Fluids Engineering Laboratory (AM2)

M.Tech. (Fluids Engineering) 2nd Semester

Study and Simulation of Flow Over Modified Wortmann high lift Airfoil at
00 angle of attack Using cfd tool and Validation with XFLR
Neeraj Shukla
M.Tech. Student, Department of Applied Mechanics, MNNIT Allahabad, India
neerajshukla_er@yahoo.in
ABSTRACT
In this study we have obtained the drag and lift coefficients and forces using CFD. Through analytical method
than it can be validated by XFLR software, analysis of the two dimensional subsonic flow over an Modified
Whortmann high lift air foil (FX 74-CL5-140 ) at zero angle of attack and operating at a Reynolds number of
1 x 10^7 is presented. The simulation results of FLUENT shows close agreement with the XFLR results. In view
of this study we have obtained lift, drag force with pressure distribution on airfoil using CFD.
Keywords: Modified Whortmann , Fluent , XFLR .

1.

Introduction

It is a fact of common experience that a body in motion through a fluid experiences a resultant force which, in
most cases is mainly a resistance to the motion. A class of body exists, however for which the component of the
resultant force normal to the direction to the motion is many time greater than the component resisting the
motion and the possibility of the flight of an airplane depends on the use of the body of this class for wing
structure. Airfoil is such an aerodynamic shape that when it moves through air, the air is split and passes above
below the wing. The wings upper surface is shaped so the air rushing over the top speeds up and stretches out.
This decreases the air pressure above the wing. The air flowing below the wing moves in a comparatively
straighter line, so its speed and air pressure remains the same, since high air pressure always moves towards low
air pressure, the air below the pushes upwards toward the air above the wing. The wing is in the middle, and the
whole wing is lifted. The faster an airplane moves the more lift there is. When the force of lift is greater than the
force of gravity the airplane is able to fly.

Nomenclature of an Airfoil
An airfoil is anybody which, when set at a suitable angle to a given airflow, produces much more lift than drag.
To fulfill these requirements, the body should be shaped, in section, smoothing like the section depicted in fig 1.
This shape is designed to ensure streamline flow as far as possible.
The leading edge is rounded to ensure smooth flow. The trailing edge is sharp, so that the Kutta conditions may
be satisfied, the wake is kept thin and any region of separated flow is kept as small as possible. These features
help to achieve high lift and low drag.

1/3

First International Conference on Applied Mechanics and Materials Engineering, Dec. 26-28, 2013, Allahabad, India

Fig: 1. Nomenclature of an Airfoil

The attitude of the airfoil is expressed by the angle between the chord line and the free stream velocity vector.
This angle denoted by , is called the incidence or angle of attack.

Fig: 2. Aerodynamic Forces

The aerodynamic force act along line whose intersection, C with the chord line is called the center of pressure of
the airfoil as shown in fig.2. The aerodynamic force may be resolved into two component one normal and one
parallel to the free stream direction. These components are respectively called lift and drag and denoted by L and
D.

Airfoil: An airfoil is the shape of a wing or blade (of a propeller, rotor or turbine) as seen in crosssection.
Leading edge: It is the point at the front of the airfoil that has maximum curvature.
Trailing edge: It is defined as the point of maximum curvature at the rear of the airfoil.
Chord line: A straight line intersecting leading and trailing edges of the airfoil.
Mean camber line: A line drawn halfway between the upper and lower surfaces of the airfoil.
Angle of attack (AOA): The angle of attack is the angle between the chord line and the average relative
wind.

2/10

First International Conference on Applied Mechanics and Materials Engineering, Dec. 26-28, 2013, Allahabad, India

Lift: Opposes the downward force of weight, is produced by the dynamic effect of the air acting onthe
airfoil, and acts perpendicular to the flight path through the center of lift.
Drag: Air resistance of force opposite to the direction of motion of the body.
Coefficient of drag and lift: The drag equation is,

..(i)

So the coefficient of drag,

(ii)

is essentially a statement that the drag force on any object is proportional to the density of the fluid and
proportional to the square of the relative speed between the object and the fluid .In fluid dynamics the Cd is a
dimensionless quantity that is used to quantify the drag or resistance of an object in a fluid environment such as
air or water. It is used in the drag equation where a lower drag coefficient indicates the object will have less
aerodynamic or drag. The drag coefficients always associated with a particular surface area. The drag coefficient
of any object comprises the effects of the two basic contributors to fluid dynamics drag: skin friction and from
drag. The drag coefficient of a lifting airfoil or hydrofoil also includes the effects of lift induced drag. The drag
coefficient of a complete structure such as an aircraft also includes the effects of interference drag. The overall
drag coefficient defined in the usual manner is the reference area depends on what type of drag coefficient is
being measured. For automobiles and many other objects, the reference area is the projected frontal area of the
vehicle. This may not necessarily be the cross sectional area of the vehicle, depending on where the cross section
is taken and for an airfoil the surface area is a plane form area.
The lift equation,

. .(iii)

The coefficient of lift given by,

2.

.(iv)

Problem Definition
To analyze the Modified Whortmann high lift airfoil using Ansys Fluent for calculation of Coefficient
of Drag and Coefficient of Lift and to validate the results obtained with XFLR5 analysis .

3.

Computational Details
Computational details are described in the following headings. Details are described in the same manner
in which the process was carried out.

3/10

First International Conference on Applied Mechanics and Materials Engineering, Dec. 26-28, 2013, Allahabad, India

3.1

Geometry

Geometrical points have been imported from UIUC 1 data base on which line operation was performed followed
by surface operation. Computational domain of dimension mentioned in figure is drawn to capture the
phenomenon. Airfoil surface was Boolean from the computational domain and new lines were projected on the
surface for mesh generation. Projected lines divided the domain into four regions. All the sketch other than the
projected one were suppressed from the surface. All dimensions were taken in meter.

Figure 1: Coordinate Imported

Figure 2: Flow domain

3.2

Grid Generation :

After creating the geometry meshing tool from component tool directory of Ansys was dragged and clubbed to
geometry. In mesh physics preference was converted into CFD and Fluent was given as solver preference. Under
the inflation section the first layer thickness was given as 1*10 -4. Meshing was approached with block structured
mesh for which four blocks (result of projected lines) were used. To do that Mapped face mesh with
Quadrilateral method was used. Each projected line along with computational boundaries was given the sizing

4/10

First International Conference on Applied Mechanics and Materials Engineering, Dec. 26-28, 2013, Allahabad, India

under which 100 divisions with bias of 400 was given. Bias was given in such a way that finer division falls near
the airfoil side.

Figure 3: Edge sizing and biasing

Figure 4: Mesh Details

5/10

First International Conference on Applied Mechanics and Materials Engineering, Dec. 26-28, 2013, Allahabad, India

Figure 5: Zoomed view of airfoil.

Figure 6: Mesh Details

3.3

Solver Settings:

Finite volume based pressure solver was used for computing velocity and pressures at different points. For
pressure velocity coupling SIMPLEC was used with skewness correction factor as 2. Second-order upwind
Discretization scheme was used for momentum, turbulent kinetic energy and specific dissipation rate while for
pressure standard setting was used in the study. Re based on C is calculated as 110 7 which corresponds to an
upstream velocity of 165.4 m/s. Standard values for under-relaxation factors are set for pressure, density, body
forces and momentum in the code. Y+ value for all the cases should be in accordance to capture separation
phenomena accurately, it is done by adapting. All the simulations are carried out in the steady-state mode. The

6/10

First International Conference on Applied Mechanics and Materials Engineering, Dec. 26-28, 2013, Allahabad, India

steady-state simulations are performed for a sufficient number of iterations until the flow data are converged to a
constant solution.

3.4

Turbulence Model:

Airfoil is analyzed using turbulence model under which shear stress transport (SST) k-omega was used.

Figure 7: Turbulence model

settings

3.5

Boundary and Initial Conditions:

Boundary conditions are given as 165.4 m/s velocity at inlet (Re is 1*10 7) of the
computational domain, whereas atmospheric pressure was specified at the outlet of the
domain. Airfoil surface is specified as a wall surface with no slip condition. The
computational domain is far from the airfoil surface so that boundary layers formed at the
surface does not affect the phenomenon occurring on the airfoil. Velocity at inlet surface is
specified with magnitude and direction in which direction is given along the x axis i.e. value
of alpha was set equal to zero. One common boundary condition at outlet s that where
instability waves emitted from the body are free to pass and are not reflected back. In this
study a non-reflecting boundary conditions was used at the outer boundary as pressure outlet.
4.

Results and Discussion

Cl and Cd values from Ansys :

7/10

First International Conference on Applied Mechanics and Materials Engineering, Dec. 26-28, 2013, Allahabad, India

5.

Validation

Analysis using XFLR analysis

8/10

First International Conference on Applied Mechanics and Materials Engineering, Dec. 26-28, 2013, Allahabad, India

Figure 8 : XFLR result

Comparison: b/w Ansys and XFLR data
Analysis tool

Cd

Cl

Error%

Ansys

1.1887

0.013

4.82%

XFLR

1.249

0.010

30%

Grid Independency:
No. of nodes

Cd

Cl

15351

1.1789

0.01402

34276

1.1813

0.01350

60398

1.1887

0.01397

93870

1.1896

0.0129

6.

Conclusion

In this study we came to an inference that analysis result through XFLR and that of Ansys FLUENT are not
much deviating.Based on CFD analysis and XFLR software the values coefficient of lift are having error less
than 5% but with coefficient of drag the agreement is not so well .
It also highlight the limitation of XFLR in calculating the coefficient of drag with absolute accuracy because it
usually consider mainly form drag .
Also running different simulations at different no. of nodes suggests that the result is grid independent.

7.

Acknowledgement
9/10

First International Conference on Applied Mechanics and Materials Engineering, Dec. 26-28, 2013, Allahabad, India

This work is supported by Dept. of Fluid Engineering of MNNIT, Allahabad. I am thankful to Prof. Dr. A. R.
Paul and Prof. Dr. V. K. Patel who have given us opportunity to work on the platform.. I am also thankful to our
research scholars for extending their support in the process of learning.

8.

References

UIUC airfoil databse m-selig.ae.illinois.edu/ads/coord_database.html

k- turbulence model (Menter, 1994)

10/10