Numerical investigation of airfoils aerodynamic performances
In this study, the aerodynamic performance of seven different airfoils named CLARK Y, CLARK YH, Curtis C-72, FX 66-S-196 V1, NACA4412, NACA4415, and NACA4418 was numerically investigated under seven different angles of attack ranging from 0° to 30° in increments of 5°. 2D (two-dimensional) CFD (Comp...
Saved in:
Published in | International Journal of Energy Applications and Technologies Vol. 9; no. 1; pp. 1 - 5 |
---|---|
Main Author | |
Format | Journal Article |
Language | English |
Published |
31.03.2022
|
Online Access | Get full text |
Cover
Loading…
Summary: | In this study, the aerodynamic performance of seven different airfoils named CLARK Y, CLARK YH, Curtis C-72, FX 66-S-196 V1, NACA4412, NACA4415, and NACA4418 was numerically investigated under seven different angles of attack ranging from 0° to 30° in increments of 5°. 2D (two-dimensional) CFD (Computational Fluid Dynamics) models of airfoils were created and performed under steady-state conditions. When the changes of the lift coefficient and drag coefficient with the angles of attack were examined, it was observed that the drag coefficient increased with the increasing angle of attack. On the other hand, the lift coefficient firstly increased and then decreased a little and remained constant. For all airfoils, this value is calculated to be the highest around 10 to 15°. The obtained results from the numerical simulations were also analyzed by using the GRA (Grey Relation Analysis) method. While determining the best aerodynamic performance with this method, “higher is the better” and “lower is the better” normalization processes were used for lift coefficient and drag coefficient, respectively. As a result of the GRA analysis made with the numerical results, it was seen that the best and the worst performances were presented by Curtis C-72 and Clark Y airfoil profiles at 10° angle of attack condition, respectively. On the other hand, at 15° and higher angle of attack conditions, the best and the worst performances were presented by NACA4418 and Clark YH airfoil profiles, respectively. The performance of the best model was also seen in the velocity distribution compared to other models. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 2548-060X 2548-060X |
DOI: | 10.31593/ijeat.1033107 |