38_Performance_NC

Download as pdf or txt
Download as pdf or txt
You are on page 1of 9

International Journal of Innovative Research in Science, Engineering and Technology (IJIRSET)

| e-ISSN: 2319-8753, p-ISSN: 2320-6710| www.ijirset.com | Impact Factor: 7.512|

|| Volume 9, Issue 8, August 2020 ||

Performance Analysis of Surfaced Modified


NACA 2412 Airfoil using CFD at Various
Angle of Attacks and Reynolds Number
Akshaya C1
Lab Instructor, Department of Aeronautical Engineering, Nitte Meenakshi Institute of Technology, Yelahanka,
Karnataka, India1

ABSTRACT:The present research work linchpins on understanding the behaviour of surface modified NACA 2412
airfoil at different Reynolds number. The airfoil’s lower surface is introduced with a inward cut of 2.5mm. Three
airfoils were built by introducing the cut at different locations. One airfoil has a cut at 25% of chord length and other
two at 50% and 75% respectively. The model is developed in Ansys Design Modeler and meshed in ICEMCFD. All
three meshed models are simulated at 00,40,80,120 and 160 Angle of Attacks (AoA) at 60000 and 100000 Reynolds
number. The post processing of the result revealed that, the increase in AoA resulted in increase in lift Co-efficient (CL)
for all three airfoils at both Reynolds number. The lift co-efficient started increasing as the postion of cut moved
towards the trailing edge. The flow started seperating after 12 0 AoA. It was found that, the airfoil with inward cut at
75% of chord length resulted in attaining highest lift co-efficient when compared to other two airfoils.

KEYWORDS:NACA 2412 Airfoil, Chord Length, Angle of Attack, Reynolds Number, Lift Co-efficient, Flow Separation.

I. INTRODUCTION

Airfoils are the main lift producing devices in an aircraft. The airfoil generates lift by creating a pressure difference
over its surface. Angle of Attack (AoA) also plays a vital role in generating lift. Change in AoA results in variation of
performance of airfoil [1]. Due to the shape of airfoil, the air passes over both the surface at different velocities and
pressures. This pressure difference causes the airfoil to lift in its vertical direction [2]. Hence, the lift generated by
airfoil purely depends on the shape of the airfoil’s surface. As the airfoil’s geometrical surface changes, the lift
generated by the airfoil also changes. This research focuses on understanding the phenomenon of how an airfoil
behaves when its surface is modified. Hence a computational research is carried out on surface modified airfoil at
different AoA and at different Reynolds number.
A research done by Alan A [3] on surface modified airfoil resulted in a phenomenal understanding of behaviour of
NACA 2412 airfoil when its surfaced is modified to a fish kind model. The researcher carried out a computational
study on behaviour of NACA 2412 airfoil when modified to a wahoo fish, sword fish and tarpon fish shape. The results
concluded by indicating that, the aerodynamic performance of tarpon fish shape airfoil is higher than NACA 2412
airfoil. A study on development of spoiler on the surface of the NACA 2412 airfoil was done by Scott Douglas
Lindsay, Paul Walsh [4] to understand the aerodynamic performance. It is found from post processing of the result that,
at high AoA, deployment of spoilers results in increase of lift and drag, but at low AoA, the lift decreases and the drag
increases. Er. ShivamSaxena and Mr. Rahul Kumar [5] worked on understanding the aerodynamic performance of
NACA 2412 airfoil at different Reynolds number and AoA. It was concluded by saying that, at thick surface of airfoil,
static pressure remains constant and at the lower ends of airfoil, the dynamic pressure remains constant.
Computational fluid dynamics approach was used to enhance the lift generation process during high lift take off
condition for an MAV NACA 2412 wing by ArvindPrabhakar and AyushOhiri [6]. The results showed, at high take off
condition, double slotted flap extended to 40 degrees is the ideal position. At this configuration of slots, the stall angle
raised from 200 to 540. A research on effect of air flow over NACA 2412 airfoil at high Reynolds number was carried
out by ShivanandaSarkar and Shaheen Beg Mughal [7]. 5 0AoA was found to be an optimum angle which results in
maximum lift to drag ratio and the stall angle was at 150. As the air flows over the airfoil, the temperature of the air also
plays a vital role in aerodynamic performance of that airfoil. A research on understanding the characteristic effect of
temperature on NACA 2412 airfoil was done by YogeshThawrani and AjithKumar[8]. Richardson number (R i) at
00AoA is directly proportional to the lift co-efficient and the increase in temperature leads to earlier flow separation
states the conclusion. An unconditional work was done on surface modification of the airfoil by adding a vortex
generator and a dimple on the airfoil to increase the aerodynamic performance by Sonia Chalia and Manish Kumar

IJIRSET © 2020 | An ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal | 7095


International Journal of Innovative Research in Science, Engineering and Technology (IJIRSET)

| e-ISSN: 2319-8753, p-ISSN: 2320-6710| www.ijirset.com | Impact Factor: 7.512|

|| Volume 9, Issue 8, August 2020 ||

Bharati [9]. The concluding remarks states that, the introduction of vortex generator leads to increase in fuel
consumption. Dimple over the airfoil surface results in more lift than a vortex generator. Md. Tariqul and Amit M. E.
Arefin[10] worked on understanding the performance of airfoil at different Reynolds number. The results said that at
lower AoA the Reynolds number had a significant effect on airfoil than at higher AoA.Vinayaka N and AkshayaC[11]
worked on flow simulation over cascade baldes at different angle of attacks. They concluded by quoting that as the
angle of attack was increased, the pressure raised and flow separation happened at more than 15 degree angle of attack.
A simulation was carried out on compressor blades at transonic velocity at different AoA by Akshaya C and
VinayakaN[12]. The solution stated that increment in velocity and AoA leads the shock wave to move at different
position. A study on transonic airfoil was carried out byVinayaka N and Akshaya C[13] at transonic regine to
understand the behaviour of shock wave at higher altitudes and at different turbulence intensity levels. The paper says
that as the turbulence intensity increases with AoA the shock wave position changes.

II. METHODOLOGY

Geometric Modelling

The coordinates of NACA 2412 airfoil were obtained from airfoil tools. Ansys Design Modeler is used to model the
airfoil. There were three surface modified airfoils generated from NACA 2412 airfoil. A 90 0inward cut of 2mm is
introduced on the lower surface of the airfoil at 25%, 50% and 75% of chord length as shown in Figure 1.

(a) (b) (c)


Fig. 1.Text Detection and Inpainting (a) Geometric Modelling of airfoil with inward cut at 25% of chord length (b) Geometric Modelling of airfoil
with inward cut at 50% of chord length (c) Geometric Modelling of airfoil with inward cut at 75% of chord length.

Meshing
The model has to be meshed before it is simulated using Ansys Fluent. ICEMCFD is used to mesh the domain. An
unstructured grid is created across the domain. There are 165116 cells created across the airfoil. The orthogonal quality
is 0.574, whereas values close to 0 signifies the low quality. The orthogonal skew is 0.343, whereas the value near to 1
is low quality. The meshed model is shown in Figure 2.

(a)

Fig. 2.(a) Unstructured Mesh across the airfoil

IJIRSET © 2020 | An ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal | 7096


International Journal of Innovative Research in Science, Engineering and Technology (IJIRSET)

| e-ISSN: 2319-8753, p-ISSN: 2320-6710| www.ijirset.com | Impact Factor: 7.512|

|| Volume 9, Issue 8, August 2020 ||


Simulation
The simulation on the meshed model is done using Ansys Fluent. The simulation was carried out at 60000 and
100000 Reynolds number at 00, 40, 80, 120 and 160AoA on airfoil which has cut at 25%, 50% and 75% on the lower
surface along chord length. The convergence of the solution was decided when C L reached a constant value and the
continuity equation was satisfied. The graph of converged solutions is given below in Fig 3.

(a) (b)

Fig. 3. (a) Convergence criteria w.r.t lift co-efficient (b) Convergence criteria w.r.t mass flow rate

III. EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS

Test Case 1 – Position of cut at 25% of chord length. Re=60000

(a) (b)

(c) (d)

Fig. 4. (a) Static Pressure Contours at 00AoA (b) Velocity Contours at 160AoA (c) CL vs. AoA graph at 60000 Reynolds Number (d) Static
Pressure vs. Chord Length graph at varies AoA.

IJIRSET © 2020 | An ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal | 7097


International Journal of Innovative Research in Science, Engineering and Technology (IJIRSET)

| e-ISSN: 2319-8753, p-ISSN: 2320-6710| www.ijirset.com | Impact Factor: 7.512|

|| Volume 9, Issue 8, August 2020 ||

The results obtained from the computational analysis are presented in this section. The simulation was carried out at
00, 40, 80, 120 and 160AoA at 60000 Reynolds number. Fig 4 (a) indicates the static pressure over the airfoil at 0 0AoA
and Fig 4 (b). shows the velocity contours at 160AoA. The lift co-efficient of the airfoil increases as the AoA increases.
Lift co-efficient at 00AoA is 0.0246 whereas the max CL is obtained at 160AoA which is 0.0878. The results indicates a
flow separation over the airfoil at 160AoA as shown in Fig 4 (b). Hence, the airfoil stall angle is in-between 120 to
160AoA. The dip of static pressure on the upper line (lower surface of airfoil) in the graph at 25% of chord length
indicates the cut on airfoil. The dip indicates the rise in velocity due to decrease in pressure. This phenomenon occurs
due to the presence of cut at 25% of chord length where the flow will be accelerating. The steep rise in pressure at
160AoA in Fig 4 (d) signifies the stall of airfoil.

Test Case 2 – Position of cut at 25% of chord length. Re=100000

(a) (b)

(c) (d)
Fig. 5. (a) Static Pressure Contours at 00AoA (b) Velocity Contours at 160AoA (c) CL vs. AoA graph at 60000 Reynolds Number (d) Static
Pressure vs. Chord Length graph at varies AoA.

Static pressure contours and velocity contours are shown in Fig 5 (a) & (b). This section discusses the results of cut
at 25% of chord length at 100000 Reynolds number. In this test case, it is found that, as the AoA increases, the lift co-
efficient increases. In test case 1, the lift coefficient was 0.0246 at 0 0AoA but in this case, the lift co-efficient is 0.0263,
which signifies that the increase in Reynolds number leads to increase in lift. Flow separation occurs at 16 0AoA as
shown in Figure 5 (b). The airfoil stalls earlier than compared to test case 1. The lift co-efficient was 0.0878 at 160AoA
in test case 1 whereas the lift co-efficient is 0.0806 in this case, signifying that the airfoil stalls early. Fig 5 (d)
represents the static pressure distribution over the airfoil at 100000 Reynolds number. It can be seen that, the area
inside the curve in graph has increased when compared to test case 1. This increase in area signifies the increase in lift.
Both test case 1 and test case 2 shows a dip in pressure on upper line of the curve (lower surface of the airfoil) in Fig 4
(d) and Fig 5 (d) indicating the loss of lift.

IJIRSET © 2020 | An ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal | 7098


International Journal of Innovative Research in Science, Engineering and Technology (IJIRSET)

| e-ISSN: 2319-8753, p-ISSN: 2320-6710| www.ijirset.com | Impact Factor: 7.512|

|| Volume 9, Issue 8, August 2020 ||

Test Case 3 – Position of cut at 50% of chord length. Re=60000

(a) (b)

(c) (d)

Fig. 6. (a) Static Pressure Contours at 00AoA (b) Velocity Contours at 160AoA (c) CL vs. AoA graph at 60000 Reynolds Number (d) Static Pressure
vs. Chord Length graph at varies AoA.

Test case 3 discusses results about the airfoil which has cut at 50% of chord length and at 60000 Reynolds Number.
Static pressure contours are shown in Fig 6 (a). The lift co-efficient at 00AoA is 0.0294 in this case, but it was 0.0246 in
test case 1. As the cut on the lower surface of the airfoil is shifted from 25% to 50% of chord length, the co-efficient of
lift increased. The lift coefficient was 0.0878 in test case 1 whereas in this case the lift coefficient is 0.0829 at 16 0AoA.
This shows that, the airfoil which has cut at its 50% of chord length stall earlier than the airfoil which has cut at its 25%
of chord length. Flow separation on the airfoil is shown in Fig 6 (b). Hence, the stalling angle is in-between 120 and
160. From Fig 6 (d) it can be signified that the area inside the curve is higher in this case than in test case 1. This is due
to the increase in lift. The rise in pressure at 50% of chord length shown in Fig 6 (d) indicates the pressure on the lower
surface is increased due to the cut, leading to the excess amount of lift. In test case 1 there is a dip in pressure which
resulted in lift loss, but in this case the raise in pressure results in gain of lift.

Test Case 4 – Position of cut at 50% of chord length. Re=100000

(a) (b)

IJIRSET © 2020 | An ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal | 7099


International Journal of Innovative Research in Science, Engineering and Technology (IJIRSET)

| e-ISSN: 2319-8753, p-ISSN: 2320-6710| www.ijirset.com | Impact Factor: 7.512|

|| Volume 9, Issue 8, August 2020 ||

(c) (d)
Fig. 7. (a) Static Pressure Contours at 00AoA (b) Velocity Contours at 160AoA (c) CL vs. AoA graph at 60000 Reynolds Number (d) Static Pressure
vs. Chord Length graph at varies AoA.

The behaviour of the airfoil changes as the flow characteristics changes. Test case 4 is carried out for the same
boundary condition as of test case 3 at 50% cut on its chord length but, the Reynolds number is increased from 60000
to 100000.The post processing of results signified that, the lift co-efficient increased as the Reynolds number and
AoAis increased as shown in Fig 6 (c). But the difference in increment of lift coefficient from test case 1 to test case 2
at 00AoA was 6.46% whereas test case 3 to test case 4 at same degree AoA is 11.14%. This signifies that there is a
higher increment as the Reynolds number increases at 50% cut at chord length than 25% cut at chord length. The flow
separation was found at 160AoA as signified in Fig 6 (b). The airfoil stalls in this test case earlier when compared with
other test cases. The increase in lift is signified by increase in area of static pressure curve as shown in Fig 6 (d). The
slight raise in pressure in Fig 6 (d) signifies the cut on the airfoil. The steep increase in pressure on the lower line
(airfoil’s upper surface) of graph indicates the flow separation on the airfoil’s upper surface.

Test Case 5 – Position of cut at 75% of chord length. Re=60000

(a) (b)

(c) (d)
Fig. 8. (a) Static Pressure Contours at 00AoA (b) Velocity Contours at 160AoA (c) CL vs. AoA graph at 60000 Reynolds Number (d) Static Pressure
vs. Chord Length graph at varies AoA.

IJIRSET © 2020 | An ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal | 7100


International Journal of Innovative Research in Science, Engineering and Technology (IJIRSET)

| e-ISSN: 2319-8753, p-ISSN: 2320-6710| www.ijirset.com | Impact Factor: 7.512|

|| Volume 9, Issue 8, August 2020 ||

Fig 8 (a) & (b) shows the static pressure and velocity contours on airfoil. In this test case, the cut on the airfoil surface
is made at 75% of the chord length. As the AoA is increased, the lift co-efficient also increased. The CL of the airfoil is
0.0299 in this test case, whereas in test case 3 it was 0.0294. But the increment in lift co-efficient from 120AoA to
160AoA is minimum in this test case. The difference in amount of increment in lift co-efficient from test case 1 to test
case 3 was 16.32% at 00AoA, but the increment from test case 3 to test case 4 is just 1%. The flow separation is shown
in Fig 8 (b). The value of lift coefficient is 0.0829 in test case 3 whereas it is 0.0911 in this test case at 160AoA. Hence,
before the airfoil stalls, it produces higher lift when compared to airfoil which has 50% cut on its chord length. The
change in lift co-efficient with respect to AoA is shown in Fig 8 (c). The lift generated is higher when compared to
previous cases. This rise in pressure at 75% chord length in Fig 8 (d) indicates the presence of cut on the lower surface
of the airfoil. This raise in pressure on the lower surface creates an extra pressure difference due to which an excess
amount of lift is generated.

Test Case 6 – Position of cut at 75% of chord length. Re=100000

(a) (b)

(a) (b)
Fig. 8. (a) Static Pressure Contours at 00AoA (b) Velocity Contours at 160AoA (c) CL vs. AoA graph at 60000 Reynolds Number (d) Static Pressure
vs. Chord Length graph at varies AoA.

The simulation is done at 100000 Reynolds number in this test case for 75% cut on the chord length. The lift co-
efficient is highest when compared to all the previous test cases. The lift co-efficient is 0.0315 which is highest of all.
The difference in amount of increment in lift co-efficient in test case 2and test case 4at 00AoA was 11.14%, but the
increment in test case 4 and test case 6 is just 6.03% at 00 AOA. The highest CLis 0.0933 at 120AoAin test case 6. The
lift co-efficient decreased as the AoA is raised to 160. The air flow gets separated from the airfoil at 160AoA as shown
in Fig 8 (b). Fig 8 (a) shows the distribution of static pressure across airfoil whereas Fig 8 (b) indicates the separation
of air flow over the airfoil’s upper surface. The increase in area of the static pressure curve signifies the increment of
lift co-efficient. Due to the increase of Reynolds number from 60000 to100000, the raise in static pressure at the
position of the cut is higher, which leads to the higher lift generation. But the airfoil stalls earlier at 100000 Reynolds
number than 60000 Reynolds number. The airfoil in this test case has achieved the maximum lift coefficient.

IJIRSET © 2020 | An ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal | 7101


International Journal of Innovative Research in Science, Engineering and Technology (IJIRSET)

| e-ISSN: 2319-8753, p-ISSN: 2320-6710| www.ijirset.com | Impact Factor: 7.512|

|| Volume 9, Issue 8, August 2020 ||

Results oflift co-efficient at various AoA and position of cut on chord line

(a)
Fig. 9. (a) Position of cut on chord vs. Lift co-efficient at various AoA.

The graph in Fig 9 (a) shows the variation of lift co-efficient at 60000 Reynolds number with change in position of cut
at different AoA. Fig 8 (d) reveals a significant results obtained from all test cases. The graph indicates that, the lift co-
efficient increases as the position of cut is changed from 25% to 75% through 50% at various AoA. Lift co-efficient
increases as the AoA increases. It can be seen from graph that, the amount of increment in lift from 12 0AoA to 160AoA
is decreased due to the separation of flow. The same phenomenon occurs as the Reynolds number is increased from
60000 to 100000.

IV. CONCLUSION

The surface modified NACA 2412 airfoil was analysed using computational method. The simulation was done on three
airfoils which have an inward cut on its lower surface at 25%, 50% and 75% of chord length. All three airfoils were
analysed at 60000 and 100000 Reynolds number at 0 0, 40, 80,120 and 160AoA. The post processing of the results
revealed that, increase in AoA will result in increment of lift coefficient. The change in cut from 25% to 75% through
50% resulted in increment of lift co-efficient. The difference in increment of lift co-efficient at two Reynolds number is
higher for the airfoil which has cut at its 50% of chord length. Due to the presence of cut at 25% of chord length which
is near the leading edge of the airfoil, the pressure decreases due to the acceleration of flow and resulting in loss of lift.
Airfoil which has cut at 75% of chord length has resulted in maximum lift co-efficient when compared with other
airfoils. The flow separation is found in between 12 0 and 160AoA for all three airfoils. Airfoil with cut at 75% on its
chord length stalls earlier than any other airfoils. Hence, it can be concluded from the results that, the surface modified
NACA 2412 airfoil which has cut at 75% of its chord length yields highest lift co-efficient at all the AoA operating at
100000 Reynolds number.
REFERENCES
[1] John D Anderson.: “Fundamnetals of Aerodynamics” McGraw-Hill Series 5th edition.
[2] John D Anderson, Introduction to Flight, McGraw-Hill Series Progress in Astronautics and Aeronautics.
[3] Alan A.: Flow Simulation on New Airfoils Design, International Journal for Scientific Research and
Development (IJSED), Vol. 4, Issue 12, pp. 980-982, 2017
[4] Scott Douglas Lindsay, Paul Walsh.: Experimental Investigation of Spoiler Deployment on Wing Stall, Open
Journal of Fluid Dynamics, 8, pp. 308-320, 2018.
[5] ShivamSaxenaEr., Rahul Kumar.: Design of NACA 2412 and its Analysis at Different Angle of Attacks,
Reynolds Number, and a Wing Tunnel Test, International Journal of Engineering Research and General Science,
Vol 3, No. 2, pp. 193-200, 2015.
[6] ArvindPrabhakar, AyushOhri.: CFD Analysis on MAV NACA 2412 Wing in High Lift Take-off Configuration
for Enhanced Lift Generation, Journal of Aeronautics and Aerospace Engineering, Vol 2, No. 5, pp. 1-8, 2013.
[7] ShivanandSarkar, Shaheen Beg Mughal.: CFD Analysis of Effect of Flow over NACA 2412 Airfoil Through the
Shear Stress Transport Turbulence Model, International Journal of Mechanical and Production Engineering, Vol.
5, No. 7, pp. 58-62, 2017.

IJIRSET © 2020 | An ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal | 7102


International Journal of Innovative Research in Science, Engineering and Technology (IJIRSET)

| e-ISSN: 2319-8753, p-ISSN: 2320-6710| www.ijirset.com | Impact Factor: 7.512|

|| Volume 9, Issue 8, August 2020 ||

[8] YogeshThawrani, Ajith Kumar S.: Influence of Surface Temperature on the Flow Charecteristics of NACA 2412
Airfoil, International Journal of Pure and Applied Mathematics, Vol. 119, No. 12, pp. 71-75, 2018.
[9] Sonia Chalia, Manish Kumar Bharti.: Design and Analysis of Vortex Generator and Dimple over an Airfoil
Surface to Improve Aircraft Performance, Vol. 3, No. 4, pp. 173-181, 2017.
[10] Tariqul Islam Md., AmitArefin M. E., Masud M. E., and MonjurMourshed.: The effect of Reynolds number in the
Performance of a modified NACA 2412 Airfoil, International Conference on Mechanical Engineering, AIP Conf.
Proc. Pp. 1-7, 1980.
[11] Vinayaka N, Akshaya C, Shiv Pratap Singh Yadav, H N Reddappa.: Study Of High Speed Flow BehaviorThrough
Axial Compressor CascadeBlades, International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Technology (IJMET)
Vol. 9, No 5, pp. 371–382, 2018.
[12] Akshaya C and Vinayaka N.: A Study on Transonic Aerodynamics of AxialCompressor Cascade Blades at Higher
Altitudes, International Journal of Innovative Research in Science,Engineering and Technology (IJIRSET), Vol. 8, No
3, pp. 1701-1710, 2019.
[13] N. Vinayaka N, C. Akshaya, AvinashLakshmikanthan, Shiv Pratap Singh Yadav, R. P. Sindhu, High Altitude
Transonic Aerodynamics of Supercritical Airfoilat different Turbulence Levels, Journal of Advanced Research in
FluidMechanics and Thermal Sciences, Vol. 60, No. 2, pp. 283-295, 2019.

IJIRSET © 2020 | An ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal | 7103

You might also like