Effect of Inlet Boundary Layer Suction on Flow Distortion in Subsonic Diffusing S-Duct

  • Jihyeong Lee
  • Seawook Lee
  • Jinsoo ChoEmail author
Original Paper


The effects of the boundary layer suction (BLS) near the S-duct inlet on the flow distortion of the S-duct were analyzed using a commercial computational fluid dynamics tool. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of shape factors on the location and length of the BLS for the RAE M 2129 S-duct with the inlet shape AR (0.75,0). The performance of the S-duct is influenced by the boundary layer thickness for duct flow and the counter-rotating vortex position on the engine face. All of the cases upon applying BLS were confirmed as having a different boundary layer thickness and the counter-rotating vortex at the engine face was confirmed. The PS (0,0.1) case has the thinnest boundary layer and the counter-rotating vortex is the farthest from the starboard side, while the PS (0.06,0.08) case has the thickest boundary layer and the counter-rotating vortex is located near the starboard side. In conclusion, it was confirmed that BLS has a significant influence on the flow distortion for the applied position compared to the applied length. Additionally, the PS (0,0.1) case applied near duct inlet showed the least flow distortion, and the PS (0.06,0.08) case located near the cowl lip showed the largest flow distortion.


Boundary layer suction Counter-rotating vortex Boundary layer thickness Flow distortion 



  1. 1.
    Plas AP (2006) Performance of a boundary layer ingesting propulsion system. MS Thesis. Dept. of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Saha K, Singh SN, Seshadri V (2007) Computational analysis on flow through transition S-diffusers: Effect of inlet shape. J Aircr 44:187–193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Menzies R (2001) Computational investigation of lows in difusing S-shaped intakes. Acta Polytechnica 41(3–4):61–67Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Menzies R (2002) Investigation of S-shaped intake aerodynamics using computational fluid dynamics. Ph.D. Thesis, Dept. of Aerospace Engineering, University of GlasgowGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Choi MS, Park JY, Baek JH (2005) Effects of the inlet boundary layer thickness on the flow in an axial compressor (I)—hub corner stall and tip leakage flow. Trans Korean Soc Mech Eng B 29(8):948–955CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Choi MS, Park JY, Baek JH (2005) Effects of the inlet boundary layer thickness on the flow in an axial compressor (II)—loss mechanism. Trans Korean Soc Mech Eng B 29(8):956–962CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Wagner JH, Dring RP, Joslyn HD (1983) Axial compressor middle stage secondary flow study. NASA CR-3701Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Wagner JH, Dring RP, Joslyn HD (1985) Inlet boundary layer effects in an axial compressor rotor: part 1, 2. J Eng Gas Turbines Power 107:374–386CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ki DJ (1997) An experimental study on the intake boundary layer diverters for transonic aircraft. J Korean Soc Aeronaut Space Sci 25(6):14–22Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Debiasi M, Herberg MR, Yan Z, Dhanabalan SS, Tsai HM (2008) Control of flow separation in S-ducts via flow injection and suction. In: 46th AIAA aerospace science meeting and exhibitionGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Scribben AR, Wing NG, Burdisso R (2006) Effectiveness of a serpentine inlet duct flow control technique at design and off-design simulated flight conditions. J Turbomach 128:332–339CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Choi JH, Cheon SM, Choe YH, Hong WR, Kim CA (2012) Study on concept design of supersonic inlet and flow control of bleeding under operating condition. J Korean Soc Aeronaut Space Sci 40(12):1025–1031Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Harloff GJ, Smith GE (1996) Supersonic-inlet boundary-layer bleed flow. AIAA J 34(4):778–785CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Slater JW (2009) Improvements in modeling 90° bleed holes for supersonic inlets. In: AIAA paper 2009-0710, 47th AIAA aerospace sciences meeting and exhibit, OrlandoGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Willis BP, Davis DO, Hingst WR (1995) Flow coefficient behavior for boundary-layer bleed holes and slots. In: AIAA Paper 95-0031, 33rd AIAA aerospace sciences meeting and exhibit, RenoGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Willis BP, Davis DO (1996) Boundary layer development downstream of a bleed mass flow removal region. In: AIAA Paper 1996-3278, AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE joint propulsion conference and exhibit, Lake Buena VistaGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Liou MF, Benson TJ (2010) Optimization of bleed for supersonic inlet. In: 13th AIAA/ISSMO multidisciplinary analysis optimization conferenceGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lee JH, Cho JS (2018) Effect of aspect ratio of elliptical inlet shape on performance of subsonic diffusing S-duct. J Mech Sci Technol 32(3):1153–1160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Tomas MB, Anne LD, Mattias C, Jaap VM, Roald AQ, Phil T (2012) GARTEUR AD/AG-43 application of CFD high offset intake diffusers. GARTEUR Final ReportGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lee BJ, Kim CA (2007) Automated design methodology of turbulent internal flow using discrete adjoint formulation. Aerosp Sci Technol 11:163–173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Sophia L, Doyle DK (2002) Automated design optimization of a three-dimensional S-shaped subsonic diffuser. J Propul Power 18:913–921CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Weltens H, Bressler H, Terres F, Neumeier H, Rammoser D (1993) Optimization of catalytic converter gas flow distribution by CFD prediction. SAE paper 930780Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Tsinoglou DN, Koltsakis GC, Missirlis DK, Yakinthos KJ (2004) Transient modelling of flow distribution in automotive catalytic converters. Appl Math Model 28:775–794CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    ANSYS Release 15 (2013) CFX-solver theory guide. ANSYS IncGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Menter FR (1994) Two-equation Eddy viscosity turbulence models for engineering applications. AIAA J 32:1598–1605CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    May NE (1997) The prediction of Intake/S-bend diffuser flow using various two-equation turbulence model variants including non-linear Eddy viscosity formulations. ARA. Contractor Report, M316/1, 1997Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    AGARD (1991) Air intakes for high speed vehicles. AGARD ADVISORY 270, Fluid Dynamics Panel Working Group 13Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Korean Society for Aeronautical & Space Sciences 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Mechanical EngineeringHanyang UniversitySeoulRepublic of Korea
  2. 2.R&D Center, IBIRDIESeoulRepublic of Korea
  3. 3.School of Mechanical EngineeringHanyang UniversitySeoulRepublic of Korea

Personalised recommendations