Aerofoil analysis, CFD and Experimental comparison

1 reply · 4K views · last reply
Ma77h3w
Messages
7
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Computational Fluid Dynamics anyone? :D I know someone out there is a genius?
I'm trying to understand some of the differences between Experimental results and a Fluent (CFD) analysis of a NACA 0012 aerofoil. There are 3 Cp/x graphs of my results (plotted with negative down just to confuse you - suction on bottom, pressure top) . I need to explain what causes the differences between CFD and the experiment. Fluent is set up with pretty standard settings, standard wall functions.. etc..

The Attempt at a Solution



Here's what I've written so far (check attachments for graphs, hopefully they'll show up) :-

Line graph of Cp/x against x/c at 0 degrees incidence for a NACA 0012 aerofoil, comparing Fluent CFD (blue) and experimental (red) curves, both starting near 1 at x/c=0 and rising negative toward about -0.4 near x/c=0.1.


The 0º incidence results show a good similarity between the Fluent solver and the
experimental results. There is a small discrepancy with the experimental results showing a
lower Cp along the whole surface than the Fluent CFD. This may be due to... ?real-world surface roughness? ?Fluent wall functions? ... any ideas?

Line graph of Cp/x against x/c for a NACA 0012 aerofoil at 9 degrees incidence, comparing Fluent CFD (blue) and experimental (red) curves; the experimental suction peak near the leading edge is lower than the CFD peak.


The 9º incidence results also show a good similarity between the CFD and the experiment.
However at the front tip of the wing the experimental results show a smaller Cp value than
the CFD on the suction surface. This may be due to ... no idea? anyone? my notes don't help!

Graph of Cp/x against x/c at 12 degrees incidence for the NACA 0012 aerofoil, comparing Fluent CFD (blue) and experimental (red) results; CFD shows a deeper suction peak near the leading edge.


The 12º incidence results show a large difference between CFD and the experiment. The Cp
on the suction surface is a lot nearer zero for the experiment, and flattens rather than
converging on zero. This is due to separation occurring on the suction surface of the
aerofoil. The standard wall functions used in Fluent don’t account for the separation
occurring in the 12º incidence case. Fluent’s non-equilibrium wall functions should be used
instead, as they provide a better estimation of the non-equilibrium effects in the separation.
... Not sure if there's anything I'm missing?

I will be amazingly greatful if anyone can help fill in the gaps.. :)
:)
Matt
 
Last edited:
i got a problem that there is offset in cp plots of Fluent and experiment regarding Naca65.
Please suggest what may be the cause
Please reply on maheshvarpe@gmail.com
 
Attachments
  • CP plot of pressure coefficient Cp = (P - Pre)/q against x/c from 0 to 1, with experimental pressure and suction curves in red dashed and solid lines and angle-of-attack 5 curves in purple dashed and solid lines.
    Cp offset.JPG
    25.5 KB · Views: 521