from
injury by the blades. Moreover, ducted fans have advantages in noise suppression and
thrust vectoring. These characteristics make the ducted fan an appropriate propulsion
system for vertical/short takeoff and landing (V/STOL) aircraft. In the 1960s, research
institutions such as National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) carried out
systematic studies on ducted-fan-propelled V/STOL aircraft. Some research aircraft de-
veloped during this period, for example, the Doak VZ-4 [2] and the Bell X-22A [3], even
completed successful flight tests. Nowadays, within the aviation industry there is a strong
and growing interest in the development of electric vertical takeoff and landing (eVTOL) air-
craft for various potential applications, especially for Urban Air Mobility (UAM) missions.
Many eVTOL aircraft, such as the Bell Nexus [4], Lilium Jet [5], and NASA UAM reference
tilt duct vehicle [6], use ducted fans as propulsion systems due to their above-mentioned
advantages. According to previous studies, most of the V/STOL aircraft suffer from some
degree of an adverse ground effect during takeoff and landing [2]. Therefore, it is necessary
to study the aerodynamic characteristics of ducted fans in the ground effect, which can
provide support for improving the performance of ducted-fan-propelled V/STOL aircraft
in the ground effect.
Ducted fans were first studied in the 1930s [7]. Sacks and Burnell [7] compiled an
exhaustive survey of the theoretical and experimental research up to 1962. Mort and
Yaggy [8] studied the aerodynamic characteristics of a wingtip-mounted ducted fan. Large
nose-up pitching moments and duct stall were observed when the ducted fan operated
https://www.mdpi.com/journal/aerospace
Aerospace 2022, 9, 572 2 of 25

at nonzero angles of attack. Grunwald and Goodson [9] investigated the division of
loads between the fan and the duct of an isolated ducted fan. They verified that the duct
could provide more than half of the thrust in hover and could carry even more of the
load in forward flight at a certain angle of attack. Mort and Gamse [10] measured the
forces, pressure, power, figure of merit, propulsive efficiency, and stall limits of a 7-foot-
diameter ducted fan under various conditions, intending to evaluate the quality of the
ducted fan design. Abrego and Bulaga [11] completed an experimental investigation to
determine the performance of a ducted fan model with different duct geometries. Model
variations included the duct’s angle of attack, the exit vane flap length, the flap deflection
angle, and the duct’s chord length. Martin and Tung [12] measured the performance and
flowfield of a ducted fan, with emphasis on the tip gap and duct lip shape effects. The
experimental results were later compared to panel method calculations by Lind et al. [13].
Good correlations within the attached flow region were achieved. Graf et al. [14] studied
the effect of duct lip shape on ducted fan performances. They found that flow separation
characteristics on the inside of the duct lip caused the performance difference between the
duct geometries. Pereira [15] experimentally studied the effects of duct profile shapes on
the performance of small-scale ducted fans. Tests performed for a specific ducted fan model
at angles of attack from 0◦ to 90◦ and various advance ratios were also reported. Colman
et al. [16] provided the force and moment data of an axial asymmetric ducted fan with
cyclic pitch actuation. The duct with circumferentially varying airfoil sections was used to
improve the cruise efficiency. Hrishikeshavan and Chopra [17] studied the response of a
ducted fan to edgewise gusts by means of experiments and flight tests. Ohanian et al. [18]
modeled the aerodynamic terms of an axisymmetric ducted fan configuration with twelve
nondimensional coefficients. This modeling technique attains very high correlation for
typical ducted fan flight conditions. Cai et al. [19] evaluated the unsteady aerodynamics
of a sinusoidal pitching ducted fan UAV using an unstructured overset grid technique
and momentum source method. Ryu et al. [20] analyzed the aerodynamic performance
of a ducted fan in crosswinds, covering an angle of attack ranging from −30◦ to 120◦ .
No lip separation was observed in Ryu’s study due to the relatively large duct lip radius
and the small advance ratios. Raeisi and Alighanbari [21,22] carried out experiments and
CFD simulations to investigate the advantages of using an asymmetrical tilting ducted
fan instead of a symmetrical one. They found that the asymmetrical duct can provide
more lift and smaller force fluctuations during the transition from hovering to cruise.
Misiorowski et al. [23] analyzed the forces, moments, and their decomposition on a ducted
fan in edgewise flight along with a detailed analysis of the flow physics. Deng et al. [24]
conducted experiments on a coaxial ducted fan UAV under forward flight conditions
and successfully defined an initial operation region of the UAV. Akturk and Camci [25]
identified the aerodynamic modifications due to fan inlet flow distortion in edgewise flight
and then proposed a method using a secondary duct to control the inlet lip separation
during edgewise flight.
Recently, Zhang and Barakos [26] provided another survey of published works on
ducted fans since the 1960s. Experiments, theoretical studies, low-order methods and high-
fidelity CFD simulations were reviewed. Studies related to ducted fans in the ground effect
are not included in Zhang’s paper. There are relatively few studies on the aerodynamics
of ducted fans in the ground effect in the literature. Giulianetti et al. [27] measured
the performance parameters in the ground effect of a large-scale model of a V/STOL
aircraft having four tilting ducted fans arranged in tandem pairs, but the parameters of
the ducted fans were not measured separately. Divitiis [28], Hosseini et al. [29], and Ai
et al. [30] developed different lower-order aerodynamic models of ducted fans considering
the ground effect for online flight control. Gourdain et al. [31] investigated the influence
of a duct on the rotor/ground interaction. The main objective of Gourdain’s study was to
validate the capability of a lattice-Boltzmann-based large eddy simulation to reproduce
the flow generated by the rotor/ground interaction. Deng et al. [26,32] measured and
analyzed the aerodynamic performances of coaxial ducted fans hovering in the ground
 heights in the ground effect. Han et al. [34] conducted experimental measureme
CFD simulations to study the aerodynamic performance of a micro-scale ducted
ering in a confined environment, including the ground, ceilings, and walls. Jin e
estimated the aerodynamic stability of a ducted fan in the ground effect with a m
Aerospace 2022, 9, 572 Moore–Greitzer model. Han et al. [36] compared the performance and 3 of flowfield
25

teristics of a ducted fan and an open propeller hovering in the ground effect by m
experiments and CFD simulations. They found that the aerodynamic performan
effect. Deng [33] measured the thrust and power of a ducted fan with different pitch
ducted fan was more sensitive to the ground effect than that of the open propeller
angles at different heights in the ground effect. Han et al. [34] conducted experimental
numerically and
measurements investigated the effects
CFD simulations to studyofthetheaerodynamic
ground, static water, ofand
performance dynamic w
a micro-
the ducted
scale aerodynamic
fan hovering performance
in a confinedofenvironment,
a ducted fan. The results
including the ground, show that and
ceilings, the water
weaker than the ground effect, and the dynamic waves have the most complicat
walls. Jin et al. [35] estimated the aerodynamic stability of a ducted fan in the ground effect
on the
with ductedMoore–Greitzer
a modified fan. model. Han et al. [36] compared the performance and
flowfield characteristics of a ducted fan and an open propeller hovering in the ground
From the above review, it can be seen that previous studies mainly focus on
effect by means of experiments and CFD simulations. They found that the aerodynamic
pact of geometric
performance parameters
of the ducted fan was and
morefreestream
sensitive to conditions
the ground effecton the aerodynamic
than that of the perf
of ducted
open fans.
propeller. Studies
Mi [37] related
numerically to the ground
investigated the effectseffect
of themainly
ground, focus on the
static water, andvariatio
aerodynamic performance with height when a ducted fan hovers in the ground ef
dynamic waves on the aerodynamic performance of a ducted fan. The results show that
the water effect is weaker than the ground effect, and the dynamic waves have the most
the mechanism of the ground effect lacks in-depth research. In addition, studie
complicated effect on the ducted fan.
aerodynamic
From the above characteristics
review, it can beofseen
ducted fans transitioning
that previous in the
studies mainly focus onground
the impact effect ha
very limited. When ducted-fan-propelled V/STOL aircraft
of geometric parameters and freestream conditions on the aerodynamic performance of take off and land vert
run onfans.
ducted the Studies
groundrelated
in STOLto themode,
groundthe ducted
effect mainly fans
focuswill
on experience
the variation significant
law of in
of the ground effect. In view of the above-mentioned considerations, the aerod
aerodynamic performance with height when a ducted fan hovers in the ground effect, but
the mechanism of the ground effect lacks in-depth research. In addition, studies on the
characteristics
aerodynamic of a ducted
characteristics fan hovering
of ducted and transitioning
fans transitioning in the ground in effect
the ground
have been effect are
using
very numerical
limited. simulations in this
When ducted-fan-propelled paper.aircraft
V/STOL The variation
take off and trends in the aerodyna
land vertically or
formance of the ducted fan are analyzed, and the flow physics leading toofthese tr
run on the ground in STOL mode, the ducted fans will experience significant influences
revealed.
the ground effect. In view of the above-mentioned considerations, the aerodynamic charac-
teristics of a ducted fan hovering and transitioning in the ground effect are studied using
numerical simulations in this paper. The variation trends in the aerodynamic performance
2.the
of Numerical
ducted fan Method andand
are analyzed, Validation
the flow physics leading to these trends are revealed.
2.1. Ducted Fan Model
2. Numerical Method and Validation
The Fan
2.1. Ducted ducted
Modelfan used in this study is shown in Figure 1. It is composed of a d
blades, a hub,fan
The ducted and
usedstruts.
in thisItstudy
should be noted
is shown that
in Figure the
1. It struts areofignored
is composed a duct, fanin the nu
models.
blades, Details
a hub, of the Itducted
and struts. should fan are summarized
be noted that the struts in
areTable
ignored1. inThe
thechord
numeri- and twi
butions of the blade are plotted in Figure 2. The quarter-chord line of the blade is
cal models. Details of the ducted fan are summarized in Table 1. The chord and twist
distributions of the blade are plotted in Figure 2. The quarter-chord line of the blade is
dicular to its rotation axis. When the blade is installed on the hub, its quarter-cho
perpendicular to its rotation axis. When the blade is installed on the hub, its quarter-chord
located
line at 42.5%
is located ofof
at 42.5% the
theduct
duct chord.
chord. TheTheducted
ductedfan fan can generate
can generate 84 kgf
84 kgf static static thru
thrust
with a fan rotational speed of 3500 revolutions per minute (rpm), and it is a 5/8 scale modelscale mo
fan rotational speed of 3500 revolutions per minute (rpm), and it is a 5/8
ducted
of a ducted fan
fanused
used for aneVTOL
for an eVTOL aircraft
aircraft withwith a maximum
a maximum takeoff
takeoff weight of weight
3000 kg. of 3000 k

Figure
Figure 1. 1. Ducted
Ducted fan model.
fan model.
Aerospace 2022,
Aerospace 9, 9,
2022, 572x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 25
4 of 27

70o1. Main parameters of the ducted fan.

Table 0.14

65o
Parameters 0.13 Value
60o
Number of βblades 0.12 8

Chord to diameter ratio c/Db

55o Blade diameter Db 0.646 m
Pitch angle at three-quarter radius 0.11 39◦
Twist angle β
50o c/Db

Hub zone
o
Hub diameter 0.18 m
Aerospace 2022, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW 45 Duct chord length cd 0.10 0.4 m 4 of 27
40o Duct exit diameter D 0.704 m
0.09
35o
70o 0.080.14
30o
o
65
25o
0.070.13
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
60o β ratio r/Rb
Radius
0.12

Chord to diameter ratio c/Db

55o
Figure 2. Blade chord and twist distributions.
0.11
Twist angle β

50o c/Db
Hub zone

Table
45o
1. Main parameters of the ducted fan.
0.10

40o Parameters Value

0.09
35o Number of blades 8
Blade diameter Db 0.08 0.646 m
30o
Pitch angle at three-quarter radius 39°
25o 0.07
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 Hub
0.4 diameter
0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 0.18 m
Duct chord length
Radius ratio r/Rb cd 0.4 m
Duct exit diameter D 0.704 m
Figure2.2.Blade
Figure Bladechord
chordand
andtwist
twistdistributions.
distributions.
2.2. Validation of Numerical Method
Table
2.2. 1. Main parameters
Validation of Method
of Numerical the ducted fan.
The coordinate system used in this study has its origin at the intersection of the fan
The coordinate system used in this study has its origin at the intersection of the fan
Parameters
rotation axis with the blade quarter-chord line. All moments were referencedValue to this
rotation axis with the blade quarter-chord line. All moments were referenced to this origin.
origin. The coordinate system
Number followed
of blades the right-hand rule. Figure 3 illustrates the coor-
The coordinate system followed the right-hand rule. Figure 3 illustrates the8coordinate axes
dinate axes and the Blade
positive directions of the velocity, angle of attack, 0.646 mand mo-
forces,
and the positive directionsdiameter Db
of the velocity, angle of attack, forces, and moments.
ments. Pitch angle at three-quarter radius 39°
Hub diameter 0.18 m
Duct chord length cd 0.4 m
Duct exit diameter D 0.704 m

2.2. Validation of Numerical Method

The coordinate system used in this study has its origin at the intersection of the fan
rotation axis with the blade quarter-chord line. All moments were referenced to this
origin. The coordinate system followed the right-hand rule. Figure 3 illustrates the coor-
dinate axes and the positive directions of the velocity, angle of attack, forces, and mo-
ments.

Figure 3.3. Coordinate

Figure Coordinate system,
system, showing
showing positive
positive sense
senseof
ofvelocity,
velocity,angle
angleofofattack,
attack,forces,
forces,and
andmoments.
mo-
ments.
The nondimensional coefficients defined by Equations (1)–(8) were used in the subse-
quentThe nondimensional coefficients defined by Equations (1)–(8) were used in the sub-
analysis:
sequent analysis: V∞
Advance ratio : J = (1)
nDb
T
Thrust coefficient : CT = (2)
ρn2 Db 4

Figure 3. Coordinate system, showing positive sense of velocity, angle of attack, forces, and mo-
ments.
Aerospace 2022, 9, 572 5 of 25

N
Normal force coefficient : CN = (3)
ρn2 Db 4
L
Lift coefficient : CL = (4)
ρn2 Db 4
FX
Propulsive force coefficient : CX = (5)
ρn2 Db 4
M
Pitching moment coefficient : C M = (6)
ρn2 Db 5
Q
Torque coefficient : CQ = (7)
ρn2 Db 5
p − p∞
Pressure coefficient : C p = (8)
1/2ρ(ΩRb )2
The Multiple Reference Frame (MRF) method was used to simulate the fan rotation in
this study. The MRF method required two separate zones connected by frame interfaces
inside the computational domain: the rotating zone containing the block near blades and
the stationary zone containing the rest block, as shown in Figure 4. The computational
domain was a cuboid with lengths of 100D, 50D, and 100D in the flow, normal, and span
directions, respectively. Out of the ground effect simulations, the most downstream farfield
boundary was set as the pressure outlet, with a gauge pressure of 0 Pa relative to the
reference pressure p∞ ; the other boundaries were set as velocity inlets, which were specified
to have the same velocity as the freestream. All surfaces of the ducted fan were set as no-slip
walls. Trial simulations showed that if the pressure inlet was replaced by a velocity inlet of
0.5 m/s at the corresponding farfield boundaries, the discrepancies between the calculated
thrust and torque were within 1%, but the order of magnitude of the maximum residual
reduced from 10−3 to 10−5 , as shown in Figure 5. Thus, a velocity of 0.5 m/s was specified
on the velocity inlet boundaries when simulating the ducted fan hovering in still air. The air
was assumed to be ideal gas with a constant dynamic viscosity µ = 1.7894 × 10−5 . The CFD
software STAR CCM+ was adopted to perform the numerical simulations. The Realizable
Aerospace 2022, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 27
k-ε turbulence model with two-layer all y+ wall treatment was used in all simulations. The
other options remained the default settings of the software [38].

(a) (b)
Figure 4. Computational domain and boundary conditions when out of ground effect: (a) boundary
Figure 4. Computational domain and boundary conditions when out of ground effect: (a) boundary
conditions; (b) computational domain divisions.
conditions; (b) computational domain divisions.

0
0.5 0.040
The experiment conducted 10
by Grunwald [9] was chosen for CFD validation, because
Pressure inlet
Pressure inlet the ducted fan studied in this paper has no experimental data yet.Velociy
-1
Theinletducted fan used
Velocity inlet 10
0.4 in Grunwald’s experiment,
0.035 hereafter labeled as Grunwald’s model, consists of a three-
blade fan with a diameter of 0.381 m,
10 a hub with a diameter of 0.109 m, and a duct with
-2
Continuity Residuals

a chord length of 0.261 m. The tip clearance is 0.53%Rb . Since the tip clearance is very
0.3 0.030 10-3
CQ
CT

10-4
0.2 0.025

10-5

0.1 0.020 10-6

 Aerospace 2022, 9, 572 6 of 25

small, to resolve it, the number of meshes as well as the difficulty of mesh generation is
increased. According to the method proposed by Bunker [39], ignoring the tip clearance
will overestimate the ducted fan performance, in terms of propulsion efficiency, by about
Aerospace 2022, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW
0.9%. This discrepancy is acceptable for the present study. Therefore, the tip clearance 6 of 27
is
ignored in the subsequent simulations. To perform the grid independence study, three sets
of polyhedral meshes were generated: the coarse, medium, and fine mesh with 4.44 million,
8.86 million, and 16.6 million cells, respectively. The grid refinement was mainly performed
on the ducted fan surfaces and the spherical region with a diameter of 5D surrounding
the ducted fan. The flowfield near walls was calculated by a wall function, and thus the
first layer height of the grid was taken to make the y+ value between 30 and 200 [38].
The fan rotational speed was set to ω = 8000 rpm in simulations of Grunwald’s model.
Firstly, the case of hovering was simulated. The thrust and torque coefficients calculated
with different grid densities are plotted in Figure 6. The discrepancy between the torque
coefficient calculated by the coarse mesh and that calculated by the medium mesh is 7.1%.
However, the discrepancies between the coefficients calculated by the medium mesh and
those calculated by the fine mesh are all within 1%. The comparison between the CFD
results of the medium mesh and the experimental values is shown in Table 2. It can be seen
(a)
that all discrepancies are within 8%, indicating that the CFD (b) results agree well with the
experimental values. The calculation accuracy in this study
Figure 4. Computational domain and boundary conditions when out is of
comparable to that
ground effect: of Qing
(a) boundary
et al. [40]. In the results of Qing, the discrepancy
conditions; (b) computational domain divisions. of C T, total is 7.06%, and the discrepancy of
CQ is −3.05%.
0.5 0.040 100
Pressure inlet
Pressure inlet Velociy inlet
Velocity inlet 10-1
0.4 0.035
10-2
Continuity Residuals

0.3 0.030 10-3

CQ
CT

10-4
0.2 0.025

Aerospace 2022, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10-5

0.1 0.020 10-6

Blades Duct Total Torque 0 400 800 1200 1600 2000 2400 2800
Parameter names Iteration

the(a)experimental values. The calculation accuracy (b) in this study is comparable to

Qing etComparison
Figure al. [40]. Inresults
the results of Qing, theinletdiscrepancy of CT, total is conditions:
7.06%, and the
Figure 5.5. Comparisonof of resultsobtained
obtainedwith
withpressure
pressure inletand
andvelocity
velocityinlet
inletboundary
boundary conditions:
ancy
(a)
(a)
forceof CQ is −3.05%.
coefficients;
force coefficients;
(b) continuity residuals.
(b) continuity residuals.

The experiment conducted by Grunwald [9] was0.030

0.5 chosen for CFD validation, because
the ducted fan studied in this paper has no experimental data yet. The ducted fan used in
0.029
Grunwald’s experiment, hereafter labeled as Grunwald’s model, consists of a three-blade
fan with
0.4 a diameter of 0.381 m, a hub with a diameter0.028 of 0.109 m, and a duct with a chord
length of 0.261 m. The tip clearance is 0.53%Rb. Since the tip clearance is very small, to
Total
resolve it, the number of meshes as well as the difficulty
Blades 0.027 of mesh generation is increased.
According
0.3 to the method proposed by Bunker Duct [39], ignoring the tip clearance will overes-
CQ
CT

Torque 0.026
timate the ducted fan performance, in terms of propulsion efficiency, by about 0.9%. This
discrepancy is acceptable for the present study. Therefore, 0.025
the tip clearance is ignored in
the subsequent
0.2 simulations. To perform the grid independence study, three sets of poly-
hedral meshes were generated: the coarse, medium, and 0.024 fine mesh with 4.44 million, 8.86
million, and 16.6 million cells, respectively. The grid refinement was mainly performed
0.1 0.023
on the ducted
Coarse fan surfacesMedium
and the spherical region Fine with a diameter of 5D surrounding
the ducted fan. The flowfield near
Grid size walls was calculated by a wall function, and thus the
first layer height of the grid was taken to make the y+ value between 30 and 200 [38]. The
Figure
fan
Figure 6. 6.
rotational Coefficients
wascalculated
speedcalculated
Coefficients by different
set tobyωdifferent
= 8000 rpm
grid in gridGrunwald’s
densities,
simulations
densities, Grunwald’s
of Grunwald’s
model model
model.
in hovering. in hoverin
Firstly,
the case of hovering was simulated. The thrust and torque coefficients calculated with
different
Table 2.grid densities are
Comparison plottedCFD
between in Figure
results 6. The discrepancy
of medium meshbetween the torque coef-
and experimental values; Gr
ficient
modelcalculated
in hovering.by the coarse mesh and that calculated by the medium mesh is 7.1%.
However, the discrepancies between the coefficients calculated by the medium mesh and
Termsby the fine mesh
those calculated CT, are all within 1%.CThe
blades CT, totalthe CFD
comparison between
T, duct C
Aerospace 2022, 9, 572 7 of 25

Table 2. Comparison between CFD results of medium mesh and experimental values; Grunwald’s
model in hovering.

Terms CT, blades CT, duct CT, total CQ

Experimental [9] 0.1878 0.2574 0.4452 0.0295
CFD 0.1729 0.2442 0.4171 0.0279
Discrepancy −7.93% −5.13% −6.31% −5.42%

Then, the case of J = 0.595, α = 30◦ was simulated with the medium mesh, and the
results are shown in Table 3. It should be noted that the coefficients in Table 3 were
calculated by the method defined in Grunwald’s report [9], which means that CL , CX ,
and CM were nondimensionalized based on the dynamic pressure of the freestream. The
discrepancies between the calculated and experimental values of all coefficients are within
10%, and this means that the medium mesh can achieve acceptable accuracy. The results of
these two cases also show that the numerical model established in this paper can be used to
analyze the aerodynamic performance of ducted fans under different freestream conditions.

Table 3. Comparison between CFD results of the medium mesh and experimental values; Grunwald’s
model at J = 0.595, α = 30◦ .

Terms CT, blades CL CX CM CQ

Experimental [9] 0.1377 2.6195 0.7020 0.8708 0.0261
CFD 0.1413 2.3833 0.6516 0.9001 0.0259
Discrepancy +2.61% −9.02% −7.73% +3.36% −0.77%

To further verify the appropriateness of the MRF method, the results of hovering
out of the ground effect were compared with those obtained via the sliding mesh method
(SMM). While performing the sliding mesh simulation, the implicit unsteady solver was
selected; the temporal discretization was set to second order; the time step was set to
∆t = 2.083 × 10−5 s, corresponding to a rotation of 1◦ per time step; and the maximum
inner iterations within a time step was set to 20. The comparison between the aerodynamic
coefficients obtained via the MRF method, the sliding mesh method, and the experiment
is shown in Table 4. As can be seen, the results of the sliding mesh method are closer to
the experimental values. However, the sliding mesh method took about 10 times more
CPU time than the MRF method in this case. Figure 7 shows the limiting streamlines on
the suction side of the blade and streamlines on the cross section very close to the blade
tip. As can be seen in Figure 7a, the streamline patterns obtained by these two methods
are only slightly different in the area immediately adjacent to the blade tip. This indicates
that, for the current simulation, the flow field obtained via the MRF method is similar to
that obtained via the sliding mesh method. In general, the accuracy of the MRF method is
sufficient to support the flow field analysis in this study.

Table 4. Comparison between results obtained via MRF method, sliding mesh method, and experiment.

Terms CT, blades CT, duct CT, total CQ

Experimental [9] 0.1878 0.2574 0.4452 0.0295
Discrepancy of SMM −6.34% +2.41% −1.28% −2.37%
Discrepancy of MRF −7.93% −5.13% −6.31% −5.42%

To the best of our knowledge, there are currently no experiments on the ground effect
of ducted fans available for numerical method validation in the public literature, because
it is difficult to accurately recreate the geometric models used in the experiments. The
MRF-based RANS solver was used to calculate the aerodynamic performances of ducted
fans in the ground effect in Han’s study [36]. In Han’s study, the discrepancies between the
calculated coefficients and the experimental values are less than 10%, considering the 5%
 obtained via the sliding mesh method. In general, the accuracy of the MRF method is
ficient to support the flow field analysis in this study.

Table 4. Comparison between results obtained via MRF method, sliding mesh method, and ex
ment.
Aerospace 2022, 9, 572 8 of 25
Terms CT, blades CT, duct CT, total CQ
Experimental [9] 0.1878 0.2574 0.4452 0.0295
Discrepancy of SMM −6.34% +2.41% −1.28% −2.37%
uncertainties in the measurements.
Discrepancy of MRF This indicates
−7.93% that the MRF-based
−5.13% RANS solver
−6.31% can −5.42%
achieve acceptable accuracy when calculating the aerodynamic performance of ducted fans
in the ground effect.

(a) (b)
Figure
Figure 7. Comparison of 7. Comparison
streamlines of streamlines
obtained obtained
via sliding via sliding
mesh method meshmethod,
and MRF method with
and pres-
MRF method,
pressure coefficients contour as background: (a) limiting streamlines on suction
sure coefficients contour as background: (a) limiting streamlines on suction side of blade; (b) stream- side of blad
streamlines on cross section at r/Rb = 0.99.
lines on cross section at r/Rb = 0.99.

To perform a grid To independence

the best of our knowledge,
study for the there are currently
ducted no experiments
fan studied in this paper,on the ground e
three
of ducted fans available for numerical method validation in
sets of meshes for simulations out of the ground effect were generated using control the public literature, bec
it isto
parameters similar difficult to accurately
those used recreateofthe
in the meshing geometricmodel.
Grunwald’s modelsThe
usedcellinnumbers
the experiments.
MRF-based RANS solver was used to calculate the aerodynamic
were 4.71 million, 8.79 million, and 16.8 million and were labeled as coarse, medium, and performances of du
fans in the ground effect in Han’s study [36]. In Han’s study,
fine mesh, respectively. Figure 8 shows some surface and cross section meshes of the the discrepancies betw
the calculated coefficients and the experimental values
medium mesh. The same surface meshes of the ducted fan were used to generate the are less than 10%, considerin
5% uncertainties in the measurements. This indicates that the MRF-based RANS so
volume meshes for the ground effect simulations. Another three sets of meshes with the
can achieve acceptable accuracy when calculating the aerodynamic performanc
number of 3.74 million, 6.25 million, and 14.9 million were obtained. The first-layer height
ducted fans in the ground effect.
of the grid was taken to make the y+ value at the three-quarter radius of the blade the same
To perform a grid independence study for the ducted fan studied in this paper, t
as that of Grunwald’s model. The fan rotational speed was set to ω = 3500 rpm. At this
sets of meshes for simulations out of the ground effect were generated using contro
rotational speed, the blade tip Mach number was 0.35 and the Reynolds number based on
rameters similar to those used in the meshing of Grunwald’s model. The cell num
the chord length at the three-quarter radius and tip speed was Re = 5.2 × 105 . The two cases
were 4.71 million, 8.79 million, and 16.8 million and were labeled as coarse, medium
of hovering in and out of the ground effect were simulated. The boundary conditions used
fine mesh, respectively. Figure 8 shows some surface and cross section meshes of the
while performing simulations of the ducted fan hovering in the ground effect are shown in
dium mesh. The same surface meshes of the ducted fan were used to generate the vol
Figure 9: the bottom surface was set as the non-slip wall; the four side surfaces were set as
meshes for the ground effect simulations. Another three sets of meshes with the num
pressure outlets with a gauge pressure of 0 Pa relative to the reference pressure p∞ ; the top
of 3.74 million, 6.25 million, and 14.9 million were obtained. The first-layer height o
surface was set as the velocity inlet, and a velocity of 0.5 m/s was imposed on it to reduce
grid was taken to make the y+ value at the three-quarter radius of the blade the sam
the order of magnitude of the residuals, as mentioned above. The results are shown in
that of Grunwald’s model. The fan rotational speed was set to ω = 3500 rpm. At
Figure 10. The maximum discrepancy between the coefficients calculated using the coarse
mesh and those calculated using the fine mesh was 5.3%, while the discrepancies between
coefficients calculated using the medium mesh and those calculated using the fine mesh
were all within 1%. Therefore, the medium mesh was used for subsequent simulations, and
the other meshes used in this study were generated according to the medium one.
 in Figure 10. Thereduce the order
maximum of magnitude
discrepancy of the residuals,
between as mentioned
the coefficients above.using
calculated The results
the are sh
coarse mesh and those calculated using the fine mesh was 5.3%, while the discrepancies using
in Figure 10. The maximum discrepancy between the coefficients calculated
coarsecalculated
between coefficients mesh and using
those calculated
the medium using the and
mesh fine those
mesh was 5.3%, while
calculated usingthe
thediscrepan
fine mesh were all within 1%. Therefore, the medium mesh was used for subsequent sim- using
between coefficients calculated using the medium mesh and those calculated
ulations, and thefine mesh were all within 1%. Therefore, the medium mesh was used for subsequent
other meshes used in this study were generated according to the medium
Aerospace 2022, 9, 572 ulations, and the other meshes used in this study were generated according to the med
9 of 25
one.
one.

(a) (a) (b) (b)

Figure 8.
Figure 8. The Figuremesh
The medium
medium 8. The
mesh medium
used
used mesh used(a)
ininsimulations: in(a)
simulations: simulations:
surface mesh
surface (a)
meshonsurface
blade
on mesh onduct;
andand
blade blade
duct; andcross
(b) cross
(b) duct;
sec- (b) cross
tion mesh aroundtion mesh around blade.
blade.
section mesh around blade.

Aerospace 2022, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 27

Figure 9. Boundary conditions when hovering in ground effect.
Figure 9.
Figure 9. Boundary
Boundary conditions
conditions when
when hovering
hovering in
in ground
ground effect.
effect.

1.2 0.16 1.1 0.16

1.1 1.0
0.15 0.15
Total
1.0 Blades Total
0.9
Duct Blade
0.14 Duct 0.14
0.9 Torque 0.8 Torque
0.8 0.13 0.7 0.13
CQ

CQ
CT

CT

0.7 0.6
0.12 0.12
0.6 0.5
0.11 0.11
0.5 0.4

0.4 0.10 0.3 0.10

Coarse Medium Fine Coarse Medium Fine
Grid size Grid size

(a) (b)
Figurecalculated
Figure 10. Coefficients 10. Coefficients calculatedgrid
by different by different gridducted
densities; densities;
fanducted fan in
studied studied in this paper: (a)
this paper:
hovering out of ground effect; (b) hovering in ground effect.
(a) hovering out of ground effect; (b) hovering in ground effect.
3. Hovering
3. Hovering in Ground in Ground Effect
Effect
In this section, the aerodynamic characteristics of the ducted fan hovering in the
In this section, the aerodynamic characteristics of the ducted fan hovering in the
ground effect are studied, which may happen when a ducted fan UAV hovers near the
ground effect areground
studied, which may happen when a ducted fan UAV hovers near the
or when a ducted-fan-propelled V/STOL aircraft takes off and lands vertically.
ground or when The a ducted-fan-propelled V/STOL
numerical method established aircraft2.2
in Section takes
was off
usedand lands vertically.
to perform simulations of the
The numerical method established in Section 2.2 was used to perform simulations
ducted fan hovering in the ground effect. According to Han’s [36] study, the of aerodynamic
the
coefficients almost keep constant at a given height in a large rotational speed range when
ducted fan hovering in the ground effect. According to Han’s [36] study, the aerodynamic
coefficients almosta keep
ducted fan hovers
constant at anear theheight
given ground.in Therefore, the following
a large rotational speedsimulations
range when were
a all per-
formed at a constant rotational speed of 3500 rpm.

3.1. Variation in Ducted Fan Performance with Height

The aerodynamic performance of the ducted fan in the height range of 0.5D−5D was
calculated. The calculation interval was 0.25D in the height range of 0.5D−2D and 0.5D in
the height range of 2D−5D. All forces and moments converged to constant values after
Aerospace 2022, 9, 572 10 of 25

ducted fan hovers near the ground. Therefore, the following simulations were all performed
at a constant rotational speed of 3500 rpm.

3.1. Variation in Ducted Fan Performance with Height

The aerodynamic performance of the ducted fan in the height range of 0.5D−5D was
calculated. The calculation interval was 0.25D in the height range of 0.5D−2D and 0.5D
in the height range of 2D−5D. All forces and moments converged to constant values after
sufficient iterations. The results are plotted in Figure 11. The values of the thrust, torque,
and power loading in the ground effect were normalized by the corresponding values
out of the ground effect, which are presented in Table 5. It can be seen that the ground
effect is negligible when the height off the ground is greater than 3D. The ground effect
becomes significant when the height is less than 1.5D, within which the thrust changes
in the duct and the blades are both above 10%. As the height decreases, the thrust of the
blade increases, while the thrust of the duct decreases. Compared with the values out of
the ground effect, at the height of 0.5D, the thrust of the blades increases by 28.4%, and the
thrust of the duct decreases by 41.1%, resulting in a total thrust decrease by 12.5%. The
conclusion that ground effect increases blade thrust but decreases duct thrust has been
unanimously recognized in the literature. However, some studies [29,30,32,34,36] found
an increase in total thrust, while other studies [33,37] found a decrease in total thrust. The
key is whether the increment in the blade thrust can compensate for the loss of the duct
thrust. In the study of Mi [37] and this paper, the ratio of the duct thrust to the total thrust
is greater than 50% when the ducted fan hovers out of the ground effect, while this
Aerospace 2022, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 ratio
of 27
is less than 50% in Han’s studies [34,36]. It is reasonable to infer that whether the total
thrust of a ducted fan increases or decreases is related to the proportion of thrust generated
by the duct and the blades when out of the ground effect. As shown in Figure 11b, the
Table
blade 5. Aerodynamic
torque performance
increases slightly in of ducted
the groundfaneffect,
when hovering out of ground
with a maximum effect.of 7% at the
increase
CT,of
height CT, duct loading decreases
0.75D. The power
blades CT, total due to theCincrease
Q
in thePL (kg/kW)
shaft power and
the decrease
0.4646 in the total thrust, and it decreases
0.6690 1.134 by 14.6% at the height of 0.5D.
0.1277 This means
3.828
that the efficiency of the ducted fan will decrease in the ground effect.
1.3 1.18 1.00
total Torque
1.2 blades 1.16 Power loading 0.98
duct
1.14
1.1 0.96
1.12
1.0 0.94
1.10
PLIGE/PLOGE
QIGE/QOGE
TIGE/TOGE

0.9 0.92
1.08
0.8 1.06 0.90

0.7 1.04 0.88

0.6 1.02 0.86

1.00
0.5 0.84
0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0
h/D h/D

(a) (b)
Figure 11. Variation
Figure 11. in ducted
Variation in ducted fan
fan performance
performance with
with height:
height: (a)
(a) thrust
thrust ratios;
ratios; (b)
(b) torque
torque and
and power
power
loading ratios.
loading ratios.

3.2. Flow
Table Physics Leading
5. Aerodynamic to Increase
performance in Bladefan
of ducted Thrust
when hovering out of ground effect.
Figure
CT, blades12 shows the pressure coefficient
CT, duct CT, total contours on Cblade surfacesPL at different
(kg/kW)
Q
heights, and Figure 13 shows the chordwise pressure coefficient distributions at different
0.4646 0.6690 1.134 0.1277 3.828
radial locations. When the ducted fan approaches the ground, the pressure on the pressure
side of the blade increases, while the pressure on the suction side of the blade decreases
3.2.the
in Flow Physics
area beforeLeading
the redtodotted
Increaseline
in Blade Thrust in the other area, as shown in Figure
and increases
12. This is also reflected in Figure 13. Takingcontours
Figure 12 shows the pressure coefficient Figure 13b as ansurfaces
on blade example,at at r/Rb = 0.55,
different the
heights,
pressure
and Figure on13 theshows
suctiontheside decreases
chordwise as the height
pressure decreases
coefficient c = 0.1
before at different
distributions , andradial
then,
locations.
the pressure When the ducted
increases as thefan approaches
height decreasestheafter c = 0.1
ground, the. pressure on the pressure side
 (a) (b)
Figure 11. Variation in ducted fan performance with height: (a) thrust ratios; (b) torque and power
loading ratios.

Aerospace 2022, 9, 572 3.2. Flow Physics Leading to Increase in Blade Thrust 11 of 25
Figure 12 shows the pressure coefficient contours on blade surfaces at different
heights, and Figure 13 shows the chordwise pressure coefficient distributions at different
radial locations. When the ducted fan approaches the ground, the pressure on the pressure
of the
sideblade
of the increases, whilewhile
blade increases, the pressure on on
the pressure thethe
suction
suctionside
sideof
of the
the blade decreases in the
blade decreases
areain before
the areathebefore
red the red dotted
dotted lineincreases
line and and increases
in thein other
the other area,
area, as as shownininFigure
shown Figure 12. This
12. This
is also is also in
reflected reflected
Figurein13.Figure 13. Taking
Taking FigureFigure
13b as13ban as an example,
example, at r/Rat br/R = 0.55,the
= b0.55, thepressure
on pressure on the
the suction suction
side side decreases
decreases as thedecreases
as the height height decreases
beforebefore
c = 0.1, c =
and0.1then,
, and then,
the pressure
the pressure
increases as theincreases
height as the heightafter
decreases decreases after c = 0.1 .
c = 0.1.

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

Aerospace 2022, 9, x FOR PEER

Figure 12.REVIEW
Pressure coefficient contours on blade surfaces at different heights: (a) OGE; (b) h/D = 1.5; 12 of 27
Figure 12. Pressure coefficient contours on blade surfaces at different heights: (a) OGE; (b) h/D = 1.5;
(c) h/D = 1.0; (d) h/D = 0.5.
(c) h/D = 1.0; (d) h/D = 0.5.
-3.0 -3.0
OGE OGE
-2.5 h/D=1.5 -2.5 h/D=1.5
h/D=1.0 h/D=1.0
-2.0 h/D=0.5 -2.0 h/D=0.5

-1.5 -1.5

-1.0 -1.0
Cp
Cp

-0.5 -0.5

0.0 0.0

0.5 0.5

1.0 1.0
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
c c
(a) (b)
-3.0 -3.0
OGE OGE
-2.5 h/D=1.5 -2.5 h/D=1.5
h/D=1.0 h/D=1.0
-2.0 h/D=0.5 -2.0 h/D=0.5

-1.5 -1.5

-1.0 -1.0
Cp

Cp

-0.5 -0.5

0.0 0.0

0.5 0.5

1.0 1.0
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
c c
(c) (d)
Figurepressure
Figure 13. Chordwise 13. Chordwise pressuredistribution
coefficient coefficient distribution at different
at different radial locations:
radial locations: (a) r/R
(a) r/R b = 0.35; (b)
b = 0.35;
r/Rb = 0.55; (c) r/Rb = 0.75; (d) r/Rb = 0.95.
(b) r/Rb = 0.55; (c) r/Rb = 0.75; (d) r/Rb = 0.95.
Figure 14 shows the stagnation streamlines of blade section at a three-quarter radius.
It can be seen that when the ducted fan approaches the ground, the position of the leading-
edge stagnation point moves backward along the pressure side of the airfoil. This indi-
cates that the effective angle of attack of the incoming flow increases as the height de-
creases. According to the blade element theory [41] shown in Figure 15, the effective angle
Aerospace 2022, 9, 572 12 of 25

Figure 14 shows the stagnation streamlines of blade section at a three-quarter radius.

It can be seen that when the ducted fan approaches the ground, the position of the leading-
edge stagnation point moves backward along the pressure side of the airfoil. This indicates
that the effective angle of attack of the incoming flow increases as the height decreases.
According to the blade element theory [41] shown in Figure 15, the effective angle of attack
of a blade element can be calculated by Equation (9). Some cross sections, as illustrated in
Figure 16, are used to explore the flowfield. Figure 17 shows the azimuthally averaged axial
velocity of the cross section in front of the blade. It should be noted that the velocities inside
the boundary layers of the hub and duct inner surface are not plotted in Figure 17. As can
be seen, when the ducted fan approaches the ground, Va decreases due to the increased
blocking effect of the ground; Vt remains unchanged because the blade rotational speed
does not change. Consequently, φ decreases and the effective angle of attack α increases
according to Equation (9). As shown in Figure 17, Va is linearly distributed along the radial
direction, with a larger value near the blade tip due to the acceleration effect of the duct
lip on the airflow. Jimenez’s study [42] shows that an outboard-biased rotor inflow can
improve the performance of a hovering ducted fan.
(
Aerospace 2022, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW α = θ−φ 13 of 27
Aerospace
Aerospace 2022, 9, 9,
2022, x FOR
x FOR PEER
PEER REVIEW
REVIEW 1313ofof2727 (9)
φ = arctan V a
Vt

Figure 14. Stagnation streamlines of blade section at three-quarter radius.

Figure14.
Figure
Figure 14.Stagnation
14. Stagnation streamlines
streamlines
Stagnation ofofblade
streamlines blade section
section
of blade atatthree-quarter
section three-quarter radius.radius.
radius.
at three-quarter

Figure 15. Flow environment at a typical blade element.

Figure15.
Figure
Figure 15.Flow
15. Flow environment
environment
Flow atata at
environment atypical
typical blade
blade
a typical element.
element.
blade element.

(a) (b)
(a)
(a) (b)
(b)
Figure 16. Locations of cross sections used in analysis: (a) azimuthal cross sections; (b) axial cross
Figure16.
16.Locations
Locationsofofcross
Figure
sections.
Figure 16. Locations of cross
cross sectionsused
sections used
sections inin
used analysis:(a)(a)azimuthal
analysis: (a)azimuthal
analysis:
in crosssections;
crosssections;
cross
azimuthal (b)axial
(b)
sections; (b)axial cross
cross
axial cross sections.
sections.
sections.
0.55
0.55
0.55 OGE
OGE
OGE
h/D=1.5
0.50 h/D=1.5
h/D=1.5
h/D=1.0
0.50
0.50 h/D=1.0
h/D=1.0
h/D=0.5
h/D=0.5
h/D=0.5
0.45
0.45
0.45
 (a) (b)
Aerospace 2022, 9, 572 13 of 25
Figure 16. Locations of cross sections used in analysis: (a) azimuthal cross sections; (b) axial cross
sections.

0.55
OGE
h/D=1.5
0.50 h/D=1.0
h/D=0.5

0.45

0.40
Va/Vtip
0.35

0.30

0.25
0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
r/Rlocal
Aerospace 2022, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW 14 of 27
Figure17.
Figure 17. Radial
Radial distribution
distribution of
of azimuthally
azimuthallyaveraged
averagedaxial
axialvelocity
velocityon
oncross
crosssection ξ/cdd=0.39.
sectionatatξ/c =0.39.

Figure 18 shows the pressure coefficient contours and streamlines on the cross section
at Ψ = 0◦ –180◦ . ItFigure
can be18 shows the pressure
seen that coefficientjet
the downward contours and streamlines
is blocked and spreadson theradially
cross section
at Ψ = 0°−180°. It can be seen that the downward jet is blocked and spreads radially out-
outward when the ducted fan gets close to the ground. Vortices are generated under the
ward when the ducted fan gets close to the ground. Vortices are generated under the
ducted fan due to the entrainment of the downward jet and the interaction between the
ducted fan due to the entrainment of the downward jet and the interaction between the
downward jetdownward
and the airflow
jet andrebounding from the ground.
the airflow rebounding from theWhen theWhen
ground. height thedecreases to
height decreases
some degree, to these vortices can induce secondary vortices, as shown in Figure 18d.
some degree, these vortices can induce secondary vortices, as shown in Figure 18d. TheThe
decelerated
decelerated airflow formsairflow forms a high-pressure
a high-pressure zone betweenzone the
between theand
blades blades
theand the ground,
ground, whichwhich
leads to a thrust
leads to a considerable considerable thrustinincrement
increment the blades.in the
As blades. As the
the height height decreases,
decreases, the pres-
the pressure
sure in this
in this zone increases, andzone increases,
thus and of
the thrust thus
thethe thrustincreases
blades of the blades increases as well.
as well.

(a) (b)

(c) (d)
Figurecoefficient
Figure 18. Pressure 18. Pressure coefficient
contour andcontour and streamlines
streamlines on crosson
section at Ψ =at0◦Ψ−=180
cross section 0°−180°:
◦ : (a) (a) OGE; (b)
OGE;
h/D = 1.5; (c) h/D = 1.0; (d) h/D = 0.5.
(b) h/D = 1.5; (c) h/D = 1.0; (d) h/D = 0.5.
The above analysis can be summarized as follows: when the ducted fan approaches
the ground, the airflow through the duct is decelerated due to the blocking effect of the
ground, and thus the static pressure of the airflow, hereafter referred to as ambient pres-
sure, around the blades increases. The pressure on the suction and pressure sides of the
Aerospace 2022, 9, 572 14 of 25

The above analysis can be summarized as follows: when the ducted fan approaches
the ground, the airflow through the duct is decelerated due to the blocking effect of the
ground, and thus the static pressure of the airflow, hereafter referred to as ambient pressure,
around the blades increases. The pressure on the suction and pressure sides of the blade
generally shows an increasing trend. The decrease in the axial flow velocity in front of
Aerospace 2022, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW 15 of 27
the blade increases the effective angle of attack of the blade, so that the pressure on the
suction side of the blade tends to decrease and the pressure on the pressure side tends
to increase. As a result, the pressure in the area near the leading edge of the suction side
effect of the
decreases, increase
while in the effective
the pressure angle
in the other of attack
area andConsequently,
increases. the increase init the
canambient pres-
be concluded
sure.the increase in the blade thrust in ground effect is the result of the combined effect of
that
the increase in the effective angle of attack and the increase in the ambient pressure.
3.3. Flow Physics Leading to Decrease in Duct Thrust
3.3. Flow Physics
As can Leading
be seen to Decrease
in Figure in is
18, air Duct Thrust
drawn into the duct and divided at a stagnation
pointAsoncan
thebeouter
seen surface
in Figure near theistrailing
18, air drawn edge. The
into the duct
duct andsection
divided acts
at like an airfoilpoint
a stagnation and
produces
on the outera resultant
surface near force
thevector
trailingthat cants
edge. Thetoward the duct
duct section actslip.
likeThe axial component
an airfoil and produces of
athis force vector
resultant provides
force vector additional
that cants towardthrust,
theasduct
shown
lip. in
TheFigure
axial 19. When theofducted
component fan
this force
approaches
vector the additional
provides ground, thethrust,
mass asflow through
shown the duct
in Figure decreases,
19. When and thefan
the ducted ambient pres-
approaches
sure around the duct increases. The pressure increases on both the inner and outer
the ground, the mass flow through the duct decreases, and the ambient pressure sur-
around
faces
the of the
duct duct, asThe
increases. shown in Figure
pressure 19. The
increases change
on both the in the and
inner pressure
outer on the outer
surfaces surface
of the duct,
is small,
as shownand the increase
in Figure 19. Theinchange
pressure on the
in the inner on
pressure surface, especially
the outer surfacenear the lip,
is small, andis the
the
increase in pressure
main reason on the inner
for the reduction surface,
in duct especially
thrust. near the
The airflow lip, by
ejected is the
themain
ducted reason for the
fan deflects
reduction
and formsinaduct thrust.
surface flowThe airflow
after hittingejected by the ducted
the ground. As thefan deflects
height and forms
decreases, theaposition
surface
flow after hitting the ground. As the height decreases, the position where
where the deflection begins gets closer to the trailing edge of the duct, forcing the stagna- the deflection
begins getstocloser
tion point move to the trailing
upward along edge of the
the outer duct, of
surface forcing the as
the duct, stagnation
shown inpointFigureto20.move
The
upward along the outer surface of the duct, as shown in Figure 20. The
outer side of the duct section is the pressure side of the airfoil, and the fact that the stag-outer side of the
duct section is the pressure side of the airfoil, and the fact that the stagnation
nation point moves forward along the pressure side of the airfoil indicates a decrease in point moves
forward along the pressure side of the airfoil indicates a decrease in the effective angle of
the effective angle of attack. Based on the above analysis, the decrease in the duct thrust
attack. Based on the above analysis, the decrease in the duct thrust in the ground effect is
in the ground effect is the result of the combined effect of the following two effects: the
the result of the combined effect of the following two effects: the increase in the ambient
increase in the ambient pressure caused by the decelerated airflow, and the decrease in
pressure caused by the decelerated airflow, and the decrease in the effective angle of attack
the effective angle of attack caused by the deflection of the airflow.
caused by the deflection of the airflow.
-1.2
OGE
-1.0 F h/D=1.5
inner h/D=1.0
T h/D=0.5
-0.8
outer
-0.6
Cp

-0.4 inner

-0.2

0.0
outer
0.2
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
ξ/cduct

Figure 19.
Figure 19. Pressure
Pressure coefficient
coefficient distributions
distributions on
on duct
duct section
section at Ψ == 22.5
at Ψ 22.5°.
◦.
 -0.2

0.0
outer
0.2
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Aerospace 2022, 9, 572 ξ/cduct 15 of 25

Figure 19. Pressure coefficient distributions on duct section at Ψ = 22.5°.

Aerospace 2022, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW 16 of 27

Figure20.
Figure 20.Stagnation
Stagnationstreamlines
streamlinesofofduct sectionatatΨΨ==22.5
ductsection 22.5°.
◦.

4. Transitioning in Ground Effect

4. Transitioning in Ground Effect
In this section, the aerodynamic characteristics of the ducted fan transitioning in the
In this section, the aerodynamic characteristics of the ducted fan transitioning in the
ground effect are studied, which may happen when a ducted fan UAV flies near the
ground effect are studied, which may happen when a ducted fan UAV flies near the ground
ground or when a ducted-fan-propelled V/STOL aircraft runs on the ground in STOL
or when a ducted-fan-propelled V/STOL aircraft runs on the ground in STOL mode. A
mode. A ducted fan is subjected to both crosswinds and the ground effect when transi-
ducted fan is subjected to both crosswinds and the ground effect when transitioning in the
tioning in the ground effect. When conducting aerodynamic studies in the transition
ground effect. When conducting aerodynamic studies in the transition phase, the whole
phase, the whole process is usually decomposed into several steady states at different an-
process is usually decomposed into several steady states at different angles of attack and
gles of attack
advance ratiosand advance ratios
[8–10,21,27]. [8–10,21,27].
This approach This
is also approach
adopted is also
in this adopted in this paper.
paper.
While performing the simulations of the ducted fan
While performing the simulations of the ducted fan transition in the transition in ground
the ground effect,
effect, the
the boundary
boundary conditions
conditions are shownare shown in Figure
in Figure 21: the21:bottom
the bottom
surface surface was
was set as set as a sliding
a sliding wall
wallthe
with with
samethevelocity
same velocity as the freestream;
as the freestream; the most downstream
the most downstream farfield was
farfield boundary boundary
set as
the pressure outlet with a gauge pressure of 0 Pa relative to the reference pressure p∞ ;pres-
was set as the pressure outlet with a gauge pressure of 0 Pa relative to the reference the
other p∞; the otherwere
sure boundaries boundaries were set
set as velocity as velocity
inlets. inlets. Three
Three advance ratiosadvance ratios were
were considered, thatcon-
is,
J sidered,
= 0.1, 0.3,that J =which
andis,0.5, 0.1, 0.3, and a0.5,
cover which
typical cover
speed a typical
range during speed range during
the transitional the phase
flight transi-
oftional flight
a tilting phasefan
ducted of aV/STOL
tilting ducted fan
aircraft V/STOL
[9]. The fan aircraft [9]. The
rotational fanwas
speed rotational speed was
kept constant at
kept constant at 3500 rpm, and the advance ratios were adjusted
3500 rpm, and the advance ratios were adjusted by changing the freestream velocity. The by changing the
freestream
Reynolds velocity.
numbers The on
based Reynolds numbers
the freestream based and
velocity on the
duct freestream
length were velocity
Re = 1.0 and× duct
105 ,
length were
5 Re = 1.0 × 510 5, 3.1 × 105, and 5.2 × 105, respectively.
3.1 × 10 , and 5.2 × 10 , respectively.

Figure21.
Figure 21.Boundary
Boundaryconditions
conditionswhen
whentransitioning
transitioningininground
groundeffect.
effect.

4.1.Ducted
4.1. DuctedFan
FanPerformance
PerformanceatatDifferent
DifferentHeights
Heights
Theaerodynamic
The aerodynamicperformance
performanceofofthetheducted
ductedfan fanininthe
theheight
heightrange
rangeofof0.5D
0.5D−2D
−2D waswas
calculatedwith
calculated withananinterval
intervalof
of 0.5D at αα == 30
0.5D at 30°, 60°. The results are shown in Figure 22. At α
◦ , 60◦ . The results are shown in Figure 22. At

30◦ ,the
α==30°, thechanges
changesin inthrust,
thrust, normal
normal force,
force, lift, propulsive force,
lift, propulsive force, and
and torque
torqueat atdifferent
different
heightsare
heights arewithin
within5%.
5%.Although
Althoughthethepitching
pitchingmoment
momentofofthe theduct
ducthas
hasaamaximum
maximumchangechange
15% at J = 0.1, the pitching moment as well as its influence is very small at J = 0.1,
ofof15% at J = 0.1, the pitching moment as well as its influence is very small at J = 0.1, α = 30α◦=.
30°. At α = 60°, the maximum changes in thrust, normal force, lift, propulsive force, and
pitching moment are greater than 10%, and the maximum change in torque is 5.2%. The
variation trends in the aerodynamic performance are different at different advance ratios
at α = 60°. Taking the lift shown in Figure 22c as an example, as the height decreases, the
Aerospace 2022, 9, 572 16 of 25

At α = 60◦ , the maximum changes in thrust, normal force, lift, propulsive force, and pitching
moment are greater than 10%, and the maximum change in torque is 5.2%. The variation
trends in the aerodynamic performance are different at different advance ratios at α = 60◦ .
Taking the lift shown in Figure 22c as an example, as the height decreases, the lift decreases
at J = 0.1, while the lift increases at J = 0.5. These indicate that the ground effect becomes
stronger and more complex as the angle of attack increases. In general, the influence zone
of the ground effect is reduced when there is a crosswind, and the ground effect becomes
Aerospace 2022, 9, x only significant
FOR PEER REVIEWwhen the height is less than 1D. Therefore, the height of 0.5D was selected 17
in the subsequent analysis to further study the aerodynamic characteristics of the ducted
fan transitioning in the ground effect.
1.02 1.20
J=0.1, α=30o
1.15 J=0.1, α=60o
1.00
1.10
J=0.3, α=30o
0.98 J=0.3, α=60o
1.05 J=0.5, α=30o
0.96 J=0.5, α=60o
1.00

NIGE/NOGE
TIGE/TOGE

0.95
0.94 J=0.1, α=30o

J=0.1, α=60o 0.90

0.92 J=0.3, α=30o
J=0.3, α=60o 0.85
0.90 J=0.5, α=30o 0.80
J=0.5, α=60o
0.88 0.75
0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0
h/D h/D

(a) (b)
1.02
1.12
1.00
1.08

0.98 1.04

0.96 1.00
FX, IGE/FX, OGE
LIGE/LOGE

0.94 J=0.1, α=30 o

0.96 J=0.1, α=30o
J=0.1, α=60o J=0.1, α=60o
0.92
0.92 J=0.3, α=30o J=0.3, α=30o
J=0.3, α=60o J=0.3, α=60o
0.88
0.90 J=0.5, α=30o J=0.5, α=30o
J=0.5, α=60o 0.84 J=0.5, α=60o
0.88 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0
0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0
h/D h/D

(c) (d)
1.05 1.06

1.00 J=0.1, α=30o

1.05
J=0.1, α=60o
0.95 J=0.3, α=30o
1.04 J=0.3, α=60o
0.90
J=0.5, α=30o
0.85 1.03 J=0.5, α=60o
MIGE/MOGE

QIGE/QOGE

0.80 J=0.1, α=30o

1.02
J=0.1, α=60o
0.75
J=0.3, α=30o 1.01
0.70 J=0.3, α=60o
J=0.5, α=30o 1.00
0.65 J=0.5, α=60o
0.60 0.99
0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0
h/D h/D

(e) (f)

Figure 22. Load Figure

ratios at22. Load ratios
different heights,atadvance
differentratios,
heights,
and advance ratios, (a)
angles of attack: andthrust
angles of attack:
ratio; (a) thrust rat
(b) normal
normal force ratio; (c) lift ratio; (d) propulsive force ratio; (e) duct pitching
force ratio; (c) lift ratio; (d) propulsive force ratio; (e) duct pitching moment ratio; (f) torque ratio. moment ratio; (f) t
ratio.
4.2. Ducted Fan Performance at h/D = 0.5
4.2. Ducted
The aerodynamic Fan Performance
performance of the at h/D =fan
ducted 0.5 in the angle of attack range of 0◦ –90◦
The
at the height of 0.5D aerodynamic
was calculated.performance of the
The calculation ductedwas
interval fan in 15◦of, and
the angle
basically attack
therange of 0
at the height of 0.5D was calculated. The calculation interval was basically 15°, an
interval was changed to 5° near stall to determine the stall angle of attack accurately
corresponding cases out of the ground effect were also calculated for comparison
results are shown in Figure 23. The pitching moment of the blades is at least one ord
Aerospace 2022, 9, 572 17 of 25

interval was changed to 5◦ near stall to determine the stall angle of attack accurately. The
corresponding cases out of the ground effect were also calculated for comparison. The
results are shown in Figure 23. The pitching moment of the blades is at least one order of
magnitude smaller than that of the duct, so only the pitching moment coefficient of the
Aerospace 2022, 9,duct
x FORisPEER
plotted. The variation trends of these coefficients are related, and thus the thrust
REVIEW 18
coefficient is mainly analyzed. Figure 24 presents the division of thrust between the blades
and the duct.
1.2 0.5
J=0.1, OGE
J=0.1, h/D=0.5
1.1 J=0.3, OGE
0.4 J=0.3, h/D=0.5
J=0.5, OGE
J=0.5, h/D=0.5
1.0
0.3

0.9
0.2

CN
CT

0.8
0.1

0.7 J=0.1, OGE J=0.3, OGE J=0.5, OGE

J=0.1, h/D=0.5 J=0.3, h/D=0.5 J=0.5, h/D=0.5 0.0
0.6
0o 15o 30o 45o 60o 75o 90o 0o 15o 30o 45o 60o 75o 90o
α α
(a) (b)
1.2 1.2
J=0.1, OGE
1.0 J=0.1, h/D=0.5
1.0
J=0.3, OGE
0.8 J=0.3, h/D=0.5
0.8 J=0.5, OGE
0.6 J=0.5, h/D=0.5

0.6
0.4
CX
CL

0.4 0.2
J=0.1, OGE
J=0.1, h/D=0.5
0.2 J=0.3, OGE 0.0
J=0.3, h/D=0.5
J=0.5, OGE -0.2
0.0 J=0.5, h/D=0.5
-0.4
0o 15o 30o 45o 60o 75o 90o 0o 15o 30o 45o 60o 75o 90o

α α
(c) (d)
0.28 0.15
J=0.1, OGE J=0.1, OGE
0.24 J=0.1, h/D=0.5 J=0.1, h/D=0.5
J=0.3, OGE J=0.3, OGE
J=0.3, h/D=0.5 J=0.3, h/D=0.5
0.20 J=0.5, OGE 0.14
J=0.5, OGE
J=0.5, h/D=0.5 J=0.5, h/D=0.5
0.16

0.12 0.13
CM, duct

CQ

0.08

0.04 0.12

0.00

-0.04 0.11
0o 15o 30o 45o 60o 75o 90o 0o 15o 30o 45o 60o 75o 90o

α α
(e) (f)
Figure 23.coefficients
Figure 23. Aerodynamic Aerodynamic coefficients
at different at different
advance ratiosadvance ratiosofand
and angles angles(a)
attack: of thrust
attack: (a) thrus
ficient; (b) normal force coefficient; (c) lift coefficient; (d) propulsive force coefficient;
coefficient; (b) normal force coefficient; (c) lift coefficient; (d) propulsive force coefficient; (e) pitching (e) pi
moment coefficient of duct; (f) torque coefficient.
moment coefficient of duct; (f) torque coefficient.
Aerospace 2022, 9, 572Aerospace 2022, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW 18 of 25 19

0.7 0.60
J=0.1, OGE
J=0.1, h/D=0.5
0.6 J=0.3, OGE
0.56
J=0.3, h/D=0.5
J=0.5, OGE
J=0.5, h/D=0.5
0.5 0.52

CT, blades
CT, duct
0.4 0.48
J=0.1, OGE
J=0.1, h/D=0.5
0.3 J=0.3, OGE 0.44
J=0.3, h/D=0.5
J=0.5, OGE
J=0.5, h/D=0.5
0.2 0.40
0o 15o 30o 45o 60o 75o 90o 0o 15o 30o 45o 60o 75o 90o

α α
(a) (b)
Figure
Figure 24. Division 24. Division
of thrust betweenofthe
thrust between
blades theduct:
and the blades
(a)and thecoefficient
thrust duct: (a) thrust coefficient
of duct; of duct; (b) t
(b) thrust
coefficient
coefficient of blades. of blades.

Stall occurs at a Stall

certainoccurs
advanceat a certain
ratio and advance
angle of ratio andwhich
attack, angle is ofmarked
attack, which is marked by a
by a distinct
reduction in thetinct reduction
lift and pitching in the lift and
moment, aspitching
shown in moment,
Figures as 22eshown
and 23c.in Figures
The stall 23c and 22e. The
angle
of attack is taken as the angle of attack when the lift coefficient of the ducted fan reachesthe ducte
angle of attack is taken as the angle of attack when the lift coefficient of
a maximum, beyondreacheswhich a maximum,
there is abeyondsignificantwhich dropthere is a lift
in the significant
coefficient. drop in the lift
It should be coefficie
shouldfan
noted that the ducted be does
notednot that theatducted
stall this anglefan does not stall
of attack. at this angle
Hereafter, both the of attack.
stall and Hereafter,
the stall
stall angle of attack refer andto stall
thoseangleof the ofducted
attack refer
fan. At to those
J = 0.1, ofnothestall
ducted
occursfan.bothAt J in
= 0.1,
andno stall o
out of the groundboth in and
effect. AtoutJ =of0.3,thetheground effect.of
stall angle J = 0.3,increases
Atattack the stall angle
from 65 of ◦attack
out ofincreases
the from
ground effect to out75of in
◦ thetheground
ground effect to 75°
effect. AtinJ the
= 0.5,ground effect.
the stall At J of
angle = 0.5, the stall
attack is 55angle
◦ bothof attack

in and out of theboth in andeffect.

ground out ofThe the stall
ground effect. The
is mainly causedstallbyis the
mainly flowcaused
separationby theon flow
theseparatio
the windward side of the duct lip [8,9]. After the
windward side of the duct lip [8,9]. After the stall occurs, the duct thrust decreases and the stall occurs, the duct thrust decr
and the blade thrust
blade thrust increases, as shown in Figure 24. increases, as shown in Figure 24.
It can be seen fromIt canFigures
be seen23 from
andFigures
24 that 23 theand 24 that
ground the ground
effect is hardlyeffect is hardly
detectable at detectab
angles of attackangles
less than of 30attack
◦ even less thanheight
if the 30° even if the height
off ground drops to off0.5D,
ground drops to
especially 0.5D, especia
at large
advance ratios. large
Within advance
this angle ratios. Within
of attack this angle
range, the bladeof attack
thrustrange,
remains thealmost
blade thrust
constant remains al
constant
at a specific advance at aand
ratio, specific advancein
the variation ratio,
the and ductedthe fan
variation in the ducted
performance with the fanangle
performance
the angle
of attack is mainly causedofby attack is mainly caused by the duct.
the duct.
At angles of attack greater than 30◦ ,greater
At angles of attack the blade than 30°, increases
thrust the bladeinthrust increases
the ground in the
effect, andground e
and the increment magnitude decreases as the
the increment magnitude decreases as the advance ratio increases, as shown in Figure 24b. advance ratio increases, as shown in F
24b. At angles of attack
◦ greater than 30° before
At angles of attack greater than 30 before stall occurs, the blade thrust out of the ground stall occurs, the blade thrust out o
ground
effect remains almost effect remains
constant, and thealmost reasonconstant, and theinreason
for the increase for theinincrease
blade thrust the ground in blade thru
effect is similarthe ground
to that effect is similar
in hovering. to that
After stall in hovering.
occurs, the blade After
thruststallout
occurs,
of thethe blade thrust o
ground
effect increases.the ground
This effect that
indicates increases. This indicates
the increase in blade that the increase
thrust in blade
after stall occurs thrust
in theafter stall o
ground effect isinpartly
the ground
due toeffect is partly
the stall. due angles
At high to the stall. At high
of attack, theangles of attack,
duct thrust andthe duct thrus
total
total thrust
thrust show different showtrends
variation different variationadvance
at different trends atratios.
different advance
In order ratios. Inthis
to compare order to com
with the hoveringthiscase,
withthe thecase
hovering
of α = case,
90◦ isthe casefor
taken of analysis.
α = 90° isAt taken for analysis.
J = 0.1, α = 90◦ , the At Jduct
= 0.1, α = 90
thrust and total thrust decrease in the ground effect, which is the same as in the hovering as in the
duct thrust and total thrust decrease in the ground effect, which is the same
case. At J = 0.3,ering
α = 90 case. At J = 0.3,the
◦ , although α =duct
90°,thrust
although the ductinthrust
decreases decreases
the ground effectin as
theinground
the effect
hovering case, the
the hovering
total thrust case, the totalAt
increases. thrust
J = 0.5, increases.
α = 90◦ ,At bothJ = the
0.5, duct
α = 90°,thrustboth andthetheduct thrus
the total
total thrust increase, which thrust increase,from
is different which theishovering
differentcase. fromIn thegeneral,
hovering thecase. In general, the aer
aerodynamic
performance of namic
the ductedperformance
fan shows of the ductedvariation
different fan shows different
trends variation
at different trends at
advance different adv
ratios,
ratios, problem
and the aerodynamic and the aerodynamic
becomes more problem
complicatedbecomes duemoreto the complicated
crosswind.due to the crosswi

4.3. Flow Physics4.3. Flow Physics

Leading Leading
to Increase to Increase
in Blade Thrust in Blade Thrust
Figure 25 showsFigure 25 shows
the thrust the thrust
coefficient coefficient
of blades of blades
at different at different
azimuths, azimuths,
where Ψ = 360where
◦
Ψ=
and Ψ = 0 areand
◦ the Ψ = 0° position.
same are the same position.
In Figure 25,InΨFigure
= 270 25,
◦ –0 Ψ–90
◦
= 270°−0°−90°
◦
is the windward
is the windward side, side
and Ψ = 90◦ –180Ψ ◦=–270
90°−180°−270° is the leeward side. At angles of attack less than 30°, the blade t
◦ is the leeward side. At angles of attack less than 30◦ , the blade

changes
thrust changes little little
in the in the effect
ground ground at effect at all azimuthal
all azimuthal positions;
positions; the difference
the difference in bladein blade t
thrust at different azimuths is attributed to the different tangential velocity between the
 Aerospace 2022, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW 20 of
Aerospace 2022, 9, 572 19 of 25

at different azimuths is attributed to the different tangential velocity between the advan
advancing and ing and retreating
retreating blades. blades. At of
At angles angles
attackofgreater
attack greater
than 30than 30° stall
◦ before before stall occurs, t
occurs,
blades at different positions are affected by different degrees of ground
the blades at different positions are affected by different degrees of ground effect, and thus, effect, and thu
the magnitude of the thrust change is also different. After the stall occurs,
the magnitude of the thrust change is also different. After the stall occurs, the blades on the the blades
the windward side are strongly affected by the separated flow, resulting
windward side are strongly affected by the separated flow, resulting in a different variation in a differe
variation trend in blade thrust with azimuth compared
trend in blade thrust with azimuth compared with that before the stall. with that before the stall.

0.10 0.10
α=0o, OGE α=0o, h/D=0.5 α=75o, OGE α=75o, h/D=0.5
0.09 α=30o, OGE α=30o, h/D=0.5 0.09 α=90o, OGE α=90o, h/D=0.5
α=55o, OGE α=55o, h/D=0.5 α=0o, OGE
0.08 retreating blades advancing blades 0.08

0.07 0.07
CT, blade

CT, blade
0.06 0.06

0.05 0.05

0.04 0.04

0.03 0.03
0o 45o 90o 135o 180o 225o 270o 315o 360o 0o 45o 90o 135o 180o 225o 270o 315o 360o
ψ ψ

(a) (b)

Figure 25. ThrustFigure 25. Thrust

coefficient coefficient
of blades of blades
at different at different
azimuths at J =azimuths at J = 0.5:
0.5: (a) before (a)(b)
stall; before
afterstall;
stall.(b) after sta

After the
After the stall occurs, thestall
flowoccurs, the flow
separation separation
extends to theextends
entire to the lip
duct entire ductwind-
on the lip on the win
ward side. Taking the case
◦ of α = 90° as an example, Figure
ward side. Taking the case of α = 90 as an example, Figure 26 shows the axial velocity 26 shows the axial veloc
contours on the cross sections passing through and intersecting
contours on the cross sections passing through and intersecting the blade rotating plane. the blade rotating plan
Negative values of the axial velocity indicate that the flow direction
Negative values of the axial velocity indicate that the flow direction is locally reversed, is locally reversed,
as shown in theshown in the areas
areas outside the outside the black
black lines lines26a
in Figure in Figure 26a and
and within thewithin the red
red dotted dotted line
line
in Figure 26b. The flow separation on the duct lip leads to a recirculation region across across t
Figure 26b. The flow separation on the duct lip leads to a recirculation region
the rotor plane.rotor
When plane. Whenrotates
the blade the blade rotatesthis
through through thisits
region, region, its outboard
outboard part willpart
seewill
an see an u
wash resulting from the recirculation. The upwash increases the effective angle of atta
upwash resulting from the recirculation. The upwash increases the effective angle of attack
of the blade locally, and thus, the blade produces more thrust in this region, as shown
of the blade locally, and thus, the blade produces more thrust in this region, as shown
Figure 25b. The intensity and scope of the recirculation increase in the ground effect co
in Figure 25b. The intensity and scope of the recirculation increase in the ground effect
pared with those out of the ground effect. Under the combined effect of the separated flo
compared with those out of the ground effect. Under the combined effect of the separated
and ground effect, the thrust of the advancing blades may decrease compared with t
flow and ground effect, the thrust of the advancing blades may decrease compared with the
value out of the ground effect, but the total thrust of the blades still increases. It should
value out of the ground effect, but the total thrust of the blades still increases. It should be
noted that given the complexity of the flow and the limitations of the MRF-based metho
noted that giventhe
theupwash
complexity of the flow and the limitations of the MRF-based method,
may not be the only reason for the increase in blade thrust after the stall o
the upwash maycurs.
not be the only reason for the increase in blade thrust after the stall occurs.

4.4. Influence of Ground Vortex

At high angles of attack, the radially spreading flow interacts with the crossflow after
the jet impinges on the ground. As a consequence, two counter-rotating vortices trail away
from the impinging zone and flow downstream. A ground vortex wrapped around the jet
is formed in the shape of a horseshoe, as shown in Figure 27. The position and intensity
of the ground vortex are related to the angle of attack and advance ratio. At the same
angle of attack, as the advance ratio increases, the position of the ground vortex is further
downstream, and the affected zone is much smaller.
Aerospace 2022, 9, Aerospace
572 2022, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW 20 of 25 21

(a)

(b)

Aerospace 2022, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW 22 of 27

Figure 26. AxialFigure
velocity26.contour
Axial velocity contour and
and streamlines streamlines
on cross sectionson
at cross sections
J = 0.5, α = 90◦at J = cross
: (a) 0.5, αsection
= 90°: (a) cross s
at ξ/c = 0.425; (b) cross
at ξ/cd = 0.425; (b) cross section at Ψ = 6 .
d section
◦ at Ψ = 6°.

4.4. Influence of Ground Vortex

At high angles of attack, the radially spreading flow interacts with the crossflow
the jet impinges on the ground. As a consequence, two counter-rotating vortices trail
from the impinging zone and flow downstream. A ground vortex wrapped around t
is formed in the shape of a horseshoe, as shown in Figure 27. The position and inte
of the ground vortex are related to the angle of attack and advance ratio. At the same
of attack, as the advance ratio increases, the position of the ground vortex is further d
stream, and the affected zone is much smaller.

(a) (b)

Figure
Figure 27.
27. Ground
Ground vortex
vortex at
at different
different advance
advance ratios at h/D
ratios at h/D ==0.5,
0.5,αα ==75°: (a)J J==0.3;
75◦ :(a) (b)JJ==0.5.
0.3;(b) 0.5.
Streamlines are colored by pressure coefficients.
Streamlines are colored by pressure coefficients.

Figure
Figure 28
28 shows
shows thethe pressure
pressure coefficient
coefficient contours
contours and
and streamlines
streamlines on
on the
the symmetry
symmetry
plane
plane under
under different
different freestream
freestream conditions,
conditions, where
where the
the red
red dots
dots are
are stagnation
stagnation points.
points. The
The
chordwise
chordwise relative positions of
relative positions ofthe
thestagnation
stagnationpoint
pointon
onthe
theduct
duct are
are shown
shown in in Figure
Figure 29.29.
At
At small angles of attack, taking α = 30° as an example, the interaction between the oblique
jet and the crossflow is weak, thus having little impact on the duct; the stagnation position
only moves slightly forward, and the ducted fan performance remains almost unchanged.
At high angles of attack, the center of the ground vortex is far away from the duct at J=
0.1, and its influence on the duct is also weak. The ducted fan is mainly affected by the
Aerospace 2022, 9, 572 21 of 25

small angles of attack, taking α = 30◦ as an example, the interaction between the oblique jet
and the crossflow is weak, thus having little impact on the duct; the stagnation position
only moves slightly forward, and the ducted fan performance remains almost unchanged.
At high angles of attack, the center of the ground vortex is far away from the duct at J = 0.1,
and its influence on the duct is also weak. The ducted fan is mainly affected by the ground
effect similar to that in hovering near the ground, as analyzed in Section 3.1. At J = 0.3,
the ground vortex is close to the outside of the duct. The upwash caused by the vortex
leads to the stagnation point greatly moving forward and the effective angle of attack of the
duct decreasing. Therefore, the duct thrust decreases and the stall angle of attack increases
compared with those out of the ground effect. At J = 0.5, the ground vortex is close to
the inner side of the duct. Its entrainment causes the stagnation point to move backward,
increasing the effective angle of attack of the duct. Therefore, the duct thrust increases. It
can be seen from the above analysis that the different positions and influence regions of the
ground vortex contribute to the different variation trends of the ducted fan performance at
different advance ratios. It should be noted that given the complexity of the flow and the
Aerospace 2022, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW
limitations of the MRF-based method, the ground vortex may not be the only 23 ofreason
27 for
the different variation trends in the ducted fan performance at different advance ratios.

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

Figure
Figure28. 28.Pressure
Pressurecoefficient
coefficient contour
contour andand streamlines
streamlines onon
symmetry
symmetry plane under
plane different
under condi-
different conditions:
tions: J =α
(a) J =(a)0.3, 0.3, α =◦ ;30°;
= 30 J = J0.1,
(b) (b) α =α 75
= 0.1, = 75°; (c)J J==0.3,
◦ ; (c) 0.3, αα =
= 75°; (d)J J==0.5,
75◦ ;(d) 0.5,α α= 75°.
= 75◦ .
0.0

0.1

0.2 J=0.3 α=30°

0.3 OGE h/D=0.5 J=0.3 α=75°
h/D=0.5
 (d)

Aerospace 2022, 9, 572 22 of 25

Figure 28. Pressure coefficient contour and streamlines on symmetry plane under different condi-
tions: (a) J = 0.3, α = 30°; (b) J = 0.1, α = 75°; (c) J = 0.3, α = 75°; (d) J = 0.5, α = 75°.

0.0

0.1

0.2 J=0.3 α=30°

0.3 OGE h/D=0.5 J=0.3 α=75°
h/D=0.5
0.4
J=0.5 α=75°
0.5
ξ/cd OGE
0.6
J=0.1 α=75° OGE
0.7 h/D=0.5
h/D=0.5
0.8

0.9
OGE
1.0

Figure 29.
Figure 29.Comparison
Comparisonofof
stagnation point
stagnation positions
point on the
positions on duct between
the duct in andinout
between andofout
ground ef-
of ground effect.
fect.
5. Conclusions
Simulations of a ducted fan hovering and transitioning in the ground effect were
performed by solving the RANS equations with the MRF approach and k-ε turbulence
model. Through the analysis of the aerodynamic performance and flow physics of the
ducted fan, the following conclusions are drawn:
1. For the ducted fan studied in this paper, the ground effect is negligible in hovering
when the height off the ground is greater than 3D and becomes significant when the
height is less than 1.5D. As the height decreases, the thrust of the blades increases,
while the thrust of the duct decreases. Compared with the values out of the ground
effect, at the height of 0.5D, the blade thrust increases by 28.4%, and the duct thrust
decreases by 41.1%, resulting in a total thrust decrease by 12.5%; the power loading
decreases by 14.6%. The efficiency of the ducted fan decreases in the ground effect.
2. When the ducted fan hovers in the ground effect, the increase in the blade thrust is
the result of the combined effect of the increase in the effective angle of attack of the
blade and the increase in the ambient pressure; the decrease in the duct thrust is the
result of the combined effect of the decrease in the effective angle of attack of the duct
and the increase in the ambient pressure.
3. Stall occurs at a certain advance ratio and angle of attack when transitioning in the
ground effect. The ground effect delays the occurrence of stall at some advance ratios.
After stall occurs, the upwash resulting from the separated flow on the duct lip causes
an increase in the total thrust of the blades.
4. When the advance ratio is greater than 0.1, the influence zone of the ground effect
is reduced, and the ground effect is hardly detectable at angles of attack less than
30◦ even if the height drops to 0.5D. At the height of 0.5D and high angles of attack,
after the jet impinges on the ground, the interaction between the radially spreading
wall flow and the crossflow generates ground vortices. The different positions and
influence regions of the ground vortex at different advance ratios contribute to the
different variation trends of the ducted fan performance and make the aerodynamic
problem more complicated.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, Y.T. and Z.W.; formal analysis, Y.Z.; investigation, Y.T.
and Z.W.; methodology, Y.Z. and Y.T.; writing—original draft, Y.Z.; writing—review and editing, Y.T.
and Z.W. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: Not applicable.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Aerospace 2022, 9, 572 23 of 25

Nomenclature

Symbols Definition
r Radial distance from fan axis
Rb Blade radius
Db Blade diameter
D Duct exit diameter
cd Duct chord
α Angle of attack
V∞ Freestream velocity
T Thrust
N Normal force
L Lift
FX Propulsive force
M Pitching moment
Q Blade torque
n Fan rotational speed, revolution/s
ω Fan rotational speed, revolution/min
Ω Fan rotational speed, radian/s
ρ Air density, 1.225 kg/m3
p Static pressure
p∞ Static pressure of freestream, 101325 Pa
Vtip Blade tip velocity, ΩRb
y+ Nondimensional wall distance of the first mesh layer
h Distance from the lowest point of duct trailing edge to the ground
P Shaft power, 2πQn
PL Power loading, T/P,
c Nondimensional chordwise distance from blade leading edge
θ Pitch angle of blade section
φ Inflow angle
Va Induced velocity parallel to fan axis
Vt Tangential velocity of blade element, Ωr
ξ Chordwise distance from duct leading edge
Rlocal Radius of duct inner surface
Ψ Azimuth angle

References
1. Black, D.M.; Wainauski, H.S.; Rohrbach, C. Shrouded Propellers–A Comprehensive Performance Study. In Proceedings of the
AIAA 5th Annual Meeting and Technical Display, Philadelphia, PA, USA, 21–24 October 1968. [CrossRef]
2. Anderson, S.B. Historical Overview of V/STOL Aircraft Technology; Report No.: NASA-TM-812801; National Aeronautics and Space
Administration: Washington, DC, USA, 1981.
3. Paxhia, V.B.; Sing, E.Y. X-22A Design Development. J. Aircr. 1965, 2, 2–8. [CrossRef]
4. BELL NEXUS. Available online: https://www.bellflight.com/products/bell-nexus (accessed on 12 July 2022).
5. Architectural Performance Assessment of an Electric Vertical Take-off and Landing (e-VTOL) Aircraft Based on a Ducted Vectored
Thrust Concept. Available online: https://lilium.com/files/redaktion/refresh_feb2021/investors/Lilium_7-Seater_Paper.pdf
(accessed on 12 July 2022).
6. Whiteside, S.; Pollard, B. Conceptual Design of a Tiltduct Reference Vehicle for Urban Air Mobility. In Proceedings of the VFS
Aeromechanics for Advanced Vertical Flight Technical Meeting, San Jose, CA, USA, 25–27 January 2022.
7. Sacks, A.H.; Burnell, J.A. Ducted propellers—A critical review of the state of the art. Prog. Aeosp. Sci. 1962, 3, 85–135. [CrossRef]
8. Mort, K.W.; Yaggy, P.F. Aerodynamic Characteristics of a 4-Foot-Diameter Ducted Fan Mounted on the Tip of a Semispan Wing; Report
No.: NASA TN D-1301; National Aeronautics and Space Administration: Washington, DC, USA, 1962.
9. Grunwald, K.J.; Goodson, K.W. Aerodynamic Loads on an Isolated Shrouded-Propeller Configuration of Angles of Attack from −10◦ to
110◦ ; Report No.: NASA TN D-995; National Aeronautics and Space Administration: Washington, DC, USA, 1962.
10. Mort, K.W.; Gamse, B. A Wind-Tunnel Investigation of a 7-Foot-Diameter Ducted Propeller; Report No.: NASA TN D-4142; National
Aeronautics and Space Administration: Washington, DC, USA, 1967.
11. Abrego, A.I.; Bulaga, R.W.; Rutkowski, M.Y. Performance Study of a Ducted Fan System. In Proceedings of the American
Helicopter Society Aerodynamics, Acoustics and Test and Evaluation Technical Specialists Meeting, San Francisco, CA, USA,
23–25 January 2002.
Aerospace 2022, 9, 572 24 of 25

12. Martin, P.; Tung, C. Performance and Flowfield Measurements on a 10-Inch Ducted Rotor VTOL UAV. In Proceedings of the 60th
American Helicopter Society Annual Forum, Baltimore, MD, USA, 7–10 June 2004.
13. Lind, R.; Nathman, J.; Gilchrist, I. Ducted Rotor Performance Calculations and Comparison with Experimental Data. In
Proceedings of the 44th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, Reno, NV, USA, 9–12 January 2006. [CrossRef]
14. Graf, W.; Fleming, J.; Ng, W. Improving Ducted Fan UAV Aerodynamics in Forward Flight. In Proceedings of the 46th AIAA
Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, Reno, NV, USA, 7–10 January 2008. [CrossRef]
15. Pereira, J.L. Hover and Wind-Tunnel Testing of Shrouded Rotors for Improved Micro Air Vehicle Design. Ph.D. Thesis, University
of Maryland, College Park, MD, USA, 2008.
16. Colman, M.; Suzuki, S.; Kubo, D. Wind Tunnel Test Results and Performance Prediction For a Ducted Fan with Collective and
Cyclic Pitch Actuation for VTOL with Efficient Cruise. In Proceedings of the AIAA Atmospheric Flight Mechanics Conference,
Portland, OR, USA, 8–11 August 2011. [CrossRef]
17. Hrishikeshavan, V.; Chopra, I. Performance, Flight Testing of a Shrouded Rotor Micro Air Vehicle in Edgewise Gusts. J. Aircr.
2012, 49, 193–205. [CrossRef]
18. Ohanian, O.J., III; Gelhausen, P.A.; Inman, D.J. Nondimensional Modeling of Ducted-Fan Aerodynamics. J. Aircr. 2012, 49, 126–140.
[CrossRef]
19. Cai, H.; Wu, Z.; Deng, S.; Xiao, T. Numerical Prediction of Unsteady Aerodynamics for A Ducted Fan Micro Air Vehicle. Proc.
Inst. Mech. Eng. Part G J. Aerosp. Eng. 2012, 229, 87–95. [CrossRef]
20. Ryu, M.; Cho, L.; Cho, J. Aerodynamic Analysis of the Ducted Fan for a VTOL UAV in Crosswinds. Trans. Jpn. Soc. Aeronaut.
Space Sci. 2016, 59, 47–55. [CrossRef]
21. Raeisi, B.; Alighanbari, H. Simulation and Analysis of Flow around Tilting Asymmetric Ducted Fans Mounted at the Wing Tips of
a Vertical Take-Off and Landing Unmanned Aerial Vehicle. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part G J. Aerosp. Eng. 2018, 232, 2870–2897.
[CrossRef]
22. Raeisi, B.; Alighanbari, H. Effects of Tilting Rate Variations on the Aerodynamics of The Tilting Ducted Fans Mounted At The
Wing Tips Of A Vertical Take-Off And Landing Unmanned Aerial Vehicle. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part G J. Aerosp. Eng. 2018,
232, 1803–1813. [CrossRef]
23. Misiorowski, M.P.; Gandhi, F.S.; Oberai, A.A. Computational analysis and flow physics of a ducted rotor in edgewise flight. J. Am.
Helicopter Soc. 2019, 64, 1–14. [CrossRef]
24. Deng, S.; Wang, S.; Zhang, Z. Aerodynamic Performance Assessment of a Ducted Fan UAV for VTOL Applications. Aerosp. Sci.
Technol. 2020, 103, 105895. [CrossRef]
25. Akturk, A.; Camci, C. Double-Ducted Fan as an Effective Lip Separation Control Concept for Vertical-Takeoff-and-Landing
Vehicles. J. Aircr. 2022, 59, 233–252. [CrossRef]
26. Zhang, T.; Barakos, G.N. Review on Ducted Fans for Compound Rotorcraft. Aeronaut. J. 2020, 124, 941–974. [CrossRef]
27. Giullianetti, D.J.; Biggers, J.C.; Maki, R.L. Longitudinal Aerodynamic Characteristics in Ground Effect of a Large-Scale, V/STOL Model
with Four Tilting Ducted Fans Arranged in a Dual Tandem Configuration; Report No.: NASA TN D-4218; National Aeronautics and
Space Administration: Washington, DC, USA, 1967.
28. De Divitiis, N. Performance and Stability Analysis of a Shrouded-Fan Unmanned Aerial Vehicle. J. Aircr. 2006, 43, 681–691.
[CrossRef]
29. Hosseini, Z.; Ramirez-Serrano, A.; Martinuzzi, R.J. Ground/Wall Effects on a Tilting Ducted Fan. Int. J. Micro Air Veh. 2011,
3, 119–141. [CrossRef]
30. Ai, T.; Xu, B.; Xiang, C.; Fan, W.; Zhang, Y. Aerodynamic Analysis and Control for a Novel Coaxial Ducted Fan Aerial Robot in
Ground Effect. Int. J. Adv. Robot Syst. 2020, 17, 1–15. [CrossRef]
31. Gourdain, N.; Singh, D.; Jardin, T.; Prothin, S. Analysis of the Turbulent Wake Generated by a Micro Air Vehicle Hovering near
the Ground with a Lattice Boltzmann Method. J. Am. Helicopter Soc. 2017, 62, 1–12. [CrossRef]
32. Deng, S.; Ren, Z. Experimental Study of a Ducted Contra-Rotating Lift Fan for Vertical/Short Takeoff and Landing Unmanned
Aerial Vehicle Application. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part G J. Aerosp. Eng. 2018, 232, 3108–3117. [CrossRef]
33. Deng, Y. Experimental Investigation on Ground Effect of Ducted Fan System for VTOL UAV. In Proceedings of the 2018
Asia-Pacific International Symposium on Aerospace Technology, Chengdu, China, 16–18 October 2018. [CrossRef]
34. Han, H.; Xiang, C.; Xu, B.; Yu, Y. Aerodynamic Performance and Analysis of a Hovering Micro-Scale Shrouded Rotor in Confined
Environment. Adv. Mech. Eng. 2019, 11, 1–21. [CrossRef]
35. Jin, Y.; Fu, Y.; Qian, Y.; Zhang, Y. A Moore-Greitzer Model for Ducted Fans in Ground Effect. J. Appl. Fluid Mech. 2020, 13, 693–701.
[CrossRef]
36. Han, H.; Xiang, C.; Xu, B.; Yu, Y. Experimental and Computational Investigation on Comparison of Micro-Scale Open Rotor and
Shrouded Rotor Hovering in Ground Effect. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part G J. Aerosp. Eng. 2021, 235, 553–565. [CrossRef]
37. Mi, B. Numerical Investigation on Aerodynamic Performance of a Ducted Fan under Interferences from the Ground, Static Water
and Dynamic Waves. Aerosp. Sci. Technol. 2020, 100, 105821. [CrossRef]
38. Siemens Industries Digital Software. Simcenter STAR-CCM+ User Guide, version 2020.1; Siemens Industries Digital Software:
Munich, Germany, 2020.
39. Bunker, R.S. Axial turbine blade tips: Function, design, and durability. J. Propuls. Power 2006, 22, 271–285. [CrossRef]
Aerospace 2022, 9, 572 25 of 25

40. Qing, J.; Hu, Y.; Wang, Y.; Liu, Z.; Fu, X.; Liu, W. Kriging Assisted Integrated Rotor-Duct Optimization for Ducted Fan in Hover.
In Proceedings of the AIAA Scitech 2019 Forum, San Diego, CA, USA, 7–11 January 2019. [CrossRef]
41. Leishman, G.J. Principles of Helicopter Aerodynamics, 2nd ed.; Cambridge University Press: New York, NY, USA, 2006; pp. 117–124.
42. Jimenez, B.G.; Singh, R. Effect of Duct-Rotor Aerodynamic Interactions on Blade Design for Hover and Axial Flight. In Proceedings
of the 53rd AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting, Kissimmee, FL, USA, 5–9 January 2015. [CrossRef]