Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Experimental analysis reveals how surface roughness alters lift and drag in foils during hydrodynamic testing.
Abstract Surface roughness modifies the flow dynamics over static surfaces and can significantly affect the instantaneous generation of lift and drag. This study presents force and flow measurements on NACA0012 foils covered with simple, commercially available spherical-cap roughness elements. We varied the roughness area coverage relative to the propulsive area from 0% (smooth) to 35% (mid-rough) and 70% (full-rough). Our experiments survey an angle of attack and a Reynolds number range of -2^∘≤α≤20^∘ and 10,000 Re 55,000, respectively. Within this parameter space, surface roughness leads to small alterations in time-averaged statistics of lift and drag. In contrast, it leads substantial changes in unsteady force and flow behavior. Specifically, surface roughness reduces lift fluctuations, up to ~60%, due to decreased pressure fluctuations on the foil surface. This reduction is accompanied by a modest decrease in time-averaged lift coefficient and an increase in time-averaged drag coefficient. Drag fluctuations increase by up to ~30%, except near stall, where both lift and drag fluctuations decrease. Roughness also mitigates flow separation, as indicated by reduced velocity fluctuations and a delayed stall onset in the CL(α) curves. These results show that surface roughness influences not only time-averaged statistics but also the instantaneous response of lift, drag, and flow fields. Our findings offer insights into the hydrodynamic function of shark-skin-inspired surfaces and demonstrate how simple, distributed roughness can provide passive control of boundary layer behavior and flow separation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kurt et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: