Comparison and evaluation of blade element methods against RANS simulations and test data

Abstract

This paper compares several blade element theory (BET) method-based propeller simulation tools, including an evaluation against static propeller ground tests and high-fidelity Reynolds-Average Navier Stokes (RANS) simulations. Two proprietary propeller geometries for paraglider applications are analysed in static and flight conditions. The RANS simulations are validated with the static test data and used as a reference for comparing the BET in flight conditions. The comparison includes the analysis of varying 2D aerodynamic airfoil parameters and different induced velocity calculation methods. The evaluation of the BET propeller simulation tools shows the strength of the BET tools compared to RANS simulations. The RANS simulations underpredict static experimental data within 10% relative error, while appropriate BET tools overpredict the RANS results by 15–20% relative error. A variation in 2D aerodynamic data depicts the need for highly accurate 2D data for accurate BET results. The nonlinear BET coupled with XFOIL for the 2D aerodynamic data matches best with RANS in static operation and flight conditions. The novel BET tool PropCODE combines both approaches and offers further correction models for highly accurate static and flight condition results.