Proceedings of ASME Turbo Expo 2017: Turbomachinery Technical Conference and Exposition

GT2017
June 26-30, 2017, Charlotte, NC, USA

GT2017-63577

Downloaded from https://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/GT/proceedings-pdf/GT2017/50794/V02BT41A018/2432330/v02bt41a018-gt2017-63577.pdf by Orta Dogu Teknik Universitesi-METU user on 06 March 2020
A REVIEW OF INLET-FAN COUPLING METHODOLOGIES

Benjamin Godard, Dr. Nabil Ben Nasr, Pr. Nicolas Gourdain

Edouard De Jaeghere
Safran Aircraft Engines
Moissy-Cramayel, France
benjamin.godard-guillaubey
@safrangroup.com
Dr. Julien Marty and Raphael Barrier
Applied Aerodynamics Department
Onera, The French Aerospace Lab
Meudon, France
nabil.ben nasr@onera.fr
Université de Toulouse
Institut Supérieur de l’Aéronautique
et de l’Espace (ISAE)
Toulouse, France
nicolas.gourdain@isae.fr

ABSTRACT STR Stagnation Temperature Ratio

With the rise of ultra high bypass ratio turbofan and shorter Cp Static pressure coefficient
and slimmer inlet geometries compared to classical architec- c Blade chord length
tures, designers face new challenges as nacelle and fan design D Fan diameter
cannot anymore be addressed independently. This paper reviews H Blade to blade staggered spacing
CFD methods developed to simulate inlet-fan interactions and fn Body force normal to the relative flow field
suitable for industrial design cycles. In addition to the reference fp Body force parallel to the relative flow field
isolated fan and nacelle models, the methodologies evaluated in K p0 Drag calibration coefficient extracted at maximum effi-
this study consist of two fan modeling approaches, an actuator ciency
disc and body-force source terms. L Inlet Length
The configuration is a modern turbofan with a high bypass p Static pressure
ratio under cross-wind. Results are compared to experimental pi Stagnation pressure
data. As to be predicted, the body-force modeling approach en- T Static temperature
ables early inlet reattachment. In addition, it provides a repre- Ti Stagnation temperature
sentative flow deviation across the fan zone which enables per- W Relative flow velocity
formance and stability assessments. α Absolute flow angle
β Relative flow angle
β0 Relative flow angle at maximum efficiency
NOMENCLATURE β0? Relative flow angle extracted form fn formulation at
AoA Angle of Attack maximum efficiency
AD Actuator Disc βs Relative flow angle parameter of stall
BFM Body-Force Modeling σ Local blade row solidity
BLI Boundary Layer Ingestion
CFD Computational Fluid Dynamics
IDC Index for Circumferential Distortion INTRODUCTION
OGV Outlet Guide Vanes Fuel burn reduction is currently one of the principal is-
SPR Stagnation Pressure Ratio sues that drives aircraft research programs. One proven way to

1 Copyright © 2017 ASME

achieve better propulsion efficiency is the elevation of turbofan
bypass ratios. This, however, leads to more cumbersome engine
designs with increased mass and drag. To address this issue, na-
celle designers are working on slimmer and shorter inlet geome-
tries. As a result, the next generation of turbofan will experience
stronger inlet-fan interactions. Besides, innovative concepts such
as boundary layer ingesting (BLI) propulsion systems [1, 2, 3]
will be subjected to even more critical inlet-fan interactions. In-
deed, BLI disruptive distortions are not only encountered during
special flight conditions (e.g. cross-wind, high angle of attack
(AoA), etc.) but throughout the entire aircraft envelope including
cruise. It is therefore necessary to include inlet-fan interaction in
future design process.
Unfortunately, fully coupled unsteady simulations, although
relatively well adapted to capture inlet-fan interactions, are still
computationally too expensive and time-consuming for every-
day design iterations. Alternative approaches are thus necessary.
To address this issue, this paper presents low-cost CFD methods
in order to account for inlet-fan interactions. The first fan model-
ing method presented relies on the use of actuator disc boundary
conditions. The second method is a body-force modeling (BFM),
which consists in replacing the bladed region by an axisymmet-
ric volume where source terms are applied in order to reproduce
fan stage effects [4]. Both fan modeling methods are compared
to isolated nacelle simulations and experimental data.
This paper includes a literature review, a description of
the test case, methodologies and numerical set-up. Follow
results and discussion including comparisons between experi-
ments, standard and low-cost simulations.
LITERATURE REVIEW
Inlet distortion has for long been identified as a major con-
cern regarding fan performance and stability. However, inlet-fan
interaction is quite complex as one may encounter difficulties
quantifying inlet distortion impact on fan performance, stability
and aeromechanics if using turbomachinary standards.
A first well established inlet-fan interaction property is the
fan action on inlet flow that works to bring forward reattach-
ment [5, 6], either in terms of mass flow and wind velocity for
cross-wind cases [7, 8] or in terms of Mach number and AoA
for climb phase cases [9]. Thus, neglecting fan effects prevents
from over-constraining the design space by excluding short in-
let. Peters (2014) [10] has undertaken a parametric study on the
inlet length to fan diameter ratio L/D , using CFD simulations
with BFM to represent fan work of a nacelle turbofan at cruise
and under AoA. It indicates that design could be push toward
L/D = 0.25 without having fan efficiency penalties offsetting
benefit from reduced nacelle drag, which remains far less than
current turbofan standards (L/D ≈ 0.6).
Impact of inlet distortion on fan performance and stability
2 Copyright © 2017 ASME
is also a subject of interest. Fundamentally, distortion trans-
fer through the compressor stage involves complex interactions
which have successfully been analyzed and theorized. Mazzawy
Downloaded from https://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/GT/proceedings-pdf/GT2017/50794/V02BT41A018/2432330/v02bt41a018-gt2017-63577.pdf by Orta Dogu Teknik Universitesi-METU user on 06 March 2020
(1997) [11] describes distortion propagation through fan stage
in order to accurately elaborate a multiple segment parallel com-
pressor model. He points out a phase difference between acoustic
and particle paths across the fan stage. More recently, Lesser and
Niehuis (2014) [12] have performed CFD simulations in order
to analyze the transfer of a circumferential stagnation pressure
distortion through a compressor stage. They highlight the fan
decoupling effect described by Mazzawy and present a thorough
analytical explanation of different parameters transfer (stagna-
tion pressure and temperature, flow angle, axial velocity, etc.).
Both analytical discussion and numerical results emphasize that
the fan tends to spread the distortion sector and thus bring to light
a critical distortion angle above which the fan stage suffers sig-
nificant loss in stability margin. Those results are consistent with
those of Reid (1969) [13], who was the first to introduce criti-
cal distortion angles. Impact of stagnation pressure distortion on
fan performance and stability has also been highlighted by many
studies. Cousins et al. (2003) [14] have tested two distortion
screens respectively of 180◦ 1/rev and 90◦ 2/rev on a turbofan
engine. While both distortion screens resulted in lowered sta-
bility limits, the 90◦ 2/rev showed the strongest decrease, con-
tradictory this time to Reid’s investigations. Fidalgo et al. [15]
have simulated the transfer of a 120◦ 1/rev stagnation pressure
distortion pattern through the NASA rotor 67. Comparisons with
experimental data has demonstrated the validity of the U-RANS
methods to study inlet distortion transfer. Among many findings,
they have pointed out that the fan may locally operate beyond
the stability limit without actually observing stall or surge de-
pending on the inlet reference plan. The fan is seen to operate
within stability margins only by taking the reference section just
upstream of the fan leading edge, which shows the importance
of inflow redistribution upstream of the fan. Fan local operating
points can then be understood by considering both mass flow and
swirl distortion.
Although authors, particularly those mentioned above, have
investigated quite thoroughly inlet-fan interactions, very few
have attempted to provide good practices for fan design with inlet
distortion. Hall (2016) [16] has used BFM to study the impact of
different parameters on distortion intensity. The parameters con-
sidered are radial loading distribution, rotor-stator spacing and
non-axisymmetric stator geometry (by applying an exit flow an-
gle cosine function). One of the main conclusions of the study
is that non-axisymmetric stator geometry can provide significant
distortion mitigation. Cao et al. (2016) [9] have studied inlet-
fan aerodynamics at high AoAs. In particular, they performed a
parametric study on the fan axial position using BFM. It shows
that the fan induces an inflow acceleration. The study points out
that the closer the fan to the inlet the stronger the acceleration,
 TABLE 1. MASCOT2 Turbofan General Characteristics

Blade Number 18

Downloaded from https://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/GT/proceedings-pdf/GT2017/50794/V02BT41A018/2432330/v02bt41a018-gt2017-63577.pdf by Orta Dogu Teknik Universitesi-METU user on 06 March 2020
Bypass ratio ≈9
Specific Mass Flow (kg.s−1 .m−2 ) ≈ 220
Nominal Pressure Ratio ≈ 1.6
Inlet Length to Fan Diameter ≈ 0.6

FIGURE 1. MASCOT 2 Engine

enabling a 5◦ offset from the onset of separation at the closest

fan location (L/D=0.17).
The previous results made use of cost-reducing methodolo-
gies (BFM, Euler equations, etc.). The current paper focuses on
two cost reduction methods popular in CFD simulations for 3D
applications. The first one is an actuator disc boundary condi-
tion while the second uses body-force source terms. A reader
interested in lower modeling levels (1D, 2D) can refer to linear
stability methods [17], compressor parallel approach [18] or 2D
throughflow methods [19].
TEST CASE
General Description
MASCOT2, shown in FIGURE 1, is a Safran Aircraft En-
gines / General Electric full-scale turbofan demonstrator for
modern aero-engines. This demonstrator has been through a
complete test campaign, including performance, acoustics, op-
erability and cross-wind tests. It provides a valuable database to
validate simulation models. General characteristics are presented
in TABLE 1.
Experimental data
Simulations reproduce two experimental configurations re-
ferred as “isolated nacelle” and “nacelle-engine”. The “isolated
nacelle” represents a scale model nacelle in which suction is
regulated via piping system. The second set of experimental
data comes from the full scale engine test bench, hence refers to
“nacelle-engine”. Cross-wind conditions were assessed in both
FIGURE 2. Distortion Rakes
configurations. The nacelle-engine configuration were notably
exposed to a cross-wind generator in GE Peebles Test operation.
Among other measurements, inlets have been instrumented with
distortion rakes (cf. FIGURE 2) which is composed of pressure
probes. This kind of instrumentation is used to describe inlet
distortions, in particular, the Index of Circumferential Distortion
(IDC) defined as:
 
p̄t,r − pt,min,r p̄t,r+1 − pt,min,r+1
IDC = max + (1)
r∈J0;rmax −1K p̄t p̄t
in which pt,r refers to stagnation pressure at a radius r (four ra-
dius are considered here). IDC is determined during shaft accel-
eration and deceleration at different cross-wind velocities rang-
ing from 0 to 50 kts. Outlet Guide Vanes (OGV) and Fan blades
were instrumented with strain gauges in order to monitor the dif-
ferent vibration modes. Those measurements were used to study
fan aeromechanics with cross-wind and matches IDC measure-
ments regarding separation detection. Although aeromechanics
remains a major issue, the scope of the paper focuses on inlet
aerodynamics and fan performance.

3 Copyright © 2017 ASME

INLET-FAN COUPLING METHODOLOGIES
Fan modeling methods enable a significant decrease of com-
puting cost because of two main reasons:

Downloaded from https://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/GT/proceedings-pdf/GT2017/50794/V02BT41A018/2432330/v02bt41a018-gt2017-63577.pdf by Orta Dogu Teknik Universitesi-METU user on 06 March 2020
(i) mesh size is significantly reduced as fan blades are modeled
and not meshed within the computational domain and
(ii) steady approach can be applied, enabling the use of stan-
dard convergence acceleration techniques.
Their performance relies on their ability to reproduce fan effects.
These approaches can provide a good representation of the mean
fan effects on the nacelle flows. They seem valuable to estimate
large pattern inlet distortion. However, the application is limited
to short length scale phenomena that can appear between succes-
sive blades or between two blade rows. Also, these techniques
are not able to capture unsteady flow effects such as rotor/stator
interactions.

Actuator Disc
The actuator disc (AD) model consists in substituting the
meshed fan by an axial sector through which stagnation pressure
and enthalpy rises and flow deviation are added. The first AD
methodology considered in this study is described in [20]. It was
originally implemented for propeller configurations and is based
on the Glauert theory [21]. In short, downstream conditions of
the disc depend on upstream conditions and are evaluated by us-
FIGURE 3. Radial Distribution of Stagnation Pressure and Tempera-
ing pre-formatted tables. Tables are composed of lists of angle,
ture Ratios for the MASCOT2 fan and the Glauert formulation Actuator
stagnation pressure and temperature variations over a range of
Disc at Maximum efficiency and 50 % of the nominal shaft rotation
radii that covers the distance hub-to-shroud and thus for several
speed
values of AoA α and Mach number M. In practice, for every
cell face of the disc, a bilinear interpolation of the input flow
conditions (i.e. M, α) is conducted at each iteration to provide and ∆α) matching those specific values is determined
output flow variations (i.e. ∆pi , ∆Ti and ∆α). Tables were set up by an additional interpolation using radial basis function
in order to reproduce fan stagnation pressure and temperature at based on the field of results generated in steps 1 and 2.
maximum efficiency. FIGURE 3 shows that the model is quite
successful at reproducing targeted stagnation pressure and tem- Compared to the previous approach, this methodology is richer
perature ratios. These ratios are based on stagnation pressure and as it requires a large number of reference simulations.
temperature of the domain reference state.
Another actuator disc methodology was also tested. This Body-force Modeling
time, instead of relying on the Glauert theory (which is question-
Body-force approaches consist in replacing the bladed re-
able for fan applications), tables are created via an interpolation
gion by an axisymmetric volume where blockage, momentum
process over RANS simulation results covering the performance
and energy source terms are applied within each cell. Source
map. The interpolation process can be described by three steps.
terms are a combination of external and flow data so as to repro-
step 1 : Two axial stations, upstream and downstream of the fan duce the effect of the blades (cf. FIGURE 4). Force components
volume, are selected. RANS results are extracted at can be decomposed following Marble’s equations [22]. Within
these stations and averaged over the circumference. the flow plane, components are respectively a force perpendic-
step 2 : Results are then translated at the station which defines ~ . In this
ular fn and parallel f p to the flow relative velocity W
the actuator disc using basic mass flow rate, momentum decomposition, f p is proportional to entropy gradient which can
and energy conservation properties. be associated with stagnation pressure losses while fn refers to
step 3 : Tables are composed of only several specific input Mach fan load and deviation. The appropriate formulations of fn and
numbers and AoAs over which the bilinear interpolation f p must then be found. This can include flow values but also
is performed during computation. Output data (∆pi , ∆Ti external data such as geometric or calibration coefficients de-

4 Copyright © 2017 ASME


FIGURE 4. Body-force Principle and Analogy with Blade Deviation
[16]
riving from experiments or CFD simulations. The most proven
body-force formulation comes from Gong (1999) [4] who orig-
inally developed this model for stall inception of compressor in
inlet distortion conditions. This model has been reworked by
several authors [23, 24]. Peters (2014) [25] has included lean
effects and improved parallel force f p behavior away from max-
imum efficiency. Blockage effects can also be taken into account
by including additional source terms as described by Kottapalli
(2013) [26] or Thollet et al. (2015) [27]. The model used in the
study uses blockage source terms and is highly inspired from the
one developed by Thollet et al. (2016) [28]. It is based on a
lift-drag analogy and is defined by :
2πσ 2
fn = W Fs (β , β0? , βs )
H
  W2
f p = K p0 (x, r) + 2πσ (β − β0 (x, r))2
H
where W and β are respectively the local flow relative velocity
and angle, σ = c/H is the local blade row solidity where c and
H respectively refer to the blade chord and he blade to blade
staggered spacing. K p0 , β0 and β0? are data extracted from a
mono-segment RANS computation of the fan at maximum ef-
ficiency (cf. [28] for additional details). The only difference with
the model of Thollet et al. is the function defined by (4) :
β − β0? (x, r)
 
Fs (β , β0? , βs ) = (β − β0? (x, r)) cos C(β s ) (4)
βs − β0? (x, r)
in which the cosine multiplier serves to account for fn reduction
near stall. This occurs at a specific angle βs (the coefficient C(βs )
is calibrated to meet a maximum value at β = βs ). This function
Downloaded from https://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/GT/proceedings-pdf/GT2017/50794/V02BT41A018/2432330/v02bt41a018-gt2017-63577.pdf by Orta Dogu Teknik Universitesi-METU user on 06 March 2020
has been shown to improve agreement with the RANS simula-
tions near stall. However, it decreases robustness. In order to
guarantee simulation convergence and stability, the body-force
simulations presented in this paper were calibrated with the val-
ues βs = π/2 which corresponds to C(βs ) = 0.86.
NUMERICAL SET-UP
CFD simulations are performed with the solver elsA devel-
oped by Onera on structured meshes [29]. Equations are dis-
cretized in space using a cell-centered finite volume method with
the Jameson scalar dissipation scheme preconditioned for adap-
tation to low speed dissipation fluxes [30]. The model of Spalart
Allmaras [31] ensures turbulence closure. Simulations are all
steady and are performed with an implicit pseudo-time marching
method with backward Euler scheme. The grid was generated
using ANSYS ICEM CFD software [32] and is relatively coarse
with domain mesh size of approximately 8.7×106 elements. The
meshing strategy was developed to limit the computational re-
sources while respecting good practices such as ∆y+ < 1 and
boundary layers discretized with at least 30 cells with a growth
rate kept below 1.1.
(2)
(3)
FIGURE 5. Nacelle-Fan Numerical Boundary Conditions
Boundary conditions are represented in FIGURE 5. Far field
conditions are applied to the external boundaries by imposing
stagnation pressure and temperature and flow Mach number and
angle. Cross-wind angle is set to 90◦ for different wind veloc-
ities. For the nacelle-engine configuration (cf. FIGURE 5 left
zoom) internal outlets are defined with valve conditions respect-
ing radial equilibrium. Primary outflow targets a reference mass
5 Copyright © 2017 ASME
flow value ṁre f by adjusting the pivot static pressure p piv at hub
through the relaxation valve factor λ2 at every iteration n :

Downloaded from https://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/GT/proceedings-pdf/GT2017/50794/V02BT41A018/2432330/v02bt41a018-gt2017-63577.pdf by Orta Dogu Teknik Universitesi-METU user on 06 March 2020
 
ṁn
p piv,n+1 = p piv,n + λ2 pre f −1 (5)
ṁre f

When powered, secondary outflow targets a mass flow that is

implicitly driven by the fan stage and the pivot static pressure is
adjusted as such :

 2
ṁn
p piv,n+1 = pre f + λ4 (6)
ṁre f

where λ4 is another valve factor. Results are also compared with

the isolated nacelle within which runs a single flow stream of
constant area (cf. FIGURE 5 right zoom). Outlet is then defined
by an uniform static pressure.
Boundary conditions target a specific mass flow condition
corresponding to a point where isolated nacelle and nacelle-
engine experiments showed different inlet flow behavior. While
the isolated nacelle inlet showed a separation at 25 kts, the
nacelle-engine kept a clean inflow until 30 kts. This point corre-
sponds to half the nominal shaft rotation speed. Thus, all simu-
lations presented in the current paper are set up with 50% of the
nominal shaft rotation speed. Under those conditions, airflow is
entirely subsonic.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

After assessing fan models on clean inlet configurations, the
discussion focuses on inlet flow aerodynamics and more par-
ticularly on the methods’ ability to predict inlet separation in
cross-wind conditions. Then, the discussion continues on how
FIGURE 6. Performance Map of the isolated fan at 50% of the nom-
fan modeling methods affect the airflow coming from the inlet.
inal rotation speed - Comparison of Actuator Disk, Body-force and
Finally, performance maps of fan modeling methods with cross-
RANS computations at 50% of nominal shaft rotation speed
wind distortion are analyzed.

whereas the interpolated actuator disc relies on data of the en-

Fan Modeling Methods Validation on Performance map
A first set of computations has been performed to assess
fan modeling methods. Results in terms of stagnation pressure
and temperature ratios are presented in FIGURE 6. First, one
can see that the interpolated actuator disc approach demonstrates
globally a better match with the RANS reference than the actu-
ator disc model calibrated with the Glauert theory at maximum
efficiency. Therefore, it has been decided to focus on the in-
terpolated AD formulation for the next part of the study. It is
nevertheless important to put these results into perspective and
to recall that the tables generator based on the Glauert theory
was originally design for propeller applications. In addition, ta-
bles were engineered to reproduce results at maximum efficiency
tire characteristic. Secondly, results show that the BFM method
successfully reproduces a maximum of stagnation pressure ratio
while the interpolated actuator disc presents continuous stagna-
tion pressure rise as mass flow is reduced.
Fan Modeling Methods for Inlet Separation Prediction
Results with crosswinds from 20 to 35 kts: Cross-wind sep-
aration is numerically challenging to predict. Several authors
have pointed out that cross-wind separation is highly sensitive
to numerical approach such as turbulence and laminar-turbulent
transition models, space and time discretization, etc. It is not
the ambition of this paper to tackle all this issues but rather to

6 Copyright © 2017 ASME

focus on the fan effect on flow reattachment and how to repro-
duce it with fan modeling techniques. No numerical scheme,
turbulence model nor transition model sensitivity analysis has
been specifically conducted for this paper. Therefore, compar-
isons with experiment must be taken into perspective. For exam-
ple, one can contest the fully turbulent assumption as laminar-
turbulent transition is well known to play a major part in inlet
separation [7, 33].
FIGURE 7. IDC vs. Cross-Wind Velocity
FIGURE 7 shows a comparisons of IDC values as functions
of cross-wind velocity between experiments and simulations of
both isolated nacelle and fan modeling methods. While ex-
perimental values were taken at iso-mass-flow rate, simulations
were performed at iso-boundary conditions. It does not necessar-
ily guarantee conservation of mass-flow as separation increases
with cross-flow intensification. As a results, IDC disparity can
emerge. In order to get rid of mass-flow influence on IDC val-
ues, the IDC is normalized by the normalized mass flow. Results
must then be interpreted as follow : near-zero IDC values reflect
clean inlet configuration while non-zero values prove the pres-
ence of inflow separation.
The simulations and experiments for the isolated configura-
tion are in rather good agreement. Separation occurs in both sets
of data above 25 kts. IDC values then differs by approximately
10%, which remains acceptable.
Differences between the “isolated nacelle” and the “nacelle-
engine” experiments illustrate well the fan’s effect on inlet sep-
aration. While the separation appears for the isolated nacelle at
25 kts, the inlet remains clean up to 30 kts for the nacelle-engine
configuration. This is the separation delay that fan modeling
methods and fully coupled simulations must capture. Accord-
ing to results shown in FIGURE 7, only the use of BFM properly
7 Copyright © 2017 ASME
predicts the onset of flow separation . It can also be noted that
nacelle-engine experiments present higher values of IDC. Those
differences are considered acceptable when taking into account
Downloaded from https://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/GT/proceedings-pdf/GT2017/50794/V02BT41A018/2432330/v02bt41a018-gt2017-63577.pdf by Orta Dogu Teknik Universitesi-METU user on 06 March 2020
additional sources of distortion (e.g. natural wind, IDC pressure
rakes, etc.).
Focus at 25 kts: FIGURE 8 offers a comparison of all con-
figurations computed at 25 kts. Left side captions represent a
slice parallel to cross-wind velocity colored with absolute Mach
number. Right side captions show stagnation pressure distortion
upstream of the fan leading edge at the location indicated by the
dashed lines on the left side captions. In order to separate fan
from internal geometry effects, an additional simulation (whose
results are shown in FIGURE 8 (b)) was performed with the en-
gine mesh but without using fan modeling methods. Secondary
mass flow was imposed by a radial equilibrium following equa-
tion (5).
Remarkably, the interpolated actuator disc has little effects
on inlet separation (cf. FIGURE 8 (c)). Inflow and distortion pat-
tern are similar with those of configuration (b), while flow down-
stream of the actuator disc is close to the flow predicted with
the BFM simulation (d). It demonstrates a lack of downstream-
upstream coupling that is likely the result of the discontinuity
introduced by the actuator disc interface. The presence of a flow
discontinuity across the disc limits the inlet mass flow redistri-
bution. On the other hand, the body force case (d) is absent of
this discontinuity as source terms are added smoothly across the
fan zone. Thus, a real coupling between the inlet, the fan vol-
ume where source terms are effective and the outlet domain is
possible. As a result, separation almost disappears.
Focus at 30 kts: FIGURE 9 presents similar comparisons of
fan modeling methods AD (a) and BFM (b) at 30 kts cross-wind
velocity. Here, both inlet flow present a separation on the in-
let lip exposed to cross-wind. However, models predict different
pattern of separation. This can be observed looking at distortion
patterns on the right side captions of the FIGURE 9. In particu-
lar, it shows that the AD distortion pattern remains spread across
almost half of the circumference. It also shows that the BFM
source terms affect the inlet distortion pattern. The stagnation
pressure loss of FIGURE 9 (b) is concentrated on the left down
quarter and resembles what can be obtained with fully coupled
simulations (cf. FIGURE 10 (a)) or with the distortion cartogra-
phy reconstituted from IDC mean probe values (cf. FIGURE 10
(b)). FIGURE 11 offers a closer view of the separation evolution
through the fan area for both AD and BFM. In the configuration
represented in FIGURE 11 (a), the separation reaches the actua-
tor disc inlet face without being affected by the latter. The actu-
ator disc condition mechanically interpolates over data stored in
tables and provides output accordingly. On the other hand, when
body-force source terms are applied, the separation is contracted
upstream of the fan zone.
 Downloaded from https://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/GT/proceedings-pdf/GT2017/50794/V02BT41A018/2432330/v02bt41a018-gt2017-63577.pdf by Orta Dogu Teknik Universitesi-METU user on 06 March 2020
FIGURE 9. Nacelle under 30 kts cross-wind velocity. Left: Slices of
Axial Mach Number at z = 0. Right: Distortions of Stagnation Pres-
sure Loss near the Fan Leading Edge. (a) Nacelle Powered by AD, (b)
Nacelle Powered by BFM

FIGURE 10. Stagnation pressure ratio distortion pattern of (a) the

URANS simulations of the configuration MASCOT2 at 30 kts taken
FIGURE 8. Nacelle under 25 kts of cross-wind velocity. Left: Slices
from Sadoudi’s PhD thesis [33] and from (b) the experimental pressure
of Axial Mach Number at z = 0. Right: Distortions of Stagnation Pres-
probes
sure Loss near the Fan Leading Edge. (a) Isolated Nacelle, (b) Non-
Powered Nacelle-engine, (c) Nacelle Powered by AD, (d) Nacelle Pow-
ered by BFM
Pressure gradients increase but smoothly from the leading edge
to the trailing edge plan of the fan zone while the sudden pressure
gradients coming from the actuator disc condition may cause
blablabla boundary layer instabilities at the hub or at the shroud location.

8 Copyright © 2017 ASME


FIGURE 11. Nacelle under 30 kts cross-wind velocity. Exposed lip
slice at z = 0 of stagnation pressure ratio with streamlines. (a) Nacelle
Powered by AD, (b) Nacelle Powered by BFM
FIGURE 12. Nacelle powered by AD under 35 kts cross-wind veloc-
ity. Slice of stagnation pressure ratio with streamlines
It is the case for the AD simulation at 35 kts cross-wind veloc-
ity. The caption presented in FIGURE 12 shows the effect of
the actuator disc condition at the shroud where it is provoking a
separation downstream of the discontinuity.
Fan performance assessment under cross-wind
Additional investigations have been pursued to assess fan
models ability to predict fan performance under inlet distortion.
In this section, a more macroscopic comparison is presented,
relying on characteristic maps within which performance is as-
sessed throughout the circumference. Indeed, assessing fan per-
formance under distortion using turbomachinary standards re-
quires the addition of a circumferential dimension to the prob-
lem. In order to correctly associate upstream and downstream by
taking into account the transfer through the fan zone, a specific
9 Copyright © 2017 ASME
Downloaded from https://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/GT/proceedings-pdf/GT2017/50794/V02BT41A018/2432330/v02bt41a018-gt2017-63577.pdf by Orta Dogu Teknik Universitesi-METU user on 06 March 2020
FIGURE 13. Stagnation pressure ratio interpolated in the post-
processed sectors upstream and downstream of the fan zone. Nacelle
under 25 kts of cross-wind velocity powered with BFM
post-processing, firstly presented by Fidalgo et al. [15] can be
used. It consists in dividing a reference section upstream of the
fan leading edge into multiple sectors. Then, for each upstream
sector, a sector located downstream the fan trailing edge is asso-
ciated using a streamline procedure. Upstream and downstream
section have been selected at axial locations respectively near to
the fan leading edge and trailing edge. FIGURE 13 shows an
example of zones obtained with this post-processing. Compared
to fully coupled unsteady simulations, using fan modeling meth-
ods greatly simplifies this kind of procedure by providing flow
field directly in the absolute frame. Therefore, there is no need
for complex averaging procedures to translate results from the
rotating to the absolute frame. Averaging flow solution within
the post-processed zones eventually enables to plot orbits of fan
performance across an entire revolution.
The above described post-processing procedure has been ap-
plied on BFM and AD simulations at 25 kts and 30 kts cross-
wind velocities. Orbits are plotted in FIGURE 14. In addition,
the mean performance center is plotted with a similar symbol that
composes the associated orbit. It can be seen that mean perfor-
mance points are very near the one of clean inlet simulation. As
expected, cross-wind distortion shows a stronger impact on fan
performance depending on the existence of a separation. Consid-
ering the BFM orbit at 25 kts, points do not extend far from the
mean center. It is consistent with the fact that no separation is
observed i.e. the fan works at almost clean inflow. When cross-
wind velocity increases and separation occurs, orbit presents a
higher eccentricity, pointing out a more destabilizing effect. Re-
sults from both AS and BFM at 30 kts implies that the fan works
closer to stall. However, orbits are quite different. This is ex-
pected as the inlet distortion patterns (cf. FIGURE 9 right side
caption) are significantly different. In one case, the separation is
modified by body-force source terms, while AD has been shown
to have negligible effect on inlet separation.

FIGURE 14. Stagnation pressure ratio performance map. Compar-
isons of performance orbits under 25 kts and 30 kts resulting from BFM
and AD. 50% of the nominal rotation speed
CONCLUSION AND PERSPECTIVE
Applications of two fan modeling methods on nacelles in
cross-wind conditions have been presented. The first one is an
actuator disc model based on pre-formatted tables. Those tables
are generated via an interpolation within the performance map.
The BFM relies on the work of Thollet et al. [28]. Both methods
are successful in reproducing the fan performance map. How-
ever, the AD model shows limited effect on nacelle inlet aero-
dynamics. Separation remains almost unchanged and the AD
must then work with the separation directly as an input condi-
tion. For cases with high cross-wind velocities, it leads to non-
physical phenomena such as re-circulation at the shroud due to
a sudden pressure gradient located at the actuator disc interface.
The body-force methods predict a more physical behavior where
source terms are successful at reproducing the fan effect on the
nacelle inflow. In particular, reattachment is reached at higher
cross-wind velocity, which is in accordance with experimental
results. Moreover, fan performance under cross-wind distortion
has been assessed following inlet sector division procedure. Or-
bits resulting from this post-processing testify the presence of
inlet separation with local points near the stability limit, while
mean points remain closed to clean inlet results. Although per-
formance orbits are very useful information for fan designer, re-
sults must still be compared with fully coupled URANS simula-
tions. Authors are currently working on realizing those reference
simulations for proper comparisons.
10
Those preliminary results indicate that the BFM method is
more promising. However, it is the authors’ shared belief that
additional improvements on the interpolated AD methodology
Downloaded from https://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/GT/proceedings-pdf/GT2017/50794/V02BT41A018/2432330/v02bt41a018-gt2017-63577.pdf by Orta Dogu Teknik Universitesi-METU user on 06 March 2020
may lead to better results. Also, the body-force modeling method
still requires a complete validation process in order to be used
accurately for industrial purpose. In particular, comparisons with
fully coupled unsteady simulations are necessary. Other rotation
speed must also be considered to investigate the model’s ability
to address fan interaction with transonic phenomenon (ex. inlet
separation induced by shock). What has been presented in this
paper serves to highlight the potential of such method to provide
a complete inlet-fan interaction assessment in terms of both inlet
aerodynamics and fan performance.
Those preliminary results represent a first milestone to sup-
ply designers with suitable tools to address inlet-fan interactions.
Not only aerodynamics performance and operability must be
considered but also aeromechanics behaviors. Therefore, addi-
tional methods such as URANS have been identified. A global
strategy proposed is the use of body-force methods to provide
representative inlet distortion to be used as inflow boundary con-
ditions in URANS computations for aeromachanics behavior as-
sessments.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
We would like to thank Safran Aircraft Engines for the fund-
ing, for the supporting and for sharing valuable experimental data
without which this research work would not have been possi-
ble. We also would like to thank Jean-Christophe Boniface and
Robert Gaveriaux for their technical support along the working
process. We are grateful to Yanis Sadoudi who shared results
from his PhD thesis. Last but not least, we are greatly indebted
to William Thollet and Guillaume Dufour who share with us their
knowledge in body-force modeling methods.
REFERENCES
[1] Plas, A., Sargeant, M., Madani, V., Crichton, D., Greitzer,
E., Hynes, T., and Hall, C., 2007. “Performance of a bound-
ary layer ingesting (bli) propulsion system”. In 45th Amer-
ican Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics Aerospace
Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, Reno, NV, January, pp. 8–
11.
[2] Hardin, L., Tillman, T., Sharma, O. P., Berton, J., and
Arend, D. J., 2012. “Aircraft system study of boundary
layer ingesting propulsion”. AIAA, 3993, p. 2012.
[3] Hall, D. K., 2015. “Analysis of civil aircraft propulsors with
boundary layer ingestion.”. PhD thesis, MIT.
[4] Gong, Y., 1999. “A computational model for rotating stall
and inlet distortions in multistage compressors”. PhD the-
sis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Dept. of Aero-
nautics and Astronautics.
Copyright © 2017 ASME
 [5] Callahan, G. M., and Stenning, A., 1971. “Attenuation of
inlet flow distortion upstream of axial flow compressors”.
Journal of Aircraft, 8(4), pp. 227–233.
[6] Larkin, M. J., and Schweiger, P. S., 1992. Ultra high bypass
nacelle aerodynamics inlet flow-through high angle of at-
tack distortion test. Tech. Rep. N92-30298, NASA, NASA
Lewis research center, July.
[7] Colin, Y., 2008. “Simulation numérique de la distor-
sion gnre par une entrée d’air de moteur civil par vent
de travers”. PhD thesis, Ecole Nationnale Suprieure de
l’Aronautique et de l’Espace.
[8] Makarov, V. E., Fedorchenko, Y. P., Shorstov, V. A., Babu-
lin, A. A., and Bolshunov, K., 2013. “Unsteady calculation
of intake-fan flow of hbpr turbofan engine at take-off with
strong cross wind”. CIAM.
[9] Cao, T., Vadlamani, N. R., Tucker, P. G., Smith, A., Slaby,
M., and Sheaf, C. T., 2016. “Fan-intake interactions under
high incidence”. Journal of Engineering for Gas Turbines
and Power.
[10] Peters, A., 2014. “Ultra-short nacelles for low fan pressure
ratio propulsors”. PhD thesis, MIT, February.
[11] Mazzawy, R. S., 1977. “Multiple segment parallel com-
pressor model for circumferential flow distortion”. Jour-
nal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power, 99(2),
pp. 288–296.
[12] Lesser, A., and Niehuis, R., 2014. “Transonic axial com-
pressors with total pressure inlet flow field distortions”.
In ASME Turbo Expo 2014: Turbine Technical Confer-
ence and Exposition, American Society of Mechanical En-
gineers, pp. V01AT01A036–V01AT01A036.
[13] Reid, C., 1969. “The response of axial flow compressors to
intake flow distortion”. In ASME 1969 Gas Turbine Con-
ference and Products Show, American Society of Mechan-
ical Engineers, pp. V001T01A029–V001T01A029.
[14] Cousins, W. T., Georges, M. J., and Rezaei, H., 2003. “Inlet
distortion testing and analysis of a high-bypass ratio turbo-
fan engine”. ISABE Paper(2003-1110).
[15] Fidalgo, V. J., Hall, C., and Colin, Y., 2012. “A study of
fan-distortion interaction within the nasa rotor 67 transonic
stage”. Journal of Turbomachinery, 134(5), p. 051011.
[16] Hall, C., and Greitzer, E.and Tan, C., 2016. “Analysis of
fan stage design attributes for boundary layer ingestion.”.
In ASME Turbo Expo.
[17] Hynes, T., and Greitzer, E., 1987. “A method for assessing
effects of circumferential flow distortion on compressor sta-
bility”. Journal of Turbomachinery, 109(3), pp. 371–379.
[18] Floyd, R. S., and Davis, M., 2015. “Validation of a modi-
fied parallel compressor model for prediction of the effects
of inlet swirl on compressor performance and operability”.
In Proceedings of ASME Turbo Expo 2015: Turbine Tech-
nical Conference and Exposition, no. GT2015-43415.
[19] Simon, J. F., 2007. “Contribution to throughflow modelling
11
for axial flow turbomachines”. PhD thesis, University of
Liege, Liege, Belgium.
[20] Wiart, L., Atinault, O., Boniface, J.-C., and Barrier, R.,
Downloaded from https://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/GT/proceedings-pdf/GT2017/50794/V02BT41A018/2432330/v02bt41a018-gt2017-63577.pdf by Orta Dogu Teknik Universitesi-METU user on 06 March 2020
2016. “Aeropropulsive performance analysis of the nova
configurations”. In 30th Confress of the International
Council of the Aerodynamical Sciences.
[21] Glauert, H., 1983. The elements of aerofoil and airscrew
theory. Cambridge University Press.
[22] Marble, F. E., 1964. “Three-dimensional flow in turboma-
chines”. High Speed Aerodynamics and Jet Propulsion, 10,
pp. 83–166.
[23] Defoe, J., Narkaj, A., and Spakovszky, Z., 2010. “A body-
force-based method for prediction of multiple-pure-tone
noise: Validation”. In Aero-Acoustics Conference, Stock-
holm, Sweden, June, pp. 7–9.
[24] Loiodice, S., Tucker, P., and Watson, J., 2010. “Modeling
of coupled open rotor engine intakes”. In Proceedings of
the 48th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit,
Orlando, FL, January, pp. 4–7.
[25] Peters, A., Spakovszky, Z. S., Lord, W. K., and Rose, B.,
2014. “Ultrashort nacelles for low fan pressure ratio propul-
sors”. Journal of Turbomachinery, 137(TURBO-14-1120),
July.
[26] Kottapalli, A. P., 2013. “Development of a body force
model for centrifugal compressors”. PhD thesis, Mas-
sachusetts Institute of Technology.
[27] Thollet, W., Blanc, F., Dufour, G., and Carbonneau, X.,
2015. “Body force modeling for aerodynamic analysis of
intake-fan interactions”. In 50th 3AF Internationnal Con-
ference on Applied Aerodynamics.
[28] Thollet, W., Dufour, G., and Carbonneau, X., 2016. “As-
sessment of body force methodologies for the analysis of
intake-fan aerodynamic interactions”. In Proceedings of
ASME Turbo Expo 2016.
[29] Cambier, L., Heib, S., and Plot, S., 2013. “The onera elsa
cfd software: input from research and feedback from indus-
try”. Mechanics & Industry, 14(3), pp. 159–174.
[30] Colin, Y., Deniau, H., and Boussuge, J.-F., 2011. “A robust
low speed preconditioning formulation for viscous flow
computations”. Computers & Fluids, 47(1), pp. 1–15.
[31] Spalart, P. R., and Allmaras, S. R., 1992. “A one equation
turbulence model for aerodinamic flows.”. AIAA journal,
94.
[32] ICEM, C., 2013. “ver. 15.1”. ANSYS Inc., Southpointe,
275.
[33] Sadoudi, Y., 2016. “Simulation numérique de l’interaction
fan/nacelle en présence de vent de travers”. PhD thesis,
ISAE/SUPAERO.
Copyright © 2017 ASME