Progress in Aerospace Sciences xxx (2017) 1–29

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Progress in Aerospace Sciences

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/paerosci

Review of hybrid laminar flow control systems

K.S.G. Krishnan *, O. Bertram, O. Seibel
German Aerospace Center (DLR), Lilienthalplatz 7, 38108, Braunschweig, Germany

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: The aeronautic community always strived for fuel efficient aircraft and presently, the need for ecofriendly aircraft
Hybrid laminar flow control is even more, especially with the tremendous growth of air traffic and growing environmental concerns. Some of
System design the important drivers for such interests include high fuel prices, less emissions requirements, need for more
Suction system
environment friendly aircraft to lessen the global warming effects. Hybrid laminar flow control (HLFC) tech-
Flight tests
nology is promising and offers possibility to achieve these goals. This technology was researched for decades for
Wind-tunnel tests
its application in transport aircraft, and it has achieved a new level of maturity towards integration and safety and
maintenance aspects. This paper aims to give an overview of HLFC systems research and associated flight tests in
the past years both in the US and in Europe. The review makes it possible to distinguish between the successful
approaches and the less successful or outdated approaches in HLFC research. Furthermore, the technology status
shall try to produce first estimations regarding the mass, power consumption and performance of HLFC systems as
well as estimations regarding maintenance requirements and possible subsystem definitions.

1. Introduction resulting in a higher lift coefficient as well as maximum angles of attack.

Flow control can be divided into Laminar Flow (Control) and Turbulence
Aircraft manufacturers as well as research organisations try to reduce Manipulation as depicted in Fig. 1. Turbulence Manipulation can be
the fuel burn of aircrafts for many years and the ambitious environmental further divided into Active Flow Separation Control by means of actua-
goals of ACARE's Vision 2020 and Flightpath 2050 lead to an even higher tors (AFSC) and Passive Turbulent Flow Control. Passive Turbulent Flow
focus on the efficiency of aircraft. There are different ways to reduce the Control devices are mainly applied to reduce the skin-friction drag of
fuel burn and thus the emission of carbon dioxide and nitrogen oxides of turbulent flows by energising the boundary layer. Examples for this kind
aircraft like new engine technology, improved system integration as well of flow control are riblets and vortex generators. With AFSC it is tried to
as improved aerodynamics. Flow control by means of keeping the flow control the boundary layer development and to delay separation effects
laminar over wetted surfaces as long as possible during cruise is one way to enhance control surface effectiveness for flaps, rudders and elevators
of reducing the overall fuel burn. The laminar flow control technology for to name only a few [4]. An enhanced rudder efficiency (e.g. through
aircraft was first experimentally tested in wind tunnels in the late 1930s higher deflection angles without separation) can lead to a decreased
in the US [1]. The research activities in the US as well as in Europe wetted area of the vertical tail plane which results in reduced skin friction
continued until the early 1960s when the interest in this topic decreased. drag during all flight phases. Since a failure of such an AFSC system
Due to the oil embargo by the OPEC in the 1970s and the resulting rapid applied to a smaller sized rudder may be catastrophic for the design
increase of fuel prices, the research on laminar flow control system was condition (one engine inoperative at low speeds), stringent reliability
revived. New technology led to significant achievements during wind requirements must be met.
tunnel and flight experiments but still major manufacturing issues and Laminar Flow systems aim at delaying the transition from laminar to
other operational obstacles prohibited an economic installation of the turbulent airflow over wings, tail planes or nacelles as far aft as possible
fuel saving technology on new aircraft [2]. to reduce the overall aircraft drag. It can be divided into full Laminar
Flow control is defined by Liddle [3] as the modification of local flow Flow Control (LFC), Natural Laminar Flow (NLF) and Hybrid Laminar
parameters without external geometric change. High-lift systems are Flow Control (HLFC) as a combination of the first two methods. HLFC
therefore not considered as flow control since the geometry is changed combines a moderate amount of suction at the leading edge with a
when the systems are deployed to increase wing area and camber following suitable pressure gradient. This reduces the overall complexity

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: [email protected] (K.S.G. Krishnan).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paerosci.2017.05.005
Received 27 February 2017; Received in revised form 29 May 2017; Accepted 31 May 2017
Available online xxxx
0376-0421/© 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Please cite this article in press as: K.S.G. Krishnan, et al., Review of hybrid laminar flow control systems, Progress in Aerospace Sciences (2017),
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paerosci.2017.05.005
K.S.G. Krishnan et al. Progress in Aerospace Sciences xxx (2017) 1–29

then have to develop hardware to achieve the requirements from the

aerodynamics and, finally, the flight test preparation group has to inte-
grate the developed hardware for the flight test. If a group has to modify
something, this has an effect on the other groups. If the system is applied
to the leading edge of a wing, it even needs to share the space with the
leading edge part of the high-lift system or the ice protection system
resulting in increased complexity and the participation of even more
disciplines. The limited space is depicted in Fig. 2, where the suction
system and instrumentation for the flight test of the Do 228 test vehicle is
shown (although more complex than necessary due to the testing of
different anti-contamination devices as well as different ice protection
systems). In section 2, the research methodology is explained, section 3
Fig. 1. Different types of Flow Control applications. explains the fundamental aerodynamics behind laminar flow control

Fig. 2. Leading edge of the Do 228 test aircraft equipped for HLFC flight test [83].

systems, section 4 gives overview of the HLFC system design and issues,
and section 5 covers the progress made so far with emphasis on various
analytical studies and flight tests that have been performed throughout
the World.

2. Research methodology

The starting point of the literature research was the literature pro-
vided by the predecessors on the topic. Further literature was found
Fig. 3. Dye trace in laminar flow [82]. based on the referenced sources as well as literature which referenced the
already available sources using google scholar and google search. The
and weight of the suction system and does not interfere with the main key words “Hybrid Laminar flow control” and “laminar flow control”
part of the wing. Nevertheless, it requires a suitable shape of the suc- were utilized in the search engine. Further research papers regarding the
ceeding main wing geometry which might have to be reworked for particular topic were found, once research institutions and researchers
retrofit applications. focusing on specific tasks in the development of HLFC systems were
Henke [5] points out, that the development of an HLFC system is a identified. Research projects were identified through the acknowledge-
highly interdisciplinary task. For the A320 fin flight test performed in ments in papers as well as through current project proposals mentioning
1998, four different groups were identified: The aerodynamics group will other projects. For the US projects, the document server from NASA was
specify the suction distribution. The system and structure groups will searched regarding relevant documentation.

Fig. 4. Dye trace in turbulent flow [82].

2
K.S.G. Krishnan et al. Progress in Aerospace Sciences xxx (2017) 1–29

Fig. 5. Fluid flow over an airfoil surface consisting of two parts [77].

respectively called laminar and turbulent [6]. In laminar flow, the fluid
layers slide smoothly over each other, in a streamlined fashion, and
typically occurs only under low velocity conditions. The linear dye trace
in Fig. 3 shows that the fluid particles follow the streamline exactly in a
laminar region.

3.2. Turbulent flow

Turbulent flow is a complex process, and is actually more likely to

occur than laminar flow in many practical situations. It still remains the
least understood area of fluid mechanics [7] The turbulent flow involves
randomly fluctuating parameters. In turbulent flow, the fluid exhibits
erratic motion, eddies of many sizes are superimposed onto the mean
flow. The dye trace path in Fig. 4 shows that the path is dictated by both
the mean flow (i.e. streamlines) and the erratic flows (i.e. eddies). These
eddies cause the dye to spread laterally, and make the dye filament to
diffuse across streamlines. Reynolds observed that a change from laminar
to turbulent occurs whenever the velocity of flow was increased and
formulated the dimensionless quantity called Reynolds number Re ¼
Fig. 6. Laminar and turbulent boundary layer velocity profiles [6].
ρVl=μ, where ρ is the density, V the velocity, l the length scale and μ the
viscosity of the fluid. Starting at the critical Reynolds number, where the
flow transitions from a laminar state into a turbulent one, the flow be-
3. Aerodynamic fundamentals
comes more turbulent at higher Reynolds number.
3.1. Laminar flow
3.3. Boundary layer concept
Osborne Reynolds in 1883 was the first to demonstrate two states of
fluid flow, which he termed “direct” and “sinuous” but now it is The concept of boundary layer was first proposed by Prandtl in the
ottingen. He argued that fluid flow consists of two
year 1904 in the city G€

Fig. 7. Laminar to turbulent transition (from Ref. [9]).

3
K.S.G. Krishnan et al. Progress in Aerospace Sciences xxx (2017) 1–29

Fig. 8. Tollmien-Schlichting waves (Image courtesy: [10]).

velocity outside the boundary layer U, τ is the shear stress and μ the
absolute viscosity. It can be seen that the velocity gradient is greater in
the turbulent flow, the shear stress τ, which represents the skin friction, is
substantially greater in the turbulent layer [6].

3.4. Laminar turbulent transition

Reynolds in his experiment observed that the flow characteristics

changes from laminar to turbulent whenever the critical value of Rey-
nolds number is reached. The transition from laminar to turbulent occurs
whenever there is an instability caused in the flow, as represented
in Fig. 7.
Instability mechanisms which are mainly responsible for the laminar
– turbulent transition are:

Fig. 9. Sketch of Crossflow vortices over swept wing [2].  Tollmien-Schlichting instability:

parts: flow closer to the surface (viscous part) and the flow away from the Tollmien in 1929 and Schlichting in 1932 discovered convective
surface (inviscid part). In the thin boundary layer closer to the surface, traveling-wave instabilities. This instability (Fig. 8) typically occurs in
viscous forces (effects of friction) are dominant. Outside the boundary the mid-chord region, the viscosity plays a major role in determining the
layer the flow is inviscid as shown in Fig. 5. The hypothesis of the stability limits. This wave can be visualized by imagining the water
adhesion of the fluid to the walls, or zero relative velocity between fluid waves created as pebbles thrown in a lake [2]. The boundary-layer flow is
and wall gave a very satisfying explanation for the process in the similar to the water waves, except that under certain critical parameters
boundary layer [8]. such as Reynolds number, this wave (instability) grows in strength,
The characteristic velocity profiles through the laminar and turbulent which leads to turbulent flow.
boundary layers are shown in Fig. 6, where y is the distance from the wall
scaled by the boundary layer thickness δ, u is the velocity scaled by the  Crossflow (CF) instability:

Fig. 10. Attachment Line flow sketch over leading edge due to interference from fuselage turbulence [2].

4
K.S.G. Krishnan et al. Progress in Aerospace Sciences xxx (2017) 1–29

Fig. 11. Device used to prevent Attachment Line contamination [2].

This phenomenon was discovered during early work on the flow over boundary layers. The steps involved in the eN method [17] consist of:
swept wing aircraft, and is characterized by co-rotating vortices as shown
in Fig. 9. The CF instability occurs in the strong pressure gradient regions  accurate computation of mean boundary layer profiles,
on a swept wing. The combination of pressure gradient and wing sweep  computation of linear amplification rate by an appropriate stability
deflects the inviscid-flow streamlines inboard. At a certain sweep angle, model and
the transition moves upstream suddenly near the leading edge. This three  integration of growth rate from the onset of instability x0 to the
dimensional effect make the design of swept wings complex, as the CF is transition location xT .
extremely sensitive to the sweep angle [11]. This also means a good
laminar airfoil in two-dimensional flow can have very poor laminar The value of the integration from x0 to xT is equal to the exponent in
properties when it has particular sweep angle. The suction through eN and is called the “N-factor”. It is computed by considering the dis-
perforated walls is an efficient means to avoid CF. turbances in the form of monochromatic waves, but in reality, these
disturbances occur in the form of “wave-packets”.
 Attachment line transition: Limitations of the eN method include inability to predict transition
when non-linear effects like cross-flow, surface roughness induced tran-
The transition is also triggered whenever there is leading edge sitions are involved. The non-linear effects are completely ignored in this
contamination due to the turbulence from the fuselage (Fig. 10). This method. This aspect was reflected in the uncertainty faced in the Boeing
turbulence can sweep onto the Attachment Line (AA) and engulf the 757 HLFC flight tests [18], as explained later in section 5.1. The LST
whole wing in turbulence. One way to prevent such occurrence is by use transition prediction methods are quite unsatisfactory for use in swept
of the so-called Gaster bump (Fig. 11), which acts as turbulence diverter wing flows. There was a need for another strong method to predict
protecting the remaining wing from the turbulent fuselage. The test especially the Crossflow disturbances. The Harmonic Linear Navier-
article shown in Fig. 11 is a modified JetStar airplane [12]. Stokes (HLNS) method [19] was found significant for this purpose. The
In case of HLFC application, strong suction can be applied at the HLNS method involves the following steps:
fuselage-wing juncture to prevent Attachment Line contamination.
 Expansion about a steady based flow and substitution in the three
3.5. Transition prediction methods dimensional Navier-Stokes equation
 The disturbance equation is then formulated which is important for
The transition prediction is very complex and involves various initial stages of computation
mechanisms which depend on the applied scenario. Since it involves the  The equations are formulated in the form of a block penta-diagonal
prediction of start of turbulent flow, it gets complicated as the turbulence system
phenomenon is still not well understood. The development of robust and  The system of equations is solved using standard recursion
reliable transition models is still a challenging task. The recent ad-
vancements in high performance computing enable the usage of powerful In spite of the above mentioned drawbacks, the eN method is the most
simulation tools for research and design in these areas. Over the years, suitable for practical industrial applications. Another method which is
there was a considerable growth in the field of transition prediction also based on linear theory and includes the weakly non-linear effects is
methods, which can be categorized broadly into three types. the Parabolized Stability Equation (PSE) method, proposed by Herbert
and Bertolotti [20]. The disturbances are represented as double Fourier
A. Stability theory approach expansions containing discrete normal modes which are both two and
B. Statistical modelling approach three dimensional. The PSE equation system consists of coupled equa-
C. DNS and LES transition simulations approach tions with initial and boundary conditions. Though robust and providing
good understanding of weakly non-linear instabilities, the PSE method
fails to address strong non-linear instabilities [14] and onset of transition
3.5.1. Stability theory approach prediction in three dimensional flows in practical applications.
The stability theory mainly deals with the disturbance sine waves
propagating in the boundary layer parallel to the wall, which are 3.5.2. Statistical modelling approach
essentially Tollmien-Schlichting (T-S) waves [13]. In the freestream, The basis of the statistical modelling approach was laid down by
these disturbances die off exponentially, and the amplitudes are small, so Emmons [21] and Dhawan and Narasimha [22]. Some of the important
that the linear stability theory could be applied. In principle, the sinu- methods using this approach include the low Reynolds number turbu-
soidal disturbances are introduced into the Navier-Stokes equation to lence models, intermittency transport method and laminar fluctuation
compute the unstable frequencies [14]. energy method.
One of the most standard transition prediction methods based on the The low Reynolds number turbulence model for transition simulation
linear stability theory (LST) is the eN method. It was developed by Smith was based on the wall damping capability in the boundary layers [23].
and Gamberoni [15] and van Ingen [16]. This method is proven to be These models are developed mainly to address turbulence aspects which
successful for transition prediction in case of two and three dimensional

5
K.S.G. Krishnan et al. Progress in Aerospace Sciences xxx (2017) 1–29

occur at low Reynold's numbers due to diffusion effects in the freestream, Table 1
such as bypass transition. The transition prediction was considered Summary of various transition prediction methods.

during calibration in many low Reynolds number models [24] including Transition Uses/Benefits Drawbacks/Limitations
k-ω model [25] k-ε model [26] and Leylek's transition model [27]. These Prediction
Methods
models suffer a close interaction between transition capability and
viscous sublayer modelling which prevents to model both these phe- eN method - Proven method for successful - Non-linear mechanisms are not
nomena independently. Also, none of the above mentioned turbulence transition prediction for 2D accounted for. Hence, the
and 3D boundary layers. transition caused by non-linear
models were able to give reliable results for any randomly chosen Rey- - Most suitable method for effects cannot be predicted.
nolds number [24]. industrial applications. - It has got compatibility issues
The intermittency concept introduced by Dhawan and Narasimha with most CFD methods.
[22] is based on the fluctuating nature of the flow between laminar and PSE method - Non-linear mechanisms are - Some strong non-linear in-
taken into account. stabilities are not taken into
turbulent regimes. This is confirmed in many detailed investigations of
- Less time consuming than DNS account in this method.
the transition process. This means that the flow becomes intermittent and method - Predicting transition in 3D
alternates. To study the physical nature of such a flow, the intermittency - Numerically robust code, so flows is difficult, since growth
factor γ was introduced, which is the fraction of time in which the flow applications can include of disturbance amplitude is
remains turbulent during the transition phase. This factor can be deter- practical (non-ideal) cases. difficult to calculate along the
streamlines.
mined by algebraic models [28], or by transport equation [29,30]. The Low Reynolds - Useful in simulating bypass - Results obtained are sensitive
start and evolution of transition can be imposed by setting the inter- number transition due to diffusion to boundary conditions, grid
mittent factors from zero to unity. The drawback of this approach for turbulence effects in the freestream. resolution etc.
transition prediction is that, it neglects the interaction between turbulent models
Intermittency - Used in special purpose - Not used in general CFD codes
and non-turbulent flows during transition. Nevertheless, the intermit-
transport turbomachinery codes. due to the evaluation of
tency concept coupled with globally averaged Navier-Stokes offer flexi- method boundary layer thickness and
bility and the statistical modelling method is the most suitable for free stream conditions by non-
computation and modelling complex flows with transition. local operations.
The bypass transition can also be caused due to high amplitude Laminar - This method needs only local - In fully turbulent flows, the
fluctuation flow quantities for transition transition model gets affected
streamwise fluctuations. Another approach based on this concept was energy prediction and is validated by calibration.
first proposed by Walters and Leylek [27]. These streamwise fluctuations method based on low Reynolds number - The flexibility is not good
were called laminar kinetic energy denoted by KL . It was first proposed κ-ε model. enough for wide range of
by Mayle and Schulz [31], and hence this approach for transition transition mechanisms and
practical applications.
modelling was called the laminar kinetic energy or laminar fluctuation
Direct - This method fully solves the - It requires very fine mesh to
energy method. Another type of energy in the near wall region called the Numerical unsteady Navier-Stokes capture turbulent flows in
turbulence energy can be divided into large scale energy and small scale Simulations equation small scale.
energy [24]. The small scale leads to turbulent production and the large (DNS) - It doesn't require any turbulence - High computing costs which
scale mostly contributes to non-turbulent fluctuations or laminar fluc- models unlike other methods prohibits its usage in practical
- It has the ability to simulate the applications at high Reynolds
tuations (KL ). The onset of transition in the Walters and Leyleks model
entire transition process and all number.
was determined by the parameters such as kinetic eddy viscosity, the wall kinds of transition processes.
distance and a turbulent kinetic energy parameter. Large Eddy - Reduced computational costs - This method is very sensitive to
The drawback of using the laminar fluctuation energy approach is Simulations when compared to DNS method. the value of the Smagorinsky
(LES) - Used in academics as research constant which is used to
that in fully turbulent flows, the calibration will affect the result, and also
tools. calibrate subgrid eddy
this model is not flexible for many different transition mechanisms and viscosity.
industrial applications.

3.5.3. DNS and LES transient simulations approach simulation such as bypass transition, natural transition and separation-
In principle, using the Direct Numerical Simulation (DNS) approach induced transition. The various transition prediction methods with
the laminar flow breakdown, the development of turbulent spots and the their uses and limitations are summarized in Table 1.
transition to turbulent flow can be accurately simulated [24]. Also, DNS
solves the full unsteady Navier – Stokes equation. A big advantage of DNS 4. HLFC system design review and issues
approach is that there is no requirement of closure by a turbulence
model, as there is no averaging of Reynold's number. However, DNS To laminarise the flow over wing, horizontal or vertical tail plane and
requires very fine grid for its computation. Therefore the computational engine nacelles, different technologies are possible. They all have one
costs are really high and also very high performance computing is aspect in common: in order for the flow to stay laminar, the surface
required for performing calculations. Even simple geometries require a quality regarding manufacturing tolerances (steps, gaps and overlap) and
very fine grid [32] and hence the DNS cannot be applied to engineering roughness has to be very high since even insect residues greater than a
applications involving complex geometries, as the computational costs critical height can transition the flow from laminar to turbulent. This also
are very high. This limits the DNS approach to research purposes only. restricts the size of steps, gaps and overlaps for laminar joints [35].
The LES is an alternate approach to DNS with reduced computational First of all, the flow can be laminarised by shaping the respective
costs. In LES computations, the large scale eddies are fully solved and geometry – this is called Natural Laminar Flow. Schrauf [36] states that
using the Smagorinsky's eddy viscosity approach [33], the small scale by applying a suitable pressure gradient to a NLF glove of a Fokker F100
eddies are modelled [24]. The main drawback in the LES is the over aircraft, laminarity can be achieved as long as the leading edge sweep
dependency on the Smagorinsk's constant, because it is used for the angle stays below 23 , the Mach number does not exceed 0.75 and the
calibration of sub-grid eddy viscosity. Nevertheless, this problem is Reynolds number is less than 25⋅106 . Above those values, Crossflow
encountered using Germano's dynamic sub-grid model [34], which instability as well as Attachment Line instability become dominant and
nullify the effects of sub-grid eddy viscosity. cannot be controlled anymore by merely shaping the geometry [37].
One of the main advantages of the DNS and LES based approaches For higher flight Reynolds numbers as well as wing sweep angles,
over others is their applicability to many different problems. Unlike other Laminar Flow Control by means of suction through discrete slots or a
approaches, DNS is capable of simulating many types of transition continuously perforated outer skin can be applied to the geometries to

6
K.S.G. Krishnan et al. Progress in Aerospace Sciences xxx (2017) 1–29

Fig. 14. HLFC system breakdown.

gradient for the remaining airfoil. This simplifies the suction system and
thus decreases the weight, power consumption as well as maintenance
Fig. 12. Schematic difference between NLF, LFC and HLFC [81]. requirements compared to a full LFC suction system. Furthermore,
structural issues are avoided since the suction system does not interfere
laminarise the flow by influencing the boundary layer. With this tech- with the wing box section. On the other hand, it is usually not possible to
nology, the flow can be laminarised over the whole chord of the keep the flow laminar over the whole chord. Still, the airflow can be
respective geometry because the aerodynamic instability mechanisms, laminarised to more than 50% of the chord length upon a suitable
which usually trigger the transition from laminar to turbulent flow, are pressure gradient. Fig. 12 depicts schematically the difference between
damped. On the other hand, a LFC suction system adds additional mass, the flows over a conventional turbulent wing, a NLF wing, a LFC wing
power consumption and complexity to the aircraft. Furthermore, struc- and finally over a HLFC wing [35].
tural issues arise when interfering with the wing box and available space The HLFC system design is a highly multidisciplinary approach. Dis-
for fuel in the wings is decreased [38]. ciplines like the aerodynamics, structures, manufacturing, systems as
A combination of the two mentioned techniques is called Hybrid well as flight dynamics and overall mission evaluations have to work
Laminar Flow Control. It combines suction at the leading edge of the together to maximize the benefits of the HLFC system and to fulfill the
geometries (up to the front spar at 10–20% of the chord) to decrease customer needs/requirements. For efficient cooperation, interfaces be-
Crossflow and Attachment Line instabilities with a favourable pressure tween the disciplines have to be specified and formats for data exchange
need to be defined. Fig. 13 depicts the inputs to the systems discipline

Fig. 13. Inputs to systems engineering and generated outputs during preliminary design phase.

7
K.S.G. Krishnan et al. Progress in Aerospace Sciences xxx (2017) 1–29

Fig. 15. Difference in the VTP and HTP between the B787-8 and -9 [40].

from several other involved disciplines and the generated outputs in the electric motor or a jet engine driven by bleed air) or by a passive system
preliminary HLFC design phase. The output form systems serve as input using the natural pressure difference between the outflow and
to the overall aircraft assessment. inflow position.
The HLFC system consists of various sub-systems as shown in Fig. 14. The active architecture has been under investigation for a long time
The following sub-sections reviews each sub-system in detail with for aircraft wings, tail planes and engine nacelles and its effectiveness has
some emphasis on the safety and reliability aspects, as it plays an been proven in several wind tunnel as well as flight test trials (see section
important role in the systems development. 5). Its advantage in contrast to a passive system is a presumably higher
laminar efficiency on the account of increased system weight, power
4.1. Suction system consumption as well as maintenance cost and complexity. Nevertheless,
the actual difference between a heavier but more effective complex
Besides other methods to laminarise the flow over airfoils, laminar- active system and a simpler less effective passive system has not yet
ising it by suction has been under investigation for quite some time and been evaluated.
seems to be the most favourable method for fast flying airplanes with a The passive architecture has yet mainly been investigated for the
conventional (swept wing) configuration. By removing air from the horizontal and vertical tail plane. According to several news articles,
boundary layer e.g. through a perforated surface, its velocity profile is Boeing most likely applied a passive suction system, which was patented
modified which improves the stability. Furthermore, the boundary layer under the number US 7866609 B2 (date of patent: 11th of January 2011),
thickness is reduced which also positively influences the associated in combination with a door assembly, which was patented under the
Reynolds number [39]. This chapter focusses on more recent advance- numbers US 8245976 B2 (date pf patent: 21st August 2012) and US
ments in the design and calculation of the suction system parameters. For 8484894 B2 (date of patent: 16th of July 2013) to the Boeing 787-9
a historic overview, references [1,2and39] are recommended. Young aircraft for the first time in commercial airline history as shown in
[35] covered many topics addressed in this report up to the year 2002 Figs. 15 and 16 [40]. The suction is achieved by opening the door as-
and is also recommended for further details. sembly. As the door opens, a suction force is applied on the porous sur-
To remove air from the boundary layer, the respective surface can face, which draws portion of the boundary layer through the pores,
either be slotted or perforated, allowing air to flow through it in case of thereby delaying transition. The door assembly is deemed to be powered
an existing pressure difference between the surface and the chamber by an actuator. Schrauf [41] states that Airbus wants to flight test a
underneath the surface. After the air passes the surface, it has to be simplified passive suction system on the middle leading-edge box of the
channelled and guided to an outflow position or to an aircraft system VTP of an Airbus A320 aircraft in the context of the European AFLoNext
which utilises the air. The necessary pressure difference between the (Active Flow- Loads & Noise control for next generation wing) project.
outside flow and the suction chambers can either be achieved by an Besides the passive system, an active system using an already certified fan
active system using a turbo-engine (like a compressor driven by an is also going to be flight tested to evaluate the performance difference

Fig. 16. Close-up of the HLFC outflow position of the B787-9 [40].

8
K.S.G. Krishnan et al. Progress in Aerospace Sciences xxx (2017) 1–29

the suction surface and the index ∞ denoting the free-stream conditions.
The main step in the design of an active and electric HLFC suction
system is the preliminary sizing of the compressor, which is usually done
using the Cordier-Diagram [42]. The compressors are sized through in-
ternal pressure losses in the ducting network and plenum chambers as
well as the requirements at the suction surfaces and at the system outlet.
Therefore, all pressure losses in the ducting network have to be estimated
prior to the selection of a suitable compressor. Once the compressor
parameters are known, its drive system can be designed and the overall
power consumption as well as additional system mass can be estimated.
During the European ALTTA project, the simplified suction system
using a single duct (for the vertical and horizontal tail plane the leading
edge box can be used as the plenum chamber if it is sealed) in combi-
nation with a double structure was developed which is schematically
depicted in Fig. 18. The pressure loss from the suction surface(s) to the
plenum chamber is the sum of the losses through the porous surface Δpsc
and through the metering holes Δpcp . According to Bieler [43] the losses
through an electron beam drilled porous surface (conical hole geometry)
can be modelled by equation (3):

Δpsc ¼ A⋅μs ⋅ws þ B⋅ρs ⋅w2s (3)

where A and B reflect loss characteristics, μ the dynamic viscosity, ρ the

density and w the suction velocity. Using equation 4
Fig. 17. Flow chart of sizing methodology for HLFC suction systems [42].
κ1
Ts ¼ T∞ þ r⋅T∞ ⋅ ⋅Ma2∞ (4)
between the active and the passive suction system. 2
In 2011, Pe performed a Synthesis and Topology Study of HLFC
to calculate the temperature T at the surface and estimating the density
System Architectures in the preliminary aircraft design phase for a long-
by using the ideal gas law, the flow condition at the surface is fully
range study aircraft in the context of the German HIGHER-LE project
determined [42]. In the above formula, r is the recovery factor, κ the
[42]. He presented a sizing methodology for the estimation of component
isentropic exponent and Ma the Mach number. Furthermore, a “Flow-
and system parameters (power consumption, mass and size) for a given
meter” was designed at German Aerospace Center (DLR) with which it is
active suction system architecture during the aircraft preliminary design
possible, to measure the pressure drop characteristics as a function of
phase, which is depicted in Fig. 17. As input parameters into the system
mass flow rates for different test articles under realistic conditions with
sizing methodology he specifies the wing and airfoil geometry, the
respect to outside pressure and temperature [44].
pressure coefficient Cp and the suction coefficient Cq where
Pe [42] also states that in the early design phases, the exact geometry
ps  p∞ of the double structure chambers and metering hole diameters is usually
Cp ¼ 1 (1)
ρ v2
2 ∞ ∞
not yet defined. He suggests an estimation to calculate the plenum
pressure pp with reasonable values for Δpcp :
ws
Cq ¼ (2) pp ¼ minðps  Δpsc Þ  Δpcp (5)
v∞
Once the air has reached the plenum chamber, further losses have to
with p as the pressure, ρ as the density, v as the velocity, w as the suction be considered on the way to the compressor or outlet. Pe [42] suggests to
velocity through the porous surface, the index s denoting the condition at

Fig. 18. Schematic representation of the simplified suction system (ALTTA-concept).

9
K.S.G. Krishnan et al. Progress in Aerospace Sciences xxx (2017) 1–29

Fig. 19. Pressure loss model for the plenum chamber Pe [42].

Fig. 20. Suction system concepts assessed by Pe [42] for long-range aircraft.

10
K.S.G. Krishnan et al. Progress in Aerospace Sciences xxx (2017) 1–29

Fig. 21. Difference in power consumption (upper) and mass estimation (lower) for different number of compressors for the wing (left) and tail planes (right) from Pe [42].

divide the chamber into n parts, where n is the number of ribs the flow is concluded that for a long-range HLFC research baseline aircraft it is most
passing through. In a next step he models the leading edge box with a beneficial (in terms of electrical power usage and additional system
formula for a rectangular tube, since the divergence angle of the leading weight) to have one compressor for each side of the wing as well as one
edge box between two ribs is very small (see model in Fig. 19). The compressor for all tail planes. The power consumption for the wing's one
pressure loss for each rib is calculated using the geometry depending compressor design is higher than the two compressor design power
pressure loss coefficient ζ by consumption. The blade diameter of the compressor had to be decreased
in order for the compressor to fit inside the leading edge which also
w2 decreased the efficiency of the compressor as shown in the Cordier-
Δprib ¼ ζ⋅ρ⋅ (6)
2 diagram. Nevertheless it could be advantageous to have separate com-
Since all pressure conditions upstream the compressor are now pressors for the horizontal and vertical tail plane as well as multiple
known, the compressor can be selected using the Cordier-diagram. The compressors for each side of the wing in terms of system reliability.
power the motor has to finally supply comes from the shaft power of the In the recent past the suction system including the chambering to
compressor divided by the efficiency of the motor as well as by the ef- obtain the desired suction distribution in span- and chordwise direction
ficiency of the frequency converter. Afterwards, the compressor, induc- has been simplified to reduce the overall weight as well as complexity.
tion motor and frequency converter masses have to be estimated, for The European ALTTA project (Application of Hybrid Laminar Flow
example by using a linear regression analysis if previous project data is Technology on Transport Aircraft) led to a simplified suction system,
available. The mass of the ducting and the wiring result from the length which is depicted in Fig. 22. In this concept the whole leading edge is the
as well as the surface area times a correction factor for brackets and suction duct in which one plenum pressure is applied. Therefore the need
couplings [42]. for separate piping is avoided on the account of a necessary sealing be-
Using the above mentioned formulas for the preliminary assessment tween the chambers as well as between the plenum chamber and the
of the suction system Pe [42] assessed the difference in the number of complete leading edge. The actual suction distribution at the surface is
compressors for the wings as well as tail planes (see Figs. 20 and 21). He controlled through the chambers, which are created by stringers, in
combination with an orifice to adjust the pressure in the suction

Fig. 22. Layout of the simplified suction system [45].

11
K.S.G. Krishnan et al. Progress in Aerospace Sciences xxx (2017) 1–29

residue that remains on the surface is dependent upon the characteristics

of the skin material (e.g. surface free energy, surface roughness and ri-
gidity), the impact angle and speed, ambient conditions (e.g. tempera-
ture, humidity, airflow over the impact site) and the insect type [49].
Upon a sufficiently high impact velocity, which Coleman concluded for
the Drosophila Melanogaster (also known as the common fruit fly) to be
about 10:9 m=s, the insects exoskeletal cuticle will rupture. The released
haemolymph (equivalent to blood) acts as glue binding the broken body
to the aircraft's skin [49]. It has also been reported that hail or rain
together with the high velocity during flight can lead to a self-cleaning
Fig. 23. Multilayer metal mesh examples [46]. effect of aircraft surfaces regarding the maximum insect residue
height [49].
chambers [45]. To protect the leading edge against insect contamination, different
It was tried to simplify the ALTTA approach even further. Therefore approaches have been investigated by numerous researchers. The pro-
Horn [46] suggested a tailored hybrid outer skin to create the necessary tection has to guarantee a clean surface at the beginning of the laminar
suction distribution at the surface without having discrete chambers. The flow operation. Humphreys [50] states that although the most significant
concept would not feature distinct chambers since the hybrid skin can be contamination takes place close to the leading edge, the debris may
used to control the pressure difference between the plenum chamber and typically be found as far aft as 15% of the chord length. According to
the outside pressure in span- and chord-wise direction. The tailored Croom [47] the following techniques have been investigated for insect
hybrid outer skin consists of a micro-perforated metal sheet with an contamination:
underlying multilayer metal mesh (like depicted in Fig. 23). Through the
choice of the different sizes of the mesh in each layer, the desired pres-  paper coverings,
sure difference between the plenum chamber and the outside pressure  scrapers, wipers,
can be tailored. Nevertheless, concepts for prohibiting flow in span- and  deflectors
chord-wise direction as well as for joining meshes of different size need to  soluble films,
be created.  resilient surface,
 liquid spray systems and
4.2. Anti-contamination system  porous leading edges.

Very high surface cleanliness requirements exist for laminar flow Some of these techniques were found to be too complicated, costly or
areas since small 3D obstacles can already exceed the critical height at heavy to be investigated further. Examples for these types are the
which the flow transitions from laminar to turbulent. The determination removable paper covers as well as mechanical scrapers or wipers. Kok
of an actual value for the critical height is difficult since it depends on [51] performed a review regarding considerations of insect residue
many parameters like the flow velocity, angle of attack and others [51]. contamination on aircraft surfaces which also covers existing methods for
Nevertheless, the critical height is an important parameter in assessing insect contamination alleviation and explains insect adhesion testing
insect contamination systems. Croom [47] researched during a 2.2 h methods as well as the effects affecting insect impact residue
flight test flying below 500 ft on a Bellanca Skyrocket the effect of insect accumulation.
residue height to transition of flow. She summarized that only 25% of the For the leading edge of wings the shielding capability of a Krüger Flap
collected insects caused transition at sea level and only 9% caused (a leading edge high lift device) which is deployed from the underside of
transition at a height of 25000 ft. the wing, has been investigated in detail to keep the upper surface clean
Contamination of the leading edge of laminar flow areas due to the for laminar operation. Nevertheless, this restricts the design freedom of
impact of insects is one threat which was investigated in the past. Cole- the high-lift system which could in total lead to a worse high-lift per-
man [48] states that the contamination due to insects mainly takes place formance. Furthermore, only the upper side of the wing can be held
below a height of 500 ft since above this height the population of insects laminar using the Krüger Flap. The assessment between the usage of a
decreases rapidly. After assessing the data by Coleman as well as by less favourable high-lift device with shielding capabilities instead of a
Croom and Holmes, Humphreys [50] summarizes that above 1000 ft the more complex anti-contamination system has to be performed for each
amount of collected insects is negligible. During the flight phases start, wing architecture separately depending upon the high-lift requirements
landing and taxiing applicable measures need to be taken to prohibit the as well as on the laminar wing performance. For the anti-contamination
contamination of exposed laminar flow leading edges, mainly the wing. of the tail planes, Krüger Flaps are installed nor necessary regarding lift
No studies regarding the contamination of the horizontal and vertical tail enhancement. Therefore other methods need to be applied if necessary to
plane could be found. keep the surfaces clean, e.g. fluid injection approaches. It has been re-
Coleman [48] also explains that the drag due to the induced velocity ported, that the monoethylene glycol (MEG) and water fluid solutions
field of lifting surfaces at corresponding critical conditions rapidly ex- (for example as used for ice protection systems by TKS) acts as a solvent
ceeds the propulsive force of an insect leading to an uncontrollable mo- for the haemolymph which acts as a glue for the insect residue [47]. By
tion. The insect could therefore be modelled as an inanimate particle to using such a solvent-based solution the quantity of required fluid can be
simulate its trajectory in the velocity field of an airplane. Based on a reduced in comparison to using plain water. The relation of the solvent to
specific lift distribution, information about the impact of insects on the water plays an important role in the protection of the leading edge as well
vertical and horizontal tail plane should be possible. Factors [47] other as the fluid flow rate as Fig. 24 depicts. By adding a surfactant to the fluid
than the airfoil geometry, the airspeed and the altitude which influence solution, the necessary flow rate of 0:013 to 0:027 gal/min/(ft2 of pro-
the rate of insect accumulation are: jected leading edge frontal area) could be reduced even further [47].

 temperature 4.3. Ice and rain protection system

 wind speed and
 humidity/moisture. Icing of aircraft surfaces is a common threat which can be dealt with
by anti-icing systems to prohibit the growth of ice as well as de-icing
Once an insect strikes the leading edge area of a wing or tail plane, its systems to remove accumulated ice. Usually, the systems are applied to

12
K.S.G. Krishnan et al. Progress in Aerospace Sciences xxx (2017) 1–29

hot air to the components which need heating [53]. Such a system can be
found on several conventional aircraft including the A350.
It has been reported, that the micro-perforated surface of the suction
system increases the heat exchange effectivity of pneumatic anti-icing
system through supplying the bleed air more uniformly. In conven-
tional anti-icing architectures (for the wing), a single duct with multiple
outlet ports heats the inside of the leading edge as depicted on the left
side of Fig. 25. Using the suction ducting in reverse operation it is
possible to heat the skin more efficiently due to the high heat transfer
coefficients between the air and the inside surface of the perforation. An
additional advantage is that the hot bleed air is in direct contact with the
ice because it emerges through the perforated surface. Limitations
regarding the structural adhesive temperature of the bonding may
complicate the whole system [54].
Another option is the use of a chemical anti-ice system which could
also be used to protect the leading edge from insect accumulation as
explained in the previous chapter. Besides the thermal anti-ice protection
Fig. 24. Effect of solvent to water ratio on insect accumulation [47].
with bleed air, this approach was also tested during the HYLTEC flight
tests on the Do 228 aircraft. The thermal anti-ice system was tested on the
critical surfaces like the leading edge of the wing, pitot sensors at the
inner test panel whereas a fluid/foam system was tested on the two outer
fuselage or engine intakes. Nevertheless, higher surface cleanliness and
test panels. The fluid/foam at first did not work as expected due to a too
suction distribution requirements can lead to an ice protection system for
small chamber pressure. By increasing the chamber pressure, the leading
the tail planes as well, if a laminar boundary layer should be guaranteed.
edge could be de-iced at conditions much more severe than required for
Icing can block the suction holes in the micro-perforated surface leading
certification. The thermal de-icing system removed accumulated ice
to an uneven suction distribution which can degrade the laminar
without problem and if kept running, the accretion of ice was prohibited
boundary layer. Another risk arises due to the higher roughness of a
[55]. Compared to thermal anti-ice systems, chemical systems have high
surface with accumulated ice. Though the original A320 fin is not
cost of operation as well as a higher environmental impact. On the other
equipped with a hot air anti-icing system it was stated based on wind-
hand they are reliable and maintenance friendly [56].
tunnel studies during the European ALTTA project, that an anti-icing
Depending on the need for anti-icing and/or anti-contamination
system is necessary for a laminar fin [52]. Results from more recent
systems for different laminar flow application areas, different combina-
projects regarding the necessity of an anti-icing system for the vertical or
tions of methods can be preferable. For example, while a combination of
horizontal tail plane are not available and might need further wind-
a Krüger Flap for anti-contamination protection at the leading edge of the
tunnel studies.
wing together with a thermal anti-ice system due to the close proximity
When designing an ice protection system, care must be taken to
to the engines could be preferable for the wing, for the horizontal or
evaporate the ice completely. Otherwise the melted ice can run back to
vertical tail plane a liquid system fulfilling both anti-contamination and
unprotected surfaces like the spoilers or flaps on the wing and freeze
anti-icing needs could be preferable. A trade-off study has to be done to
again [50]. Since only the leading edges of aerofoils are prone to icing,
evaluate the best possible approach for each boundary condition [35].
only they need protection against icing, run-back ice due to wrong design
Besides potential anti-icing requirements, the whole suction system
of the anti-icing system cannot be removed. Large transport-category
will have to be purged to remove entrained water due to rain or
airplanes usually use thermal pneumatic (bleed air) or thermal electric
condensation. In the 757 flight test it was proposed, to reverse the airflow
(heat mats) anti-icing systems as well as the application of a chemical
in a similar manner as for the anti-icing to remove the entrained water. It
prior to take-off in winter [53].
was stated, that the purging operation had to be performed in above-
The thermal pneumatic anti-icing systems use hot bleed air from the
freezing conditions to avoid run-back ice due to the purged water.
engines to heat the leading edge of the wing in icing conditions. The
Furthermore, the purging had to be done sequentially due to the high
heated surface leads to the evaporation of water upon impingement and
airflow rate required to overcome surface tension [54]. The sequential
thus prohibiting ice accumulation as well as run-back ice. Such systems
procedure will be difficult to realise and adds weight and complexity for a
typically consist of ducting, valves, manifolds and sensors to deliver the
chamberless suction approach or the ALTTA concept using the whole

Fig. 25. Comparison of ice protection method for the wing of the B757 [54].

13
K.S.G. Krishnan et al. Progress in Aerospace Sciences xxx (2017) 1–29

leading edge as the plenum chamber. layer, the pressure and mass flow inside the suction chambers provide
No information about the water intake of the micro-perforated sur- information about the conditions of the suction system [35]. It has to be
face due to flying through heavy rain could be found so far so that the evaluated within sensitivity studies between the aerodynamics and sys-
entrained water cannot be estimated. In Powell [57] it was only stated tems disciplines if the active control of the suction system (e.g. the
that the intake of freezing-point depressant liquid as well as of rainwater plenum pressure) based on different flight conditions (flight level, yaw
through the porous surface is prevented by a small positive pressure angle, …) lead to a performance benefit with regard to additional system
difference e.g. as performed during the purge operation. Since even a low cost and complexity.
positive pressure difference already consumes energy, the question ari- For an in-service HLFC system, the requirements regarding a moni-
ses, how much energy is available during critical flight conditions like toring system are different. The system should be started without pilot
take-off and landing. input once the start-up design altitude is reached. The start-up procedure
may need additional measures to avoid high inrush currents. The pilot
only needs to be informed upon malfunctioning of the system in case that
4.4. Control and monitoring system fuel reserves for reaching the target destination might not be sufficient.
The system therefore has to communicate with the fuel monitoring sys-
For design of the monitoring system it has to be distinguished be- tem in order to monitor the consumption with respect to a laminar
tween a flight test monitoring concept and a final in-service monitoring operation. Another interface with the fuel planning exists since time in
concept. The architecture for the flight test monitoring is usually much clouds, where the flow is turbulent independent of the suction level, also
heavier and more complex to accumulate a lot of different measurement increase the fuel consumption. Other requirements regarding the control
data to understand the system behaviour due to different input signals or and monitoring system may arise based on additional anti-contamination
boundary conditions. Furthermore, the precise extent of the laminar and anti-icing systems as well as due to purging the whole system. For the
boundary layer is important to be known to modify the calculation tools/ anti-icing system, monitoring of the temperature is necessary to avoid
methods used for the design of the suction system and for predicting the overheating and thus damage to the materials.
laminar extent of the boundary layer. Besides the state of the boundary

Fig. 26. Schematic HLFC control system architecture for the B757 HTP [35].

14
K.S.G. Krishnan et al. Progress in Aerospace Sciences xxx (2017) 1–29

Table 2 encounters (TIC- Time in Clouds) during aircraft missions has been
Events and their impact on HLFC systems (adapted from Ref. [35]). evaluated by Jasperson [59]. He concluded for the investigated routes
Description Mission Consequence Mitigation Influencing that the probability of cloud encounter is not large enough to be a show-
Phase factors stopper for LFC. For example the probability of flying in clouds for more
Clouds Cruise, Complete loss of laminar Route planning, Weather than 10% of the time is 27:4% on a route from the US East Coast to North-
Top of flow for finite time pilot action west Europe with an average cruise altitude between 33500 and
climb 38500 ft. Although less frequent than flying through clouds, volcano ash
Contamination Take-off, Partial loss of laminar On-board system Weather,
(insects, ice) Climb flow for entire mission cleaning by rain season,
or sand storms have the same effect on laminar flow as ice crystals [60].
and ice location Damage to the perforated surface (like bird strikes) cannot be avoi-
System failure Take-off, Partial or complete loss System design, System ded. Nevertheless, it has to be considered when designing the structural
Climb, of laminar flow for maintenance reliability concept of the leading edge suction nose to prevent damage to the front
Cruise remainder of mission
spar. Other factors which affect laminar flow through changing the sur-
Damage to Take-off, Partial or complete loss Route planning, Weather,
perforated Climb, of laminar flow for pilot action, component face/profile form are hail, corrosion/erosion or the deviation of
surface (e.g.: Cruise remainder of mission surface design design manufacturing quality with respect to roughness, waviness, steps and
bird strike) gaps. Most of these failure conditions can be avoided by choice of ma-
terials and manufacturing as well as quality control processes [60].
Different studies regarding the system reliability, which influences
Young [35] calculated the weight of the control system for the whole
the failure condition “system failure”, have been conducted by Young
HTP of a Boeing 757-200 airplane, which is schematically depicted in
[35], Pe [60] and Ohme [61]. Different preliminary suction system ar-
Fig. 26, to be 36:8 kg which is around 12% of the whole system weight
chitectures with typical component reliability values were investigated
(76:3 kg for surfaces, ducts and valves, 97:9 kg for pump system and
by Pe [60] to calculate the overall failure rate. However, subsystems like
power as well as 84:1 kg for a decontamination system). Innovative
an anti-contamination system, which can also reduce the reliability of the
concepts as well as a reduced complexity may lead to lesser system and
overall HLFC system, were not included in these calculations. For the
components weight.
single non-redundant suction system a mean failure rate per flight hour of
8:1⋅105 was estimated by mainly having a series connection of com-
4.5. Safety and reliability considerations ponents as depicted in Fig. 27. The IMA (Integrated Modular Avionics)
IMA is basically basically, the data line, the components, the processors
A failure condition for HLFC systems is the inability of the system to and the control unit integrated. Young [35] calculated the failure rate per
achieve the target fuel burn reduction. They were analysed by Young flight hour for the normal suction mode as 3:7⋅104 . The difference in the
[35] for his aircraft performance models and are shown in Table 2. value is based on slightly different system architectures (compare Fig. 26
Failures due to contamination of the suction surface through ice, with Fig. 27) and different component failure rates due to 11 years of
confined rain or insects can be avoided by considering appropriate pro- development between the two studies. Failure rates for anti-
tection systems as explained earlier in this report. A failure of this system contamination or purge modes were calculated to be in the same
may lead to partial loss (depending on the amount of contamination) of ranges as the normal suction mode but since having only a short time of
laminar flow until the next manual cleaning and repair of the anti- operation do not affect the overall reliability severely. He proposes to
contamination system is performed. Wicke [58] performed studies modify the failure rates with a duty cycle factor to account for the limited
regarding cleaning costs for a Natural Laminar Flow conceptual aircraft time of operation.
based on different contamination levels as well as with different fuel Other architectures, which were investigated by Pe [60], were a
prices. It was found out, that already a low number of critical surface cross-link HLFC suction system in which a left hand side was connected
disruptions (disruptions which are greater than the critical height and through a cross duct (XDC) to a right hand side (e.g. for wing and HTP)
therefore transition the flow from laminar to turbulent) lead to a sig- along with various isolation valves (ISV) as depicted in Fig. 28. In this
nificant fuel benefit penalty (e.g. 400 insects residues greater than the architecture, the compressor and drive system as well as the IMA (Inte-
critical height result in a 4.4% fuel saving cutback). The appropriate time grated Modular Avionics) components were redundant while the plenum
interval to clean the leading edge (if no active system is installed) is chamber and ducting were not redundant. Furthermore, different k-out
strongly dependent of the cleaning cost per event, the fuel price as well as of-n systems were analysed in which the probability for k remaining
the contamination rate and aircraft utilisation. functional subsystems out of n total systems was calculated. For the cross-
Temporary loss of laminar flow due to flying through cirrus clouds, in link concept a mean failure rate per flight hour of 4:3⋅107 was calcu-
which ice particles penetrate the boundary layer and cause turbulent lated. The system mass is increased due to the oversizing of the
wakes, can only be avoided by considering weather effects during route compressor and drive system to operate both sides. Furthermore, the
planning. Based on the measurements of the 4 year long Global Atmo- cross duct adds additional mass. The redundant suction system has a
spheric Sampling Program (GASP) conducted by NASA on four com- slightly smaller mean failure rate per flight hour of approximately 3:2⋅
mercial Boeing 747 aircraft from 1975 to 1979 the probability of cloud

Fig. 27. Single non redundant suction system [60].

15
K.S.G. Krishnan et al. Progress in Aerospace Sciences xxx (2017) 1–29

Fig. 28. Cross-duct suction system architecture [60].

107 although space constraints in the leading edge may prohibit a decreased due to the additional fuel weight. To maximize the benefit, the
parallel architecture on each side. airline's fuel planning tools shall consider the probability of cloud en-
An increase in system reliability always decreases the system per- counters when calculating the contingency fuel.
formance (as long as the system is not degraded) e.g. due to increased
weight when choosing redundant components or additional pressure 5. Key projects in HLFC
losses when adding more components to the system. Nevertheless, hav-
ing a heavier but more reliable HLFC system can be beneficial since less 5.1. HLFC research in the United States
contingency fuel needs to be transported resulting in an overall lighter
aircraft. These trade-off studies can only be performed on overall aircraft The laminar flow research gained momentum in the US, after a
level when assessing the benefits of the decreased fuel burn due to stagnation period during the 1960's. The OPEC (Organization of the
laminar flow in contrast to the added weight based on different Petroleum Exporting Countries) oil embargo resulted in increased fuel
flight envelopes. cost and shortage of fuel [2], resulting in the importance of laminar flow
The effect of HLFC system degradation on aircraft level has been research once again. The laminar projects during the 1970's and 1980's
studied by Ohme [61]. An HLFC system for the wing as well as the under the NASA's Energy Efficient Transport Technology (EETT) program
horizontal and vertical tail plane was included in a long-range aircraft was formed to increase overall aircraft's fuel efficiency using various
model by adding an additional negative delta drag at their specific po- advanced innovative concepts such as winglets, aircraft surface coatings,
sition. The worst case scenario for a degradation of the HLFC system laminar flow research etc. Significant progress has been made in the
regarding the resulting aircraft movements was the asymmetrical HLFC laminar flow technology since its inception in 1976. NASA performed an
failure on one side of the wing in combination with an engine failure on analytical study on the application of Hybrid Laminar Flow Control
the same side of the wing. It was shown based on calculations, that the technology on the wing of a Boeing 757 aircraft [62]. The study showed
control surface deflections for the critical failure case are small. There- approximately 60% and 40% of the wing upper and lower surfaces
fore, the asymmetrical failure of laminar flow surfaces does not lead to an respectively can be laminarised. For a Mach number of Ma ¼ 0:80 and a
uncontrollable state of an aircraft even when considering a combined range of 3900 km, a fuel saving of 8% was realized without any re-
engine failure leading to a safely controllable and manoeuvrable aircraft optimization of the variables to obtain the best possible fuel savings. A
during all flight phases as required by the authorities. re-optimization could lead to an even higher fuel saving. It was also
Nevertheless, the HLFC system degradation can affect the remainder shown that the aircraft has an increased available envelope with HLFC as
of the flight due to an increase in fuel burn (through reduced laminarity compared to Natural Laminar Flow designs. Some recommendations
as well as increased trim drag) and therefore lead to diversions based on were made from this analytical study: to perform more research needed
fuel calculations. If additional contingency fuel is carried on-board to in the definition of transition criterion for Tollmien-Schlichting (T-S) and
account for HLFC failures, the effectivity of the overall system is Crossflow (CF) instabilities, to define the achievable smoothness and to
address the severity arising out of the insect-contamination problem.

Fig. 29. Three types of pressure distribution obtained on HLFC model. Re ¼ 15⋅106 , α ¼ 0:028 [63].

16
K.S.G. Krishnan et al. Progress in Aerospace Sciences xxx (2017) 1–29

Fig. 30. Transition boundaries for the three types of pressure distribution, Re ¼ 15⋅106
[63].

Fig. 33. Transition location as a function of chord Reynolds number for the upper surfaces
of the slotted LFC and HLFC models at Ma ¼ 0:82 [63].

stability characteristics in 1975. In 1978, the Langley 8-Foot Transonic

Pressure Tunnel (TPT) with a Mach number capability from approxi-
mately 0.2 to 1.3 was chosen as the preferred tunnel for carrying out LFC
experiments, where both the slotted and perforated suction surfaces were
tested. The slotted-suction model experiments happened during the years
1981–1985, and the perforated-suction during 1985–1987. The HLFC
test was performed during the years 1987–1988. The model used for
testing was a 7-ft chord, 23 swept wing model. Using the slot-suction
model, the HLFC simulation was attempted by simply applying suction
near the leading edge region and progressively turning-off the suction at
the rear portion. By using the suction at quarter-chord (25% chord), the
full chord laminar flow moved to 53% chord laminar flow [2] at a Rey-
nolds number of Re ¼ 10⋅106 . In the year 1987, the slotted suction model
experiments were completed and the model was replaced with a perfo-
Fig. 31. Variation of transition with Reynolds number for three types of pressure distri- rated suction surface to perform HLFC testing [63]. The perforated upper
bution [63].
surface was 0.025 inches thick and made of titanium. It was perforated by
electron beam drilled holes with an approximate diameter of 0.0026
inches. The spacing between the holes was 0.025 inches. The experiment
provided interesting results, by varying the Mach number from 0.80 to
0.826, different pressure distributions were obtained as shown in Fig. 29.
Of these pressure distributions, the closest match between design and
experimental data was obtained for Ma ¼ 0:82 (Type 2). The extent of
laminar flow for the three Mach numbers (Fig. 29), when suction is
applied for 25% chord is shown in Fig. 30. It shows that the extent of
laminar flow was highest (around 65%) for the highest Mach number,
while for the lowest Mach number, the most uniform spanwise distri-
bution (around 59%) was obtained. These results reflect the extent of
favourable pressure gradient above the HLFC model.
The transition locations for Type 1 and 2 pressure distributions shown
in Fig. 29 is not much affected by Reynolds number changes, whereas
Type 3 changes significantly as shown in Fig. 31. Beyond Reynolds
number of Re ¼ 17⋅106 and Mach numbers of Ma ¼ 0:826, flow sepa-
Fig. 32. Transition location as a function of the chord-wise extent of suction at Ma ¼ 0:82 ration are more critical than transition location [63].
and Re ¼ 15⋅106 [63]. The chord-wise extent of suction has an influence on the amount of
laminar flow, at a Reynolds number of Re ¼ 15⋅106 and a Mach number
Since mid-1980's most of the laminar flow control research concen- of Ma ¼ 0:82, as shown in Fig. 32. The result of the wind tunnel tests
trated on the HLFC technology, where suction is only required in the indicates that while the transition location changes only slightly between
leading edge region of the wing up to 10–20% of chord. HLFC overcomes a chord suction of 5% and 15%, a further increase beyond 15% chord
many of the constraints of NLF and also the complexity is less compared suction leads to a high increase in the extent of laminar flow.
to the LFC, where suction is applied over the entire surface. From 1981 to Another interesting result from the HLFC experiment is the compar-
1988, various wind tunnel tests were carried out at the Langley research ison of transition locations on the chord for slotted LFC section and the
center. Werner Pfenninger devised a wind tunnel experiment for appli- perforated upper surface HLFC section. While the slotted LFC model
cation of suction (slotted and perforated) to control the boundary seems to have laminar flow over nearly 100% chord at a Reynolds

17
K.S.G. Krishnan et al. Progress in Aerospace Sciences xxx (2017) 1–29

Prior to the beginning of the NASA Leading-Edge Flight Test (LEFT)

program from 1983 to 1986, many preliminary studies were performed
by the Lockheed-Georgia Company starting from 1974 regarding a
practical application of LFC [64]. The LEFT program addressed many
environmental and technical issues [57] which are potentially stopping
the implementation of the laminar flow control. Though the LEFT pro-
gram mainly implemented LFC concept at the leading edge on both sides
of the wing, it generated important results leading to the advancement of
both LFC and HLFC concepts with regards to implementation and tech-
nology readiness. The flight test was performed on the NASA C–170
Jetstar aircraft, the port side wing leading edge was fitted with a
Lockheed test section and the starboard side was fitted with a Douglas
test section as shown in Fig. 34.
The Douglas test section employed a retractable leading edge shield
for contamination avoidance and ice protection in the lower altitude
flight phases. It also employed the propylene glycol methyl ether (PGME)
Fig. 34. NASA Jetstar aircraft for flight test [57]. spray system for de-icing (Fig. 35). The rainwater was prevented from

Fig. 35. Douglas contamination-avoidance and ice protection systems [57].

entering by maintaining a positive pressure differential across the

Table 3
porous surface.
Benefits of HLFC for Globe range military transport compared to baseline turbulent design
[64]. The Jetstar flight test was the first to demonstrate the use of a tita-
nium skin for the perforated suction panel. It was also very successful in
Parameters HLFC NO HLFC on NO HLFC on lower
baseline Empennage surfaces testing the functionality of an anti-contamination system to protect the
leading edge. It was observed that the shield protection was sufficient to
Operating Empty Weight 5.4 5.4 7.9
[%]
avoid insect contamination. Though some laminarity was lost when
Gross Weight [%] 4.0 4.2 0.6 encountering ice particles in clouds, it was regained directly after leaving
Fuel Consumption [%] 13.4 13.7 7.9 the turbulent conditions. The Gaster-bump and notch-bump were suc-
L/D ratio [%] 18.4 18.2 12.5 cessful in preventing the Attachment Line contamination [57]. It was
seen that there is no need for additional maintenance, and the LFC sur-
face was operational without any degradation.
number of Re ¼ 10⋅106 and a transition location decrease to 61% chord
During mid-1986 to 1987, preliminary studies for conceptual design
for a Reynolds number of Re ¼ 15⋅106 , the HLFC model has a constant
of HLFC system were performed as one of the main tasks for the Globe
transition location at 59% chord throughout the range of Reynolds
range military transport [64] and the associated benefits were analysed
number as shown in Fig. 33.

Fig. 36. Potential benefits of HLFC on advanced subsonic transport aircraft. M ¼ 0:85, R ¼ 6500 nm, 300 passengers [65].

18
K.S.G. Krishnan et al. Progress in Aerospace Sciences xxx (2017) 1–29

Fig. 37. Boeing 757 flight test aircraft with HLFC test section ([2,66]).

analytically. The obtained results are summarized in Table 3. The study reduction in operating empty weight (OEW) and 18.2% reduction in
also suggested the need for an experimental flight program with HLFC block fuel (BF), plus a 14.7% increase in the L/D ratio.
system on a swept wing aircraft to obtain data at high Reynolds numbers, All the above mentioned analytical studies, and especially the Jetstar
and also concluded the industry is in need of a database for transport LEFT program improved confidence in the aeronautical community in
aircraft application. the laminar flow technology and paved way for the Boeing 757 HLFC
Arcara [65] performed a benefit study on HLFC system on a com- flight tests (1990–1991). It was a cooperative flight test program
mercial subsonic aircraft with projected 1995 technology improvements. involving NASA, US Air Force Wright Laboratory and Boeing. This test is
The study used the conceptual design and analysis code called Flight historic as it is the first to demonstrate the feasibility of the HLFC concept
Optimization System (FLOPS), which is used for multi-disciplinary in flight. The objectives was to perform high Reynolds number flight
studies of advanced concepts. It is assumed that the laminar flow rea- research, to develop a database for HLFC effectiveness and to develop
ches 50% chord on the upper wing surfaces as well as on horizontal and and validate an integrated practical high-lift, anti-ice and HLFC system.
vertical tails. The analysis used conservative HLFC system weights and The leading edge box of 20-ft span, outboard of the engine nacelle pylon
engine bleed air requirements. The obtained benefits as shown in Fig. 36, of the B757's port wing, was replaced with an all metal surface. The new
include a 9.9% reduction of take-off gross weight (TOGW), 5.7% leading edge box consisted of titanium perforated outer skin, subsurface

Fig. 38. Leading edge panel and stringer outline [74].

19
K.S.G. Krishnan et al. Progress in Aerospace Sciences xxx (2017) 1–29

Fig. 39. Suction system airflow path during normal operation [75].

Fig. 40. Wake rake measured drag reduction on the B757 flight tests [12,67].

Fig. 41. Laminar flow extent at Ma ¼ 0:82, h ¼ 38600 ft and cl ¼ 0:48 [66].

20
K.S.G. Krishnan et al. Progress in Aerospace Sciences xxx (2017) 1–29

Fig. 42. GEAE CF6-50C2 HLFC nacelle test article and obtained laminar flow [66].

suction flutes, and collection ducts to allow suction control of the application to the external surface of a large bypass turbofan jet engine
boundary layer cross flow and disturbance growth [66]. The micro- nacelle. The project initiated in 1991 was led by General Electric Aircraft
perforated titanium skin was laser drilled with over 19⋅106 closely Engines with Rohr, Allied Signal and NASA also being involved. The
spaced holes ([12,67]). engine used for testing was GEAE CF6-50C2 installed on the starboard
The hot air anti-icing system and Krüger flap was also integrated. The side of A300/B2 commercial transport aircraft. It was modified to
Krüger flap acts as a protection and insect shield. To meet the surface incorporate two HLFC panels, one inboard and one outboard as shown in
smoothness and waviness requirements, only minor clean-up was Fig. 42. The panels were manufactured to very stringent surface waviness
required, as the test flight included original B757 surface and contour. specifications, and consisted of a micro-perforated composite material
The design point of Ma ¼ 0:80 at a lift co-efficient of Cl ¼ 0:50 was [66]. As a proven method in previous LFC designs, the surface where the
chosen for the flight test. The information obtained from such a flight test suction was applied had subsurface circumferential flutes, into which the
was very important for further analysis and for future research. A range air is sucked. It was ducted to an industrial turbo-compressor unit driven
of instrumentation was included, to procure relevant flight test data, by engine bleed, located at the storage bay of the aircraft.
which is shown in Fig. 37. Many sensors and other measurement and instrumentation tech-
The leading edge panel along with the stringers and panel support is niques were utilized to create a database for the flight test. It included a
shown in Fig. 38 and the suction system airflow path during operation is boundary-layer rake for quantifying boundary layer build-up, hot film
shown in Fig. 39. sensors for boundary layer transition detection, surface embedded mi-
The instrumentation included flush mounted and strip-a-tube belts for crophones to assess noise field influence on the state of the boundary
static pressure measurement capability, hot film sensors for transition layer, charge patch for atmospheric particle concentration measurement
detection, infrared camera for boundary layer transition detection, and and infrared imaging for global laminar boundary layer transition
wake survey probe for inferred local drag reduction determination. The detection. The flight testing was extended for a period of 50 flight hours
flight testing began in February 1991 and consisted of 31 flights and 150 and consisted of 16 flights. The HLFC concept proved to be extremely
flight test hours, it investigated HLFC on the wing upper surface only. effective, resulting in laminar flow to 43% engine nacelle length, inde-
Higher benefits are possible from upper surface as it produces twice as pendent of altitude. Even without suction, some laminarity was main-
much drag as the lower surface [68]. The results demonstrated that the tained, but the extent of laminar flow diminished as altitude was
HLFC concept was extremely effective in delaying boundary layer tran- decreased, as shown in Fig. 42.
sition. The wake rake measurements (Fig. 40) indicated a local drag As seen earlier, the uncertainty in the Boeing 757 flight test results
reduction of 29% with operating HLFC system and an overall drag concerning the required suction rate (due to difference between the
reduction of 6% for the aircraft ([12,67]). predicted and experimental values) led to the HLFC wind tunnel exper-
The hot film sensors/gauges indicated the extent of laminar flow iments from 1993 to 1995. The advantage of using HLFC in terms of the
beyond 65% (Fig. 41), but surprisingly the amount of suction rate direct operating costs (DOC) amounts to negligible because of this un-
required was only one-third of that predicted during the early design certainty. It was seen as a show stopper, so there is a need to understand
phase. This led to a significant uncertainty in the design tools as a deeply the complex flow physics over swept wing geometry. This is
consequence of the flight test. considered important as the design tools used for HLFC technology had
The success of the Boeing 757 flight experiment encouraged the an unacceptable risk for the commercial market. The model installed in
aeronautic community to attempt the demonstration of HLFC concept the wind tunnel was a 7 ft span and 10 ft chord 35 swept wing oriented

21
K.S.G. Krishnan et al. Progress in Aerospace Sciences xxx (2017) 1–29

Fig. 43. Amplitude of stationary CF disturbances with various spanwise wavelength for flow fields: without peak (left) and with peak (right) [18].

floor to ceiling. Using the instrumentation such as infrared (IR) camera

and hot wire sensors, 3000 images and 6000 velocity profiles were ob-
tained respectively [2]. The surface temperature difference at the tran-
sition location occurring due to the difference in skin friction at the
laminar and turbulent boundary layer is shown in the IR images.
An unprecedented extent of Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD)
numerical simulations were utilized for this experiment. CFD was used:

 in the design of the test wing in order to produce the desired growth
characteristics in the airfoil shape,
 in the design of suction-surface perforation pattern to get enhanced
Crossflow-disturbance growth and
 in the hot-wire traverse system to have minimal influence on the
measured disturbance growth [18].

In order to study the Crossflow effects, the Tollmien-Schlichting dis-

turbances were suppressed by wall cooling.
The design concept for the suction hole size in the Boeing 757 flight
test experiment was believed to have been done conservatively, due to
lack of detailed data and physical understanding. The hole size was
chosen to be as small as the laser drilling process would allow, and the
spacing was small enough to provide the required porosity. Such a design
is costly and more knowledge is needed to know how large the hole size Fig. 45. Final wind tunnel airfoil profile and pressure distribution [18].
and spacing could be before “over-suction” occurs. This lets the indi-
vidual suction holes act as receptivity sites. [18]. Streett performed crossflow (CF) disturbance growth simulations
Hence, the ultimate aim for the wind tunnel experiment was to pro- utilising the numerical HLNS method. Various flow fields were studied to
vide high-quality data, needed to develop next-generation transition identify the best possible one which has minimum CF growth distur-
prediction tools and to study the suction-hole receptivity issue in detail bances. It was seen that there is resumption in growth of disturbances for

Fig. 44. Amplitude of stationary CF disturbances with various spanwise wavelengths for flowfields: without suction (left) and with suction (right) [18].

22
K.S.G. Krishnan et al. Progress in Aerospace Sciences xxx (2017) 1–29

Fig. 46. Leading edge panel cross section showing flute arrangement [69].

time-dependent velocities. This unique dataset was useful for the un-
Table 4
Preliminary calculations of HLFC benefits on Airbus fins and horizontal tail planes [73].
derstanding of suction effects on Crossflow growth and transition. It also
cautioned the experimentalists when designing and experimenting where
HLFC application area Fuel burn saving [%]
traveling Crossflow is an important factor.
A320 A310 A340 It is understood that, after all the research activity mainly concerned
Fin 1.1 0.7 0.5 with the active HLFC concept for the wing in the US, there was also a
Horizontal tail 2.1 1.4 1.2 growing interest in the passive suction concept as seen in section 4.1.
Net Gain 3.2 2.1 1.7 Boeing implemented a passive HLFC system in the Boeing 787-9 aircraft
vertical tail plane VTP. The benefits acquired by such a system are not
a flow field with leading edge suction peak, and there is decay in the available in open literature for comparison with other active concepts.
chordwise direction for the flow field with no peak, as shown in Fig. 43.
The graphs show the chordwise-normal boundary layer (BL) edge ve- 5.2. HLFC research in Europe
locity near the leading edge as abscissa and normalized chord length as
ordinate, the parameter β is called the Hartree pressure gradient Major research projects including laminar flow flight demonstrators
parameter which indicates whether there is pressure rise or pressure drop were started in Europe at the end of the 1980s and were obviously
in the basic boundary layer. This decay leads to the stabilization of short- triggered by the success of American projects like the Lockheed/
wavelength CF disturbances aft of the initial leading edge expansion and McDonnell Douglas Jetstar or the Boeing 757 projects [70]. At first, the
reduces the growth of longer wavelength disturbances. projects mainly aimed at NLF, afterwards the HLFC was investigated in
It was seen that the CF physics is changed considerably, when a more detail [2,5and35] presented a thorough overview of the research
leading edge suction peak is added. This resumption of disturbance results and flight tests until 2002 in the US as well as in Europe. The
growth in the flowfield without suction peak is the main issue behind the triggered laminar research led to two European Forums on Laminar Flow
uncertainty in the application of transition prediction tools based on Technology in 1992 (Hamburg) and 1996 (Bordeaux) respectively as
linear stability theory. The reason is the local growth rate which is in- well as a European Drag Reduction Workshop in 2000 (Potsdam). DAS-
tegrated under assumptions of the nature of the disturbance growth, SAULT Aviation in cooperation with ONERA started a comprehensive
when local growth rates are computed via linear stability theory (LST) in research programme on laminar flow in the 1980s through partial
the N-factor method [18]. The LST theory gives little guidance for the funding of the French government [71]. In a first phase a NLF outer
assumptions for such growth rate unfortunately. On the other hand, the leading edge on the wing of a Falcon 50 was tested from 1985 to 1987. In
HLNS method computes the disturbance growth directly instead of a second phase from 1987 to 1990 a HLFC-system was tested on the inner
integration of local growth rate. The chosen flowfield for the wind tunnel leading edge of the same aircraft type to address issues regarding the
experiment is shown in Fig. 44. anti-icing/cleaning-system, the suction system as well as a device to
For the experiment, it was deemed necessary to measure velocities counter attachment line transition. The leading edge cleaning mecha-
ahead of the leading edge suction peak. This led to the relatively large nism using a TKS (Tecalemit-Kilfrost-Sheepbridge Stokes) liquid system
leading edge radius and curvature change in that region. The final airfoil was very effective since no pollution problem was noted on the protected
profile and pressure distribution for the experimentation are shown side while on the unprotected side 600 insects per square meter were
in Fig. 45. identified. Due to the close proximity to the fuselage a Gaster Bump was
It was decided to test four different leading edge suction surface necessary to reduce fuselage induced turbulences (Attachment Line
configurations [18]: transition). The positioning of the bump in spanwise direction played an
important role regarding the transition location [71].
 Conservative hole size and spacing based on 757 flight test article, After the successful results on the Falcon 50 jet, Dassault started a
smallest hole that can be drilled by laser succeeding project called FLAM (Falcon LAMinar) which was running
 Maximum coupling to CF: large holes and hole spacing/pattern angle from 1990 to 1997. The aircraft was changed from the Falcon 50 to the
set to match CF vortex evolution bigger Falcon 900. A HLFC system was applied to both inboard wings to
 Relaxed criteria on hole size and spacing test the sturdiness of the system at operational level [71]. The HLFC
 Solid surface system was certified in 1995 and afterwards put into service for two years
accumulating 1000 h under hybrid laminar flow at various climatic
The wind tunnel tests were conducted at a fixed Mach number of 0.24 conditions [72].
and chord Reynolds number between 5 million and 25 million [69]. The At around the same time as Dassault, Airbus started the three phase
leading edge suction surface panels were divided into 20 individual Laminar Fin Programme in cooperation with DLR and ONERA in 1987 as
chambers as shown in Fig. 46. the first step of the LaTec (Laminar Technology) strategy. The Airbus
The data acquired from the wind tunnel tests consisted of mean sur- A320 was estimated to have the highest fuel burn saving when compared
face pressures, infrared images, and hotwire measurements of steady and to the A310 and A340 as shown in Table 4 by preliminary calculations.

23
K.S.G. Krishnan et al. Progress in Aerospace Sciences xxx (2017) 1–29

Fig. 47. Installation of flight test components for A320 HLFC fin [76].

like anti-icing and anti-contamination systems as well as an economical

manufacturing of the whole system [5] needs to be addressed. Further-
more, the suction system would have to be simplified to reduce the
weight penalty of installing the new system.
Two years after the beginning of the Laminar Fin Programme, the
European Community supported the ELFIN project (European Laminar
Flow INvestigations – 1989 to 1992) consisting of 24 European partners.
The objective was to investigate the limits of NLF, starting work in the
field of HLFC and to develop numerical design tools. Experimental data
was generated through large scale wind tunnel tests both on HLFC wings
and nacelles as well as through flight tests. The data was used to validate
the numerical stability codes. Suction was applied to the leading edge (up
to x=c ¼ 0:1) of the model at a leading edge sweep angle of 28 and a
Mach number of 0.7. At 44% chord length the flow would transition to
turbulent due to increased Tollmien-Schlichting instabilities. The results
of these experiments led to the investigation of 1:2 scaled A320 HLFC fin
model in preparation for future flight tests [70].
After the basic flow investigations in the ELFIN project, the LARA
project (LAminar flow Research Action – 1993 to 1994) was triggered to
Fig. 48. Test panels and instrumentation on Do 228 test aircraft [55]. research more application oriented issues like contamination protection
(liquid anti-contamination system as well as a Krüger shielding device),
The phases of the program were analytical studies from 1987 to 1988, roughness criteria and suction requirements. At the same time, the
wind tunnel testing from 1990 to 1992 and flight test from 1992 to 1994. follow-up project ELFIN II started in 1993 and was ongoing until 1995.
The goal was flight tests using a wing glove in 1995–1996 as well as the The focus of this project was again numerical work to improve boundary
industrial application at the end of the 1990s [73]. The suction system for layer prediction as well as off-design conditions for laminar flow over the
the A320 fin consisted of a three-stage axial compressor which was wing and engine nacelles [70].
controlled and monitored by a central data processor. The overall The project HYLDA (HYbrid Laminar Flow Demonstration on Aircraft
installation equipment for the flight tests is depicted in Fig. 47. The – 1996 to 1999) was sponsored by the European Community and
central data processor worked as the interface of the suction system to the included 23 partners. The objective was to investigate the factors needed
aircraft data management. Turbulent reference flight tests took place in to advance the Technology Readiness Level (TRL) of HLFC for the wing,
1995 to qualify measurement equipment and the Gaster Bump as well as the engine nacelle as well as the A320 fin to flight demonstration [35].
to acquire turbulent reference data. The HLFC flight tests finally took The project also utilized the A320 HLFC Fin from the LaTec project [5].
place in 1998. The design was rather complex and voluminous and even The project HYLTEC (Hybrid Laminar Flow Technology – 1998 to
occupied some cabin space in the last rows of the A320. The leading edge 2001) was the next European HLFC project aiming at a full-scale devel-
was completely filled by suction ducts. Additionally a sophisticated opment of an HLFC wing to counter issues regarding manufacturing and
control system with nine individually controlled valves and flow meters contamination due to insects or ice. Besides critical issues regarding
was needed. Though this design aspect was perfectly fine for experi- manufacturing, systems and operational issues, studies regarding a
mental verifications, it cannot be suited for airline operations. It could be retrofit for in-service aircraft were performed as well as experimental
concluded that the system internal noise was not as critical as expected data generated to validate new prediction and design tools [35].
and that a properly working passive device like the Gaster Bump, can A wing glove for one side of DLR's test aircraft Do 228 has been
reduce the number, position and size of suction chambers. Furthermore it developed as part of HYLTEC. It featured several methods of anti-
was stated that the surface quality requirements derived from wind contamination systems (Krüger shield, fluid, coatings) as well as
tunnel experiments are less critical for flight tests. Overall, the HLFC different ice protection methods (fluid, bleed) which are schematically
system on the A320 fin can improve fuel efficiency, but operational issues depicted in Fig. 48. With this new wing designs, flight tests have been

24
K.S.G. Krishnan et al. Progress in Aerospace Sciences xxx (2017) 1–29

Fig. 49. Different pressures and suction velocities for the design condition [45].

1933 flights and varying meteorological and entomological conditions,

no visible sign of erosion or damage due to ground handling could be
found. The active panel was always free of insects and ice when
inspected. On the other hand, the unprotected panel showed signs of
insect debris but they were mainly smeared out having little or no
perceptible thickness while at the adjoining rubber boots numerous in-
sect hits above the critical height were reported. The average usage of the
liquid for anti-contamination was 0:082 l=min per metre of span [78].
The ALTTA project (Application of Hybrid Laminar Flow Technology
on Transport Aircraft (2000–2003) utilized the A320 HLFC fin, which
was developed in earlier projects, as baseline for further studies. The
objective was a more robust and simpler and thus lighter system which
was designed for operational rather than experimental conditions [35].
The schematic of the newly developed simplified suction system design
utilising a double-skin surface for the chambering was already depicted
in Fig. 22. The weight of the double-skin leading edge (without system
Fig. 50. Pump power as a function of flight level [45].
installations) is comparable to the standard leading edge of the fin. The
remaining part of the leading edge is the plenum chamber and the
conducted in four test campaigns in the end of 2001. The flow transition pressure difference between plenum and outside pressure leads to a
could be delayed between 25% and 50% depending on the flap deflection suction airflow in the chambers. Due to the orifices in the double-skin the
and suction velocity. Problems arose from the fluid de-icing system due system is self-adapting and therefore works without flow meters or
to a too low chamber pressure. Nevertheless, those areas covered by fluid valves. When designing the suction system, the pressure losses through
were de-iced sufficiently. The thermal anti-ice system removed the the micro-perforated surface were calculated from formulas derived in
accumulated ice with ease once it was turned on and was even more HYLDA (see Ref. [43]) which were increased by 30% to allow for
effective than the standard thermal ice protection system due to the manufacturing tolerances. The design condition for the HLFC system was
microperforated surface. On the Krüger flap test panel, only three insects a flight level of 31000 ft with a Mach number of 0:78 and no yaw angle or
(0.7% of total amount counted on outside reference panel) were counted rudder deflection. The calculated values for the design condition are
after a total of 11 anti-contamination test flights. The fluid anti- depicted in Fig. 49 utilising an exhaust Mach number of 0:2 [45].
contamination system did not perform as good as the Krüger shield and The pump power and therefore the weight and size of it are deter-
accumulated roughly 11% of the insects of the reference panel [55]. mined by the lowest height, so that the HLFC system can laminarise the
Another aspect of HYLTEC was the gaining of service experience with flow. Fig. 50 depicts the relationship between the two parameters pump
and without insect contamination protection on a SAAB 2000 aircraft power and flight level. It is recommended to design the system for a
flying regular routes across Northern Europe. For that purpose, two small starting altitude of around 29000 ft in the second segment climb based on
test sections on each side of the wing have been installed which featured performance studies [45]. The optimum starting flight level for HLFC has
a number of porous surfaces but no active suction system. One panel was to be found in a multi-disciplinary way between aerodynamics, systems
protected by a fully automatic liquid anti-contamination system while and the overall assessment group .
the other panel was unprotected. The airline service tests were started In the context of the LuFo IV HIGHER-LE (High Lift Enhanced
mid of 1999 and were stopped after 15 months with approximately Research Leading Edge) compound project which started in 2009,
200–250 flights each month. Durability aspects of the perforated surfaces different research institutes worked together to assess an HLFC system
like erosion, corrosion and damage were monitored during that time- deployed on a conceptual long-range HLFC research baseline aircraft. For
frame to address issues like choice of materials for the perforated surface that purpose, a suction system synthesis was performed by the Hamburg
as well as operational and certification issues. After 1748 flight hours on University of Technology. The aerodynamic calculations were performed

25
K.S.G. Krishnan et al. Progress in Aerospace Sciences xxx (2017) 1–29

In VER2SUS (Verification and Validation of a Simplified Suction

System), which was part of the HIGHER-LE compound project, a
simplified suction system for the fin of the A320 was developed. The
number of suction chambers could be significantly reduced to obtain a
lighter system. The enhanced suction system was successfully tested in
the German-Dutch Wind Tunnels Large Low-Speed Facility (DNW-LLF) as
shown in Fig. 51. With these tests not only the designs were validated but
also the whole process chain to develop such a simplified suction sys-
tem [79].
The section of the fin to be tested shall be identical with a suitable
section for flight tests. The verification and validation of the simplified
suction system is done to pave the way for a flight test of the simplified
suction system during the European AFLoNext (Active Flow- Loads &
Noise Control on Next Generation Wing) which started mid of 2013. In
the course of AFLoNext, an HLFC system will be installed and flight tested
on the fin of DLR's Airbus A320 ATRA (Advanced Technology Research
Aircraft). Schrauf [80] states that the consortium partners plan to install a
passive suction system which is driven by the pressure differences
occurring naturally on the aircraft. Nevertheless, an active system will
most likely also be installed to assess the difference in benefit between
the two solutions. The design principles of the simplified suction system
on the fin are also going to be transferred to the wing to allow for large
scale testing. Furthermore, the suction system on the HLFC research
Fig. 51. Installation of the HLFC fin on middle section at DNW-LLF wind tunnel [84].
baseline aircraft of HIGHER-LE will be assessed in a multidisciplinary
way on aircraft level. The assessment includes tasks regarding opera-
tional reliability, effects on fuel and power consumption as well as the
costs of the technology.
DLR also started an internal laminar flow control project called
Laminar Aircraft Research (LamAiR) in 2009. In the project, NLF was
investigated for a novel forward swept wing configuration as well as an
HLFC system for the vertical fin of an A320. The goal of the A320 HLFC
system was to further simplify the ALTTA-concept. After the end of the
project in 2012 a follow-up project was launched in 2014 named TuLAM
(Toughen up Laminar Technology) to further improve and simplify the
chosen suction concept and the Technology Readiness Level (TRL).
TuLAM dealt with the chamberless suction nose concept, which was first
proposed in LamAiR as shown in Fig. 52 Furthermore, DLR's Institute of
Flight Systems was chosen as additional project partner to address system
Fig. 52. Chamberless HLFC suction nose concept. issues and integration topics.
In July 2015, a European funded research project named ECHO
(Evaluation of Certified HLFC elevator Operation) was started with the
by DLR's Institute of Aerodynamics and Flow Technology and the overall aim of developing HLFC technology for the horizontal tail plane (HTP)
assessment was performed by RWTH Aachen's ILR Institute using the tool for long range aircraft. It is planned to develop a prototype and to eval-
MICADO (Multidisciplinary Integrated Conceptual Aircraft Design and uate it for flight tests, ultimately increasing the TRL for application in
Optimization). Despite the baseline configuration, an optimized wing commercial aircraft.
planform was developed to reduce the total system mass as well as the
required power [37].

Fig. 53. Timeline showing various laminar flow programs for subsonic transport aircraft from the US and the European Union.

26
K.S.G. Krishnan et al. Progress in Aerospace Sciences xxx (2017) 1–29
Table 5
Summary of HLFC Flight test programs in the US.

Duration Project/Program Study/Experime-ntal Model/Aircraft Other Details Partners/Stakeholders Remarks

type

1976–1982 EETT HLFC Boeing 757 NASA, Boeing Estimated 8.2% fuel savings
benefits – analytical
study
1985–1987 LEFT Program Flight test JetStar Study conducted to compare Lockheed, Douglas The Anti-contamination
both slotted and perforated system was tested in-flight for
suction sections. The study positive results
greatly helped for future
HLFC projects
1987–1991 Boeing 757 flight Flight test Boeing 757 65% laminarity achieved NASA, US Air Force 29% drag reduction was achieved
test program with just one-third Wright Laboratory, and an estimated 6% drag
of suction amount predicted and Boeing reduction on the aircraft
using design tools, which gave
rise to uncertainty. Extensive
wind tunnel experiments
conducted in 1995 to have a
reliable database for
future HLFC concepts
1991–1992 GE AE CF6-50C2 Flight test A300 aircraft General Electric Aircraft Upto 43% laminarity
HLFC nacelle test with GEAE Engines, Rohr, Allied was achieved
CF6-50C2 Signal and NASA
engines
2008–2013 Boeing 787 Flight test Boeing 787 No open literature available NASA, Boeing A passive HLFC system was
(approximately) flight test successfully installed

5.3. Summary control (HLFC) technology, for application in commercial aircraft. There
is a growing concern for environmental protection and the important
Research in laminar flow control has been active for the past four factor to be considered is the fuel consumption. The HLFC technology
decades both in the US and in Europe. Various analytical studies and flight was found very promising and has good potential to enhance aircraft fuel
tests have been performed under various projects, the timeline view of all efficiency, subsequently with improved payload and range capabilities.
main HLFC programs is shown in Fig. 53. There was a great deal of The technology has evolved in many proportions over the years, through
knowledge transfer and lessons learned from the experiences of each of the lessons learned from each project. These improvements have made
the programs. The OPEC embargo was one of the main drivers of the the technology more and more feasible. The development of HLFC sys-
laminar flow technology as seen earlier, since the technology offers to tems is a complex, multi-disciplinary task, which needs technical solu-
reduce drag and hence fuel consumption. Some of the earlier laminar flow tions from various disciplines for proper systems integration. A great deal
research started in the US in 1976 under the Energy Efficient Transport of work has been performed in the aerodynamic domain in the past de-
Technology program. Soon, the demonstration of the success of the HLFC cades to assess the potential benefits of the technology, and there is a
studies in the US generated interests in Europe to pursue research, and growing need to deal with various systems, and structural issues. The
hence research began in NLF and LFC in 1984. Under the Falcon LAMinar systems aspect involves identification and assessment of various possible
program, the first HLFC flight test was started. A summary of flight tests in system solutions in-order to find the most optimal system architecture,
both the US and Europe is summarized in Table 5 and Table 6. and also the possible penalty it poses on the aircraft fuel consumption. In
addition, the safety and reliability of various possible system architec-
6. Conclusions tures needs to be assessed thoroughly for certification purposes. Since
HLFC technology involves usage of micro-perforated surfaces in the
The paper explained the theoretical basis behind the HLFC system airframe, prior attention is required to address issues such as anti-
and reviewed the system design and prevailing issues, important pro- contamination, ice-protection, which requires both optimal and novel
jects, analytical studies and flight tests which were intentioned to solutions. Although many different solutions were proposed earlier with
improve major technical aspects and difficulties of hybrid laminar flow regards to anti-contamination and ice-protection, as detailed in this

Table 6
Summary of HLFC Flight test programs in Europe.

Duration Project/ Study/ Model/ Other Details Partners/Stakeholders Remarks

Program Experime- Aircraft
ntal type

1990–1997 FLAM Flight test Falcon 2 year HLFC wing flight tests on a Falcon 900
900 airplane with a total of 1000 h
1986–1998 LaTec Flight test A 320 Airbus A320 HLF fin project, flight tests in 1998
1996–1999 HYLDA Flight test A 320 3E/LATEC and HYLDA funded flight Technical feasibility proven
tests with A320, HLFC applied at No show stopper for HLFC was found
vertical tail
1998–2001 HYLTEC Flight test Saab HLFC wing flight test on DLR Do228 Airbus (D/F/E), Apparatebau Gauting, Aerospace Operational flight tests, lab tests, manufacturing
2000 test vehicle in 2002 including Systems and Technologies, BAE Systems, DERA, DLR, issues
and protection systems against icing and FFA, Nord-Micro, ONERA, Saab, SONACA, University Laminar flow retrofit studies for medium range
Do228 insect contamination of Limerick, TU Berlin Airbus aircraft
Generation and analysis of experimental data,
two wind tunnel tests at ONERA, two flight tests
(Saab 2000 and Do228) and data analysis for
A320 HLF campaign

27
K.S.G. Krishnan et al. Progress in Aerospace Sciences xxx (2017) 1–29

paper, issues concerned with system weight and drag penalty needs to be [34] M. Germano, U. Piomelli, P. Moin, W.H. Cabot, A dynamic subgride-scale eddy
viscosity model, J. Phy. Fluids A 3 (7) (1991) 1760–1765.
taken into account, when weighing the options. When addressed with
[35] T.M. Young, Investigations into the Operational Effectiveness of Hybrid Laminar
optimal and novel system solutions, the HLFC seems an attractive option Flow Control Aircraft, PhD Thesis, Cranfield University, 2002.
for application in commercial aircraft in the years to come. [36] G.H. Schrauf, Status and perspectives of laminar flow, Aeronautical J. 109 (2005).
[37] K. Risse, et al., Conceptual wing design methodology for aircraft with hybrid
laminar flow control, in: 52nd Aerospace Sciences Meeting Held at the AIAA
Acknowledgments SciTech Forum, Maryland, 2014.
[38] J.-P. Robert, Drag Reduction: an Industrial Challenge. AGARD Special Course on
Skin Friction Drag Reduction, 1992. AGARD-R-796.
The authors would like to thank for the support from EU CleanSky2 [39] R.A.L. Wilson, The Introduction of Laminar Flow to the Design and Optimisation of
ECHO (JTI-CS2-CPW01-LPA-01-02) project. Transport Aircraft, PhD Thesis, Cranfield University, 1997.
[40] https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/farnborough-aero-secrets-of-boeings-
new-dreamliner-401784/, (Accessed 14 September 2015).
References [41] Schrauf, G. H.: The Need of Large-Scale HLFC Testing in Europe http://www.
aflonext.eu/files/pdf/schrauf_2013_HLFC_research-needs_v2.pdf, (Accessed 14
[1] A.L. Braslow, A History of Suction-type Laminar-flow Control with Emphasis on September 2015).
Flight Research, Monographs in Aerospace History Number 13, Washington, 1999. [42] T. Pe, F. Thielecke, in: Synthesis and Topology Study of HLFC System Architectures
[2] R.D. Joslin, Overview of Laminar Flow Control, NASA Technical Publication, in Preliminary Aircraft Design. 3rd CEAS Air & Space Conference, 2011.
Washington, 1998. [43] H. Bieler, J. Preist, HLFC for Commercial Aircraft – First ELFIN Test Results, First
[3] S.C. Liddle, M. Jabbal, W.J. Crowther, Systems and certification issues for civil European Forum on Laminar Flow Technology, Hamburg, 1992.
transport aircraft flow control systems, Aeronautical J. 113 (2009). [44] A. Seitz, K.-H. Horstmann, Design studies on NLF and HLFC applications at DLR, in:
[4] E. Stanewsky, H. Rosemann, in: Active Flow Control Applied to Military and Civil 27th International Congress of the Aeronautical Society, Nice, 2010.
Aircraft. RTV/AVT (AGARD) Symposium, Braunschweig, 2000. [45] G.H. Schrauf, K.-H. Horstmann, Simplified hybrid laminar flow control, in:
[5] R. Henke, A320 HLFC fin flight tests completed, Air & Space Eur. 1 (2) (1999). European Congress on Computational Methods in Applied Sciences and Engineering
[6] E.J. Green, AIAA, in: Laminar Flow Control – Back to the Future. 38th Fluid (ECCOMAS), Jyv€askyl€a, 2004.
Dynamics Conference and Exhibit, June 2008, pp. 2008–3738. [46] M. Horn, Bauweisen und Fertigungskonzepte für Hybride Laminarhaltung, DLRK
[7] F.D. Young, et al., A Brief Introduction to Fluid Mechanics, fifth ed., John Wiley & Kongress, 2012.
Sons, 2011. [47] C.C. Croom, B.J. Holmes, Insect Contamination Protection for Laminar Flow
[8] D.J. Anderson Jr., Ludwig Prandtl's Boundary Layer, Physics Today, December Surfaces, NASA Report N88–14954, 1988.
2005. Edition. [48] W.S. Coleman, Roughness Due to Insects. Boundary Layer and Flow Control Volume
[9] http://www.lairgacy.com/2013/06/laminar-flow-aircraft-possibility-or.html, II, Pergamont Press, Oxford, 1961.
(Accessed 8 December 2015). [49] T.M. Young, Laboratory testing of insect contamination for laminar flow
[10] http://www.smartwingdesign.org/_include/img/work/full/TS.png (Accessed 27 applications using an insect-impact test facility, in: 28th International Congress of
September 2016). the Aeronautical Sciences, Brisbane, 2012.
[11] AGARD Report 786, Special Course on Skin Friction Drag Reduction. AGARD-r-786, [50] B. Humphreys, Contamination Avoidance for Laminar Flow Surfaces, First European
North Atlantic Treaty Organization, March 1992. Forum on Laminar Flow, Hamburg, 1992.
[12] D.V. Madallon, Simulated Airline Service Flight Tests of Laminar Flow Control with [51] Kok, Mariana, et al., Critical considerations in the mitigation of insect residue
Perforated Surface Suction System, March 1990. NASA Technical Paper 2966. contamination on aircraft surfaces – a review, Prog. Aerosp. Sci. 75 (2015).
[13] L.M. Mack, Boundary Layer Linear Stability Theory, AGARD Report No 709, 1984. [52] ALTTA Final Technical Report, 2003.
[14] D. Arnal, G. Casalis, Laminar-turbulent transition prediction in three-dimensional [53] Federal Aviation Administration, Aviation Maintenance Technician Handbook, vol.
flows, Prog. Aerosp. Sci. (2000) 173–191. 2, 2012. Airframe.
[15] A.M.O. Smith, N. Gamberoni, Transition, Prerssure Gradient and Stability Theory, [54] Boeing Commercial Airplane Group, High Reynolds Number Hybrid Laminar Flow
1956. Douglas Aircraft Co. Rept. ES26388, El Segundo, California. Control (HLFC) Flight Experiment. IV, Suction System Design and Manufacture,
[16] Van Ingen, A Suggested Semi-empirical Method for the Calculation of the Boundary NASA/CR-1999–209326, Hampton, 1999.
Layer Transition Region, Report, UTH-74, University of Technology, Department of [55] K.-H. Horstmann, et al., in: HYLTEC Laminar Flow Systems Flight Tests: Flight
Aerospace Engineering, Delft, 1956. Testing of Anti-icing and Anti-contamination Systems on the DLR Do228 Test
[17] M. Malik, R.: stability theory applications to laminar flow control, in: Research in Vehicle. CEAS Conference, London, 2003.
Natural Laminar Flow and Laminar-flow Control, NASA Conference Publication [56] F. Thielecke, Flugzeugsysteme 3. Lecture Notes, TU Hamburg-Harburg Institute of
2487, Part 1, 1987. Aircraft Systems Engineering, Hamburg, 2012.
[18] C.L. Streett, Designing a hybrid laminar flow control experiment – the CFD- [57] G.A. Powell, The right wing of the L.E.F.T. Airplane. Research in natural laminar
experiment connection, in: 41st Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, AIAA flow and laminar flow control, in: NASA Conference Publication 2487, Part 1, 1987.
Paper 2003-979, Reno, 2003. [58] K. Wicke, et al., Insect contamination impact on operational and economic
[19] C.L. Streett, Direct harmonic linear navier-stokes method for efficient simulation of effectiveness of natural-laminar-flow aircraft, in: 29th Congress of the International
wave packets, in: 36th Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, AIAA Paper 1998- Council of the Aeronautical Sciences (ICAS), St. Petersburg, 2014.
0784, Reno, 1998. [59] W.H. Jasperson, et al., GASP clound encounter statistics: implication for laminar
[20] T. Herbert, F.P. Bertolotti, Stability analysis of nonparallel boundary layers, Bull. flow control flight, J. Aircr. 21 (11) (1984).
Am. Phys. Spc 32 (1987) 2079–2806. [60] T. Pe, F. Thielecke, System Reliability Analysis of HLFC Suction System
[21] H. Emmons, The laminar-turbulent transition in a boundary layer-part I, Architectures, Workshop on Aircraft System Technologies, Hamburg, 2013.
J. Aeronaut. Sci. 18 (1951) 490–498. [61] P. Ohme, D. Vechtel, Criticality and Sensitivity Analysis of a Hybrid Laminar Flow
[22] S. Dhawan, R. Narasimha, Some properties of boundary layer flow during transition Control System on Aircraft Level, Institute Report, DLR Institute of Flight Systems,
from laminar to turbulent motion, J. Fluid Mech. 3 (1958) 418–436. Braunschweig, 2010.
[23] W.P. Jones, B.E. Launder, The calculation of low Reynolds number phenomena with [62] Hybrid Laminar Flow Control Study Final Technical Report, Energy Efficient
a two-equation model of turbulence, Int. J. Heat. Mass Transf. 15 (1973) 301–314. Transport Program, NASA-cr-165930, 1982.
[24] D.D. Pasquale, A. Rona, S.J. Garrett, A selective review of CFD transition models, in: [63] P.J. Bobbitt, et al., Results for the Hybrid Laminar Flow Control Experiment
AIAA 2009-3812, 39th AIAA Fluid Dynamics Conference, San Antonio, Texas, June Conducted in the NASA Langley 8-ft Transonic Pressure Tunnel on a 7-ft Chord
2009, pp. 22–25. Model, 1992.
[25] D.C. Wilcox, Simulation of transition with a two-equation turbulence model, AIAA [64] H.R. Lange, Lockheed laminar flow control systems development and applications,
J. 32 (2) (1994). in: Research in Natural Laminar Flow and Laminar Flow Control, NASA Conference
[26] Langtry R.B, Sjolander S.A.: Prediction of transition for attached and separated Publication 2487, Part 1, 1987.
shear layers in turbomachinery, AIAA Paper 2002-3643. 38th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ [65] P.C. Arcara Jr., D.W. Bartlett, L.A. McCullers, Analysis for the Application of Hybrid
ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference, Indianapolis, Indiana. Laminar Flow Control to a Long-range Subsonic Transport Aircraft, 1991. SAE Paper
[27] D.K. Walters, J.H. Leylek, A new model for boundary-layer transition using a single- 912113.
point RANS approach, J. Turbomach. 126 (Jan. 2004) 193–202. [66] F.S. Collier Jr., An overview of recent subsonic laminar flow control flight
[28] J.P. Gostelow, A.R. Blunden, G.J. Walker, Effects of free-stream turbulence and experiments, Florida, AIAA, in: AIAA 24th Fluid Dynamic Conference, July 1993,
adverse pressure gradients on boundary layer transition, ASME J. Turbomach. 116 pp. 93–2987.
(1994) 392–404. [67] D.V. Madallon, Hybrid Laminar Flow Control Flight Research, Research and
[29] Y.B. Suzen, P.G. Huang, Modeling of flow transition using an intermittency Technology, 1991. NASA TM-4331.
transport equation, ASME J. Fluids Eng. 122 (2) (2000) 273–284. [68] D.M. Sawyers, R.A.L. Wilson, An Assessment of the Impact of Hybrid Laminar Flow
[30] Y.B. Suzen, G. Xiong, P.G. Huang, Predictions of transitional flows in low-pressure on a Large Subsonic Aircraft, 2nd European Forum for Laminar Flow Technology,
turbines using intermittency transport equation, AIAA J. 40 (2) (2002) 254–266. Bordeaux, June 1996.
[31] R.E. Mayle, A. Schultz, The path to predicting bypass transition, ASME J. [69] J. Eppink, R. Wleizen, Data analysis for the NASA/boeing hybrid laminar flow
Turbomach. 119 (1997) 405–411. control crossflow experiment, in: 41st AIAA Fluid Dynamics Conference and
[32] X. Zheng, C. Liu, F. Liu, C. Yang, Turbulent transition simulation using the k-ω Exhibit, AIAA, 2011, p. 3879.
model, Int. J. Numer. Methods Eng. 42 (1998) 907–926. [70] B. Dziomba, European Laminar Flow Projects, in: Aerodays 1993: Second
[33] J. Smagorinsky, Mon. Weather Rev. 91 (3) (1963) 99–164. Community Aeronautics R&D Conference, Naples, 1993.

28
K.S.G. Krishnan et al. Progress in Aerospace Sciences xxx (2017) 1–29

[71] C. Bulgubure, D. Arnal, Dassault Falcon 50 Laminar Flow Flight Demonstrator, First European Congress on Computational Methods in Applied Sciences and Engineering
European Forum on Laminar Flow Technology, Hamburg, 1992. (ECCOMAS), Barcelona, 2000.
[72] J. Fiton, Lessons learned from Dassault's Falcon 900 HLFC demonstrator, in: CEAS/ [79] C.-H. Rohardt, et al., Simplified-HLFC/Entwurf eines Seitenleitwerks mit Hybrid-
DragNet European Drag Reduction Conference, Potsdam, 2000. Laminarhaltung für den Airbus A320, Deutscher Luft-und Raumfahrtkongress,
[73] J.J. Thibert, A. Quest, J.P. Robert, The A320 Laminar Fin Programme, First Bremen, 2011.
European Forum on Laminar Flow Technology, Hamburg, 1992. [80] G.H. Schrauf, The Need of Large-scale HLFC Testing in Europe. http://www.
[74] NASA-CR-1999–209325, High Reynolds Number Hybrid Laminar Flow Control aflonext.eu/files/pdf/schrauf_2013_HLFC_research-needs_v2.pdf (Accessed 14
(HLFC) Flight Experiment III – Leading Edge Design, Fabrication and Installation, September 2015).
1999. [81] T. Pe, F. Thielecke, Methodik zur Leistungsabsch€atzung von HLFC-Absaugsystemen
[75] NASA-CR-1999–209326, High Reynolds Number Hybrid Laminar Flow Control im Flugzeugvorentwurf, 2010. Deutscher Luft- und Raumfahrtkongress.
(HLFC) Flight Experiment IV – Suction System Design and Manufacture, 1999. [82] http://www.mit.edu/course/1/1.061/OldFiles/www/dream/SEVEN/
[76] R. Henke, Airbus A320 HLF fin flight tests, in: CEAS/DragNet European Drag SEVENTHEORY.PDF, (Accessed 16 December 2015).
Reduction Conference, Potsdam, 2000. [83] J. Meyer, et al., System Layout and Instrumentation of a Laminar Flow System for
[77] D.J. Anderson Jr., Ludwig Prandtl's Boundary Layer, Physics Today, December the DLR Do 228 Test Vehicle, CEAS Conference, London, 2003.
2005. Edition. [84] DLR's Institute of Aerodynamics and Flow Technology Braunschweig Newsletter,
[78] B.E. Humphreys, E.J. Totland, K.-H. Horstmann, Flight testing of laminar flow 2015. http://www.dlr.de/as/en/Portaldata/5/Resources/dokumente/newsletter/
materials and systems to gain experience with respect to operational aspects, in: 2015_II_Newsletter.pdf (Accessed 30 November 2015).

29