Self Improvement

CFD Analysis of Pressure Coefficient for NACA 4412

CFD Analysis of Pressure Coefficient for NACA 4412
of 3
All materials on our website are shared by users. If you have any questions about copyright issues, please report us to resolve them. We are always happy to assist you.
   International Journal of Engineering Trends and Technology (IJETT) – Volume 4 Issue 5 - May 2013 ISSN: 2231-5381  Page 2041 CFD Analysis of Pressure Coefficient for NACA 4412   Mr. Mayurkymar kevadiya M. E. Student, Mechanical Department, Government engineering college, valsad, Gujarat, India  Abstract — in this paper NACA 4412 airfoil profile is considered  for analysis of wind turbine blade. Geometry of the airfoil is  created using GAMBIT 2.4.6. And CFD analysis is carried out using FLUENT 6.3.26 at various angles of attack from 0 ˚ to 12˚. Variations of pressure coefficient are plotted in form of contour for 1 ×10  5  Reynolds number.  Keywords — Computational fluid dynamics, Angle of Attack, Airfoil. I.   I  NTRODUCTION  Realize a 2-D flow it is necessary to extrude an aerofoil into a wing of infinite span. On a real wing the chord and twist changes along the span and the wing starts at a hub and ends in a tip, but for long slender wings, like those on modern gliders and wind turbines, Prandtl has shown that local 2-D data for the forces can be used if the angle of attack is corrected accordingly with the trailing vortices behind the wing. These effects will be dealt with later, but it is now clear that 2-D aerodynamics is of practical interest even though it is difficult to realize. Figure 1 shows the leading edge stagnation  point present in the 2-D flow past an aerofoil. The reacting force F from the flow is decomposed into a direction  perpendicular to the velocity at infinity V  ∝  and to a direction  parallel to V  ∝ . The former component is known as the lift,  L ; the latter is called the drag,  D (see Figure 2). [1]   Fig 1   schematic view of streamlines past an airfoil [1] Fig 2 Definition of lift and drag [1] II.   A IRFOIL  N OMENCLATURE  1)   Chord length – length from the LE to the TE of a wing cross section that is parallel to the vertical axis of symmetry   2)   Mean camber line – line halfway between the upper and lower surfaces   leading edge (LE) is the front most point on the mean camber line, trailing edge (TE) is the most rearward point on mean camber line 3)   Camber – maximum distance between the mean camber line and the chord line, measured perpendicular to the chord line 0 camber or uncambered means the airfoil is symmetric above and below the chord line 4) Thickness – distance between upper surface and lower surface measured perpendicular to the mean camber line   Fig 3 Airfoil nomenclatures [2]   International Journal of Engineering Trends and Technology (IJETT) – Volume 4 Issue 5 - May 2013 ISSN: 2231-5381  Page 2042 III.   C ONSTRUCTING THE DOMAIN AND MESHING  For the flow analysis of the wind turbine blade mesh is created in the GAMBIT software. Figure 4 shows the meshing drawing of the airfoil below . [3] Fig 4 Geometry of Airfoil created in GAMBIT Figure 5 Completed Meshes . FLUENT input parameters: Solver Pressure based steady state Viscous model Spalart-allmaras Density (kg/m 3 ) 1.225 Viscosity (kg/m-s) 1.7894 Turbulent viscosity ratio 10 Inlet velocity 18 m/s Chord-length 0.1 m Momentum Second order upwind Pressure velocity coupling Simple IV.   R  ESULT OF PRESSURE COEFFICIENT   From the contours, we see that there is a region of high pressure at the leading edge (stagnation point) and region of low pressure on the upper surface of airfoil. From Bernoulli equation, we know that whenever there is high velocity, we have low  pressure and vice versa. Figure 1 to 6 shows the simulation outcomes of static pressure at angles of attack 0° to 12° with spalart allmaras model. The  pressure coefficient on the lower surface of the airfoil was greater than that of the incoming flow stream and as a result it effectively “pushed” the airfoil upward, normal to the incoming flow stream. Pressure coefficient at 0° Angle of attack Pressure coefficient at 2° Angle of attack Pressure coefficient at 4° Angle of attack    Pressure coefficient at 6° Angle of attack   International Journal of Engineering Trends and Technology (IJETT) – Volume 4 Issue 5 - May 2013 ISSN: 2231-5381  Page 2043 Pressure coefficient at 8° Angle of attack Pressure coefficient at 10° Angle of attack    Pressure coefficient at 12° Angle of attack Fig 6 variation of pressure coefficient from 0 ˚ to 12˚   V.   CONCLUSION  From the contours of the CFD analysis of NACA 4412 airfoil conclude that at 0 ˚ pressure coefficient of upper surface indicate negative pressure. When increase the angle of attack we can understand the decrease the pressure coefficient on upper surface and increase on lower Surface also became the maximum at 12 ˚.   R  EFERENCES   [1]   Martin O. L. Hansen,  Aerodynamics of Wind Turbines , Earthscan, London, sterling, VA, 2008. [2]   Airfoil nomenclature.pdf    [3]   
Related Search
We Need Your Support
Thank you for visiting our website and your interest in our free products and services. We are nonprofit website to share and download documents. To the running of this website, we need your help to support us.

Thanks to everyone for your continued support.

No, Thanks

We need your sign to support Project to invent "SMART AND CONTROLLABLE REFLECTIVE BALLOONS" to cover the Sun and Save Our Earth.

More details...

Sign Now!

We are very appreciated for your Prompt Action!