https://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?

R=19980022683 2018-07-25T15:48:05+00:00Z

//A 34/c'_.--l_i_--- zo73o9 &/)

AIAA 98-0328

BOUNDARY LAYER FLOW CONTROL WITH

A ONE ATMOSPHERE UNIFORM GLOW
DISCHARGE SURFACE PLASMA

J. Reece Roth and Daniel M. Sherman

University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN

and

Stephen P. Wilkinson
NASA Langley Research Center
Hampton, VA

36th Aerospace Sciences

Meeting & Exhibit
January 12-15, 1998 / Reno, NV

For permission to copy or republish, contact the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
1801 Alexander Bell Drive, Suite 500, Reston, Virginia 20191-4344
 AIAA 98-0328

BOUNDARY LAYER FLOW CONTROL WITH A ONE ATMOSPHERE

UNIFORM GLOW DISCHARGE SURFACE PLASMA

J.Reece Roth" and Daniel M. Sherman*

University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN 37996

and

Stephen P. Wilkinson t
NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA 23681

Abstract Introduction

Low speed wind tunnel data have been The use of magnetohydrodynamics
acquired for planar panels covered by a (MHD) to control the turbulent viscous
uniform, glow-discharge surface plasma drag due to aerodynamic boundary layer
in atmospheric pressure air known as the flow has received considerable attention
One Atmosphere Uniform Glow over the years. Most concepts have been
Discharge Plasma (OAUGDP). based on ionized flow around a
Streamwise and spanwise arrays of magnetized hypersonic vehicle, or on
flush, plasma-generating surface achieving such a plasma with ion seeding
electrodes have been studied in laminar, techniques. Numerous examples ate
transitional, and fully turbulent boundary found in patents awarded in the 1960's
layer flow. Plasma between symmetric (see references 1 and 2). Emphasis has
streamwise electrode strips caused large been placed on the magnetohydrodynainic
increases in panel drag, whereas approach in hydrodynamics due to the
asyrnmetric spanwise electrode electrically conducting nature of seawater
configurations produced a significant and perceived high economic or
thrust. Slnol/e wire flow visualization performance payoffs. However, in terms
and mean velocity diagnostics show the of a net energy balance, performance
prilnary cause of the phenomena to be a enhancement has proven elusive. An
combination of mass transport and extensive review of pure MHD methods
vortical structures induced by strong for drag reduction (i.e., those based
paraelectric electrohydrodynamic (EHD) exclusively on the cross product of the
body forces on the flow. local current density and magnetic
...................... induction, j x B), through 1989 was
* Professor, Dept. of Electrical compiled by Tsinober (ref. 3). Several
Engineering, Associate Fellow AIAA current investigations are discussed in
references 4 and 5.
' Graduate Research Assistant, Dept. of
Physics and UTK Plasma Sciences An alternative to MHD flow control
LaboIatou which has received far less attention in
the field of boundary layer research is
-i- Aerospace Engineer, Fluid Modeling based on the electric field alone, or
and Control Branch, Senior Member electrohydrodynamic (EHD) control. In
AIAA p_mially ionized gases the electric field
itself, or the pm-aelectric effects associated

1
Copyright ©1998 by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics. Inc. No copyright is asset'led in the United States
under Title 17, U. S Code. The U. S. Government has a royalty-frec license to exercise all rights under the copyright claimed
herein for Governmental purposes All other rights are reserved by tile copyright owner
 with an electric field gradient, can be used charge for practicable engineering values
to accelerate ions and, via particle of magnetic and electric field strengths.
collisions (mobility drift), the neutral gas This is an important point in view of
(references 6, 7). In the past, a difficulty potential aerospace flight applications.
with the EHD approach, especially in The maximum practical magnetic field
non-hypersonic flight applications, is from permanent magnets which can be
generating an energy-efficient ionized expected in flush-mounted, non-
flow near the surface. This report obstructive surface application is
presents experimental data on the first estimated to be no more that about B =
aerodynamic application of a new EHD 0.1 Tesla. While higher values are
method based upon the One Atmosphere obtainable with electromagnets, their
Uniform Glow Discharge Plasma or Joulean dissipation (or superconducting
OAUGDP (refs. 6 to 13), that may refrigeration energy requirements) would
change this situation. seriously compromise any net energy
saving in, for instance, a drag reduction
The OAUGDP is a novel, surface- application. The minimum electric field
generated, atmospheric, RF (radio required to generate an OAUGD plasma
frequency) plasma. The concept of the in air is about E = 1.0 MV/meter (10
device is discussed in detail later. The kV/cm). Assuming a typical commercial
primary feature that distinguishes it from transport flight velocity of U = 300 m/sec,
prior RF plasmas is its efficient ability to the force ratio on a singly charged particle
create a uniform glow discharge at is given by the quotient -- E/UB -- 3.3
atmospheric pressure on an extended fiat xl04. In other words, the electric force on
surface. The electrodes required to do this such a charged particle is more than four
have characteristics which lend orders of magnitude greater than the
themselves to practical engineering maximum practicable magnetic force.
applications, such as simplicity and
robustness. They should also be To examine the ratio of boUv forces, the
inexpensive and reliable. Given this magnitude of the electrical current and
capability, the goals of the present EHD charged particle number densities rnust be
study employing the OAUGDP for considered as well. For the plasma
laminar or turbulent boundary layer considered in this report, a charged
control are twofold: 1)-demonstrate the particle number density, N = 1.0x 10_T/m 3
generation of EHD forces with is characteristic. A maximum current
magnitudes sufficient to alter boundary density corresponding to the glow-to-arc
layer flow dynamics, and 2) demonstrate transition, J = 10 4 A/n-l 2, is assumed as a
that such forces constitute a useful flow value not likely to be exceeded in any
control mechanism. glow discharge plasma application. The
body force ratio is then given by the
Before introducing the OAUGDP and the quotient rB = qN<E/JB where q is the
current flow control study, however. electronic charge. This yields rn = 16, or
some additional discussion of pure EHD an EHD body force more than one order
controls will help to show why this of magnitude greater than that of the
approach has been chosen. An interesting MHD body force.
feature of EHD controls, which perhaps
is not generally appreciated, is that the Another fundamental advantage of EHD
electrostatic force on a charged p,'uticle forces is that the electric field can do work
can be significantly larger than the on the charged particles and. through
magnetic force on the same moving strong collisional coupling at one

2
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
 atmosphere,on the aerodynamicflow pertinent independent variables, which
itself. A static magnetic field of force include the electric field strength (E),
always operates orthogonally to the electrode separation distance (d), type of
chargedparticle velocities,and therefore gas, pressure (p), and RF electric field
cando no work on the particlesor the frequency (Vo). A relation among these
flow. For aerodynamic flow control variables is given by Roth (section 12.5.2
applications,it is evidentthatEHD is the in reference 6)
preferred approach. The obvious
questionsare how to effectivelyproduce Vo _ E/(pd) (1)
therequisiteelectricallycharged medium
atoneatmosphere,andhow to configure for the case of a parallel plate geometry.
and drive the electric fields to produce A planar strip geometry will have a
effectsthat may be useful in such areas similar but more complicated relation due
as drag reduction,heat transfer,lift, or to the arched field lines, but the same
flow separation. qualitative functional dependencies would
be expected to prevail. The electric field E
An adequatenumber densityof charged in Equation 1 may be approximated by
particles can be produced in an the electrode potential, V, with E=V/d.
atmospheric glow discharge using a Provided the operating parameters are in
recentlydevelopedtechnologyproprietary accordance with Equation 1, the
to the University of TennesseeResearch OAUGDP will function at one
Corporation.While undergrantfrom the atmosphere and produce a stable, steady-
Air Force Office of Scientific Research, state glow discharge. A plasma thickness
the first author was successful in of one or two millimeters at power
producing the OAUGDP (Ref. I1), densities well below one watt per cubic
which is an extremely uniform, low centimeter was typical for the current
frequencyRF glow dischargethat does experiments.
notrequireeithera vacuum environment
or the mega- or gigahertz supply Equation 1 does not represent a finely
frequencies typical of industrial RF tuned phenomenon and the parameters
plasmas.The OAUGDP operateson the can vary over a useful range while
principle of the charge-trapphzg maintaining the existence and uniformity
mechanism. Charge trapping refers to a of the plasma2 If any of the parameters
specific, constrained, periodic oscillation deviate significantly from Equation 1,
of ions and/or electrons along electric field however, either the OAUGDP will cease
lines between a pair of fiat electrodes to function, or its uniformity will degrade
which are characteristically side-by-side in into a filamentary discharge. The
flat panel aerodynamic applications. This sensitivity of the OAUGDP to variations
electrostatic trapping may reduce plasma in the independent input parameters is a
polarization, keep ions from knocking current subject of investigation at the
secondary electrons off the instantaneous University of Tennessee's Plasma
cathode (which may initiate avalanches or Sciences Laboratory.
breakdown), and prevent ions from
healing the cathode surface and initiating a The magnitudes of the parameters in
glow-to-arc transition. Equation 1 for bench top demonstration
of the OAUGDP are easily attainable.
Based on straightforward Lorentzian For instance, a frequency of several
electrodynamic analysis of the plasma, the kilohertz, an rms voltage of several
charge trapping mechanism identifies the kilovolts, and a planar strip separation

3
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
 distanceof 5 or 10 mm are adequate to principle, the lowest possible energy cost
initiate the plasma at atmospheric of producing an ion-electron pair in a
pressure. The OAUGDP is not hard- plasma source, and compares very
starting, and does not require external favorably with the energy cost of other
initiation with a Tesla coil or spark gap. atmospheric plasma sources, such as
While the dissipative (or plasma) current plasma torches or arcjets, for which the
in the OAUGDP is small (about 0.030 energy cost is about 10,000 eV/ion-
amp rms in these experiments), without electron pair.
special impedance matching the reactive,
non-dissipative current can be large Regarding applications, the OAUGDP is
(approximately 0.4 amp rms) and the quenched by liquid water, although it
power source must be sized accordingly. recovers rapidly from a water spray. The
usual ranges of atmospheric, climatic
The absence of any large dissipative humidity conditions are acceptable
currents due to filamentary breakdown or although high, near condensing levels
arcing in the OAUGDP plasma allows it have not been investigated. Only dry,
to operate at low power levels, consistent high altitude applications are currently
with the possibility of net energy savings envisioned.
in flight boundary layer flow control or
drag reduction applications. For example, The OAUGDP is fundamentally different
a characteristic boundary layer viscous from ion wind concepts that rely on a
dissipation value for a long range corona discharge as an ion source. Malik,
commercial transport has been estimated et al. (ref. 14)used the ion wind technique
to be roughly 5000 watts per square in a fiat plate DC "brush" discharge
meter (737-class airplane at cruise fashion and were able to secure a small
conditions). By comparison, in bench top reduction in measured drag of about 5%
tests, the OAUGDP can operate with a for a turbulent boundary layer flow at a
power of 320 W/m 2 or less based on the length Reynolds number of
measured, non-reactive power and the approximately one million. Research was
surface area covered by the plasma. later abandoned, however, due to inability
While there is no evidence or claim at this to scale the operation of the hardware to
time that such a low power level can flight conditions. More recently, EI-
effectively control, say, a turbulent Khabiry and Colver (ref. 15) were able to
boundary flow at high Reynolds number produce up to 50% or more viscous drag
flight conditions, the energy cost of reduction in very low Reynolds number
sustaining a uniform layer of glow flows (on the order of 105) using a corona
discharge plasma over a large area is discharge between spanwise wires on a
nonetheless very low. flat surface for both DC and low
frequency (60 Hz) AC excitation. Each
This low energy cost occurs for a of these techniques is probably limited to
fundamental reason: the OAUGDP has
low Reynolds number applications due to
been shown to be a glow discharge, limitations on scaling the corona
created twice during each RF cycle (see discharge effect to higher flow velocities.
refs. 12, 13). As a glow discharge, the The OAUGDP, however, is more readily
ionization process in the instantaneous scaleable and has the potential to function
cathode region occurs at the Stoletow at much higher Reynolds numbers.
point, which is about 81 electron-
volts(eV) per ion-electron pair for air With an efficient source of surface
(Ref. 6, Section 8.3.4). This is, in plasma, the challenge becomes how to

4
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
 effect a useful EHD flow control out. Any small remaining residual force
mechanism in a boundary layer, is well within the linear range of the
particularly a turbulent boundary layer. instrument and is accounted for in the no-
Initial investigations were aimed at flow drag tare readings.
understanding the basic response of a
boundary layer to several simple, planar The smoke wire was 0.1 mm diameter
electrode configurations that can be used type 304 stainless steel and was stretched
to produce the OAUGD plasma. These across the width of the test section at a
consist of streamwise and spanwise variable height above the wall. A weight
arrays of flush-mounted strip electrodes and pulley arrangement kept the wire taut
on a fiat panel, all at the same RF potential during heating. It was powered by a
and phase with respect to a ground plane variable DC power supply with a 100 vdc
or electrode on the opposite side of the maximum output (typical range at 4 m/s
panel. was 40-50 vdc). The "smoke" was the
vapor of common mineral oil. Smoke
Experimental Apparatus wire photographs were obtained by firing
an electronic flash during the vertical
Low speed wind tunnel tests of panels blanking period of a full frame,
with the OAUGD plasma were conducted monochromatic digital video camera (8-
in the NASA Langley 7xl 1 Inch Low bit resolution, 768 by 484 pixels), at a
Speed Wind Tunnel (7xll) to determine variable delay time after energizing the
the basic response of boundary layer smoke wire. The delay time was
flow to the plasma for a few simple panel determined by trial and error. Video
configurations. The 7xll is a closed pixel data were downloaded from the
return, unpressurized air facility with a digital camera to a computer for
test section 178H x 279W x 914L processing.
millimeters. A 305 x 279 millimeter
central portion of the lower test section For velocity profiles, a slender, tapered
wall was used for testing. Tests included total pressure pitot tube was traversed
the directly measured viscous drag of fiat across the boundary layer height
plate panels with the OAUGD plasma downstream of the energized plasma
generated on the surface, vertical (wall- panels. The tip was fabricated from
normal) boundary layer pitot pressure flattened, stainless steel hypodermic
profiles measured a short distance tubing. The tip height was 0.28 mm and
downstream of the panels, and smoke the width was 0.65 mm. The probe was
flow visualization tests. The air-bearing far enough downstream of the energized
drag balance used and a general view of panel to prevent any electrical arcing to
the tunnel test section is shown in Figures the instrument. The initial height of the
la and lb. The semi-catenaries shown in probe above the wall was set by
Figure l a are high voltage power leads to monitoring electrical contact between the
the plasma panels. They consist of brass- probe and metallic wall. The probe was
ball utility chains (commonly used for raised through the boundary layer with an
light switch pull chains, etc.) and were automated stepping motor-driven slide
chosen for their extreme flexibility, mechanism in 0.5 mm increments. A
electrical conductivity, and lack of any typical profile was acquired quickly (in
sharp, corona-producing features. By about 30 seconds) to prevent heating the
exerting equal and opposite horizontal panels, which could cause their adhesive
forces on the drag balance, the forces due backing to weaken and release. Pitot
to the power leads approximately cancel differential pressure was measured

5
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
 between the probe and a static pressure underneath the panel to the other terminal.
port of the tunnel wall with a high The parallel electrode strips on top of the
accuracy capacitive or piezoelectric gauge. panel were generally at high voltage,
while the lower electrode was grounded,
Figure 2 shows a plan view sketch of a although configurations with the opposite
typical panel. The panels were polarity would also produce plasma and
constructed from conventional dielectric the effects reported below. A high
printed circuit board material (woven- voltage (up to 5.4 kV), low frequency RF
glass/epoxy construction, 0.75 mm thick, (up to 20 kHz) power supply was used
double-sided, I ounce copper coating). with its transformer output connected
The plasma-generating electric field lines directly to the panel without a special
arch over the upper surface of the board impedance matching network.
(where the plasma is generated) and
traverse the board thickness. In the more Figure 4 is a plan view photograph of a
recent designs, an array of electrode strips panel energized (plasma activated but with
was etched on the top (flow) side of the no flow) and is representative of the
board and the bottom surface left as a technique. The 0.5 mm solid, horizontal,
uniform copper plane as illustrated in dark strips are the parallel copper
Figure 2. Alternately, an asymmetric electrodes. The gray-scale regions to
array of electrode strips was etched on the either side of the electrodes are the
bottom of the panel when it was desired OAUGD plasma. The plasma was
to accelerate or decelerate the boundary visually extremely uniform.
layer flow. The geometrical
configurations of the various panels used For the drag tests, the panel was mounted
in this study are shown in Figures 3a on an air bearing drag balance located
through 3c. below the tunnel test section, with the
panel forming the central section of the
For all tests, the flow passed over the lower wall. The boundary layer flow was
copper electrodes with no additional tripped near the outlet of the tunnel's
dielectric coating. Since the OAUGDP contraction with a 1.07 mm circular rod
charge trapping mechanism operates on on the test wall 575 mm upstream of the
displacement rather than real electrical leading edge of the panel. Small (0.25
currents, this surface can, if desired, be ram) gaps around the test panels allowed
covered with a thin insulating and/or them to float freely on the drag balance.
protective layer without qualitatively A pressure control box around the test
affecting the results reported herein. The section allowed the static pressure in the
circuit board was attached to a 12.7 mm test section to be matched to the control
thick fiberglass backing board (type G- box pressure. This minimized errors in
10) with double-sided adhesive tape to drag measurements by reducing flow in
make the panel structurally rigid but still the gaps surrounding the panels.
capable of being disassembled. The
designation code and electrode Procedures and Results
dimensions of the various panels reported
on in this paper are listed in Table 1. Data for streamwise and spanwise
electrode orientations were acquired, as
The parallel electrode strips on the top of well as paired comparison drag data for
the panel were bussed together and both the plasma-energized and
connected to one power supply terminal unenergized (approximate smooth flat
and the lower plane or electrodes plate drag) conditions. Data were also

6
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
 taken on panels with asymmetric arrays unsteady oscillations) as evidenced by
of electrodes such as those shown in smoke wire pathline visualization and the
Figure 3b to study the acceleration and absence of any turbulent breakdown in
deceleration of the flow in the boundary diagnostic hot wire signals.
layer, and the consequent drag decrease or
increase (respectively) compared to the Representative results from a panel with
unenergized fiat plate. Data on drag symmetric electrodes, each electrode a
increase or decrease were measured as copper strip 0.5 mm wide with centers
parametric functions of the flow velocity spaced 10.5 mm apart, are shown in
(up to 26 m/s), electrode voltage (up to Figure 5a for the streamwise electrode
5.4 kV rms), and RF frequency (from orientation (panel C7-A), and in Figure 5b
500 to 8000 Hz). for the spanwise electrode orientation
(panel C7-C). Each of these displays the
The direction and magnitude of the expected power-law Reynolds number
paraelectric plasma-induced acceleration dependence for the "plasma off"
of the flow is determined by the direction condition. Note the change in slope of the
of the electric field gradients, and these are "plasma off" curve in Figure 5a or 5b in
in turn strongly influenced by the the range of 7-8m/s, corresponding to
orientation and details of the electrode transition from laminar to turbulent flow.
geometry. The preliminary data reported For the "plasma on", streamwise
here are for unoptimized electrode electrode case, a substantial increase in
geometries. It is anticipated that with drag is observed. This is due to several
additional modeling studies, geometrical factors. As will be shown, the plasma
optimization will increase the magnitude excitation for velocities below about 7 m/s
of the effects reported at a given set of (laminar region) trips the flow to full
plasma operating parameters. In addition, turbulence, partially explaining the drag
the electrodes in this study were energized increase in that region. The drag increase
with a single phase of RF excitation. This persists, however, to the highest attainable
produces EHD body forces which are the velocity of the wind tunnel indicating that
result of averaging attractive and repulsive more than just flow tripping is involved.
forces over the RF cycle, a second order For the "plasma on", spanwise electrode
effect. Much stronger effects should be case, a smaller drag increase is produced
possible when adjacent electrodes are and only in the laminar/transitional region.
excited with polyphase RF power, The difference in behavior between the
providing a DC electric field parallel to the two cases along with evidence presented
surface, afirst order EHD effect. later in the paper suggests the formation
of strong, EHD-driven, streamwise
In this paper, data are presented for three vortical structures in the boundary layer
principal cases: laminar data, for which for the streamwise-oriented electrode
the wind tunnel flow was laminar before case.
encountering the panel; transitional data
corresponding to about 75% intermittency The very small differences in surface
at the upstream edge of the model, and configuration among different panels did
fully turbulent data. Since the boundary not measurably affect (beyond the
layer flow was tripped upstream of the intrinsic precision of the data) the drag for
panel, there was actually no case of the unenergized panels reported in this
completely undisturbed laminar flow. At paper. Despite the small roughness
low tunnel velocities, however, the flow introduced by the copper electrodes on the
was laminar (but with occasional panel surfaces, relative to the energized

7
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
 . - . . _,?/- = _fj +._ ",,

cases, the unenergized models behaved as Figure 6c is further evidence of strong

smooth flat plates. EHD forces in play. (Also observed in
Figure 6c are quasi-two-dimensional
It was observed that when the panels with wave crests upstream and to the sides of
electrode orientations parallel to the flow the vortical structures. These waves were
were energized, the presence of the also present without the plasma, and are
OAUGDP was a strong promoter of full presumed to be laminar instability waves
boundary layer turbulence. If the flow (TS waves) associated with other flow
was laminar at the panel leading edge, disturbances, i.e. the disturbances input by
energizing the plasma for either the the boundary layer trip upstream of the
spanwise or streamwise electrode case test section or even the smoke wire itself.
would trip the flow. This is illustrated in They have no significant relation to the
Figures 6a and 6b, smoke wire EHD forcing or streamwise vortical
visualizations at a height of 5 mm of the structure formation.)
flow over panel C7-A (the streamwise
electrode counterpart of panel C7-C For each of the early plasma panels, it
shown in Figures 2 and 4). Figure 6a was observed that a small electrostatic
shows the smoke wire pathlines for a drag (by comparison with the viscous
stream velocity of 4 m/s at a height of 5 drag usually measured) was observed,
mm above the surface. The panel is which is unrelated to the flow. This drag
energized at 3.0 kHz and 3 kV rms. The is induced by electric field lines
convergence of the smoke pathlines terminating on the panels with or without
toward the electrodes, the apparent a plasma present, and is present even in
subsequent formation of vortical the absence of a flow. This electrostatic
structures, and the breakdown into drag arises from the electrodynamic stress
turbulence are all clearly evident, Figure tensor, in which the electric field lines can
6b shows the same conditions as Figure be visualized as acting in tension between
6a, but at a higher electrode voltage of 5 the panel electrodes and the grounded
kV rms. Because of the higher electric surroundings, producing an electrostatic
field at this voltage, the vortical structures pressure and an rms average force on the
develop sooner, are more compact, and panel. The measured drag must (and
break down sooner. The presence of the was) corrected for this electrostatic, non-
plasma generated by the symmetric flow-related drag. The electrostatic drag
electrode configuration constitutes a very (or electrostatic pressure) follows a
strorig tripping mechanism. quadratic relationship between the applied
rms excitation voltage and measured drag.
Figure 6c shows the smoke pathlines for Figure 7 is a representative plot of the
the case of a single, isolated streamwise electrostatic drag force for panel C1-B.
electrode above a planar lower electrode. By replacing metallic with non-metallic
The electrode strip is 0.5 mm wide. The surfaces near the panel and drag balance,
velocity is 4 rrds and the wire height in the magnitude of the electrostatic drag
this case is 2 mm. Near the leading tip of shown in Figure 7 was reduced to
the electrode, the smoke pathlines appear insignificant levels in the more recent
initially to symmetrically converge data. All drag data presented in this paper
towards the electrode, forming counter- were corrected for electrostatic drag when
rotating vortical structures which quickly it was above the resolution of our drag
become turbulent. This process occurs measurements (about 10 milligrams).
along the length of the electrode, giving
rise to the spreading effect observed.

8
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
Vertical boundarylayer velocity profiles between the pressure sensor and A/D
werealsomeasuredwith a total pressure converter ranges. The trend of the data is
probe on severalpanelswith symmetric valid.)
as well as asymmetric electrode
configurations.Figure8 presentsvelocity The profiles corroborate the drag and
profilesfor Panel C7-A (with symmetric, smoke wire data. For the streamwise
streamwise electrodes) one-half way electrode case, there is a substantial
betweentwo adjacentelectrodes,for the retardation of the profile affecting the
caseof laminar (a), transitional(b) and entire boundary layer. This increases the
fully turbulent (c) flow at the panel boundary layer momentum deficit and
leadingedge. The probe tip was located qualitatively corresponds to the large
approximately one boundary layer increase observed in the drag in Figure 5a.
thicknessdownstreamof the model over For the spanwise electrode configuration
the smooth aft filler plate of the lower shown in Figure 10, a significant effect is
wall. (A metallicaft platewasusedfor the evident only in the laminar regime, with a
profile measurements to aid probe initial similar effect on the drag (Figure 5b). For
height determination; for drag the smoke wire flow visualization, the
measurements, a non-metallic plate was eruption of vortical structures observed in
used to minimize electrostatic drag error.) Figures 6a and 6b appears to be consistent
Figure 9 presents similar data, also from with the flow retardation observed in the
the streamwise electrode configuration, velocity profiles of Figures 8 and 9.
with the pitot probe directly behind one of
the streamwise electrodes. Figure 10 Figure 11 shows the instantaneous RF
shows the profiles downstream of voltage and current for panel C1-C
spanwise oriented electrodes on panel C7- operated at an rms voltage of 1.4
C. kilovolts, and a frequency of 2.5 kilohertz.
The voltage was measured at the power
The profiles for the streamwise case supply output with a high voltage probe
(Figures 8 and 9) show a dramatic having the requisite frequency response.
alteration of the flow due to interaction The current through the high voltage
with the plasma that diminishes with power cable was measured with a high
increasing velocity. There is a large bandwidth, toroidal current transformer
acceleration of the flow near the wall and with a sensitivity of 1 volt/amp. The
a retardation farther out. The cases of the noisy region at the positive peaks of the
probe between and behind the electrodes current waveform represents the plasma
are qualitatively similar, but differ in initiation, during which a classical, "DC",
magnitude. Smoke wire (e.g., Figures normal glow discharge briefly exists
6(a,b)) and hot wire diagnostics show that between the electrodes (Refs. 12, 13). The
the energized, streamwise electrode plasma ignition appears only once per
patterns effectively trip the flow, and that cycle for the model and conditions
any between-electrode/behind-electrode portrayed in Figure 11. For most models
differences are largely mixed out at the studied during these tests, however,
end of the panel. For the spanwise case in plasma ignition occurred twice per cycle
Figure 10, the effect is largely limited to (see Introduction). There was a noticeable
the laminar flow condition, with little variability in the current waveforms for
effect in the transitional case and virtually the various panels and excitation voltages,
no discernible effect in the turbulent case. which are the subject of ongoing study.
(The step-wise appearance of the data in
Figure 10(a) is an error due to a mismatch

9
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
: •7:%:) ,5 :!,_j! _il_ : ,,,=_s_.

A final observation applicable to all of the Figure 12 illustrates the production of a

current OAUGDP flat panels relates to force (thrust in this case) by panel E6-C
acoustics. Each panel exhibited a strong mounted on the wind tunnel drag balance,
audible tone at the RF excitation but with no flow. Due to previously
frequency. The tone was present in mentioned wind tunnel modifications, the
unconfined bench-top testing of the panels electrostatic drag correction is
as well as in the enclosed wind tunnel test insignificant. The plasma was operated at
section, ruling out any resonant chamber 3.0 kilohertz and the electrode spacing
effects. It was initially suspected that the was 8.5 mm between the centers of
OAUGDP might be exciting a panel spanwise electrode strips each 0.5 mm
resonance. However, monolithic wide. The asymmetric strips on the
mounting of the panel to its baseplate did bottom of the panel were located at only
not appreciably change the pitch or one side of the top electrode strips. These
intensity of the tone. The emitted sound bottom strips were 3.0 mm wide, and
therefore must be considered a direct separated streamwise from the top strip
coupling of the OAUGD plasma by about 0.25 mm. This is not
formation mechanism into radiated necessarily (and is probably not) an
acoustic energy, a further indication of optimum geometrical configuration to
strong plasma-neutral gas coupling. produce thrust, but nonetheless illustrates
the asymmetrical force effect.
Drag Reduction Data
Figure 13 presents the drag on panel E6-
Probably the most interesting data taken C (the same model used in Figure 12)
during this study were those from the over the usual laminar, transitional and
asymmetric panels which were designed turbulent velocity ranges. The plasma
to unidirectionally accelerate the flow. was operated at 3.0 kilohertz and 4.0
The smoke flow visualization of Figures kilovolts rms. The two curves
6a and 6b with symmetric electrodes corresponding to the unenergized cases
indicate an attraction of the flow toward are virtually coincident, and represent the
the electrodes. If the electrodes are smooth flat plate reference drag data. The
fabricated in an asymmetric manner, such lower curve shows an (unoptimized)
as the geometry illustrated in Figure 3b, reduction in drag comparable to the
an unbalanced paraelectric EHD body plasma generated thrust. The upper curve
force is exerted on the plasma/flow field, was taken with the same panel rotated 180
and a corresponding force is exerted on degrees to generate a plasma-induced drag
the panel on which the electrodes are on the plate.
mounted. (The term paraelectric refers
to the fact that the observed attraction of Figure 14 shows the difference between
the smoke towards the electrode is the plasma-on and plasma-off drag for the
independent of the instantaneous electric asymmetric panel E6-C in both the co-
polarity of the electrode. It is used in the flow and counter-flow velocity fields.
same sense as the more familiar Note that the ordinate of Figure 14 is the
phenomenon of paramagnetism). The absolute value of the drag difference. For
resultant force can be in the direction of the counter-flow case, the 0.9 +/-0.05
the airflow (co-flow), or opposite the free gram drag increase is approximately
stream flow (counter-flow) depending on constant across the speed range of the
the orientation of the electrode tunnel. This indicates that the plasma-
asymmetry. induced, counter-flow EHD force is
additive and the effect is primarily

10
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
propulsive. For the caseof the co-flow commonly used white flow marker
orientation, however, a trend exists below chemical) injected manually in a slow,.
10 m/s indicating a clear Reynolds steady stream from a plastic squeeze
number dependence. The plasma has been bottle. The plasma is not visible in Figure
noted in all cases to trip the boundary 16 due to the strong illumination required
layer so the Reynolds number for the smoke. The paraelectric forcing in
dependency shown in Figure 14 could be Figure 16b causing the jet to deflect
more boundary layer trip related than towards the electrode is evident.
turbulence modification related.
Nonetheless, this finding along with other In terms of a phenomenology, the flow of
data presented in this report point to the the smoke and the air which it marks
possibility of using the newly discovered responds to paraelectric EHD effects in
EHD forcing to target and control the following way. In Figure 16b, the
boundary layer turbulence. flow is drawn downward by a low
pressure above the low electric field
Model E6-C was not optimized for the gradient region of the plasma, entrained in
EHD force. While the predominant the ion-driven plasma flow toward the
plasma forms on the upper surface over region of high electric field gradient, and
the lower surface electrode, flow forced outward by the region of high
visualization has shown that a small (plasma stagnation) pressure along the
amount of plasma forms on the opposite surface of the panel. The flow is rapidly
edge of the upper surface electrode due to accelerated away from the region of high
field lines wrapping around to the lower gas pressure and high electric field
electrode. The net effect is to have a large gradient (primarily to the left of the
EHD force in one direction (downstream electrode due to the asymmetry but also to
in the co-flow case) and a smaller force in a lesser degree to the right as well). This
the opposite direction. effect is responsible for the blowing
velocity profiles illustrated in Figure 15.
The asymmetric panel E6-C was
mounted in the wind tunnel without flow, The behavior shown in Figure 16b is
but with the pitot tube positioned at the consistent with a pure paraelectric effect
same location used in Figures 8-10. The on the plasma and on the flow which it
resulting blowing velocity profiles are entrains. It is not a classical case of
shown in Figure 15 for electrode voltages dielectrophoresis, although similarities
of 3, 4, and 5 KV rms. Maximum exist. Dielectrophoresis refers to the
plasma-induced velocities up to 4.0 forces on neutral, polarizable, dielectric
meters/sec were observed. Particularly material when subjected to a spatially
interesting were the induced velocities of non-uniform or a time-varying electric
up to 0.5 meters/sec at distances at least 3 field (ref 16). In the current case, no
cm from the wall, which occurred for "all smoke or air movement is observed until
driving voltages. sufficient voltage is reached for the
plasma to initiate. This indicates a
Figure 16a and 16b are photographs of different phenomenon than
the influence of the OAUGDP on a dielectrophoretic behavior alone. It is
laminar jet of smoke injected above a clear that the underlying mechanism for
single, asymmetric electrode arrangement. neutral gas movement in the presence of
The test was conducted in a still air the OAUGD plasma warrants further
chamber. The "smoke" in this case was theoretical and experimental study.
actually titanium tetrachloride (a

11
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
 "4 ;_<. . _ ,,,_'.

Accuracy of Experimental Data will of course depend upon application-

specific studies. Also, the likelihood that
The primary experimental data measured the observed paraelectric behavior is a
during this investigation were pressure second-order effect compared to
(for velocity) and force (for drag). polyphase electrode excitation holds
Pressures were measured with capacitive further hope for useful engineering
or piezoelectric transducers with better applications (see Ref. 10).
than 0.1% accuracy and read on 5 1/2
digit digital voltmeters with an order of Several key questions were addressed by
magnitude or better accuracy than the the diagnostics conducted during this
pressure transducers. Given additional study. The cause of the dramatic drag
sources of error such as the data reduction increase which occurs for the symmetric
model, probe alignment and position, streamwise electrode arrays (Figure 5a) is
probe viscous effects, and electronic clearly associated with formation of the
voltage offsets and noise, the overall symmetric streamwise vortical structures
accuracy is still estimated to be within no evidenced by both the smoke wire flow
more than +/-2% of the actual value, visualization (Figure 7) and the pitot tube
which was adequate for the current tests. velocity profiles (Figures 8 and 9).
The force on the drag balance was Conversely, the much smaller drag
measured with an elastic piezoresistive increase associated with the symmetric,
force sensor with two active resistor spanwise arrays (Figure 5b) results from
elements. Two passive resistors were the lack of streamwise vortex formation
added to complete a bridge circuit. The and advance tripping of the turbulent
bridge offset was amplified, filtered with boundary layer on the panel. For the case
a 4th-order Butterworth low pass filter at of the asymmetric spanwise electrode
0.5 Hz, and calibrated against an applied panels (e.g., model E6-C), the directed
streamwise force. The resultant thrust leading to a drag increase or
resolution was about 10 milligrams. The decrease results from the same
absolute, systematic error is estimated to mechanism that causes the vortex
be less than 5% of the actual value and formation in the streamwise, symmetric
much better for comparative case. This is clear from the still air smoke
measurements. flow visualization (Figure 16) and the no-
flow blowing profiles (Figure 15).
Discussion
The possibility of a local wall heating
The goals of this study, as discussed in mechanism deserves closer attention, but
the introduction, were to demonstrate that is not a primary mechanism responsible
EHD forces could be generated of for the observed model behavior. The
sufficient magnitude to alter wall OAUGDP is not a high energy density
turbulence and drag, and to demonstrate plasma, and does not generate a great
that such forces can lead to a useful deal of heat. Power input levels to the
control mechanism. The first goal was plasma were no more than about 100
clearly met, and was limited only by the mW/cm ', based on the eleclrode array
voltage of the power supply. The latter area. After several minutes of operation
must also be considered a success, since it the panels become sensibly warm to the
has been demonstrated that EHD forcing touch but certainly not enough to explain
can generaie significant body forces on any of the dramatic changes in drag,
the neutral gas tlow. The usefulness of velocity profiles, or smoke flow patterns.
the flow forcing demonstrated thus far A cursory measuremenl of boundary

12
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
layer temperature downstream of an the ability to move a neutral gas with
energized model showed only a small EHD forcing to reduce or enhance drag,
temperature rise of several degrees or significantly alter the velocity profile
Celsius. A more pertinent question of the boundary layer. Beyond this,
would be the magnitude of the localized future efforts need to be directed at
electron temperature within the plasma passing through Bushnell's second filter,
and its impact on the observed that of technological feasibility. This
phenomena. However, this is beyond the entails demonstrating such factors (where
scope of current investigations. not already demonstrated) as simplicity,
economy, retrofittability, mechanical
Figures 8 and 9 show that the effect on passivity, and robustness and reliability.
the plasma is spread across the entire It also means demonstrating the ability to
boundary layer for the streamwise simulate the processes and mechanisms
symmetric electrode case. It seems clear in such a way as to make possible
that a major vortex-dominated developmental work on small inexpensive
mechanism is in play. This is evidenced models in ground facilities. In addition,
by direct manipulation of the streamwise much future work needs to be done to
flow by EHD forces in the (initially) characterize, parameterize, and understand
laminar smoke wire data shown in Figure the physical processes both in the
6. OAUGDP and with respect to the
paraelectric EHD effects responsible for
Future Plans the plasma-flow interaction.

A strong paraelectric EHD effect on Summary

boundary layer flow has been
demonstrated, and opens the way to The first aerodynamic data from planar
refinements and new configurations panels with a uniform glow discharge
which may lead to useful applications. surface plasma at atmospheric pressure
Immediate plans are to extend the current (known as the One Atmosphere Uniform
work to more specific active control Glow Discharge Plasma or OAUGDP)
investigations based on either accelerating have been acquired. Flat plate panels with
the flow in a steady fashion, or oscillating either streamwise or spanwise arrays of
the flow in the spanwise direction. The flush, closely spaced symmetric or
later technique is suggested by recent asymmetric plasma-generating surface
studies (e.g., ref. 17) showing that electrodes were studied with laminar,
oscillating a turbulent boundary layer in transitional, and fully turbulent boundary
the spanwise direction can have a layer flow in a low speed wind tunnel. It
dramatic effect on reducing turbulence was observed that EHD forces can
intensity and drag. While control of wall produce dramatic effects, arising from
turbulence and drag was the subject of the paraelectric, RF forcing of the flow.
current investigations, other possibilities Notable effects include large increases in
in areas such as heat transfer, lift measured drag due to either vortex
enhancement, and flow separation control formation (symmetric electrode case) or
are also of interest. directed thrust (asymmetric electrode
case). In the more dramatic cases, the
Finally, in terms of Bushnell's "Designer entire thickness of the boundary layer was
Fluid Mechanics" (Ref. 18), the EHD affected by either flow acceleration or
approach has successfully negotiated his retardation. The effects of heating are
technical/scientific filter by demonstrating discounted and the primary cause of the

13
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
observed flow phenomena attributed to Engineering Conf., Forum on Control of
electrohydrodynamic (EHD) forcing of Transitional and Turbulent Flows, July 7-
the flow by a paraelectric RF body force. 11, 1996.

6. Roth, J. R.: Industrial Plasma

Acknowledgments Engineering, Volume 1 Principles.
Institute of Physics Publishing, Bristol
This research was a collaborative study by and Philadelphia, ISBN 0-7503-0318-2 ,
the University of Tennessee, Knoxville 1995, pp. 453-461.
and NASA Langley conducted under the
auspices of the Chief Scientist (D. M. 7. Roth, J. R.; Liu, C.; and Laroussi, M.:
Bushnell), NASA Langley Research "Experimental Generation of a Steady-
Center, Director's Discretionary Fund. State Glow Discharge at Atmospheric
The work of the first and second author
Pressure," Paper 5P21, 19th IEEE
was supported under NASA Langley International Conference on Plasma
Cooperative Agreement NCC-1-223.
Science, Tampa, FL, June 1-3, 1992.

References 8. Roth, J. R.; Tsai, P. P.; and Liu, C.:

"Steady_State, Glow Discharge
1. Clauser M. U. and Meyer R. X.: Plasma," U. S Patent # 5,387,842, Issued
"Magnetohydrodynamic Control February 7, 1995.
Systems", US Patent 3,162,398, Issued
Dec. 22, 1964. 9. Roth, J. R.; Tsai, P. P.; Liu, C.;
Laroussi, M.; and Spence, P. D.: "One
2. Hill, G. A.: "Ionized Boundary Layer
Atmosphere, Uniform Glow Discharge
Fluid Pumping System", US Patent Plasma." U. S Patent 5,414,324, Issued
3,095,163, Issued June 25, 1963.
May 9, 1995.

3. Tsinober, A.: , "MHD Flow Drag

10. Roth, J. R. (1997): "Method and
Reduction", in Viscous Drag Reduction
Apparatus for Covering Bodies with a
in Boundary_ Layers, AIAA Progress in
Uniform Glow Discharge Plasma and
Astronautics and Aeronautics, Vol. 123,
Applications Thereof". U. S. Patent
Seabass A. R., ed., ISBN 0-930403-66-5,
#5,669,583, Issued September 23, 1997.
pp. 327-349.

11. Roth, J. R.: "Investigation of

4. Nosenchuck D.M., Brown G.L.,
Uniform Glow Discharge in Atmospheric
Culver H.C., Eng, T.I. and Huang I.S.:
Air," AFOSR Final Scientific Report,
"Spatial and Temporal Characteristics of PSL-95-4, April 1, 1994-March 31, 1995.
Boundary Layers Controlled with the
Lorentz Force," Proceedings of the 12. Ben Gadri, Rami: "Numerical
Twelfth Australasian Fluid Mechanics
Simulation of an Atmospheric Pressure
Conference, Vol. I, pp. 93-96, Sydney, and Dielectric Barrier Controlled Glow
NSW, Australia, December 10-15, 1995.
Discharge", Doctorat (Ph.D.) of the
University Paul Sabatier of Toulouse,
5. Kral, L. D. and Donovan J. F.:
France. Order Number : 2644, 30 April,
"Numerical Simulation of Turbulence
1997.
Control Using Electromagnetic Forces,"
Proceedings of the 1996 ASME Fluids

14
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
 (i ;_(_;__>: i__!i_:"_ _,_,_, _::_-:
!> <_._t :_<_v_:.__% __ _:_¢_,:.

13. Massines, F.;Ben Gadri, R.;Rabehi, 16. Pohl, H. A.: "Dielectrophoresis, The
A.; Decomps, Ph.; Segur, P.; and Behavior of Neutral Matter in
Mayoux, Ch.: "Mechanisms of a Glow Nonuniform Electric Fields", Cambridge
Discharge at Atmospheric Pressure University Press, 1978, ISBN 0-521-
Controlled by Dielectric Barrier", Journal 21657-5, pp. 6-18.
of Applied Physics. (accepted and in
press, 1997). 17. Jung, W., Mangiavacchi, N. and
Akhavan, R.: "Suppression of Turbulence
14. Malik, M. R., Weinstein, L.M., and in Wall-Bounded Flows by High
Hussani, M. Y., "Ion Wind Drag Frequency Spanwise Oscillations", Phys.
Reduction", AIAA Paper 83-0231, 1983. Fluids A. vol. 4(8), pp 1605-1607, 1992.

15 . EI-Khabiry, S. and Colver, G. M.: 18. Bushnell, D. M.: "Application

"Drag Reduction by DC Corona Frontiers of 'Designer Fluid Mechanics'
Discharge Along an Electrically Visions versus Reality or an Attempt to
Conductive Flat Plate for Small Reynolds Answer the Perennial Question 'Why
Number Flow". Phys. Fluids, Vol. 9, isn't it Used?'", AIAA Paper 97-2110,
No. 3 (1997) pp 587-599. 28th AIAA Fluid Dynamics Conference,
June 29-July 2, 1997, Snowmass Village,
CO.

Table 1. Panel Designations and Electrode Dimensions

Panel# Orientation Arrangement Electrode Width Electrode Pitch*

C7-C Spanwise Symmetric/planar 0.5 mm 10.5 mm
C7-A Streamwise Symmetric/planar 0.5 10.5
C1-B Streamwise Symmetric/staggered 2.0 8
E6-C Spanwise Asymmetric/staggered 0.5 8.5

* center-to-center spacing of electrodes

15
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
 Power leads

Fore and aft

filler plates

Air bearing drag balance, OAUGDP panel

Figure la. NASA Langley 7xl 1 Inch Low Speed Wind Tunnel. Plasma panel
(unenergized) on drag balance in wind tunnel test section (front and top walls of test
section removed for clarity)

Tunnel Contraction
Tunnel
' [ 915 [ diffuser
""--__ N\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"L .......
I
Airflow _ll_* 177.8
I_ 305
I--.- 305

Forwhrd Filler Plate J k_

OAUGDP Panel J ,---,II --Leveling Screws (4)

Insulating Supports /
_] _P e_oelectric
forcesensor
Linear Air Bearing

Not to scale All dimensions mm

Figure lb. Strearnwise cross-sectional sketch of 7xl 1 Inch Low

Speed Wind Tunnel test section.

16
 All dimensions mm

46 270

14.3
'_2_-" ..................................
i
! II

_!I

bottom planar
electrode
(dashed outline)
i

[---) ;i
273

J !i

1 mm bus bar !

__
/
_ ................................
I
i

14.3
x" /
2 mm bus b." 26 electrodes 0.5 mm width, 10.5 mm center spacing

Figure 2. Dimensioned sketch of panel C7-C

17
 dielectric

circuit boar_e__,_._._n.__

(b)__

NOT TO SCALE

Figure 3 (a-c). Cross-sectional sketch of plasma panel concepts. (a) symmetric,

staggered lower electrodes, (b) asymmetric, staggered lower electrodes, (c)
symmetric, planar lower electrode

0.5 mm
_k___
Electrode

Glow Discharge 10.5 mm

Region

Figure 4. Portion of Model C7-C with plasma. E=3 kVrms, F=3 kHz.
(Original photograph taken with 35mm 400 ISO color print film,
approximately 10 second exposure.)

18
 30 I l I I I I I I I I

I0
m
m

{0
E
1
_3b

a
0.1

Plasma Off
m

0.01 I I I I I I I II I
I 0 20 30
Velocity (m/s)

Figure 5a. Directly measured drag of panel C7-A (streamwise oriented

electrodes) operated at 3.0 kHz and approx. 4.0 kV rms.

30
I I I I I I I I I I

10
m

O3
E
Plasma On
0")
v

tm
0.1
Plasma Off
m

0.01 I I I I I I I I I I
10 20 30
Velocity (m/s)

Figure 5b. Directly measured drag of panel C7-C (spanwise oriented

electrodes) operated at 3.0 kHz and approx. 4.0 kV rms.

19
 Fforward bus bar

10.5 mm

(a) E=3 kV rms, F=3 kHz

(b) E=5 kV rms, F=3 kHz

Figure 6(a,b,c). Smoke wire flow visualization of panel C7-A (streamwise upper
electrodes with planar lower electrode) at two excitation voltages. U_ = 4 m/s. Smoke
wire at Y=5 mm (u/U_- 0.65). Images digitally enhanced with unsharp mask filter.

20
 leading tip of electrode

Figure 6(cont.) (c). Horizontal smoke wire flow visualization of a single

electrode with symmetric plasma formation. The wire is at Y=2 mm. Stream
velocity is 4 m/s.

I I I I

E 0.8

03
0.6

o
o_

t_
c_ 0.4
o
O
09

m 0.2

0 I I I
1000 2000 3000 4000 5OOO

Voltage(V rms)

Figure 7. Electrostatic drag for panel C 1-B (streamwise upper electrodes over planar
lower electrode); F= 1.5 kHz, U_ = 0.

21
 35
U=4m/s

E25 .............
::.:..v.::...P.!.a...s._.
"',,, 20 .......................
_-.......................
!.......................
_......................
. _....
(a)
15 .......................
_........................
i.......................
_.....................
a
>- 10 .......................
_........................
_........... '......

v-_---'_"'- " _"

0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0

Velocity ratio (u/U)

35 , ,
i U=7m/s
30
.........
___-0_ ................
_..................
_...................
8
........... ..............
:...i
.......................
i.....................
i i i i; w _

(b)
15

>- 20 ......................
10 _........................
:: i .......................
_........................
:: .,.
..............
:: _ ::
5 :: f

0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0

Velocity ratio (u/U)

35
i ! i
U=26rrv'sl
3O

25
E
E
20
(c) ,-
15
121

10

0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
Velocity ratio (u/U)

Figure 8 (a,b,c) Wall-normal velocity profiles for Panel C7-A (symmetric,

streamwise electrodes; 3.0 kHz, 5.1 kV). Pitot tube located 28 mm downstream
of the panel aligned between two adjacent electrodes.
22
 35 ,
i U---4nVs i
30

--- 25
E
E
v
_) 20
(b
(a) t"

._ 15
a
.............
--.-,-.-i...._!.a...,.....=...._
.............
I'"
>" 10
.......................
i............
_-i ...........
_-i.-.-
0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
Velocity ratio (u/U)

35 i i

_ U=7m/s _
3O

(b)
E
E

L,)
t-

121
25

2O

15
....i.
".'.i.'i.
i.I"i..i......,
...............
,,-.-.,
............
......................
......................................
'...!....
.........
10

0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0

Velocity ratio (u/U)

35 ! i
U=26m/s
3O
.............
_ i_ias_iSn
..................
......................
i...................
_'"
25 ..........
':_.I:..P'as_O"
...............
...........
E
E
v
20
(c) t-

.o_ 15
>- 10

0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0

Velocity ratio (u/U)

Figure 9 (a,b,c) Wall-normal velocity profiles for Panel C7-A (symmetric,

streamwise electrodes; 3.0 kHz, 5.1 kV). Pitot tube located 28 mm downstream
of the panel aligned directly behind an electrode.

23
 35 !

u=4m/s
30
................
_"Pias'_" On
---v-'_ Plasma _ ,
!
......................................
•.-.. 25

__.....1_.
8 2o
(a) ..................
!........................
i.......................
_.......................
i,-.-
._._ r-
C

_ 15
i5
_- 10 ........................
i........................
i.......................
!.......................
iL:_/_
i i i _IF _"
5 i _....___---_ i
0 i#r _i-- i
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
Velocity ratio (u/U)

35
U=7rn/s
30

25
.................
_Pia_s__Oii
---v--i Plasma Off
......................
i............................
i................
i i ii]
E
g
@ 20
(b) e'-

.__ 15
o
_" 10

0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
Velocity ratio (u/U)

35
U=26m/si
3O ..............
_ i_ias_On .................................................................
---v.i- Plasma Off
25 ....................... i ....................... .......................................................
E
E
20
,,J
(c) t-"

15
0
>- 10

0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0

Velocity ratio (u/U)

Figure lOa.,b.,c.) Pitot tube velocity profiles for Panel C7-C (with symmetric,
span-wise electrodes; 3.0 kHz, 5.0 kV). Pitot tube located 28 mm downstream
of last electrode.
24
 i i i i
2 - V/lO00,"l .l_ -J
/ _ , I I/lO / /\ IMh \ ]
><
O
., ,,("J"\)l
- / f_\ ,' 'Y.D_t"I...
ID

r,.)
O

ID
-1
_

la ma
Formation

ex0

O
> -2

t I I I

0 2re 4_

Phase

Figure 11. Example of instantaneous OAUGDP voltage and current

waveforms. Showing plasma formation. Panel C1-C. Frequency 2.5 kHz.

0.2
I I I I I

0 ---0-- -o- O-Go o

0
-0.2 0
0
E -0.4 0
v
ID) 0
121 -0.6
t_
0
if)
-0.8 0
0
0
-1
0
-1.2 I I I I I
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Voltage (kV)

Figure 12. Electrostatic drag for panel E6-C in still air. Electrodes are spanwise,
asymmetric with lower electrode staggered downstream relative to the upper electrode.
Frequency: 3 kHz. Negative values correspond to a reduction in drag.

25
 15
I ! I I I I

10 m

_o Plasma On:
E Counter-Flow

v
13t) N
m

m
n n

Plasma Off _ Plasma On:

B
Co-Flow

0.1 I I I t t J I I t
2 4 6 8 10 20 3(

Velocity (m/s)

Figure 13. Directly measured drag of panel E6-C (spanwise, asymmetric

electrodes, 3 kV, 4 kHz). Co-flow case corresponds to bottom electrode
staggered downstream of top electrode; Counter-flow corresponds bottom
electrode staggered upstream of top electrode.

1.1 I I I I I I

-_ _ A_?,
_'0 0.9
,,,j Lf -', -
,_ 0.8

i_
c5
0.7
f _C °-_,°w
_- 0.6
-- B-- - Counter-Flow

0.5 I I I I I I
0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Velocity (m/s)

Figure 14. Drag change due to OAUGDP for panel E6-C in Co-flow and Counter-flow
configurations (See Figure 13). Voltage and frequency were 4kV rms and 3kHz
respectively.

26
 35 I ' I

30

25

20
E
v
E 15
>-
10

0 - 3 kV 4kV 5 kV _
, I , I , I I

0 1 2 3 4
Velocity (m/s)

Figure 15. OAUGDP-induced velocity (blowing) along panel E6-C surface, normal
to the electrodes. Frequency was 3 kHz. Measurements conducted in still air.

27
 laminarjet of titanium
tetrachloride vapor

~15mm

/_
(a) Plasma Off

(b) Plasma On, E - 4.5 kV rms, F = 3 kHz

Figure 16(a,b). Demonstration of OAUGDP paraelectric force due to a single

asymmetric electrode in still air. Model is a single 0.5 mm wide electrode on the upper
surface with a 3 mm wide lower electrode offset to the left. Jet exit velocity is estimated
be in the range of 1 to 2 m/s.

28