Canadian Aeronautics and Space Institute AERO09 Conference Aerodynamics Symposium

Robins Magnus effect an attempt of complete explanation

Emil MARINCHEV Assistant professor Department of Applied Physics Dian GESHEV Associate professor Department of Air Transport Ivan DIMITROV Assistant professor Department of Air Transport Ivailo Post-graduate student Department of Applied Physics NEDIALKOV Sofia Technical University, Sofia-1000, BULGARIA Stoil DONEV
ABSTRACT
An experimental data analysis has been performed and an attempt of complete explanation of Robins Magnus Effect has been presented as a particular case of reactive motion occurred during interaction between a rotating cylinder and a transverse air flow. The reasons and the conditions for the maximum Robins Magnus Effect and for the Reverse Robins Magnus Effect are explained. The functional relationships of lift and drag are obtained and explained simultaneously through the relative speed of rotation. The obtained results are correct and valid for a real three-dimensional fluid. Associate professor Institute for Nuclear Research and Nuclear Energy, BAS emar@tu-sofia.bg dgeshev@aero.tu-sofia.bg idimitrov@aero.tu-sofia.bg ivaka_vn@abv.bg

sdonev@inrne.bas.bg

Sofia-1000, BULGARIA

INTRODUCTION
There are a lot of experimental results showing the existence of lift force when a transverse flow interacts with rotating bodies. Theory does not explain well experimental results. As in [5], the following mechanical theorems have been used here. The momentum of a mechanical system p is equal to the momentum of the systems masses center

velocity.

p = p c = mv c , where m is the systems mass and v c is the mass centers velocity. The reactive force R is defined by & u , where | m & | is the mass flow and u is the change of its the rate of change of the momentum of the mass flow R = m
ROBINS-MAGNUS EFFECT
Robins-Magnus Effect [4, 6] the lift force is a result of the interaction of a transverse flow and a rotating body with the rotation axis of symmetry (e.g. cylinder, globe and other) Figure 1. The effect depends on the existence of an air flow separation on the cylinders surface - Figure 2a and Figure 2b.

Figure 1 [3, 5] about a real low viscous fluid, if the losses of energy are ignored: v + u v and

u = r = v

ROBINS-MAGNUS EFFECT WITHOUT FLOW SEPARATION

Robins-Magnus effect without flow separation Figure1 for a real and Figure 2a for an ideal fluid flow. When a rotating cylinder with no dimensional rotation rate = r / v interacts with a transverse air flow, the flow deflects to an effective

angle = 2 arcsin / 2 and the change of the mass center velocity v c is u = r = v - Figure 1. The mass flow interacting with the cylinder surface is proportional to the stream-lined area SC , the mass density of the air

, and the

& |, |m

& ~ v SC = v 2rl . Considering the cylinder planform area S = 2rl , m & ~ v S . As a matter of flow velocity v : m
experiment,

& = v S when l >> r ,e.g. the constant of proportionality is equal to 1. The originating total m aerodynamic force R is a result of the influence of the inflow and outflow momentum, e.g.

&v + m & ( v + u) = m &u . R = m

(1)

& | u = v S r = 2.S R =| m

v2 2

& < 0 . Consequently, the coefficients CR , CL and CD of the & > 0 and mass outflow by m Mass inflow is expressed by m total aerodynamic force, lift and drag are equal to:

CR =
(2)

R = 2 S v2 / 2

C L = 2 cos

, C D = 2 sin

The maximum lift coefficient occurs at

m =

and

m = 2

(Figure 3a).

(3)

CRm = 2 2, CLm = CDm =

2 CR = 2 2

The result at

m = 2

is valid for a real fluid. In case of an ideal fluid

m = 2

according to Prandtl [5] refer to Figure

2a. For real fluid the maximum is achieved more easily.

ROBINS-MAGNUS EFFECT WITH FLOW SEPARATION

An essential change occurs when the air flow separation exists and the following facts are found to be significant Figure 2b. 1) The mass flow decreases with multiplier approximately between and 2/3, Figure 2b. 2) An air flow downwash occurs on the back part of the cylinder and because of air flow separation, the possibility for maximum deflection decreases with a factor of 0.45 ( ). The maximum lift coefficient reduces to

m = CL

2 3 2 = (0.53 0.47)2 m . ( )2 m 2 4 3
m =
2
needs a reciprocal increase of the rotation rate between the margins

For the lift maximum to be reached at

1 4 3 4 3 = ( ) m (4.19 4.71) - Figure 3b and Figure 4. ( ) / 0.45 , e.g. - m 3 2 0.45 3 2

Figure 2, [1] 2a in case of an ideal fluid without flow separation, 2b in case of a real fluid with flow separation between S1 and S2 The maximum of drag coefficient reduces to

Figure 3 Figure 3a without separation of air flow and Figure 3b with separation of air flow

3 2 m = 0.45( )2 = (2.12 1.88) . CD 4 3

3) During the air flow separation from the surface of a cylinder there is a possibility for transferring of energy from the rotating cylinder to the deflected air flow and the lift coefficient maximum increases Figure 3b and Figure 4.

m = m = (13.16 14.80) , CL

Figure 4, [1] Experimental results of the from different authors A an asymptote .

CL ( )

and

2 CD ( ) for rotating cylinder with aspect ratio AR = l = l = 8

C = d / d = 1 3, d - diameter of the discs at the ends of the cylinder, = sin( / 7.7) , CD ( ) ( CL = . Figure 4 - CL ( ) CD CL = 0.6 sin 2 ( / 7.7) ).
4

4) At the values of the Reynolds numbers less than the critical Re < Re and low rotation rate , the air flow separation occurs at the front part of the cylinder and an upward air flow deflection exists Figure 2b. The back cylinder part does not participate in the air flow deflection and this is the main reason for the presence of reverse Robins-Magnus effect. The Reynolds number is not a reliable reference since experience shows the smoothness of the rotating body has to be taken into account as well.

( ) AND CD ( ) FUNCTIONAL RELATIONS CL

In 2b the lift and drag coefficients maximums for a real fluid with separation are obtained. Obtaining of the functional ( ) and CD ( ) is a real challenge. Theoretically CL = - for an ideal fluid with separation. The relations CL experiment with a real fluid doesnt confirm this linear relation Figure 4. It is a quite difficult to obtain the functional

( ) . Due to (2) for a real fluid without flow separation CL = 2 cos relation CL

as the back area of the cylinder (Figure 2b) taking a part in the downward fluid deflection increases with the increase of . From expression (2)

= sin , Figure 4 fluid with separation of air flow is necessary further combining of the linear and sinus functions - CL

= 2 sin and = 2 sin . For a real 2 2

CD = 2 sin

3 2 = 0, 45( )2 sin = (0, 675 0, 60) sin 2 , due to = 2sin . In addition the profile drag of the cylinder must CD 2 4 3 2 2
be accounted by moving the beginning of this graph at

it

could

be

defined

( ) CD

by

means

of

small

corrections:

, CD = 0, 6 be combined with linear function as above in CL

experiment is having the following choices of

the

sin

minimum

of

experimental

data

and

. Very good match between theory and

functional dependencies:

= 0, 6 CD

= sin( / a) CL

and

sin 2 ( / a ) , with an additional choice of the parameter a = 7.7 , so the maximum of function to match
data (m

experimental

m = 14 ). = 5, C L

Despite

the

good results

should

be

work

even

more

on

the

precise bring out of these functions.

APPLICATIONS
Magenn Power Air Rotor System (Figures 5 and 6) is a new type wind-generator combining the aerostatic effect and the Robins-Magnus effect.

Figure 5, [7]

Figure 6, [7]

The FanWing (Figure 7) achieves several of times bigger lift coefficient because of the several of times bigger critical angle of attack. There are no theoretical limits in energy transfer to the downward deflected flow and gaining more lift. In this case a vertical take off is possible, even without Robins-Magnus effect.

Figure 7, [8] FanWing

CONCLUSION
What has been achieved? 1. The maximum of the lift coefficient for a real fluid with and without a separation of the air flow has been defined. 2. The functional relationships of lift and drag are obtained and explained simultaneously through the relative speed of rotation. 3. The reverse Robbins-Magnus effect has been explained. 4. A very good correspondence of the theory with the experiment has been obtained. 5. In the general case of interaction of a non-transverse flow with a rotating body the possibility of precession should be taken into account.

REFERENCES
1. ., . , , 2005, 12, 1 2. ., , , V, . 1-2., 1925 3. Hyperphysics: Kutta-Joukowski Lift Theorem, 2006, http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/fluids/kutta.html#c1 4. Magnus G., Uber die Abweichung der Geschosse. Abh. d. Kgl. Ak. d. Wiss. zu Berlin. 1852: Pogg. Ann. 88, 1, 1853. 5. Marinchev E., D. Geshev, I. Dimitrov, S. Donev, I. Nedyalkov, ON THE PHYSICS OF FLIGHT, http://www.lulu.com/content/569164 6. Robins, B., New Principles of Gunnery Containing the Determination of the Force of Gunpowder and Investigation of the Difference in the Resisting Power of the Air to Swift and Slow Motion, 1742. 7. http://www.magenn.com 8. http://funwing.com