1. Limited time only! Sign up for a free 30min personal tutor trial with Chegg Tutors
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Aerofoil analysis, CFD and Experimental comparison

  1. Apr 23, 2009 #1
    1. The problem statement, all variables and given/known data

    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..

    3. The attempt at a solution

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

    1.png

    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?

    2.png

    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 dont help!

    3.png

    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: Apr 23, 2009
  2. jcsd
  3. Jun 29, 2011 #2
    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
     

    Attached Files:

Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook




Similar Discussions: Aerofoil analysis, CFD and Experimental comparison
Loading...