‫‪Archive of SID‬‬

‫‪Aero2016P616T1-3‬‬
‫ﺖ ﻮا ﻤﺎ ﯽ ﻮری‪،‬‬ ‫ه‬ ‫ا ن ‪-‬د ا‬
‫‪..............................‬‬

‫ﺍﺭﺯﻳﺎﺑﻲ ﺍﺛﺮ ﺷﮑﻞ ﮐﻤﺒﺮ ﺑﺮ ﭘﺎﻳﺪﺍﺭﻱ ﺍﺳﺘﺎﺗﻴﮏ ﻃﻮﻟﻲ ﺍﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺛﺮ ﺳﻄﺢ‬

‫‪٢‬‬
‫ﻣﺤﻤﺪ ﺣﺴﻴﻦ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﺋﻲ‪ ،۱‬ﻣﺤﻤﺪ ﻃﻴﺒﻲ ﺭﻫﻨ ﻲ‬
‫ﺩﺍﻧﺸﮕﺎﻩ ﺻﻨﻌﺘﻲ ﺷﺮﻳﻒ‪ ،‬ﺩﺍﻧﺸﮑﺪﻩ ﻣﻬﻨﺪﺳﻲ ﻫﻮﺍﻓﻀﺎ‬

‫ﭘﺮﻭﺍﺯ ﺩﺭ ﺧﺎﺭﺝ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺛﺮ ﺳﻄﺢ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺍﺭﺍ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﺎ ﻫﻮﺍﭘﻴﻤﺎ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ﭼﮑﯿﺪه‬
‫ﺑﺎ ﻧﺰﺩﻳﮏ ﺷﺪﻥ ﺑﺎﻝ ﺑﻪ ﺳﻄﺢ ﻓﺸﺎﺭ ﺭﻭﻱ ﺳﻄﺢ ﺯﻳﺮ ﻳﻦ ﺍ ﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﺍﻓﺰﺍﻳﺶ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻖ ﺑﻪ ﺍﺭﺯﻳﺎﺑﻲ ﺍﺛﺮ ﮐﻤﺒﺮ ﺑﺮ ﭘﺎﻳﺪﺍﺭﻱ ﺍﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺛﺮ ﺳﻄﺢ ﭘﺮﺩﺍﺧﺘﻪ‬
‫ﻣﻲ ﻳﺎﺑﺪ ﺑﻪ ﮔﻮﻧﻪﺍﻱ ﮐﻪ ﻳﮏ ﺑﺎﻟﺸﺘﮏ ﻫﻮﺍﻱ ﭘﺮﻓﺸﺎﺭ ﺷﮑﻞ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﮐﻪ ﺑﺎﻝ ﺑﺮ ﺭﻭﻱ‬ ‫ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﺮﺍﻱ ﺣﺼﻮﻝ ﺑﻪ ﭘﺎﻳﺪﺍﺭﻱ ﺍﺳﺘﺎﺗﻴﮏ ﻃﻮﻟﻲ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺛﺮ ﺳﻄﺢ ﺳﻪ ﺷﺮﻁ‬
‫ﺁﻥ ﺷﻨﺎﻭﺭ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺗﺒﻊ ﻟﻴﻔﺖ ﺑﺎﻝ ﺍﻓﺰﺍﻳﺶ ﻣﻲﻳﺎﺑﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﭘﺪﻳﺪﻩ ﺑﺎ ﻧﺎﻡ ﺍﺛﺮ ﺳﻄﺢ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺑﺮﺁﻭﺭﺩﻩ ﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﭘﺎﻳﺪﺍﺭ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺛﺮ ﺳﻄﺢ ﻋﻼﻭﻩ ﺑﺮ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻦ ﻣﺸﺘﻖ ﺿﺮﻳﺐ‬
‫ﮐﺮﺩ ﺣﺎﮐﻢ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻪ ﻣﻲﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺑﺎ ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻨﮑﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﭘﺪ ﻳﺪﻩ ﺍﺛﺮﺍﺕ ﺳﻪ ﺑﻌﺪﻱ‬ ‫ﮔﺸﺘﺎﻭﺭ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺯﺍﻭﻳﻪ ﺣﻤﻠﻪ ﻣﻨﻔﻲ ﻭ ﻣﺸﺘﻖ ﺿﺮﻳﺐ ﻟﻴﻔﺖ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ‬
‫ﺑﺎﻝ ﺩﺧﻴﻞ ﻧﻴﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻣﻲﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺍﺛﺮ ﺳﻄﺢ ﮐﺮﺩ ﺣﺎﮐﻢ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﺩﻭ ﺑﻌﺪﻱ ﻧﻴﺰ‬ ‫ﻣﻨﻔﻲ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﻣﺮﮐﺰ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ﺁﻥ ﺟﻠﻮﺗﺮ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺮﮐﺰ ﺁﻳﺮﻭﺩﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﮑﻲ ﭘﻴﭻ )‪ (pitch‬ﻭﺍﻗﻊ‬
‫ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﮐﻨﮑﺎﺵ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺩﺍﺩ ]‪.[١‬‬ ‫ﺷﺪﻩ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ ﮐﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺁﻥ ﺷﺮﻁ ﭘﺎﻳﺪﺍﺭﻱ ﺍﻳﺮﻭﺩﻭﻑ )‪ (Irodov‬ﮔﻔﺘﻪ ﻣﻲﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﻧﮑﺘﻪ‬
‫ﻧﮑﺘﻪﺍﻱ ﮐﻪ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﮔﻴﺮﺩ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﮐﻪ ﻧﺰﺩﻳﮏ ﺷﺪﻥ‬ ‫ﻣﻬﻢ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﮐﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺟﺎﺑﺠﺎﻳﻲ ﻣﺮﮐﺰ ﺟﺮﻡ ﻧﻤﻲﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺷﺮﻁ ﺩﻭﻡ ﻭ ﺳﻮﻡ ﺭﺍ‬
‫ﺍ ﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﺑﻪ ﺳﻄﺢ ﻟﺰﻭﻣﹰﺎ ﻫﻤﺮﺍﻩ ﺑﺎ ﺍﻓﺰﺍ ﻳﺶ ﻟﻴﻔﺖ ﻧﺒﻮﺩﻩ ﺑﻠﮑﻪ ﺣﺘﻲ ﻣﻤﮑﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ‬ ‫ﺑﺮﺁﻭﺭﺩﻩ ﮐﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﻣﻨﺎﺳﺐ ﺑﺮﺍﻱ ﺍﺛﺮ ﺳﻄﺢ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﮐﻤﺒﺮ ‪ S‬ﺷﮑﻞ ﻭ ﺳﻄﺢ‬
‫ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ ﮐﺎﻫﺶ ﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﭘﺪﻳﺪﻩ ﻫﻨﮕﺎﻣﻲ ﺭﺥ ﻣﻲﺩﻫﺪ ﮐﻪ ﮐﻪ ﺳﻄﺢ ﺯﻳﺮ ﻳﻦ‬ ‫ﺯﻳﺮﻳﻦ ﺗﺨﺖ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ ﮐﻤﺒﺮ ﺍﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﻧﺎﮐﺎ ‪ ۴۴۱۲‬ﺑﺮﺍﻱ‬
‫ﺍ ﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﻣﺤﺪﺏ ﺑﻮﺩﻩ ﻭ ﺯﺍﻭﻳﻪ ﺣﻤﻠﻪ ﮐﻢ ﻭ ﻳﺎ ﻣﻨﻔﻲ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺣﺎﻟﺖ ﻳﮏ‬ ‫ﮐﺎﺭﺑﺮﺩ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺛﺮ ﺳﻄﺢ ﺍﺻﻼﺡ ﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﺮﺍﻱ ﺍﻳﻦ ﮐﺎﺭ ﺧﻤﻴﺪﮔﻲ ﮐﻤﺒﺮ ﺁﻥ ﺑﺎ ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﻣﺴﻴﺮ ﻫﻤﮕﺮﺍ ‪-‬ﻭﺍﮔﺮﺍ ﺑﻴﻦ ﺍﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﻭ ﺳﻄﺢ ﺷﮑﻞ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﻭ ﺟﺮﻳﺎﻥ ﭘﺮ ﺳﺮﻋﺖ ﮐﻢ‬ ‫ﻳﮏ ﺑﺮﻧﺎﻣﻪ ﮐﺎﻣﭙﻴﻮﺗﺮﻱ ﮐﺎﻫﺶ ﺩﺍﺩﻩ ﺷﺪ ﻭ ﻣﻌﻴﺎﺭﻫﺎﻱ ﭘﺎﻳﺪﺍﺭﻱ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺛﺮ ﺳﻄﺢ‬
‫ﻓﺸﺎﺭ ﺍﻳ ﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺳﻤﺖ ﭘﺎ ﻳﻴﻦ ﻣﻲﮐﺸﺪ ﮐﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺁﻥ ﺍﺛﺮ ﻣﮑﺶ ) ‪suction‬‬ ‫ﺷﺪﻳﺪ )ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ﺑﻲ ﺑﻌﺪ ﮐﻤﺘﺮ ﺍﺯ ‪ (۰/۲‬ﺍﺭﺯﻳﺎﺑﻲ ﮔﺮﺩﻳﺪ‪ .‬ﺷﺮﺍﻳﻂ ﺟﺮﻳﺎﻥ ﻣﺸﺎﺑﻪ‬
‫‪ (effect‬ﮔﻔﺘﻪ ﻣﻲﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺑﺮﺍﻱ ﭘﺮﻫﻴﺰ ﺍﺯ ﺑﺮﻭﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺗﻔﺎﻕ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﻱ ﺍﺳﺖ ﮐﻪ ﺳﻄﺢ‬ ‫ﺷﺮﺍﻳﻂ ﭘﺮﻭﺍﺯ ﻳﮏ ﭘﺮﻧﺪﻩ ﺍﺛﺮ ﺳﻄﺤﻲ ﺩﺭ ﻓﺎﺯ ﮐﺮﻭﺯ ﺍﻧﺘﺨﺎﺏ ﮔﺮﺩﻳﺪ‪ .‬ﻋﺪﺩ ﺭﻳﻨﻮﻟﺪﺯ‬
‫ﺯﻳﺮﻳﻦ ﺍﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﺗﺨﺖ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ ]‪.[٢‬‬ ‫ﺟﺮﻳﺎﻥ ﺗﺮﺍﮐﻢﻧﺎﭘﺬﻳﺮ ﺗﻘﺮﻳﺒﺎﹰ ‪ ۲/۷×۱۰۶‬ﺑﻮﺩﻩ ﻭ ﺯﺍﻭﻳﻪ ﺣﻤﻠﻪ ﺩﻭ ﺩﺭﺟﻪ ﺍﻧﺘﺨﺎﺏ‬
‫ﺗﺎﮐﻨﻮﻥ ﻣﻄﺎﻟﻌﺎﺕ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻲ ﻭ ﻋﺪﺩﻱ ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭ ﺯﻳﺎﺩﻱ ﺑﺎ ﻣﻮﺿﻮﻉ ﺍﺛﺮ ﺳﻄﺢ‬ ‫ﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﻧﺘﺎ ﻳﺞ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﺩﺍﺩﻧﺪ ﮐﻪ ﮐﺎﻫﺶ ﺧﻤﻴﺪﮔﻲ ﮐﻤﺒﺮ ﺍﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﺍﺛﺮ ﻣﻬﻤﻲ ﺑﺮ ﺷﺮﻁ‬
‫ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﺳﻤﻴﺖ )‪ (Smith‬ﻭ ﻫﻤﮑﺎﺭﺍﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻘﺎﻳﺴﻪ ﻣﺸﺨﺼﺎﺕ‬ ‫ﺍﻭﻝ ﭘﺎﻳﺪﺍﺭﻱ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﻫﻤﭽﻨﻴﻦ ﻫﺮ ﺩﻭ ﺍ ﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﺷﺮﺍﻳﻂ ﺍﻭﻝ ﻭ ﺩﻭﻡ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮﺁﻭﺭﺩﻩ ﻣﻲ‪-‬‬
‫ﺁﻳﺮﻭﺩﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﮑﻲ ﺩﻭ ﺍﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﻧﺎﮐﺎ ‪ ۴۴۱۲‬ﻭ ﻭﺭﺗﻤﺎﻥ ‪Wortmann ) ۶۳- ۱۳۷‬‬ ‫ﮐﻨﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺷﺮﻁ ﺩﻭﻡ ﭘﺎﻳﺪﺍﺭﻱ ﺗﻘﺮﻳﺒﺎﹰ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻞ ﺍﺯ ﺷﮑﻞ ﮐﻤﺒﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺯﻳﺮﺍ ﻣﺸﺘﻖ‬
‫‪ (63137‬ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﻋﺪﺩﻱ ﭘﺮﺩﺍﺧﺘﻨﺪ ]‪ .[۳‬ﻳﺎﻧﮓ )‪ (Yang‬ﻭ ﻫﻤﮑﺎﺭﺍﻧﺶ ﺍﺛﺮ‬ ‫ﺿﺮﻳﺐ ﻟﻴﻔﺖ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ﺩﻭ ﺍﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕﻫﺎﻱ ﺟﺰﺋﻲ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻋﻼﻭﻩ‬
‫ﻟﺰﺟﺖ ﺳﻄﺢ ﻭ ﺭﺷﺪ ﻻ ﻳﻪ ﻣﺮﺯﻱ ﺭﻭﻱ ﺳﻄﺢ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮ ﻣﺸﺨﺼﺎﺕ ﺁﻳﺮﻭﺩ ﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﮑﻲ‬ ‫ﺑﺮ ﺍ ﻳﻦ ﻣﺤﻞ ﻣﺮﮐﺰ ﺁ ﻳﺮﻭﺩﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﮑ ﻲ ﭘﻴﭻ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉﻫﺎ ﻭ ﺯﺍﻭ ﻳﻪ ﺣﻤﻠﻪ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﺑﺮﺭﺳﻲ‬
‫ﺍ ﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺛﺮ ﺳﻄﺢ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﻋﺪﺩﻱ ﺍﻣﺎ ﺟﺎﻣﻊ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﺑﺮﺭﺳﻲ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺩﺍﺩﻧﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺗﻘﺮ ﻳﺒﹰﺎ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻞ ﺍﺯ ﮐﻤﺒﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺣﺎﻟﻲ ﮐﻪ ﻣﺮﮐﺰ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ﺍﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﺍﺻﻼﺡ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺑﺎ‬
‫ﻫﺪﻑ ﺁﻥﻫﺎ ﺍﺭﺯ ﻳﺎﺑﻲ ﻭ ﺩﺭﮎ ﻋﻤﻴﻖﺗﺮ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻧﺘﺎﻳﺞ ﺗﺴﺖﻫﺎﻱ ﺗﻮﻧﻞ ﺑﺎﺩﻱ ﺑﻮﺩ‬ ‫ﺍﻓﺰﺍ ﻳﺶ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ﺍﺯ ﻟﺒﻪ ﺣﻤﻠﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺳﻤﺖ ﻟﺒﻪ ﻓﺮﺍﺭ ﺣﺮﮐﺖ ﻣﻲﮐﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻣﺮﮐﺰ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ‬
‫ﮐﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻥﻫﺎ ﺳﻄﺢ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺍ ﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ ]‪ .[۴‬ﮊﺍﻧﮓ ﻭ ﻫﻤﮑﺎﺭﺍﻧﺶ‬ ‫ﺍ ﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﻧﺎﮐﺎ ‪ ۴۴۱۲‬ﻓﻘﻂ ﺩﺭ ﻣﺤﺪﻭﺩﻩ ﮐﻮﭼﮑﻲ ﺟﺎﺑﺠﺎ ﻣﻲﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺁﺷﮑﺎﺭ ﺷﺪ ﮐﻪ‬
‫ﺟﺮﻳﺎﻥ ﺗﺮﺍﮐﻢ ﻧﺎﭘﺬﻳﺮ ﺣﻮﻝ ﺍﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﻧﺎﮐﺎ ‪ ۴۴۰۶‬ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺛﺮ ﺳﻄﺢ ﺩﺭ ﺯﻭﺍﻳﺎﻱ‬ ‫ﻣﺤﻞ ﻣﺮﮐﺰ ﺁﻳﺮﻭﺩﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﮑﻲ ﭘﻴﭻ ﺍﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﺑﺎ ﮐﻤﺒﺮ ﺍﺻﻼﺡ ﺷﺪﻩ ﻋﻘﺐ ﺗﺮ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺮﮐﺰ‬
‫ﺣﻤﻠﻪ‪ ،‬ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ﻭ ﺍﻋﺪﺍﺩ ﺭﻳﻨﻮﻟﺪﺯ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﻋﺪﺩﻱ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﻣﻄﺎﻟﻌﻪ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺩﺍﺩﻧﺪ ]‪.[۵‬‬ ‫ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ﺑﻮﺩﻩ ﻭ ﺍ ﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﭘﺎ ﻳﺪﺍﺭ ﺍﺳﺖ ﮐﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺍﻓﺰﺍﻳﺶ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ﺳﻄﺢ ﭘﺎﻳﺪﺍﺭﻱ ﺁﻥ‬
‫ﺟﺎﻣﻌ ﻲ )‪ (Jamei‬ﻭ ﻫﻤﮑﺎﺭﺍﻥ ﻣﺸﺨﺼﺎﺕ ﺁﻳﺮﻭﺩ ﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﮑﻲ ﺑﺎﻝﻫﺎ ﻱ ﺳﻪ ﺑﻌﺪﻱ‬ ‫ﮐﺎﻫﺶ ﻣﻲﻳﺎﺑﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺣﺎﻝ ‪ S‬ﺷﮑﻞ ﮐﺮﺩﻥ ﮐﻤﺒﺮ ﺑﺎﺯﺩﻩ ﺁﻳﺮﻭﺩﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﮑﯽ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺗﺮﮐﻴﺒﻲ )‪ (compound‬ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎ ﻣﻘﻄﻊ ﻧﺎﮐﺎ ‪ ۶۴۰۹‬ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺛﺮ ﺳﻄﺢ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ‬ ‫ﻣﻴﺰﺍﻥ ﺯﻳﺎﺩﯼ ﮐﺎﻫﺶ ﻣﯽﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻣﺎ ﺍﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﻧﺎﮐﺎ ‪ ۴۴۱۲‬ﮐﺎﻣﻼﹰ ﻧﺎﭘﺎ ﻳﺪﺍﺭ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﻋﺪﺩﻱ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﻣﻄﺎﻟﻌﻪ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺩﺍﺩﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻧﺘﺎ ﻳﺞ ﺣﺎﮐﻲ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻓﺰﺍ ﻳﺶ ﻟﻴﻔﺖ ﻭ ﮐﺎﻫﺶ ﺩﺭﮒ‬ ‫ﻭﺍﮊﻩ ﻫﺎﻱ ﻛﻠﻴﺪﻱ‪ :‬ﭘﺎﻳﺪﺍﺭﻱ ﺍﺳﺘﺎﺗﻴﮏ ﻃﻮﻟﻲ ‪ -‬ﺍﺛﺮ ﺳﻄﺢ ‪ -‬ﺍﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ‪ -‬ﮐﻤﺒﺮ‪-‬‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﺍﺛﺮ ﺳﻄﺢ ﺑﻮﺩﻧﺪ ]‪ .[۶‬ﮔﺮﺍﺱ )‪ (Gross‬ﻭ ﺗﺮﺍﺏ )‪ (Traub‬ﺑﻪ ﺑﺮﺭﺳﻲ ﺍﺛﺮ‬ ‫ﻣﺮﮐﺰ ﺁﻳﺮﻭﺩﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﮑﻲ ﭘﻴﭻ ‪ -‬ﻣﺮﮐﺰ ﺁﻳﺮﻭﺩ ﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﮑﻲ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ‬
‫ﺳﻄﺢ ﺑﺮ ﺍ ﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﺍﺱ ‪ (S8036) ۸۰۳۶‬ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻲ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻋﺪﺍﺩ ﺭﻳﻨﻮﻟﺪﺯ‬
‫ﭘﺎﻳﻴﻦ ﻭ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉﻫﺎﻱ ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒ ﭘﺮﺩﺍﺧﺘﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺁﻥﻫﺎ ﺩﺭﻳﺎﻓﺘﻨﺪ ﮐﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺮﺧﻲ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻮﺍﻗﻊ‬ ‫ﻣﻘﺪﻣﻪ‬
‫ﺍﺛﺮ ﺳﻄﺢ ﺿﺮ ﻳﺐ ﺩﺭﮒ ﺭﺍ ﺍﻓﺰﺍ ﻳﺶ ﻣﻲﺩﻫﺪ ]‪ .[۷‬ﺗﺮﺍﺏ ﺑﻪ ﺑﺮﺭﺳﻲ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺩﻫﺎﻧﻪ‬ ‫ﭘﺮﻧﺪﻩ ﺍﺛﺮ ﺳﻄﺤﻲ )‪ (Wing In Ground Effect Vehicle‬ﻭﺳﻴﻠﻪﺍﻱ ﺍﺳﺖ‬
‫ﺑﺎﻝ ﺑﺎ ﺍﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﺍﺱ ‪ ۸۰۳۶‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﺛﺮ ﺳﻄﺢ ﺩﺭ ﻳﮏ ﺗﻮﻧﻞ ﺑﺎﺩ ﮐﻢ ﺳﺮﻋﺖ ﭘﺮﺩﺍﺧﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ﮐﻪ ﭘﻴﺶﺑﻴﻨ ﻲ ﻣﻲﺷﻮﺩ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻳﻨﺪﻩ ﻧﺰﺩ ﻳﮏ ﻓﺮﺍﮔﻴﺮ ﺷﻮﺩ ﻭ ﻳﺎ ﺣﺪﺍﻗﻞ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﺗﻮﺟﻪ‬
‫ﻧﺘﺎﻳﺞ ﺣﺎﮐﻲ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻓﺰﺍ ﻳﺶ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﻟﻴﻔﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺩﺭﮒ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺛﺮ ﺳﻄﺢ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﻧﺘﺎ ﻳﺞ ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻠﻲ‬ ‫ﻋﻼﻗﻤﻨﺪﺍﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻔﺮﻳﺤﺎﺕ ﺩﺭ ﻳﺎﻳﻲ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﮔﻴﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﭘﺮﻧﺪﻩ ﺍﺛﺮ ﺳﻄﺤﻲ ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮﺭ ﮐﻠﻲ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﻣﻄﺎﺑﻘﺖ ﻣﻨﺎﺳﺒﻲ ﺑﺎ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻲ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻨﺪ ]‪ .[۸‬ﻟﻴﺎﻧﮓ ) ‪ (Liang‬ﻭ ﺯﻭﻧﮓ ) ‪ (Zong‬ﺑﺎ‬ ‫ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﻭﺳﻴﻠﻪ ﻧﻘﻠﻴﻪﺍﻱ ﺍﺳﺖ ﮐﻪ ﺑﺎﻝ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ﮐﻤﻲ ﺍﺯ ﺳﻄﺢ )ﻣﻌﻤﻮ ﹰﻻ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﺍﺯ ﺗﺌﻮﺭﻱ ﺻﻔﺤﻪ ﺑﺮﺍﺯﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺟﺮ ﻳﺎﻥ ﺯﻳﺮ ﺻﻮﺕ ﺑﺎﻝ ﺳﻪ ﺑﻌﺪﻱ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺛﺮ ﺳﻄﺢ‬ ‫ﺁﺏ( ﭘﺮﻭﺍﺯ ﻣﻲﮐﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﺁﻧﺠﺎﻳﻲ ﮐﻪ ﭘﺮﻧﺪﻩ ﺍﺛﺮ ﺳﻄﺤ ﻲ ﺗﻮﺍﻧﺎﻳﻲ ﻣﺤﺪﻭﺩﻱ ﺑﺮﺍﻱ‬
‫ﺭﺍ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﻣﻄﺎﻟﻌﻪ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺩﺍﺩﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺁﻥﻫﺎ ﺍﺛﺮ ﻋﺪﺩ ﻣﺎﺥ ﺭﺍ ﻧﻴﺰ ﻟﺤﺎﻅ ﮐﺮﺩﻧﺪ]‪ .[۹‬ﻫﻲ‬
‫)‪ (He‬ﻭ ﻫﻤﮑﺎﺭﺍﻥ ﺩﺭ ﺳﺎﻝ ‪ ۲۰۱۱‬ﺍﺯ ﺍﻟﮕﻮﺭﻳﺘﻢ ﮊﻧﺘﻴﮏ ﺑﺎ ﻫﺪﻑ ﺍﻓﺰﺍﻳﺶ ﻟﻴﻔﺖ ﻭ‬ ‫‪ -1‬ﮐﺎرﺷﻨﺎس ارﺷﺪ ﻫﻮاﻓﻀﺎ‪) [email protected] ،‬ﻧﻮﯾﺴﻨﺪه ﻣﺨﺎﻃﺐ(‬
‫‪ -2‬اﺳﺘﺎد ﺗﻤﺎم‬
‫ﺑﺎﺯﺩﻩ ﺁﻳﺮﻭﺩﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﮑﻲ ﺍﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﻧﺎﮐﺎ ‪ ۴۴۱۲‬ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﮐﺮﺩﻧﺪ ]‪ .[۱۰‬ﻳﺎﻧﮓ )‪(Yang‬‬

‫‪www.SID.ir‬‬
‫‪Archive of SID‬‬

‫‪¶C L‬‬ ‫‪¶C L‬‬ ‫ﻭ ﻫﻤﮑﺎﺭﺍﻥ ﺩﺭ ﺳﺎﻝ ‪ ۲۰۱۵‬ﺑﺮ ﺧﻼﻑ ﻣﻄﺎﻟﻌﺎﺕ ﭘﻴﺸﻴﻦ ﺑﻪ ﺑﺮﺭﺳ ﻲ ﭘﺎﻳﺪﺍﺭﻱ‬
‫= ‪C La‬‬ ‫= ‪, C Lh‬‬ ‫‪,‬‬
‫‪¶a‬‬ ‫‪¶h‬‬ ‫)‪(۱‬‬ ‫ﻃﻮﻟ ﻲ ﺷﻨﺎﻭﺭ ﺍﺛﺮ ﺳﻄﺤﻲ ﺩﺭ ﻓﺎﺯﻫﺎﻱ ﻓﺮﻭﺩ ﻭ ﺑﺮﺧﺎﺳﺖ ﭘﺮﺩﺍﺧﺘﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮﺍ ﻳﻦ‬
‫‪¶C m‬‬ ‫‪¶C m‬‬ ‫ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﻱ ﻫﻴﺪﺭﻭﺩ ﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﮑﻲ ﻭﺍﺭﺩ ﺑﺮ ﺷﻨﺎﻭﺭ ﺭﺍ ﻧﻴﺰ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺩﺍﺩﻧﺪ ]‪.[۱۱‬‬
‫= ‪C ma‬‬ ‫= ‪, C mh‬‬
‫‪¶a‬‬ ‫‪¶h‬‬ ‫ﭘﺎﺭﮎ )‪ (Park‬ﻭ ﻟﻲ )‪ (Lee‬ﺍﺛﺮﺍﺕ ﺻﻔﺤﺎﺕ ﺍﻧﺘﻬﺎﻳﻲ ﺑﺮ ﺁﻳﺮﻭﺩ ﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﮏ ﻭ ﭘﺎﻳﺪﺍﺭﻱ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﺍﺛﺮ ﺳﻄﺢ ﮔﺸﺘﺎﻭﺭﻫﺎ ﻭ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﻱ ﺁﻳﺮﻭﺩ ﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﮑﻲ ﺑﺎ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﻝ ﺑﺎ ﺍﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﺍﺻﻼﺡ ﺷﺪﻩ ﮔﻠﻦ ﻣﺎﺭﺗﻴﻦ ‪ (Glenn Martin 21) ۲۱‬ﺑﺮﺍﻱ ﺍﺛﺮ‬
‫ﻣﻲ ﮐﻨﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﺮﺍ ﻱ ﭘﺮﻧﺪﻩﻫﺎﻱ ﺍﺛﺮ ﺳﻄﺤﻲ ﻭ ﻗﺎﻋﺪﺗ ﹰﺎ ﺍﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞﻫﺎ ﺩﻭ ﻣﺮﮐﺰ‬ ‫ﺳﻄﺢ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﻋﺪﺩﻱ ﭘﺮﺩﺍﺧﺘﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻣﺸﺨﺺ ﺷﺪ ﮐﻪ ﺻﻔﺤﺎﺕ ﺍﻧﺘﻬﺎﻳﻲ ﺑﺮﺍﻱ‬
‫ﺁﻳﺮﻭﺩﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﮑﻲ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺛﺮ ﺳﻄﺢ ﻣﻄﺮﺡ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻣﺮﮐﺰ ﺁ ﻳﺮﻭﺩﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﮑ ﻲ ﭘﻴﭻ‬ ‫ﭘﺎﻳﺪﺍﺭﻱ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ﻣﻨﺎﺳﺐ ﻧﻴﺴﺘﻨﺪ ]‪ .[۱۲‬ﺍﻧﺠﻞ ) ‪ (Angle‬ﻭ ﻫﻤﮑﺎﺭﺍﻧﺶ ﺑﻪ ﺑﺮﺭﺳﻲ‬
‫)‪ (aerodynamic center of pitch‬ﮐﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻥ ﺿﺮ ﻳﺐ ﮔﺸﺘﺎﻭﺭ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻞ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﺍﺛﺮ ﻓﻠﭗ ﺍﺳﻼﺕ )‪ (slot‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﻭﺭﺗﻤﺎﻥ ﺍﻑ ﺍﻳﮑﺲ ‪ ۶۳- ۱۳۷‬ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﺩﻭ‬
‫ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮﺍﺕ ﺯﺍﻭﻳﻪ ﺣﻤﻠﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﻣﺮﮐﺰ ﺁﻳﺮﻭﺩﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﮑﻲ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ) ‪aerodynamic‬‬ ‫ﺑﻌﺪ ﻱ ﭘﺮﺩﺍﺧﺘﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻧﺘﺎ ﻳﺞ ﺁﻥﻫﺎ ﺣﺎﮐﻲ ﺍﺯ ﮐﻤ ﻲ ﮐﺎﻫﺶ ﻟﻴﻔﺖ ﺑﺮ ﺍﺛﺮ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺍﺳﻼﺕ‬
‫‪ (center of altitude‬ﮐﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻥ ﺿﺮ ﻳﺐ ﮔﺸﺘﺎﻭﺭ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻞ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ﺍﺳﺖ ]‪.[۱۷‬‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﺍﺛﺮ ﺳﻄﺢ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺣﺎﻟﻲ ﮐﻪ ﺩﺍﻣﻨﻪ ﺟﺎﺑﺠﺎﻳﻲ ﻣﺮﮐﺰ ﻓﺸﺎﺭ ﺭﺍ ﮐﺎﻫﺶ ﺩﺍﺩﻩ ﻭ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺭﻭﺍﺑﻂ ﺯﻳﺮ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﺩﻫﻨﺪﻩ ﻣﺤﻞ ﻣﺮﮐﺰ ﺁ ﻳﺮﻭﺩﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﮑ ﻲ ﭘﻴﭻ ‪ X a‬ﻭ ﻣﺮﮐﺰ‬ ‫ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ ﺑﺎﻋﺚ ﺑﻬﺒﻮﺩﻱ ﭘﺎﻳﺪﺍﺭﻱ ﭘﻴﭻ )‪ (pitch‬ﮔﺮﺩ ﻳﺪ ]‪.[۱۳‬‬
‫ﺁﻳﺮﻭﺩﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﮑﻲ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ‪ X h‬ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ ]‪،[۱۵‬‬ ‫ﻣﻄﺎﻟﻌﺎﺕ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﺩﺍﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ ﮐﻪ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ﺑﺤﺮﺍﻧﻲ )‪ (critical height‬ﮐﻪ ﺍﺛﺮ‬
‫‪C ma‬‬ ‫)‪(۲‬‬ ‫ﺳﻄﺢ ﮐﺮﺩ ﺣﺎﮐﻢ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻥ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﻣﻲﺩﻫﺪ ﮐﻤﺘﺮ ﺍﺯ ﻃﻮﻝ ﮐﺮﺩ ﺍﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ‬
‫= ‪Xa‬‬
‫‪C La‬‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ ]‪ .[۱۴‬ﺍﻣﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﺳﺮ ﺍﻧﮕﺸﺘﻲ ﺩﺭ ﮐﻤﺘﺮ ﺍﺯ ﻳﮏ ﭼﻬﺎﺭﻡ ﮐﺮﺩ ﻣﺰﺍﻳﺎﻱ ﺍﺛﺮ‬
‫‪C mh‬‬ ‫)‪(۳‬‬ ‫ﺳﻄﺢ ﻗﺎﺑﻞ ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﻭ ﺯﻳﺮ ﻳﮏ ﺩﻫﻢ ﮐﺮﺩ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﺍﺛﺮ ﺳﻄﺢ ﺣﺪﻱ ) ‪extreme‬‬
‫= ‪Xh‬‬
‫‪C Lh‬‬ ‫‪ (ground effect‬ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻪ ﻣﻲ ﺷﻮﺩ ﮐﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﺎﺣﻴﻪ ﺑﺎﺯﺩﻩ ﺁﻳﺮﻭﺩﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﮑﻲ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺑﺮﺍﻱ ﺣﺼﻮﻝ ﺑﻪ ﭘﺎﻳﺪﺍﺭﻱ ﻃﻮﻟ ﻲ ﺍﺳﺘﺎﺗﻴﮑﻲ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺛﺮ ﺳﻄﺢ ﺷﺮﺍﻳﻄﻲ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﮐﻪ‬ ‫ﻣﻘﺪﺍﺭ ﺯﻳﺎﺩﻱ ﺍﻓﺰﺍﻳﺶ ﭘﻴﺪﺍ ﻣﻲﮐﻨﺪ ]‪ .[۱۵‬ﺩﺭ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ ﻳﮏ ﭘﺮﻧﺪﻩ ﺍﺛﺮ ﺳﻄﺤﻲ‬
‫ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺑﺮﺁﻭﺭﺩﻩ ﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﭘﻴﺶ ﺍﺯ ﻫﺮﭼﻴﺰ ﺷﺮﻁ ﺯ ﻳﺮ ﻫﻤﭽﻨﺎﻥ ﮐﻪ ﺑﺮﺍﻱ ﭘﺮﻭﺍﺯ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﻣﺘﻌﺎﺭﻑ )ﺷﺒﻴﻪ ﻫﻮﺍﭘﻴﻤﺎﻱ ﻣﺘﻌﺎﺭﻑ( ﺑﺮﺍﻱ ﺑﻬﺮﻩ ﮔﻴﺮﻱ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺛﺮ ﺳﻄﺢ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺧﺎﺭﺝ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺛﺮ ﺳﻄﺢ )ﻣﺎﻧﻨﺪ ﻫﻮﺍﭘﻴﻤﺎ( ﺿﺮﻭﺭﻱ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﺮﺍﻱ ﭘﺮﻭﺍﺯ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺛﺮ ﺳﻄﺢ ﻧﻴﺰ‬ ‫ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻋﻲ ﮐﻤ ﺘﺮ ﺍﺯ ﻃﻮﻝ ﮐﺮﺩ ﭘﺮﻭﺍﺯ ﮐﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻣﺎ ﺑﺮﺍﻱ ﺍﻃﻤﻴﻨﺎﻥ ﺍﺯ ﻗﺎﺑﻞ ﻣﻘﺎﻳﺴﻪ ﺑﻮﺩﻥ‬
‫ﺣﻴﺎﺗﻲ ﺍﺳﺖ ]‪،[۱‬‬ ‫ﻭﺣﺘﻲ ﺑﺮﺗﺮﻱ ﺑﺎﺯﺩﻫﻲ ﭘﺮﻧﺪﻩ ﺍﺛﺮ ﺳﻄﺤﻲ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻮﺍﭘﻴﻤﺎ ﻓﺎﺯ ﮐﺮﻭﺯ ﺁﻥ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺩﺭ‬
‫‪C ma < 0‬‬ ‫)‪(۴‬‬ ‫ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ﮐﻤﺘﺮ ﺍﺯ ﻳﮏ ﭼﻬﺎﺭﻡ ﮐﺮﺩ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺧﺼﻮﺹ ﺩﺭ ﺣﺪﻭﺩ ﻳﮏ ﺩﻫﻢ ﮐﺮﺩ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺭﺍﺑﻄﻪ ﻓﻮﻕ ﺑﺪﻳﻦ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﺳﺖ ﮐﻪ ﭘﺮﻧﺪﻩ ﺑﺮ ﺍﺛﺮ ﻳﮏ ﺍﺧﺘﻼﻝ ﺯﺍﻭﻳﻪ ﺣﻤﻠﻪ ﻣﺜﺒﺖ‬ ‫ﭘﺮﻭﺍﺯ ﺩﺭ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ﮐﻤﻲ ﻭﺳﻴﻠﻪ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻌﺮﺽ ﺧﻄﺮ ﺩﺍﺋﻤﻲ ﺑﺮﺧﻮﺭﺩ ﺑﻪ ﺳﻄﺢ‬
‫ﮔﺸﺘﺎﻭﺭ ﻣﻨﻔﻲ ﺍﻳﺠﺎﺩ ﮐﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺳﺎﻝ ‪ ۱۹۷۰‬ﺍﻳﺮﻭﺩﻭﻑ ﺁﻧﺎﻟﻴﺰ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮ ﻣﺒﻨﺎﻱ ﺍﻳﻦ‬ ‫ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻲﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮﺍﻳﻦ ﭘﺎﻳﺪﺍﺭﻱ ﺍﺳﺘﺎﺗﻴﮏ ﻃﻮﻟﻲ ﺍﻫﻤﻴﺘﻲ ﺣﻴﺎﺗﻲ ﺑﺮﺍﻱ ﭘﺮﻧﺪﻩﻫﺎﻱ‬
‫ﻓﺮﺽ ﮐﻪ ﺍﺧﺘﻼﻝ ﺑﺮﺍﻱ ﭘﺮﻧﺪﻩ ﺍﺛﺮ ﺳﻄﺤﻲ ﺩﺭ ﺳﺮﻋﺖ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﺭﺥ ﻣﻲﺩﻫﺪ؛ ﺍﻧﺠﺎﻡ‬ ‫ﺍﺛﺮﺳﻄﺤﻲ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺗﺎﮐﻨﻮﻥ ﻗﺴﻤﺖ ﺍﻋﻈﻢ ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻘﺎﺕ ﻣﻨﺘﺸﺮ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺩﺭ ﺯﻣﻴﻨﻪ ﺍﺛﺮ‬
‫ﺩﺍﺩ‪ .‬ﺑﺮ ﻃﺒﻖ ﻓﺮﻣﻮﻝﺑﻨﺪﻱ ﻭﻱ ﺷﺮﻁ ﺯﻳﺮ ﺑﺮﺍﻱ ﭘﺎﻳﺪﺍﺭﻱ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺛﺮ ﺳﻄﺢ‬ ‫ﺳﻄﺢ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﻣﺸﺨﺼﺎﺕ ﺁﻳﺮﻭﺩﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﮑﻲ ﺑﻮﺩﻩﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺭﻭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﭘﮋﻭﻫﺶ ﺑﺮ‬
‫ﺣﺎﺻﻞ ﮔﺮﺩﻳﺪ ]‪،[۱۸‬‬ ‫ﭘﺎﻳﺪﺍﺭﻱ ﺍﺳﺘﺎﺗﻴﮏ ﻃﻮﻟﻲ ﺍﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﺗﻤﺮﮐﺰ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﺑﺘﺪﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺑﺮﺭﺳﻲ ﭘﺎﻳﺪﺍﺭﻱ‬
‫‪C‬‬ ‫‪C‬‬ ‫)‪(۵‬‬ ‫ﺍﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﻧﺎﮐﺎ ‪ ۴۴۱۲‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﺛﺮ ﺳﻄﺢ ﺣﺪﻱ ﭘﺮﺩﺍﺧﺘﻪ ﺷﺪﻩ ﻭ ﺳﭙﺲ ﺑﺎ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﮐﻤﺒﺮ‬
‫‪SSM = mh - m a = X h - X a > 0‬‬
‫‪C Lh C L a‬‬ ‫ﺁﻥ ﺍﺛﺮﺍﺕ ﮐﺎﻫﺶ ﺧﻤﻴﺪﮔﻲ ﮐﻤﺒﺮ ﺍﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﻭ ‪ S‬ﺷﮑﻞ ﺷﺪﻥ ﺁﻥ ﺑﺮ ﻣﺸﺨﺼﺎﺕ‬
‫ﺭﺍﺑﻄﻪ ﺑﺎﻻ ﺑﻴﺎﻧﮕﺮ ﺍ ﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﮐﻪ ﺑﺮﺍﻱ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﭘﺎﻳﺪﺍﺭﻱ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ‪ ،‬ﻣﺮﮐﺰ ﺁﻳﺮﻭﺩ ﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﮑﻲ‬ ‫ﺁﻳﺮﻭﺩﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﮑﻲ‪ ،‬ﭘﺎﻳﺪﺍﺭﻱ ﺯﺍﻭﻳﻪ ﭘﻴﭻ )‪ (pitch‬ﻭ ﭘﺎﻳﺪﺍﺭﻱ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ﺑﺮ ﻣﺒﻨﺎﻱ ﻣﻌﻴﺎﺭ‬
‫ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺩﺭ ﺟﻠﻮ ﻣﺮﮐﺰ ﺁﻳﺮﻭﺩﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﮑﻲ ﭘﻴﭻ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ ﻳﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺗﻲ‬ ‫ﺍ ﻳﺮﻭﺩﻭﻑ )‪ (Irodov‬ﺩﺭ ﺷﺮﺍﻳﻂ ﮐﺮﻭﺯ ﻳﮏ ﭘﺮﻧﺪﻩ ﺍﺛﺮﺳﻄﺤﻲ ﻣﺘﻌﺎﺭﻑ ﺑﺮﺭﺳﻲ‬
‫ﺣﺎﺷﻴﻪ ﭘﺎﻳﺪﺍﺭﻱ ﺍﺳﺘﺎﺗﻴﮑﻲ ﻣﺜﺒﺖ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﻫﻤﭽﻨﻴﻦ ﻭﻱ ﺍﺿﺎﻓﻪ ﮐﺮﺩ ﺩﺭ ﺻﻮﺭﺗﻲ‬ ‫ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﮐﻪ ﺁﻧﺎﻟﻴ ﺰ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻟﺒﻪ ﻓﺮﺍﺭ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﺩﻫﺪ ﮐﻪ ﭘﺮﻧﺪﻩ ﭘﺎ ﻳﺪﺍﺭ ﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﺩﺭ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﻫﺮ ﻣﮑﺎﻥ ﺩﻟﺨﻮﺍﻩ ﻣﺮﮐﺰ ﺟﺮﻡ ﮐﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺟﻠﻮﻱ ﻟﺒﻪ ﻓﺮﺍﺭ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﺷﺪﻩ ﻧﻴﺰ ﭘﺎ ﻳﺪﺍﺭ‬ ‫ﭘﺎﻳﺪﺍﺭﻱ ﺍﺳﺘﺎﺗﻴﮏ ﻃﻮﻟﻲ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺛﺮ ﺳﻄﺢ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﺳﺘﺎﻓﻨﺒﻴﻞ )‪ (Staufenbiel‬ﻭ ﺷﻠﻴﺨﺘﻴﻨﮓ )‪ (Schlichting‬ﺩﺭ ﻣﻄﺎﻟﻌﻪ‬ ‫ﺗﻤﺎﻳﻞ ﻭﺳﻴﻠﻪ ﭘﺮﻧﺪﻩ ﺑﻪ ﺑﺎﺯﮔﺸﺘﻦ ﺑﻪ ﺣﺎﻟﺖ ﺗﻌﺎﺩﻝ ﭘﺲ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻮﺍﺟﻪ ﺑﺎ ﻳﮏ ﺍﺧﺘﻼﻝ‬
‫ﺧﻮﺩ ﺍﺧﺘﻼﻝ ﺩﺭ ﺳﺮﻋﺖ ﺭﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺟﻠﻮ ﺭﺍ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻈﺮ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻨﺪ ]‪ .[۱۹‬ﺑﺎ ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﻳﺎ ﺁﺷﺘﻔﮕﻲ )‪ (disturbance‬ﺭﺍ ﭘﺎﻳﺪﺍﺭﻱ ﺍﺳﺘﺎﺗﻴﮑ ﻲ ﻣﻲﮔﻮﻳﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﻤﺎﻳﻞ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺘﺎﻓﻨﺒﻴﻞ ﭘﺮﻧﺪﻩ ﺍﺛﺮ ﺳﻄﺤ ﻲ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﻲ ﭘﺎﻳﺪﺍﺭﻱ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﮐﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺮﺍﺑﺮ ﺍﺧﺘﻼﻝ‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻴﻞ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎ ﻭﮔﺸﺘﺎﻭﺭﻫﺎ ﻱ ﺁﻳﺮﻭﺩﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﮑ ﻲ ﺍﻳﺠﺎﺩ ﻣﻲﮔﺮﺩﺩ ]‪ .[۱۶‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‬
‫ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ﺩﺭ ﺣﺎﻟﻲ ﮐﻪ ﺿﺮﻳﺐ ﮔﺸﺘﺎﻭﺭ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺳﻴﻠﻪ ﻟﻴ ﻔﺖ ﻣﻘﺎﻭﻣﺖ ﮐﻨﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻃﻮﺭ ﮐﻪ ﮔﻔﺘﻪ ﺷﺪ؛ ﻋﻼﻭﻩ ﺑﺮ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﺯﺍﻭﻳﻪ ﺣﻤﻠﻪ‪ ،‬ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺛﺮ ﺳﻄﺢ‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﺯﺑﺎﻥ ﺭ ﻳﺎﺿﻲ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺑﺎﻋﺚ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎ ﻭ ﮔﺸﺘﺎﻭﺭﻫﺎﻱ ﺁﻳﺮﻭﺩ ﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﮑﻲ ﻣﻲﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﺮﺍﻱ ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻞ‬
‫‪¶C‬‬ ‫)‪(۶‬‬ ‫ﭼﻪ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻨﻈﺮ ﭘﺎﻳﺪﺍﺭﻱ ﻭ ﭼﻪ ﺁﻳﺮﻭﺩﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﮑﻲ ﺍﺯ ﭘﺎﺭﺍﻣﺘﺮ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ﺑﻲ ﺑﻌﺪ ﮐﻪ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ‬
‫‪( L )C m < 0‬‬ ‫ﻟﺒﻪ ﻓﺮﺍﺭ ﺍﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﺍﺯ ﺳﻄﺢ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮﻝ ﮐﺮﺩ ﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﻣﻲﮔﺮﺩﺩ‪.‬‬
‫‪¶h‬‬
‫ﺑﺎ ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﻣﺸﺘﻖ ﺑﻪ ﺳﺎﺩﮔﻲ ﻣﻲﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﻧﻮﺷﺖ‪،‬‬ ‫ﭘﺎﻳﺪﺍﺭﻱ ﻃﻮﻟﻲ ﺍﺳﺘﺎﺗﻴﮏ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺛﺮ ﺳﻄﺢ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻲﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﺁﻧﺎﻟﻴﺰ ﻣﺸﺘﻘﺎﺕ ﺿﺮ ﻳﺐ‬
‫‪d C L = C La da + C Lh‬‬ ‫ﻟﻴﻔﺖ ﻭ ﺿﺮﻳﺐ ﮔﺸﺘﺎﻭﺭ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺯﺍﻭ ﻳﻪ ﺣﻤﻠﻪ ﻭ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ﺑﻲ ﺑﻌﺪ ﺍﻧﺠﺎﻡ ﺩﺍﺩ‪.‬‬
‫‪d C m = C ma da + C mh d h‬‬ ‫)‪(۷‬‬ ‫ﻣﺘﻐﻴﺮﻫﺎﻱ ﺍﺳﺎﺳ ﻲ ﻣﺮﺑﻮﻃﻪ ﺷﺎﻣﻞ ﺿﺮﺍﻳﺐ ﻟﻴﻔﺖ ﻭ ﮔﺸﺘﺎﻭﺭ ﺑﻪ ﺗﺮﺗ‪‬ﺐ ﺑﺎ ‪ C L‬ﻭ‬
‫‪ C m‬ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﺩﺍﺩﻩ ﺷﺪﻩﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺿﺮﻳﺐ ﮔﺸﺘﺎﻭﺭ ﺣﻮﻝ ﻣﺮﮐﺰ ﺟﺮﻡ ﻣﺤﺎﺳﺒﻪ ﻣﻲﺷﻮﺩ‪.‬‬
‫ﺑﺎ ﺣﺬﻑ ‪ da‬ﺑﺪﺳﺖ ﻣﻲ ﺁﻳﺪ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻃﻮﻝ ﮐﺮﺩ ﺍﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﺑﺎ ‪ ، c‬ﺯﺍﻭﻳﻪ ﺣﻤﻠﻪ ﺑﺎ ‪ a‬ﻭ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ﺍﺯ ﻟﺒﻪ ﻓﺮﺍﺭ ﺗﺎ ﺳﻄﺢ ﺑﺎ ‪h‬‬
‫)‪(۸‬‬ ‫ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﺩﺍﺩﻩ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻧﻘﻄﻪ ﻣﺮﺟﻊ ﺑﺮﺍﻱ ﺗﻤﺎﻣﻲ ﮔﺸﺘﺎﻭﺭﻫﺎ ﺩﺭ ﻟﺒﻪ ﻓﺮﺍﺭ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ‬
‫‪é‬‬ ‫‪C‬‬ ‫‪ù‬‬ ‫‪C‬‬
‫‪d C L = êC Lh‬‬ ‫‪- ( mh )C L a ú d h + ( L a )d C m‬‬ ‫ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﻣﺸﺘﻘﺎﺕ ﺿﺮﻳﺐ ﻟﻴﻔﺖ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺯﺍﻭﻳﻪ ﺣﻤﻠﻪ ‪ C La‬ﻭ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ‪ C Lh‬ﻭ‬
‫‪ë‬‬ ‫‪C ma‬‬ ‫‪û‬‬ ‫‪C ma‬‬
‫ﺿﺮ ﻳﺐ ﮔﺸﺘﺎﻭﺭ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺯﺍﻭ ﻳﻪ ﺣﻤﻠﻪ ‪ C ma‬ﻭ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ‪ C mh‬ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﺯﻳﺮ‬
‫ﺗﻌﺮ ﻳﻒ ﻣﻲﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪،‬‬

‫‪www.SID.ir‬‬
‫‪Archive of SID‬‬

‫ﭼﻨﺪﻳﻦ ﺷﺒﮑﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺗﻌﺪﺍﺩ ﺳﻠﻮﻝ ﻫﺎﻱ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺍﻳﺠﺎﺩ ﮔﺮﺩﻳﺪ ﻭ ﺿﺮﺍﻳﺐ‬ ‫ﺑﺎ ﻓﺮﺽ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﺑﻮﺩﻥ ‪ C m‬ﺩﺭ ﻃﻲ ﺍﺧﺘﻼﻝ‪ ،‬ﺷﺮﻁ ﭘﺎﻳﺪﺍﺭﻱ ﺍﺳﺘﺎﻓﻨﺒﻴﻞ )ﺭﺍﺑﻄﻪ‬
‫ﻟﻴﻔﺖ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭﮒ ﻭ ﮔﺸﺘﺎﻭﺭ ﻣﻌﻴﺎﺭﻫﺎﯼ ﻫﻤﮕﺮﺍﻳﻲ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻈﺮ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺷﺪﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻧﻬﺎﻳﺖ ﺑﺮ‬ ‫)‪ ((٦‬ﺑﻪ ﺷﮑﻞ ﺯﻳﺮ ﺑﻪ ﺩﺳﺖ ﻣﻲﺁﻳﺪ‪،‬‬
‫ﺣﺴﺐ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ﺍﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﺍﺯ ﺳﻄﺢ‪ ،‬ﭼﻬﺎﺭ ﺷﺒﮑﻪ ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒ ﺑﺎ ﻣﻴﺎﻧﮕﻴﻦ ﺗﻌﺪﺍﺩ ﮔﺮﻩ‬ ‫‪¶C L‬‬ ‫‪C mh‬‬ ‫)‪(۹‬‬
‫(‬ ‫( ‪)C m = C Lh -‬‬ ‫‪)C L a < 0‬‬
‫‪ ٢٥٠٠٠٠‬ﺍﻧﺘﺨﺎﺏ ﮔﺮﺩﻳﺪﻧﺪ ﮐﻪ ﺍﺳﺘﻘﻼﻝ ﺣﻞ ﺍﺯ ﺷﺒﮑﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﺁﻥﻫﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺍﺛﺒﺎﺕ‬ ‫‪¶h‬‬ ‫‪C ma‬‬
‫ﺭﺳﻴﺪﻩ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﻣﻴﺰﺍﻥ ‪ y+‬ﺩﺭ ﺗﻤﺎﻣﻲ ﻧﻘﺎﻁ ﮐﻤﺘﺮ ﺍﺯ ﻳﮏ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺷﺒﮑﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ‬ ‫ﺑﺮﺍﻱ ﻳﮏ ﻃﺮﺍﺣﻲ ﻣﻨﺎﺳﺐ ‪ C Lh‬ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﻣﻨﻔﻲ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ ]‪ .[١٥‬ﺩﺭ ﻏﻴﺮ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ‬
‫ﻫﻴﺒﺮ ﻳﺪﻱ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﮔﺮﺩ ﻳﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﺷﮑﻠﻲ ﮐﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻮﺍﺣﻲ ﻧﺰﺩ ﻳﮏ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﻣﺜﻠﺜﻲ‬ ‫ﺑﺮ ﺍﺛﺮ ﺍﺧﺘﻼﻝ ﺍﻓﺰﺍﻳﺸﻲ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ‪ ،‬ﻟﻴﻔﺖ ﺍﻓﺰﺍﻳﺶ ﭘﻴﺪﺍ ﮐﺮﺩﻩ ﮐﻪ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺑﺎﻋﺚ ﺍﻓﺰﺍﻳﺶ‬
‫)‪ (triangle‬ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻮﺍﺣﻲ ﺩﻭﺭﺗﺮ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﻈﻮﺭ ﺍﻓﺰﺍﻳﺶ ﺩﻗﺖ ﻭ ﮐﺎﻫﺶ ﻫﺰﻳﻨﻪ‬ ‫ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ﺷﺪﻩ ﮐﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﻲ ﻧﺎﭘﺎﻳﺪﺍﺭ ﺑﻮﺩﻥ ﻭﺳﻴﻠﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﻣﺤﺎﺳﺒﺎﺗﻲ ﭼﻬﺎﺭ ﺿﻠﻌﻲ )‪ (quadrilateral‬ﺑﻮﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫‪C Lh < 0‬‬ ‫)‪(۱۰‬‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﻈﻮﺭ ﺍﻃﻤﻴﻨﺎﻥ ﺍﺯ ﺩﻗﺖ ﻧﺘﺎﻳﺞ ﻣﺮﺯ ﻭﺭﻭﺩﻱ ﻭ ﺑﺎﻻﻳﻲ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻧﺪﺍﺯﻩ ‪۱۲‬‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ ﺭﺍﺑﻄﻪ )‪ (٨‬ﺭﺍ ﻣﻲﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﺯ ﻳﺮ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻮ ﻳﺴﻲ ﮐﺮﺩ‪،‬‬
‫ﺑﺮﺍﺑﺮ ﮐﺮﺩ ﻭ ﻣﺮﺯ ﺧﺮﻭﺟﻲ ‪ ۳۵‬ﺑﺮﺍﺑﺮ ﮐﺮﺩ ﺗﺎ ﺍﻳ ﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﻓﺎﺻﻠﻪ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻓﺎﺻﻠﻪ ﻣﺮﺯ‬ ‫‪C L aC mh‬‬ ‫‪X‬‬ ‫‪X -Xa‬‬ ‫)‪(۱۱‬‬
‫ﭘﺎﻳﻴﻨﻲ ﺗﺎ ﺍﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﺑﺮ ﺍﺳﺎﺱ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ﻟﺒﻪ ﻓﺮﺍﺭ ﺍﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﺗﺎ ﺳﻄﺢ ﺗﻌﻴﻴﻦ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫‪-1 = h - 1 = h‬‬ ‫‪>0‬‬
‫‪C m aC Lh‬‬ ‫‪Xa‬‬ ‫‪Xa‬‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﻭﺭﻭﺩﻱ ﺷﺮﻁ ﻣﺮﺯﻱ ﻭﺭﻭﺩﻱ ﺳﺮﻋﺖ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﻣﺮﺯ ﺧﺮﻭﺟﻲ ﺷﺮﻁ ﺧﺮﻭﺟﻲ ﻓﺸﺎﺭ‬ ‫ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﻃﻮﺭ ﮐﻪ ﺩ ﻳﺪﻩ ﻣﻲﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻣﻌﻴﺎﺭ ﻓﻮﻕ ﺑﺎ ﻣﻌﻴﺎﺭ ﺍﻳﺮﻭﺩﻭﻑ ﻳﮑﺴﺎﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺑﺎ ﻓﺸﺎﺭ ﮔﻴﺞ )‪ (gauge‬ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﺻﻔﺮ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻣﺮﺯ ﺑﺎﻻﻳﻲ ﺑﺎ ﻓﺮﺽ ﻋﺪﻡ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺟﺮﻳﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﻣﻌﻴﺎﺭ ﺍﻳﺮﻭﺩﻭﻑ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﺗﻠﻮﻳﺤﻲ ﻣﻨﻔﻲ ﺑﻮﺩﻥ ﻣﺸﺘﻖ ﺿﺮﻳﺐ ﻟﻴﻔﺖ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﻋﺮﺿﻲ ﻋﺒﻮﺭﻱ ﺷﺮﻁ ﺗﻘﺎﺭﻥ ﺍﻋﻤﺎﻝ ﮔﺮﺩﻳﺪ )ﺳﺮﻋﺖﻫﺎﻱ ﻋﻤﻮﺩﻱ ﺻﻔﺮ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻈﺮ‬ ‫ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ﻳﻌﻨﻲ ‪ C Lh < 0‬ﺭﺍ ﻣﺴﻠﻢ ﻓﺮﺽ ﮐﺮﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺣﺎﻟﻲ ﮐﻪ ﻣﻌﻴﺎﺭ‬
‫ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺷﺪﻧﺪ(‪ .‬ﺷﺮﻁ ﻋﺪﻡ ﻟﻐﺰﺵ ﺑﺮﺍﻱ ﺩﻳﻮﺍﺭﻩ ﭘﺎﻳﻴﻨﻲ ﺑﻪ ﮐﺎﺭ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﻳﻮﺍﺭﻩ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺘﺎﻓﻨﺒﻴﻞ ﺗﺮﮐﻴﺐ ﺍﺛﺮ ﭘﻴﭻ ﻭ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻈﺮ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ ]‪.[۱۵‬‬
‫ﭘﺎﻳﻴﻨﻲ ﺟﻬﺖ ﺍﻧﻄﺒﺎﻕ ﺑﺎ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻴﺖ ﻭ ﺟﻠﻮﮔﻴﺮﻱ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺛﺮﺍﺕ ﺗﺪﺍﺧﻞ ﺭﺷﺪ ﻻﻳﻪ ﻣﺮﺯﻱ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮﺭ ﺧﻼﺻﻪ ﺑﺮﺍﻱ ﺩﺳﺖﻳﺎﺑﻲ ﺑﻪ ﭘﺎﻳﺪﺍﺭﻱ ﻃﻮﻟﻲ ﺍﺳﺘﺎﺗﻴﮑﻲ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺛﺮ‬
‫ﺑﺮ ﺭﻭﻱ ﺁﻥ ﻭ ﺟﺮﻳﺎﻥ ﺣﻮﻝ ﺍﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﻣﺘﺤﺮﮎ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻈﺮ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺷﺪ ﮐﻪ‬ ‫ﺳﻄﺢ ﺳﻪ ﺷﺮﻁ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﮐﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺗﺮﺗﻴﺐ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺗﻨﺪ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻨﻔﻲ ﺑﻮﺩﻥ ﻣﺸﺘﻖ‬
‫ﺳﺮﻋﺖ ﺁﻥ ﺑﺮﺍﺑﺮ ﺑﺎ ﺳﺮﻋﺖ ﺟﺮﻳﺎﻥ ﺁﺯﺍﺩ ﺑﻮﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺿﺮﻳﺐ ﮔﺸﺘﺎﻭﺭ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺯﺍﻭﻳﻪ ﺣﻤﻠﻪ‪ ،‬ﻣﻨﻔﻲ ﺑﻮﺩﻥ ﻣﺸﺘﻖ ﺿﺮﻳﺐ ﻟﻴﻔﺖ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ‬
‫ﺍ ﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ‪ Tyrrell-026‬ﺑﻪ ﻋﻠﺖ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺩﻩﻫﺎﻱ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻲ ﻣﻨﺎﺳﺐ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ﻭ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻦ ﻣﺮﮐﺰ ﺁﻳﺮﻭﺩﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﮑﻲ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ﺩﺭ ﺟﻠﻮ ﻣﺮﮐﺰ‬
‫ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﻳﮏ ﺳﻨﺠﻪ ﻗﺎﺑﻞ ﺍﻃﻤﻴﻨﺎﻥ ﺑﺮﺍﻱ ﺟﺮﻳﺎﻥ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺛﺮ ﺳﻄﺢ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻪ ﻣﻲﺷﻮﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺁﻳﺮﻭﺩﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﮑﻲ ﭘﻴﭻ‪ .‬ﺍﻭﻟﻴﻦ ﺷﺮﻁ ﺍﻭﻝ )ﺭﺍﺑﻄﻪ )‪ ((۴‬ﺑﻪ ﺭﺍﺣﺘﻲ ﺑﺎ ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﺍﺯ ﺩﻡ‬
‫ﺧﻤﻴﺪﮔﻲ ﺧﻂ ﮐﻤﺒﺮ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﺯﻳﺎﺩ ﻭ ﻣﻌﮑﻮﺱ ﺑﻮﺩﻩ ﺯﻳﺮﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺗﻮﻣﺒﻴﻞﻫﺎﻱ‬ ‫ﺍﻓﻘﻲ ﻭ ﻳﺎ ﺟﺎﺑﺠﺎﻳﻲ ﻣﺮﮐﺰ ﺟﺮﻡ ﻫﻤﺎﻧﻨﺪ ﺧﺎﺭﺝ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺛﺮ ﺳﻄﺢ ﻗﺎﺑﻞ ﺩﺳﺖﻳﺎﺑﻲ‬
‫ﻓﺮﻣﻮﻝ ‪ ١‬ﺟﻬﺖ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻟﻴﻔﺖ ﻣﻨﻔﻲ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﺮﺍﻱ ﺍﻃﻤﻴﻨﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺳﻪ ﻓﺎﮐﺘﻮﺭ ﻣﻬﻢ ﺑﺮ ﻣﻌﻴﺎﺭ ﭘﺎﻳﺪﺍﺭﻱ ﺍﻳﺮﻭﺩﻭﻑ )ﺷﺮﻁ ﺳﻮﻡ( ﺗﺄﺛﻴﺮ ﮔﺬﺍﺭ‬
‫ﺍﺯﺗﻮﺍﻧﺎﻳﻲ ﺭﻭﺵ ﻋﺪﺩﻱ ﺍﺳﺘﺨﺪﺍﻡ ﺷﺪﻩ ﻧﺘﺎﻳﺞ ﺣﺎﺻﻞ ﺍﺯ ﺷﺒﻴﻪ ﺳﺎﺯﻱ ﺟﺮﻳﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺩﻡ ﺍﻓﻘﻲ )ﻣﺴﺎﺣﺖ ﺩﻡ ﻭ ﺑﺎﺯﻭﻱ ﺩﻡ(‪ ،‬ﭘﺮﻭﻓﻴﻞ ﻣﻘﻄﻊ ﺑﺎﻝ ﻭ ﺷﮑﻞ ﺑﺎﻝ‬
‫ﺍﻃﺮﺍﻑ ﺍﻳ ﺮﻓﻮﻳ ﻞ ‪ Tyrrell-026‬ﺩﺭ ﺣﺎﻟ ﻲ ﮐﻪ ﻋﺪﺩ ﺭﻳﻨﻮﻟﺪﺯ ‪ ،٤/٦×١٠٥‬ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ‬ ‫ﺍﺻﻠﻲ ﻭﺳﻴﻠﻪ ﭘﺮﻧﺪﻩ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺕ ﺩ ﻳﮕﺮ ﺑﺎ ﺟﺎﺑﺠﺎﻳﻲ ﻣﺤﻞ ﻣﺮﮐﺰ ﺟﺮﻡ ﻧﻤﻲﺗﻮﺍﻥ‬
‫ﺑ ﻲ ﺑﻌﺪ ‪ ٠/٢٢٤‬ﻭ ﺯﺍﻭﻳﻪ ﺣﻤﻠﻪ ‪ ٣/٦‬ﺩﺭﺟﻪ ﺑﻮﺩ ﺑﺎ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻲ ﺯﺭﻳﻬﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﭘﺮﻧﺪﻩ ﺭﺍ ﭘﺎﻳﺪﺍﺭ ﮐﺮﺩ ]‪ [۲۰‬ﻭ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺑﻪ ﮐﻤﮏ ﻃﺮﺍﺣﻲ ﺁﻳﺮﻭﺩﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﮑﻲ ﮐﻞ ﻭﺳﻴﻠﻪ‬
‫)‪ (Zerihan‬ﻭ ﮊﺍﻧﮓ ]‪ [٢٣‬ﻣﻘﺎﻳﺴﻪ ﮔﺮﺩﻳﺪ‪ .‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﻃﻮﺭ ﮐﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺷﮑﻞ ‪ ١‬ﻣﺸﺨﺺ‬ ‫ﺩﺳﺖﻳﺎﺑﻲ ﺑﻪ ﺳﻄﺢ ﻣﻄﻠﻮﺏ ﭘﺎﻳﺪﺍﺭﻱ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ﺍﻣﮑﺎﻥ ﭘﺬﻳﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﺑﻪ ﻏﻴﺮ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺧﺘﻼﻑ ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭ ﮐﻢ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻘﻄﻪ ﺣﺪﺍﻗﻞ ﻓﺸﺎﺭ )‪(suction peak‬‬
‫ﺭﻭﺵ ﻋﺪﺩﻱ ﺩﻗﺖ ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭ ﺧﻮﺑﻲ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺘﺮﺍﺗﮋ ﻱ ﻋﺪﺩﻱ‬
‫ﻣﻌﺎﺩﻻﺕ ﺣﺎﮐﻢ ﺍ ﻳﻦ ﻣﺴﺌﻠﻪ ﻣﻌﺎﺩﻻﺕ ﻧﻮﻳﺮ ‪-‬ﺍﺳﺘﮑﻮﺱ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﻈﻮﺭ ﺣﻞ‬
‫ﻧﺘﺎﻳﺞ ﻭﺑﺤﺚ‬ ‫ﺟﺮ ﻳﺎﻥ ﺍﺯ ﻧﺮﻡ ﺍﻓﺰﺍﺭ ﺗﺠﺎﺭ ﻱ ‪ ANSYS Fluent 16‬ﺩﺭ ﺣﺎﻟﺖ ﺩﻗﺖ ﻣﻀﺎﻋﻒ‬
‫ﻋﺪﺩ ﺭﻳﻨﻮﻟﺪﺯ ﺟﺮﻳﺎﻥ ﺑﺮﺍﻱ ﺗﻤﺎﻡ ﺷﺒﻴﻪ ﺳﺎﺯﻱﻫﺎ ﺑﺮ ﺣﺴﺐ ﻃﻮﻝ ﮐﺮﺩ ﻭ‬ ‫)‪ (double precision‬ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﮔﺮﺩﻳﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﺮﺍﻱ ﺑﺮﻗﺮﺍﺭﻱ ﻫﻤﺒﺴﺘﮕﻲ ﺑﻴﻦ‬
‫ﺳﺮﻋﺖ ﻭﺭﻭﺩﻱ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﺣﺪﻭﺩ ‪ ۲/۷×۱۰۶‬ﻣﻲﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺳﺮﻋﺖ ﻭﺭﻭﺩﻱ ‪ ٤٠‬ﻣﺘﺮ ﺑﺮ ﺛﺎﻧﻴﻪ‬ ‫ﺳﺮﻋﺖ ﻭ ﻓﺸﺎﺭ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻟﮕﻮﺭ ﻳﺘﻢ ﻧﻴﻤﻪ ﺿﻤﻨﻲ ﺳﻴﻤﭙﻞ )‪ (SIMPLE‬ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﺷﺪﻩ‬
‫ﺑﻮﺩﻩ ﻭ ﺑﺎ ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺷﺮﺍﻳﻂ ﻣﺴﺌﻠﻪ ﻋﺪﺩ ﻣﺎﺥ ﺟﺮﻳﺎﻥ ‪ ٠/١١٧‬ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮﺍﻳﻦ ﻓﺮﺽ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﮐﻠﻴﻪ ﻣﻌﺎﺩﻻﺕ ﮔﺴﺴﺘﻪﺳﺎﺯﻱ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﭘﺎﻳﺎ ﺣﻞ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﺮﺍﻱ‬
‫ﺗﺮﺍﮐﻢ ﻧﺎﭘﺬﻳﺮ ﺑﻮﺩﻥ ﺟﺮﻳﺎﻥ ﻣﻨﻄﻘﻲ ﻣﻲﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺷﺒﻴﻪ ﺳﺎﺯﻱﻫﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ﺑﻲﺑﻌﺪ )‬ ‫ﮔﺴﺴﺘﻪﺳﺎﺯﻱ ﻣﻌﺎﺩﻻﺕ ﻣﻮﻣﻨﺘﻮﻡ ﺍﺯ ﺭﻭﺵ ﮐﻮﺋﻴﮏ )‪ (QUICK‬ﻭ ﺑﺮﺍﻱ ﺑﻪ ﺩﺳﺖ‬
‫ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ﺍﺯ ﻟﺒﻪ ﻓﺮﺍﺭ ﺗﺎ ﺳﻄﺢ ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮﻝ ﮐﺮﺩ( ﮐﻤﺘﺮ ﺍﺯ ﺩﻭ ﺩﻫﻢ ﻳﺎ ﺍﺛﺮ ﺳﻄﺢ‬ ‫ﺁﻭﺭﺩﻥ ﻣﻴﺪﺍﻥ ﻓﺸﺎﺭ ﺍﺯ ﺩﺭﻭﻥﻳﺎﺑﻲ ﻣﺮﺗﺒﻪ ﺩﻭ )‪ (second order‬ﺑﻬﺮﻩ ﺑﺮﺩﻩ ﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﺷﺪﻳﺪ ﺍﻧﺠﺎﻡ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺯﺍﻭﻳﻪ ﺣﻤﻠﻪ ﺯﺍﻭﻳﻪ ﺑﻴﻦ ﮐﺮﺩ ﺍﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﻭ ﺳﻄﺢ ﻣﻲﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺣﻞ ﻣﻌﺎﺩﻟﻪ ﺍﻧﺮﮊﻱ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ ﺗﺮﺍﮐﻢ ﻧﺎﭘﺬﻳﺮ ﺑﻮﺩﻥ ﺟﺮﻳﺎﻥ ﺻﺮﻑ ﻧﻈﺮ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﺟﺮﻳﺎﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﻳﮑﻨﻮﺍﺧﺖ ﻭ ﻣﻮﺍﺯﻱ ﺑﺎ ﺳﻄﺢ ﻭﺍﺭﺩ ﺩﺍﻣﻨﻪ ﻣﺤﺎﺳﺒﺎﺗﻲ ﻣﻲﺷﻮﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺍﻧﺘﺨﺎﺏ ﻣﺪﻝ ﺁﺷﻔﺘﮕﻲ ﻫﻤﻮﺍﺭﻩ ﻳﮑﻲ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺴﺎﺋﻞ ﭼﺎﻟﺶ ﺑﺮﺍﻧﮕﻴﺰ ﺩﺭ ﺣﻞ‬
‫ﺗﻤﺎﻣﻲ ﺿﺮﺍﻳﺐ ﺑﺮ ﺣﺴﺐ ﺳﺮﻋﺖ ﺟﺮﻳﺎﻥ ﻭﺭﻭﺩﻱ ﻭ ﮐﺮﺩ ﺍﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﺑﻲﺑﻌﺪ ﺷﺪﻩﺍﻧﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺟﺮ ﻳﺎﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﻋﺪﺩﻱ ﺑﻮﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻣﺎﻫﻮﻥ )‪ (Mahon‬ﻭ ﮊﺍﻧﮓ ) ‪ (Zhang‬ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﻣﺮﺟﻊ ﻣﺨﺘﺼﺎﺕ ﺑﺮ ﻟﺒﻪ ﺣﻤﻠﻪ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﺑﺎ ﺣﺎﺷﻴﻪ‬ ‫ﺳﺎﻝ ‪ ٢٠٠٤‬ﺑﻪ ﺑﺮﺭﺳﻲ ﻋﻤﻠﮑﺮﺩ ﻣﺪﻝﻫﺎﻱ ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒ ﺁﺷﺘﻔﮕﻲ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺛﺮ ﺳﻄﺢ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺘﺎﺗﻴﮑﻲ ﻣﻨﻔﻲ ﭘﺎﻳﺪﺍﺭ ﺗﻠﻘﻲ ﻣﻲﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﮔﺸﺘﺎﻭﺭﻱ ﮐﻪ ﺑﺎﻋﺚ ﭘﺎﻳﻴﻦ ﺭﻓﺘﻦ ﻟﺒﻪ‬ ‫ﭘﺮﺩﺍﺧﺘﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻧﺘﺎﻳﺞ ﺁﻥﻫﺎ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﺩﺍﺩ ﮐﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺑﻴﻦ ﻣﺪﻝﻫﺎﻱ ﺭﻧﺲ )‪ (RANS‬ﺑﺮﺭﺳﻲ‬
‫ﺣﻤﻠﻪ ﻣﻲﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻣﻨﻔﻲ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻈﺮ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺷﺪﻩ ﻣﺪﻝ ‪ SST k-ω‬ﻋﻤﻠﮑﺮﺩ ﺑﻬﺘﺮﻱ ﺩﺭ ﺭﺍﺑﻄﻪ ﺑﺎ ﻓﺸﺎﺭ ﺳﻄﺢ ﻭ ﻣﺪﻝ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﻧﻴﺒﻞ ﻭ ﮐﻼﻳﻨﻴﺪﺍﻡ )‪ ( Kleineidam‬ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﺍﺛﺮ ﺷﮑﻞ ﺍﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﺑﺮ‬ ‫‪ Realizable k-ε‬ﻋﻤﻠﮑﺮﺩ ﻣﻨﺎﺳﺐﺗﺮﻱ ﺩﺭ ﺩﻧﺒﺎﻟﻪ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻧﺘﺎ ﻳﺞ ﺁﻥﻫﺎ ﺑﻴﺎﻥﮔﺮ‬
‫ﭘﺎﻳﺪﺍﺭﻱ ﺍﺳﺘﺎﺗﻴﮑﻲ ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻖ ﮐﺮﺩﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻞ ﺁﻥﻫﺎ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﺩﺍﺩ ﮐﻪ ﮐﺎﻫﺶ ﺑﺎﺭﮔﺬﺍﺭﻱ‬ ‫ﺩﻗﺖ ﻣﻨﺎﺳﺐ ﺭﻭﺵﻫﺎﻱ ﻋﺪﺩﻱ )ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﮐﻠ ﻲ( ﺩﺭ ﺷﺒﻴﻪﺳﺎﺯﻱ ﺟﺮﻳﺎﻥ ﺍﺛﺮ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﻗﺴﻤﺖ ﻋﻘﺐ ﺍﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﺭﻭﻱ ﺳﻄﺢ ﺯﻳﺮﻳﻦ ﮐﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮﺭ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﻲ ﺩﺭ ﻧﺰﺩﻳﮑﻲ‬ ‫ﺳﻄﺤﻲ ﺩﺍﺷﺖ ]‪ .[٢١‬ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻖ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺪﻝ ‪SST k-ω‬‬
‫ﺳﻄﺢ ﺯﻳﺎﺩ ﻣﻲﺷﻮﺩ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻘﻄﻪ ﻧﻈﺮ ﭘﺎﻳﺪﺍﺭﻱ ﻣﻄﻠﻮﺏ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮﺭ ﻣﺜﺎﻝ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﻣﺪﻝ ‪ SST‬ﺗﻮﺍﻧﻤﻨﺪﻱﻫﺎﻱ ﻣﺪﻝ ‪ K-ω‬ﺑﺮﺍﻱ ﺟﺮﻳﺎﻥﻫﺎﻱ‬
‫ﺩﺍﺩﻩ ﺷﺪ ﮐﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﮐﻼﺭﮎ ﻭﺍﻱ )‪ (Clark-Y‬ﻣﺠﻬﺰ ﺑﻪ ﻓﻠﭗ )‪ (flap‬ﻟﺒﻪ‬ ‫ﺑﺎ ﺭ ﻳﻨﻮﻟﺪﺯ ﭘﺎﻳﻴﻦ ﮐﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻧﺰﺩ ﻳﮑﻲ ﺩ ﻳﻮﺍﺭﻩ ﻣﻨﺎﺳﺐ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎ ﻣﺰﺍﻳﺎﻱ ﻣﺪﻝ ‪K-ε‬‬
‫ﻓﺮﺍﺭ ﺑﺎ ﮐﺞ ﮐﺮﺩﻥ ﻓﻠﭗ ﺑﻪ ﺳﻤﺖ ﺑﺎﻻ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺛﺮ ﺳﻄﺢ ﭘﺎﻳﺪﺍﺭﻱ ﺍﻓﺰﺍﻳﺶ ﻣﻲ ﻳﺎﺑﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﻣﻨﺎﻃﻖ ﺩﻭﺭ ﺍﺯ ﺟﺪﺍﺭﻩ ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮﺭ ﻫﻤﺰﻣﺎﻥ ﺩﺍﺭﺍ ﻣﻲﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﻭﻳﮋﮔﻲﻫﺎﻱ ﺍ ﻳﻦ ﻣﺪﻝ‬
‫ﻋﻼﻭﻩ ﺑﺮ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺁﻥﻫﺎ ﺩﺭﻳﺎﻓﺘﻨﺪ ﮐﻪ ﺍﮔﺮ ﻋﺪﻡ ﺑﺎﺭﮔﺬﺍﺭﻱ ﺩﺭﻗﺴﻤﺖ ﻋﻘﺐ ﺍﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﺑﺎ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﻋﺚ ﺷﺪﻩ ﮐﻪ ﻋﻤﻠﮑﺮﺩ ﺩﻗﻴﻖ ﻭ ﻣﻄﻤﺌﻨ ﻲ ﺑﺮﺍﻱ ﺷﺒﻴﻪﺳﺎﺯﻱ ﺟﺮﻳﺎﻥ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ‬
‫ﮐﺎﻫﺶ ﺧﻤﻴﺪﮔﻲ ﮐﻤﺒﺮ )‪ (de-cambering‬ﻫﻤﺮﺍﻩ ﺷﻮﺩ؛ ﺩﺍﻣﻨﻪ ﭘﺎﻳﺪﺍﺭﻱ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺟﺰﺋﻴﺎ ﺕ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺪﻝ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﻟﻪ ﻣﻨﺘﺮ )‪ (Menter‬ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩ ﺍﺳﺖ ]‪.[٢٢‬‬

‫‪www.SID.ir‬‬
‫‪Archive of SID‬‬

‫ﭘﻴﺪﺍ ﻣﻲﮐﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺿﺮﻳﺐ ﮔﺸﺘﺎﻭﺭ ﻧﺎﮐﺎ ‪ ۴۴۱۲‬ﺑﺎ ﺍﻓﺰﺍ ﻳﺶ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ﺍﻓﺰﺍ ﻳﺶ ﭘﻴﺪﺍ ﮐﺮﺩﻩ‬ ‫ﻣﻘﺪﺍﺭ ﻗﺎﺑﻞ ﺗﻮﺟﻬﻲ ﺍﻓﺰﺍﻳﺶ ﭘﻴﺪﺍ ﻣﻲﮐﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻣﺸﺨﺺ ﺷﺪ ﺍﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﻭﺍﺟﺪ ﻫﺮ ﺩﻭ‬
‫ﮐﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺍﻓﺰﺍﻳﺶ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ﺷﻴ ﺐ ﺁﻥ ﮐﺎﻫﺶ ﭘﻴﺪﺍ ﻣﻲﮐﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻣﻘﺪﺍﺭ ﺿﺮﻳﺐ ﮔﺸﺘﺎﻭﺭ‬ ‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺸﺨﺼﺎﺕ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﺑﺎ ﮐﻤﺒﺮ ‪ S‬ﺷﮑﻞ ﺍﺳﺖ ]‪ .[٢٤‬ﻫﻤﭽﻨﻴﻦ ﻟﻲ )‪ (Lee‬ﻭ‬
‫ﺍ ﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﺍﺻﻼﺡ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎ ﻳﺴﻪ ﺑﺎ ﻧﺎﮐﺎ ‪ ۴۴۱۲‬ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻔﺮ ﻧﺰﺩﻳﮏﺗﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ‬ ‫ﻟﻲ ﺑﺎ ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﺍﺯ ﺗﮑﻨﻴﮏ ﺑﻬﻴﻨﻪ ﺳﺎﺯﻱ ﭼﻨﺪ ﻣﻨﻈﻮﺭﻩ ) ‪ (Multiobjective‬ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﮐﻪ ﺍﺯ ﻟﺤﺎﻅ ﻃﺮﺍﺣﻲ ﻭﺳﻴﻠﻪ ﭘﺮﻧﺪﻩ ﻣﻄﻠﻮﺏﺗﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺷﮑﻞ ‪ ۶‬ﻣﺸﺘﻖ ‪ C ma‬ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮ‬ ‫ﺍﻳﺠﺎﺩ ﻣﺼﺎﻟﺤﻪ ﺑﻴﻦ ﭘﺎﻳﺪﺍﺭﻱ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ﻭ ﺑﺎﺯﺩﻫﻲ ﺁﻳﺮﻭﺩﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﮑﻲ ﺑﺎﻝ ﺳﻪ ﺑﻌﺪﻱ‬
‫ﺣﺴﺐ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ﺭﺍ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﺩﺍﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻧﻤﻮﺩﺍﺭ ﻫﺮ ﺩﻭ ﺍﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭ ﺷﺒﻴﻪ ﻳﮑﺪﻳﮕﺮ‬ ‫ﭘﺮﺩﺍﺧﺘﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻭﻳﮋﮔﻲ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻮﻉ ﺑﻬﻴﻨﻪ ﺳﺎﺯﻱ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﮐﻪ ﭘﺎﺳﺦ ﺁﻥ ﻳﮏ ﺍﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﮐﻪ ‪ C ma‬ﺍ ﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﻧﺎﮐﺎ ‪ ۴۴۱۲‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ‪ ۰/۱‬ﺗﺎ ‪ ۰/۱۵‬ﺑﺎ‬ ‫ﻣﻨﺤﺼﺮ ﺑﻪ ﻓﺮﺩ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﺁﻧﺎﻟﻴﺰ ﺁﻥﻫﺎ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﺩﺍﺩ ﮐﻪ ﺍﻓﺰﺍﻳﺶ ﺧﻤﻴﺪﮔﻲ ﮐﻤﺒﺮ ﻭ‬
‫ﺷﻴﺐ ﮐﻢ ﮐﺎﻫﺶ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺣﺎﻟﻲ ﮐﻪ ﺍ ﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﺍﺻﻼﺡ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺩﺭ ﺍ ﻳﻦ ﺑﺎﺯﻩ ﮐﻤﻲ‬ ‫ﺿﺨﺎﻣﺖ ﺍﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ‪ ،‬ﻟﻴﻔﺖ ﺭﺍ ﺍﻓﺰﺍﻳﺶ ﺩﺍﺩﻩ ﺍﻣﺎ ﺑﺮﺍﻱ ﭘﺎﻳﺪﺍﺭﻱ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ﻭ ﺑﺎﺯﺩﻩ‬
‫ﺍﻓﺰﺍ ﻳﺶ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮﺭ ﮐﻠﻲ ﺳﻄﺢ ﭘﺎﻳﺪﺍﺭﻱ ﺍﺳﺘﺎﺗﻴﮑﻲ ﭘﻴﭻ ﻫﺮ ﺩﻭ‬ ‫ﺁﻳﺮﻭﺩﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﮑﻲ ﻣﺴﺎﻋﺪ ﻧﻴﺴﺘﻨﺪ ]‪ .[۲۵‬ﺑﻪ ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻄﺎﻟﺐ ﺍﻗﺪﺍﻡ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪ‬
‫ﺍ ﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﺑﺎ ﺍﻓﺰﺍﻳﺶ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ﮐﺎﻫﺶ ﭘﻴﺪﺍ ﮐﺮﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻳﮏ ﮐﺪ ﮐﺎﻣﭙﻴﻮﺗﺮﻱ ﮔﺮﺩﻳﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﮐﺪ ﺗﻮﺍﻧﺎﻳﻲ ﻃﺮﺍﺣﻲ ﺍﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞﻫﺎﻳﻲ ﺑﺎ ﺳﻄﺢ‬
‫ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﻃﻮﺭ ﮐﻪ ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩ ﮔﺮﺩﻳﺪ ﺑﺮﺍﻱ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﭘﺎﻳﺪﺍﺭﻱ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ﻻﺯﻡ ﺍﺳﺖ ﮐﻪ ﺑﺎ‬ ‫ﺯﻳﺮﻳﻦ ﺗﺨﺖ ﻭ ﻭ ﮐﻤﺒﺮ ‪ S‬ﺷﮑﻞ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﮐﻤﮏ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﺮﻧﺎﻣﻪ ﮐﻤﺒﺮ ﺍﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﻧﺎﮐﺎ‬
‫ﮐﺎﻫﺶ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ﻟﻴﻔﺖ ﺍﻓﺰﺍﻳﺶ ﭘﻴﺪﺍ ﮐﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﺷﮑﻞ ‪ ۷‬ﻭﺍﺿﺢ ﺍﺳﺖ ﮐﻪ ﻫﺮ ﺩﻭ‬ ‫‪ ۴۴۱۲‬ﺑﺮﺍﻱ ﮐﺎﺭﺑﺮﺩ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺛﺮ ﺳﻄﺢ ﺍﺻﻼﺡ ﮔﺮﺩﻳﺪ‪ .‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﻃﻮﺭ ﮐﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺷﮑﻞ ‪۲‬‬
‫ﺍ ﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺛﺮ ﺳﻄﺢ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉﻫﺎﻱ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﻣﻄﺎﻟﻌﻪ ﭘﺎﻳﺪﺍﺭ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺭﻓﺘﺎﺭ ﺩﻭ‬ ‫ﻣﺸﺨﺺ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﮐﻤﺒﺮ ﺍﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﺍﺻﻼﺡ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺧﻤﻴﺪﮔﻲ ﮐﻤﺘﺮﻱ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻧﺎﮐﺎ‬
‫ﺍﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﺷﺒﺎﻫﺖ ﺯﻳﺎﺩﻱ ﺑﻪ ﻳﮑﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﮐﻤﺒﺮ ﺍﺛﺮ ﻣﻬﻤﻲ ﺑﺮ‬ ‫‪ ۴۴۱۲‬ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﻭ ‪ S‬ﺷﮑﻞ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﺷﺮﻁ ﺩﻭﻡ ﭘﺎﻳﺪﺍﺭ ﻱ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺑﺎ ﺍﻓﺰﺍ ﻳﺶ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ﺳﻄﺢ ﭘﺎﻳﺪﺍﺭﻱ ﻫﺮ ﺩﻭ ﺍ ﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ‬ ‫ﺷﮑﻞ ‪ ۳‬ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﺩﻫﻨﺪﻩ ﺑﺎﺯﺩﻩ ﺁﻳﺮﻭﺩﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﮑﻲ ﻳﺎ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﻟﻴﻔﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺩﺭﮒ ﺑﺮ‬
‫ﮐﺎﻫﺶ ﭘﻴﺪﺍ ﻣﻲﮐﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻗﺎﻋﺪﺗﺎﹰ ﺑﺮﺍﻱ ﺩﺭﮎ ﺑﻬﺘﺮ ﺭﻓﺘﺎﺭ ﺍﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞﻫﺎ ﻻﺯﻡ ﺍﺳﺖ ﮐﻪ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﺣﺴﺐ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ﺑﻲ ﺑﻌﺪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﻃﻮﺭ ﮐﻪ ﻣﺸﺎﻫﺪﻩ ﻣﻲﺷﻮﺩ؛ ﺑﺎ ﺍﻓﺰﺍﻳﺶ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ‬
‫ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻋﺎﺕ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻱ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺁﻧﺎﻟﻴﺰ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﺑﮕﻴ ﺮﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺑﺎﺯﺩﻩ ﺁﻳﺮﻭﺩ ﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﮑﻲ ﻫﺮ ﺩﻭ ﺍﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﮐﺎﻫﺶ ﭘﻴﺪﺍ ﻣﻲﮐﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺷﻴﺐ ﮐﺎﻫﺶ ﺑﺎﺯﺩﻩ‬
‫ﺍﻧﺘﻈﺎﺭ ﻣﻲﺭﻭﺩ ﺑﺎ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ‪ C ma‬ﻣﺤﻞ ﻣﺮﮐﺰ ﺁﻳﺰﻭﺩﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﮑ ﻲ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺟﺎﺑﺠﺎ‬ ‫ﺍ ﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﻧﺎﮐﺎ ‪ ۴۴۱۲‬ﺑﺎ ﺍﻓﺰﺍﻳﺶ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﮐﺮﺩﻩ ﻭ ﺭﻓﺘﺎﺭ ﻧﺎﻣﻨﻈﻤﻲ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫ﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻮﺿﻮﻉ ﺩﺭ ﺷﮑﻞ ‪ ۸‬ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﺩﺍﺩﻩ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻭﺍﺿﺢ ﺍﺳﺖ ﮐﻪ ﻣﺤﻞ‬ ‫ﮐﺎﻫﺶ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ‪ ۰/۰۵‬ﺗﺎ ‪ ۰/۱‬ﺯﻳﺎﺩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻧﮑﺘﻪ ﺟﺎﻟﺐ ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﮐﺎﻫﺶ ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭ ﮐﻢ‬
‫ﻣﺮﮐﺰ ﺁﻳﺮﻭﺩﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﮑﻲ ﭘﻴﭻ ﻫﺮ ﺩﻭ ﺍ ﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﻧﺰﺩ ﻳﮏ ﺑﻪ ﻳﮑﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮﺭ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﺯﺩﻩ ﺍﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﻧﺎﮐﺎ ‪ ۴۴۱۲‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ‪ ۰/۱‬ﺗﺎ ‪ ۰/۱۵‬ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﭘﺲ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ‪۰/۱۵‬‬
‫ﻣﺘﻮﺳﻂ ﺩﺭ ﻓﺎﺻﻠﻪ ﺣﺪﻭﺩ ‪ ۰/۳‬ﮐﺮﺩ ﺗﺎ ﻟﺒﻪ ﺣﻤﻠﻪ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﺎ ﺍ ﻳﻦ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻣﺤﻞ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﺯﺩﻩ ﺗﻘﺮﻳﺒ ﹰﺎ ﻳﮑﻨﻮﺍﺧﺖ ﮐﺎﻫﺶ ﻣﻲﻳﺎﺑﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﺎﺯﺩﻩ ﺍ ﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﺍﺻﻼﺡ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺗﻘﺮ ﻳﺒﺎﹰ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﻣﺮﮐﺰ ﭘﻴﭻ ﻧﺎﮐﺎ ‪ ۴۴۱۲‬ﻧﻮﺳﺎﻧﺎﺗﻲ ﺑﺎ ﺩﺍﻣﻨﻪ ﮐﻢ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺣﺎﻟﻲ ﮐﻪ ﺍ ﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﺍﺻﻼﺡ‬ ‫ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﺧﻄﻲ ﺗﺎ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ‪ ۰/۲‬ﮐﺎﻫﺶ ﭘﻴﺪﺍ ﻣﻲﮐﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺟﻬﺖ ﺑﺮ ﺍﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﻧﺎﮐﺎ‬
‫ﺷﺪﻩ ﺑﻪ ﻏﻴﺮ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ‪ ۰/۰۵‬ﺗﺎ ‪ ۰/۱‬ﮐﻪ ﮐﻤﻲ ﺑﻪ ﺳﻤﺖ ﻟﺒﻪ ﺣﻤﻠﻪ ﺣﺮﮐﺖ ﮐﺮﺩﻩ‬ ‫‪ ۴۴۱۲‬ﺑﺮﺗﺮﻱ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ‪ ۰/۲‬ﺑﻪ ﺑﻌﺪ ﺷﻴﺐ ﻧﻤﻮﺩﺍﺭ ﮐﺎﻫﺶ ﭘﻴﺪﺍ ﻣﻲﮐﻨﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﺑﻘﻴﻪ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻋﺎﺕ ﺗﻘﺮﻳﺒﹰﺎ ﻫﻴﭻ ﺟﺎﺑﺠﺎﻳﻲ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ ﮐﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻟﺤﺎﻅ ﺑﺮ ﻧﺎﮐﺎ ‪۴۴۱۲‬‬ ‫ﻣﺰﻳﺖ ﺑﺎﺯﺩﻩ ﺑﺎﻻﺗﺮ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉﻫﺎﻱ ﮐﻢ ﭘﺮﺭﻧﮓﺗﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﻃﻮﺭ ﮐﻪ ﭘﻴﺶ ﺑﻴﻨﻲ‬
‫ﺍﺭﺟﺤﻴﺖ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺑﺮ ﺧﻼﻑ ﻣﺮﮐﺰ ﭘﻴﭻ‪ ،‬ﻣﺤﻞ ﻣﺮﮐﺰ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ﺩﻭ ﺍﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻴﺰﺍﻥ‬ ‫ﻣﻲﺷﺪ ﺍﺛﺮ ﮐﺎﻫﺶ ﺧﻤﻴﺪﮔﻲ ﮐﻤﺒﺮ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﮐﺎﻫﺶ ﺑﺎﺯﺩﻩ‬
‫ﺯﻳﺎﺩﻱ ﺑﺎ ﻳﮑﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺣﺎﻟﻲ ﮐﻪ ﻣﺮﮐﺰ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ﺍﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﻧﺎﮐﺎ ‪ ۴۴۱۲‬ﺑﺎ‬ ‫ﺁﻳ ﺮﻭﺩﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﮑﻲ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﺩﺍﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻋﻠﺖ ﺍﻳﻦ ﮐﺎﻫﺶ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻲﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺑﺎ ﻣﺸﺎﻫﺪﻩ ﻧﻤﻮﺩﺍﺭ‬
‫ﺍﻓﺰﺍﻳﺶ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ﺑﻴﻦ ‪ ۰/۴‬ﺗﺎ ‪۰/۵‬ﮐﺮﺩ ﺟﺎﺑﺠﺎ ﻣﻲﮔﺮﺩﺩ‪ ،‬ﻣﺮﮐﺰ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ﺍﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ‬ ‫ﺿﺮ ﻳﺐ ﻓﺸﺎﺭ ﺩﺭﻳﺎﻓﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺷﮑﻞ ‪ ۴‬ﺿﺮﻳﺐ ﻓﺸﺎﺭ ﻫﺮ ﺩﻭ ﺍﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ﺑﻲ‬
‫ﺍﺻﻼﺡ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺯ ﻟﺒﻪ ﺣﻤﻠﻪ ﺣﺮﮐﺖ ﮐﺮﺩﻩ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﻟﺒﻪ ﻓﺮﺍﺭ ﻧﺰﺩﻳﮏ ﻣﻲﮔﺮﺩﺩ؛ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﺑﻌﺪ ‪ ۰/۰۵‬ﺑﺎ ﻳﮑﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﻣﻘﺎ ﻳﺴﻪ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻣﻬﻢﺗﺮﻳﻦ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺭﻭﻱ ﺳﻄﺢ ﺯﻳﺮ ﻳﻦ‬
‫ﻃﻮﺭﻱ ﮐﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻘﺪﺍﺭ ‪ ۰/۱۹‬ﮐﺮﺩ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ‪۰/۲‬ﻣﻲﺭﺳﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﺛﺮ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺟﺎﺑﺠﺎﻳﻲ ﻣﺮﺍﮐﺰ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﻧﺰﺩﻳﮑﻲ ﻟﺒﻪ ﻓﺮﺍﺭ ﺩﻳﺪﻩ ﻣﻲﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺿﺮ ﻳﺐ ﻓﺸﺎﺭ ﺭﻭﻱ ﺳﻄﺢ ﺯﻳﺮﻳﻦ ﺍ ﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ‬
‫ﺁﻳﺮﻭﺩﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﮑﻲ ﺑﺮ ﺣﺎﺷﻴﻪ ﭘﺎﻳﺪﺍﺭﻱ ﺍﺳﺘﺎﺗﻴﮑﻲ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ﺩﺭ ﺷﮑﻞ ‪ ۹‬ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﺩﺍﺩﻩ‬ ‫ﻧﺎﮐﺎ ‪ ٤٤١٢‬ﺑﻪ ﺟﺰ ﻧﺰﺩﻳﮏ ﻟﺒﻪ ﺣﻤﻠﻪ ﮐﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻠﺖ ﺧﻤﻴﺪﮔ ﻲ ﺩﻣﺎﻏﻪ ﺍ ﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ‬
‫ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﺎ ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺒﺖ ﺑﻮﺩﻥ ﺣﺎﺷﻴﻪ ﭘﺎﻳﺪﺍﺭﻱ ﺍﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﻧﺎﮐﺎ ‪ ۴۴۱۲‬ﺍ ﻳﻦ‬ ‫ﺿﺮ ﻳﺐ ﻓﺸﺎﺭ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﺗﻘﺮ ﻳﺒﹰﺎ ﺗﺎ ‪ ۰/۸‬ﮐﺮﺩ ﻣﻘﺪﺍﺭ ﻣﺜﺒﺖ ﺛﺎﺑﺘﻲ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻣﺎ‬
‫ﺍ ﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺛﺮ ﺳﻄﺢ ﻧﺎﭘﺎﻳﺪﺍﺭ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﻳﺪﻩ ﻣﻲﺷﻮﺩ ﮐﻪ ﺣﺎﺷﻴﻪ ﭘﺎﻳﺪﺍﺭﻱ ﻧﺎﮐﺎ‬ ‫ﺿﺮ ﻳﺐ ﻓﺸﺎﺭ ﺍﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﺍﺻﻼﺡ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺯ ﺣﺪﻭﺩ ‪ ۰/۳‬ﮐﺮﺩ ﺑﻪ ﺑﻌﺪ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﭘﻴﻮﺳﺘﻪ‬
‫‪ ۴۴۱۲‬ﻧﻮﺳﺎﻧﺎﺕ ﻧﺎﻣﻨﻈﻤﻲ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺑﺮ ﺧﻼﻑ ﻧﺎﮐﺎ ‪ ۴۴۱۲‬ﺍﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳ ﻞ ﺍﺻﻼﺡ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﻭ ﺗﻘﺮﻳﺒ ﹰﺎ ﺧﻄﻲ ﮐﺎﻫﺶ ﭘﻴﺪﺍ ﮐﺮﺩﻩ ﺑﻪ ﺷﮑﻠﻲ ﮐﻪ ﺣﺘﻲ ﺍﺯ ﺣﺪﻭﺩ ‪ ۰/۷۵‬ﮐﺮﺩ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺍ ﻳﻦ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉﻫﺎ ﮐﺎﻣﻼﹰ ﭘﺎﻳﺪﺍﺭ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺣﺎﻝ ﺑﺎ ﺍﻓﺰﺍﻳﺶ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ﺍﺯ ﺳﻄﺢ ﭘﺎﻳﺪﺍﺭﻱ‬ ‫ﺑﻌﺪ ﻣﻨﻔﻲ ﺷﺪﻩ ﮐﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻱ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻟﻴﻔﺖ ﻣﻨﻔﻲ ﺩﺭ ﻗﺴﻤﺖ ﻋﻘﺐ ﺍ ﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ‬
‫ﺁﻥ ﮐﺎﺳﺘﻪ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺑﻪ ﮔﻮﻧﻪﺍﻱ ﮐﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ﺑﻲ ﺑﻌﺪ ‪ ۰/۲‬ﺑﻪ ﺣﺪﻭﺩ ‪ - ۰/۰۸‬ﻣﻲ‪-‬‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻮﺿﻮﻉ ﺩﻗﻴﻘﹰﺎ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﺍﺗﻔﺎﻗﻲ ﺍﺳﺖ ﮐﻪ ﻫﻨﮕﺎﻡ ﮐﺞ ﺷﺪﻥ ﻓﻠﭗ ﻟﺒﻪ ﻓﺮﺍﺭ‬
‫ﺭﺳﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻣﺎ ﻣﺮﮐﺰ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ﻧﺎﮐﺎ ‪ ۴۴۱۲‬ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮﺭ ﻣﻴﺎﻧﮕﻴﻦ ﺗﻘﺮﻳﺒ ﹰﺎ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺪﺍﺭ ‪ ۰/۱‬ﺛﺎﺑﺖ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﺳﻤﺖ ﺑﺎﻻ ﺭﺥ ﻣﻲﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﻋﻼﻭﻩ ﺑﺮ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻗﺪﺭ ﻣﻄﻠﻖ ﺿﺮ ﻳﺐ ﻓﺸﺎﺭ ﺑﺮ ﺭﻭﻱ ﺳﻄﺢ‬
‫ﺑﺎﻗﻲ ﻣﺎﻧﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺑﺎﻻﻳﻲ ﺍ ﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﺍﺻﻼﺡ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺩﺭ ﻧﺰﺩﻳﮑﻲ ﻟﺒﻪ ﻓﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻘﺪﺍﺭ ﮐﻤﺘﺮﻱ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﻳﺴﻪ ﺑﺎ‬
‫ﻧﺎﮐﺎ ‪ ۴۴۱۲‬ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﮐﻪ ﺍ ﻳﻦ ﻣﻮﺿﻮﻉ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺑﺎﻋﺚ ﮐﺎﻫﺶ ﻟﻴﻔﺖ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ )ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻨﺠﺎ‬
‫ﻧﺘ ﻴﺠﻪ ﮔﻴﺮﻱ‬ ‫ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻟﻴﻔﺖ ﻣﻨﻔﻲ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ( ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻧﮑﺘﻪ ﻗﺎﺑﻞ ﺫﮐﺮ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻧﻘﻄﻪ ﻣﻴﻨﻴﻤﻢ ﻓﺸﺎﺭ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻖ ﺑﻪ ﺑﺮﺭﺳﻲ ﭘﺎﻳﺪﺍﺭﻱ ﺍﺳﺘﺎﺗﻴﮏ ﺍﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺛﺮ ﺳﻄﺢ ﭘﺮﺩﺍﺧﺘﻪ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻧﻘﻄﻪ ﻣﻴﻨﻴﻤﻢ ﻓﺸﺎﺭ ﻫﺮ ﺩﻭ ﺍﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳ ﻞ ﺗﻘﺮﻳﺒﺎﹰ ﺩﺭ ﻣﮑﺎﻥ ﻳﮑﺴﺎﻧﻲ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﻈﻮﺭ ﺁﻧﺎﻟﻴﺰ ﺗﺄﺛﻴﺮ ﺷﮑﻞ ﮐﻤﺒﺮ ﺑﺮ ﭘﺎﻳﺪﺍﺭﻱ ﺍﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﺑﺎ ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﺍﻣﺎ ﻣﻴﻨﻤﻢ ﻓﺸﺎﺭ ﺍ ﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﺍﺻﻼﺡ ﺷﺪﻩ ﮐﻤﺘﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺗﻘﺮ ﻳﺒﺎﹰ ﺩﺭ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﻣﮑﺎﻥ ﺭﻭﻱ‬
‫ﻳﮏ ﺑﺮﻧﺎﻣﻪ ﺧﻤﻴﺪﮔﻲ ﮐﻤﺒﺮ ﺍ ﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﻧﺎﮐﺎ ‪ ٤٤١٢‬ﮐﺎﻫﺶ ﺩﺍﺩﻩ ﻭ ‪ S‬ﺷﮑﻞ ﮔﺮﺩﻳﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺳﻄﺢ ﺯ ﻳﺮﻳﻦ ﺍﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ‪ ،‬ﺿﺮﻳﺐ ﻓﺸﺎﺭ ﺍﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﺍﺻﻼﺡ ﺷﺪﻩ ﻣﻘﺪﺍﺭ ﻣﺜﺒﺖ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮﻱ‬
‫ﺷﺮﺍﻳﻂ ﺟﺮﻳﺎﻥ ﻣﺸﺎﺑﻪ ﺷﺮﺍﻳﻂ ﭘﺮﻭﺍﺯ ﮐﺮﻭﺯ ﻳﮏ ﭘﺮﻧﺪﻩ ﺍﺛﺮ ﺳﻄﺤﻲ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻈﺮ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ‬ ‫ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﻫﺮ ﺩﻭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻋﻮﺍﻣﻞ ﺑﺎﻋﺚ ﻣﻲﺷﻮﻧﺪ ﮐﻪ ﻗﺴﻤﺖ ﺟﻠﻮﻳﻲ ﺍ ﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﺍﺻﻼﺡ ﺷﺪﻩ‬
‫ﺷﺪﻩ ﻭ ﭘﺎﻳﺪﺍﺭﻱ ﺍﺳﺘﺎﺗﻴﮑﻲ ﺑﺮ ﺍﺳﺎﺱ ﻣﻌﻴﺎﺭ ﺍﻳﺮﻭﺩﻭﻑ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﺍﺭﺯﻳﺎﺑﻲ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﮔﺮﻓﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺗﺎ ﺣﺪﻭﺩ ﻳﮏ ﭼﻬﺎﺭﻡ ﮐﺮﺩ ﻧﻘﺶ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮﻱ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻟﻴﻔﺖ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﻧﺘﺎﻳﺞ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﺩﺍﺩﻧﺪ ﮐﻪ ﮐﺎﻫﺶ ﺧﻤﻴﺪﮔﻲ ﮐﻤﺒﺮ ﺍﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﺍﺛﺮ ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭ‬ ‫ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺕ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺑﺎﺭﮔﺬﺍﺭﻱ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮﻱ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﻳﺴﻪ ﺑﺎ ﻧﺎﮐﺎ ‪ ۴۴۱۲‬ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ ﮐﻪ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺷﺪ ﻳﺪﻱ ﺑﺮ ﺑﺎﺯﺩﻩ ﺁﻳﺮﻭﺩﻳﻨﺎﻣﮑﻲ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻭ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺷﺪﺕ ﮐﺎﻫﺶ ﻣﻲﺩﻫﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻃﻮﺭ ﺿﻤﻨﻲ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﻲ ﮐﺎﻫﺶ ﺑﺎﺭ ﮔﺬﺍﺭﻱ ﺩﺭ ﻗﺴﻤﺖ ﻋﻘﺐ ﺍﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﻫﻤﭽﻨﻴﻦ ﺑﺎ ﺍﻓﺰﺍﻳﺶ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ﺍﺯ ﺑﺎﺯﺩﻩ ﺁﻳﺮﻭﺩﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﮑﻲ ﮐﺎﺳﺘﻪ ﻣﻲﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﮐﺎﻫﺶ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﺷﮑﻞ ‪ ۵‬ﺿﺮ ﻳﺐ ﮔﺸﺘﺎﻭﺭ ﺣﻮﻝ ﻧﻘﻄﻪ ﻳﮏ ﭼﻬﺎﺭﻡ ﮐﺮﺩ ﺑﺮ ﺣﺴﺐ‬
‫ﺧﻤﻴﺪﮔﻲ ﮐﻤﺒﺮ‪ ،‬ﮐﺎﻫﺶ ﺑﺎﺭﮔﺬﺍﺭﻱ ﻳﺎ ﺣﺘﻲ ﻋﺪﻡ ﺑﺎﺭﮔﺬﺍﺭﻱ ﺍﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﺩﺭ ﻗﺴﻤﺖ‬ ‫ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ﺑﻲ ﺑﻌﺪ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﺩﺍﺩﻩ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻧﮑﺘﻪ ﺟﺎﻟﺐ ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﮐﻪ ﺭﻓﺘﺎﺭ ﺩﻭ‬
‫ﻼ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻀﺎﺩ ﺑﺎ ﻳﮑﺪ ﻳﮕﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺿﺮﻳﺐ ﮔﺸﺘﺎﻭﺭ ﺍﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳ ﻞ ﺍﺻﻼﺡ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺑﺎ‬ ‫ﺍ ﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﮐﺎﻣ ﹰ‬
‫ﺍﻓﺰﺍ ﻳﺶ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ﮐﺎﻫﺶ ﻣﻲﻳﺎﺑﺪ؛ ﺷﻴﺐ ﺍﻳﻦ ﮐﺎﻫﺶ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺑﺎ ﺍﻓﺰﺍﻳﺶ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ﮐﺎﻫﺶ‬

‫‪www.SID.ir‬‬
‫‪Archive of SID‬‬

‫ﻋﻘﺐ ﺭﻭﻱ ﺳﻄﺢ ﭘﺎﻳﻴﻨﻲ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﭘﻲ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﮐﻪ ﻋﻠﺖ ﮐﺎﻫﺶ ﺑﺎﺯﺩﻩ ﺁ ﻳﺮﻭﺩ ﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﮑﻲ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﺑﺎ ﺍﺻﻼﺡ ﮐﻤﺒﺮ ﺿﺮﻳﺐ ﮔﺸﺘﺎﻭﺭ ﺣﻮﻝ ﻧﻘﻄﻪ ﻳﮏ ﭼﻬﺎﺭﻡ ﮐﺮﺩ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎ ﻳﺴﻪ‬
‫ﺑﺎ ﻧﺎﮐﺎ ‪ ٤٤١٢‬ﺑﻪ ﻣﻴﺰﺍﻥ ﺯﻳﺎﺩﻱ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻔﺮ ﻧﺰﺩ ﻳﮏﺗﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﺎ ﺍ ﻳﻦ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻣﺸﺘﻖ‬
‫ﭘﺎﻳﺪﺍﺭﻱ ‪ C ma‬ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﺩﺍﺩ ﮐﻪ ﺳﻄﺢ ﭘﺎﻳﺪﺍﺭﻱ ﺑﺎ ﺍﻓﺰﺍ ﻳﺶ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ﮐﺎﻫﺶ ﻣﻲﻳﺎﺑﺪ‬
‫ﻭ ﺍﺻﻼﺡ ﮐﻤﺒﺮ ﺗﺄﺛﻴﺮ ﮐﻤﻲ ﺑﺮ ﺁﻥ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﺭﺯﻳﺎﺑﻲ ﻣﺸﺘﻖ ﭘﺎ ﻳﺪﺍﺭﻱ ‪ C Lh‬ﻧﺸﺎﻥ‬
‫ﺩﺍﺩ ﮐﻪ ﻫﺮ ﺩﻭ ﺍ ﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺛﺮ ﺳﻄﺢ ﭘﺎﻳﺪﺍﺭﻱ ‪ C Lh‬ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻫﻤﭽﻨﻴﻦ ﭘﺎﻳﺪﺍﺭﻱ‬
‫‪ C Lh‬ﻫﺮ ﺩﻭ ﺍﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﺗﻘﺮﻳﺒ ﹰﺎ ﻳﮑﺴﺎﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺳﻄﺢ ﭘﺎ ﻳﺪﺍﺭ ﻱ ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮﺭ ﮐﻠﻲ ﺑﺎ‬
‫ﺍﻓﺰﺍ ﻳﺶ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ﮐﺎﻫﺶ ﭘﻴﺪﺍ ﻣﻲﮐﻨﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﻣﺮﮐﺰ ﺁ ﻳﺮﻭﺩﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﮑﻲ ﭘﻴﭻ ﻫﺮ ﺩﻭ ﺍ ﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻢ ﻧﺰﺩ ﻳﮏ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻣﺮﮐﺰ‬
‫ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ﺍﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﺍﺻﻼﺡ ﺷﺪﻩ ﻧﺰﺩﻳﮏ ﻟﺒﻪ ﺣﻤﻠﻪ ﺑﻮﺩﻩ ﻭ ﺑﺎ ﺍﻓﺰﺍﻳﺶ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺳﻤﺖ ﻟﺒﻪ ﻓﺮﺍﺭ ﺣﺮﮐﺖ ﻣﻲﮐﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻣﺎ ﻣﺮﮐﺰ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ﺍﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﻧﺎﮐﺎ ‪ ۴۴۱۲‬ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺷﮑﻞ ‪ -۴‬ﺿﺮﻳﺐ ﻓﺸﺎﺭ ﺩﺭ ‪h / c = 0.05‬‬
‫ﻳﮏ ﺑﺎﺯﻩ ﻣﺤﺪﻭﺩ ﻧﻮﺳﺎﻥ ﺩﺍﺷﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻧﻬﺎﻳﺖ ﺣﺎﺷﻴﻪ ﭘﺎﻳﺪﺍﺭﻱ ﺍﺳﺘﺎﺗﻴﮑﻲ ﻃﻮﻟﻲ‬
‫ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﺩﺍﺩ ﮐﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﻧﺎﮐﺎ ‪ ۴۴۱۲‬ﻣﺮﮐﺰ ﭘﻴﭻ ﺟﻠﻮﺗﺮ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺮﮐﺰ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ‬
‫ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﻭ ﺍﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﻧﺎﭘﺎﻳﺪﺍﺭ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻣﺎ ﮐﺎﻫﺶ ﺩﺍﺩﻥ ﺧﻤﻴﺪﮔﻲ ﮐﻤﺒﺮ ﺁﻥ ﺑﺎﻋﺚ‬
‫ﭘﺎﻳﺪﺍﺭ ﺷﺪﻥ ﺍﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﺷﺪﻩ ﮐﻪ ﺳﻄﺢ ﭘﺎﻳﺪﺍﺭﻱ ﺁﻥ ﺑﺎ ﺍﻓﺰﺍﻳﺶ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ﮐﺎﻫﺶ ﭘﻴﺪﺍ‬
‫ﻣﻲﮐﻨﺪ‪.‬‬

‫ﺷﮑﻞﻫﺎ‬

‫ﺷﮑﻞ ‪ - ٥‬ﺿﺮﻳﺐ ﮔﺸﺘﺎﻭﺭ ﺣﻮﻝ ﻧﻘﻄﻪ ﻳﮏ ﭼﻬﺎﺭﻡ ﮐﺮﺩ ﺑﺮ ﺣﺴﺐ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ﺑﻲ ﺑﻌﺪ‬

‫ﺷﮑﻞ ‪ - ١‬ﻣﻘﺎﻳﺴﻪ ﺿﺮﻳ ﺐ ﻓﺸﺎﺭ ﺣﺎﺻﻞ ﺍﺯ ﮐﺎﺭ ﻋﺪﺩﻱ ﻭ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻲ ﺯﺭﻳﻬﺎﻥ ﻭ‬
‫ﮊﺍﻧﮓ ]‪[٢٣‬‬

‫ﺷﮑﻞ ‪ - ٦‬ﻣﺸﺘﻖ ‪ C m a‬ﺑﺮ ﺣﺴﺐ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ﺑﻲ ﺑﻌﺪ‬

‫ﺷﮑﻞ ‪ - ۲‬ﻣﻘﺎﻳﺴﻪ ﮐﻤﺒﺮ ﺍﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﺍﺻﻼﺡ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺑﺎ ﺍﻳﺮﻓﻮﻳﻞ ﻧﺎﮐﺎ ‪۴۴۱۲‬‬

‫ﺷﮑﻞ ‪ - ٧‬ﻣﺸﺘﻖ ‪ C Lh‬ﺑﺮ ﺣﺴﺐ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ﺑﻲ ﺑﻌﺪ‬ ‫ﺷﮑﻞ ‪ - ٣‬ﺑﺎﺯﺩﻩ ﺁﻳﺮﻭﺩﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﮑﻲ ﺑﺮ ﺣﺴﺐ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ﺑﻲ ﺑﻌﺪ‬

‫‪www.SID.ir‬‬
Archive of SID

10. He, Y., Qu, Q., Agarwal, R.K., Shape Optimization of an

Airfoil in Ground Effect for Application to WIG Craft, Journal
of Aerodynamics, V. 2014, n. 2014.
11. Yang, W., Yang, Z., Collu, M., Longitudinal static
stability requirements for wing in ground effect vehicle,
International Journal of Naval Architecture and Ocean
Engineering, 2015.
12. Park, K., Lee, J., Influence of endplate on aerodynamic
characteristics of low-aspect-ratio wing in ground effect, J
Mech Sci Technol, V. 22, n. 12, 2008, pp. 2578-2589.
13. Angle, G.M., O'Hara, B.M., Pertl, F.A., Smith, J.E., Pitch
Stability Analysis of an Airfoil in Ground Effect, Journal of
Aircraft, V. 46, n. 3, 2009, pp. 756-762.
14. Christof, H., Christof, H., NACA 5312 in ground effect -
Wind tunnel and panel code studies, 15th Applied
Aerodynamics Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics ‫ ﻣﮑﺎﻥ ﻣﺮﺍﮐﺰ ﺁﻳﺮﻭﺩﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﮑﻲ ﭘﻴﭻ ﻭ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ﺑﻲ ﺑﻌﺪ‬- ٨ ‫ﺷﮑﻞ‬
and Astronautics 1997.
15. Rozhdestvensky, K.V., Aerodynamics of a Lifting System
in Extreme Ground Effect, Springer Science & Business
Media, 2000.
16. Etkin, B., Reid, L.D., Dynamics of flight : stability and
control, 3rd ed., Wiley, New York, 1996.
17. Yun, L., Bliault, A., Doo, J., WIG craft and ekranoplan:
ground effect craft technology, Springer, New York, 2010.
18. Irodov, R., Criteria of the Longitudinal Stability of the
Ekranoplan, DTIC Document, 1974.
19. Staufenbiel, R.W., Schlichting, U.J., Stability of airplanes
in ground effect, Journal of Aircraft, V. 25, n. 4, 1988, pp.
289-294.
20. Nikolai, K., Konstantin, M., Complex Numerical
Modeling of Dynamics and Crashes of Wing-in-Ground
Vehicles, 41st Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, ‫ ﺣﺎﺷﻴﻪ ﭘﺎﻳﺪﺍﺭﻱ ﺍﺳﺘﺎﺗﻴﮑﻲ ﻃﻮﻟﻲ‬- ٩ ‫ﺷﮑﻞ‬
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics 2003.
21. Mahon, S., Zhang, X ,. Computational Analysis of ‫ﻣﺮﺍﺟﻊ‬
Pressure and Wake Characteristics of an Aerofoil in Ground
Effect, Journal of Fluids Engineering, V. 127, n. 2, 2004, pp. 1. Rozhdestvensky, K.V., Wing-in-ground effect vehicles,
Progress in Aerospace Sciences, V. 42, n. 3, 2006, pp. 211-
290-298.
22. Menter, F.R., Two-equation eddy-viscosity turbulence 283.
models for engineering applications, AIAA Journal, V. 32, n. 2. Ahmed, M.R., Sharma, S.D., An investigation on the
aerodynamics of a symmetrical airfoil in ground effect,
8, 1994, pp. 1598-1605.
Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science, V. 29, n. 6, 2005,
23. Zerihan, J., Zhang, X., Aerodynamics of a Single Element
Wing in Ground Effect, Journal of Aircraft, V. 37, n. 6, 2000, pp. 633-647.
3. Justin, S., Henry, G., James, S., The Validation of an Airfoil
pp. 1058-1064.
in the Ground Effect Regime Using 2-D CFD Analysis, 26th
24. Staufenbiel, R., Kleineidam, G., Longitudinal motion of
AIAA Aerodynamic Measurement Technology and Ground
low-flying vehicles in nonlinear flowfields, Proceedings of
Testing Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and
the Congress of the International Council of the Aeronautical
Astronautics, 2008.
Sciences, 1980, pp. 293-308. 4. Yang, Z.-G., Yang, W., Jia, Q., Ground Viscous Effect on
25. Lee, S.-H., Lee, J., Optimization of Three-Dimensional 2d Flow of Wing in Ground Proximity, Engineering
Wings in Ground Effect Using Multiobjective Genetic Applications of Computational Fluid Mechanics, V. 4, n. 4,
Algorithm, Journal of Aircraft, V. 48, n. 5, 2011, pp. 1633-
2010, pp. 521-531.
1645.
5. Jung, J., Yoon, H.S ,.Chun, H.H., Hung, P.A., Elsamni,
O.A., Mean flow characteristics of two-dimensional wings in
ground effect, International Journal of Naval Architecture and
Ocean Engineering, V. 4, n. 2, 2012, pp. 151-161.
6. Jamei, S., Maimun, A., Mansor, S., Azwadi, N ,. Priyanto,
A., Numerical Investigation on Aerodynamic Characteristics
of a Compound Wing-in-Ground Effect, Journal of Aircraft, V.
49, n. 5, 2012, pp. 1297-1305.
7. Gross, J., Traub, L.W., Experimental and Theoretical
Investigation of Ground Effect at Low Reynolds Numbers,
Journal of Aircraft, V. 49, n. 2, 2012, pp. 576-586.
8. Traub, L.W., Experimental and Analytic Investigation of
Ground Effect, Journal of Aircraft, V. 52, n. 1, 2014, pp. 235-
243.
9. Liang, H., Zong, Z., A subsonic lifting surface theory for
wing-in-ground effect, Acta Mechanica, V. 219, n. 3-4, 2011,
pp. 203-217.

www.SID.ir