UNIVERSITY OF GAZIANTEP

ME 582
TURBULANCE

Term Project

Submitted by : Ayta ANLISOY, Suna GYILMAZ

Submitted to : Asst.Prof Emrah ZAH
Date

: 02/06/2014

FLUENT ANALYSIS OF NACA0021 AIRFOIL

In this study, the flow around NACA0021 airfoil will analyse computationally. Pressure
distribution around airfoil will be determined at different Reynolds number and the attack of
angles. For this purpose, the changing parameters and the knowns are mentioned below.
Knowns;
Geometrical parameters;
Chord length: 148mm
Span length: 300mm
Flow parameters;
Fluid: Air
Athmospheric pressure: 84.2 kPa
Temperature:
Density:

Kinematic viscoisty:

The Changing parameters are the velocity and the angle of attack. When the attack angle is
4,8,12 and 16, the effect of velocity to flow structure around airfoil will examine. For this,
the velocity is chanced between 5m/s and 20m/s.

Figure 1: NACA 0021 airfoil profile

Creating geometry in Gambit program;

The coordinate file which defines the geometry of NACA 0021 airfoil downloaded from
UIUC airfoil coordinates database. Then, the file modified from unit length to the required
chord length (148mm).
The gambit program is launched and the file is imported by using the following commands.
File Import ICEM Inputs
From the window, the edges are selected and faces are unclicked. The geometry is created by
two edges. The flow reqion is defined by the flowing coordinates.
Label
A
B
C
D
E
F
G

x
148
3108
3108
3108
148
-1850
148

y
1850
1850
0
-1850
-1850
0
0

z
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

The following AB, BC, CD, DE, EG, GA, CG lines and AF, EF arcs created by line and arc
commands respectively.
Operating toolpad Geometry command button Edge command button Create
edge
The created edges are joined together to form faces. For this, the first face is formed by
joining the AB, BC, CG and GA. For the second face; ED, DC, CG and GE edges joined. For
the half circle face; GA, AF, FE and EG edges joined to form face.
Operating toolpad Geometry command button Face command button
Creating Mesh in Gambit;
In previous section, the faces defined. In here, the faces will mesh for desired solution. Before
meshing the faces, the point distribution should be defined to obtain desired mesh. The details
of point distribution are defined in the table below;
Edges
GA
BC
AB
CG
EG

Arrow direction
Upwards
Upwards
Left to right
Left to right
Downward

1.15(successive ratio)
1.15(successive ratio)
2.96(First length)
2.96(First length)
1.15(successive ratio)

Interval
45(count)
45(count)
60(count)
60(count)
45(count)

CD
DE
HI
HJ
IG
JG
AF
EF

Downward
Left to right
From H to I
From H to J
Left to right
Left to right
From A to F
From E to f

1.15(successive ratio)
2.96(First length)
2.96(Last length)
2.96(Last length)
1(successive ratio)
1(successive ratio)
2.96(First length)
2.96(First length)

45(count)
60(count)
40(count)
40(count)
2.96(size)
2.96(size)
75(count)
75(count)

Then, the edges meshed by following command;

Operating toolpad Mesh command button Face command button Face mesh
Defining the Boundary layers;
To define boundary layers, the groups are created and each group defined depends on its
specification.
Groups
edges
Farfield 1
AF, EF
Farfield 2
AB, DE
Farfield 3
BC, CD
Airfoil
Airfoil edges
To group the edges, the following commands are used.
Operating toolpad Geometry command button Group command button Create
group
The boundary of groups defined as follows;
Groups
Farfield 1
Farfield 2
Farfield 3
Airfoil

Velocity inlet
Velocity inlet
Pressure outlet
Wall

Defining the physical parameters in Fluent program;

After creating the geometry and mesh of the flow field, the mesh file is imported to the Fluent
program and the size of the meshes checked. If the negative volumes exist, the mesh of
geometry should rearrange, otherwise it can give mistake. First the problem set up started by
solver.
For solver pressure base is chosen because flow is incompressible. The parameters chosen as
Space are planer and time is steady. The rest is kept default setting.
For material, air is chosen. Density and dynamic viscosity set as
and

respectively. Spalart Allmaras method is chosen for viscous model. The Spalart-

Allmaras model was designed for aerospace applications involving wall-bounded flows. For
operation condition atmospheric pressure settled as 84.2 kPa. In boundary condition setting,
the velocity entered as x and y components. To arrange the angle of attack, the velocity
components multiplied by sinus and cosines components of attack angle.

Setting the solution methods;

Under discretization, the Pressure and Momentum is settled as Presto and Second order
upwind respectively.
Solve Control Solution
For the initial guess value, the computation will begin by Velocity field 1 values. It means
that all the mesh will start velocity field 1 values. For this;
Solve Initialize Compute from
Velocity 1 is chosen under option than init is chosen.
Also, the farfield 1 is chosen to define the base case for iteration from the report.
For the residuals, the absolute criteria settled for x, y, and continuity is
. It means
that the iteration will continue until the residual value will be lower than the absolute criteria.
Then, iteration is chosen and the program run until the desired residual value obtained.
Results
In this study, flow around NACA0021 airfoil investigated numerically. The test conditions
prepared in the fluent program and the effect of velocity and the angle of attack is examined.
In figure 1, the velocity contours around the airfoil obtained when the velocity is 12m/s at
different angle of attack. When the attack angle is 0, the fluid flows symmetrically along the
airfoil and the lift coefficient is equal to zero. By increasing the attack angle from zero to
12m/s, the velocity difference between upper surface and lower surface was getting higher
and pressure lower. This is creating pressure gradient which causes the lift forces. When the
attack angle is 16, it is clearly seen that the flow separates from the airfoil wall which causes
sudden decrease in lift coefficient called stall.
In figure 2, the pressure distribution along NACA0021 airfoil is obtained. When the attack
angle is zero, the pressure coefficient on upper surface and the lower surface was same. That
why, the curves overlapped when the attack angle is zero. By increasing the attack angle,
pressure on the upper surface decreases and pressure on lower surface increases until stall
angle. In figure 2, while the upper curves show the lower surface pressure, the lower curves

show the upper surface pressure. The pressure difference between the surfaces cause lift
forces. By increasing the attack angle the lower surface pressure is increased. The area
between the curves also shows this effect. However, when the angle of attack is 16, the
pressure on upper surface is chanced. The reason of that is the separation of flow from the
wall. The velocity and pressure chances inversely. If there is no velocity, the pressure will be
higher when it is compared with separation case.
=0

=4

=12

=8

=16

Figure1: Effect of attack angle to the flow structure around NACA0021 airfoil when the
velocity is 12m/s
In figure 3, the effect of velocity to pressure distribution along NACA0021 airfoil at 8 angle
of attack is examined. By increasing the velocity, the amplitude of the pressure difference
between lower and upper surfaces increases and it causes higher lift forces.

=0

=4

=8

=12

=16

Figure 2: Pressure distribution along NACA0021 airfoil in the case of 4, 8, 12 and 16

attack angle when the velocity is 12m/s.

V=2m/s

V=6m/s

V=4m/s

V=8m/s

V=10m/s

V=12m/s

V=14m/s

V=16m/s

Figure 3: Pressure distribution along NACA0021 airfoil in the case of 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14
and 16m/s free stream velocity when the attack angle is 8.
Conclusion
The results indicate that the pressure difference causes lift force and it increases by
increasing the attack angle and velocity. However, the attack angle can increase up to stall
angle. Because the flow begins to separate from wall and it can cause sudden decrease in lift
coefficient.
References;
Wolfe P. W., Ochs S. S., Predicting Aerodynamic Characteristics of Typical Wind Turbine
Airfoils Using CFD, Sandia Report, SAND96-2345, USA, 1997.

Logsdon N., A Procedure for Numerically Analyzing Airfoils and Wing Sections, Thesis of
Department of Mechanical & Aerospace Engineering University of Missouri, Columbia,
2006.
Weidner
S.,
Cornell
University
Learning
Modules,
https://confluence.cornell.edu/display/SIMULATION/FLUENT+Learning+Modules,
last
update may 2014.