Low Speed Lift and Drag Calculation for a NACA 0012

Wing Section Using the Coefficient of Pressure on the Wing

Surface

J. Murray
Aerospace Engineering Student, Lab Section 1007, Tempe, AZ, 85287

This experiment was performed to determine the lift and drag coefficients of a NACA
0012 wing section using the coefficient of pressure that is created by the shape of the wing
section. The NACA 0012 wing section has been studied in depth and has a precise data base
to compare the results of the experiment with. The results from this experiment showed that
the maximum coefficient of lift was close to .3, and occurred at an angle of attack of 9
degrees. The lift-to-drag ratio was a maximum at an angle of attack of 5 degrees. These
results do not match the documented properties because of the low Reynolds number. This
was a known error before the experiment was performed. Even with these errors the
experiment was still able to describe what is happening to the wing section as it changes in
angle of attack.

Nomenclature
AoA = angle of attack
α = angle in degrees
CD = coefficient of drag
CL = coefficient of lift
CP = coefficient of pressure
c = chord
D = drag
Fx = CD
Fy = CL
L = lift
P = total pressure
Pamb = ambient pressure
P∞ = static pressure
q = dynamic pressure
V∞ = wind velocity

I. Introduction

The laboratory procedure was to determine how the pressure distribution around the NACA 0012 wing can be

used to find the Clmax and (L/D)max at varying angles of attack. To determine the pressure distribution in this

experiment, the NACA 0012 wing section was exposed to a low speed freestream. Because this was a low speed

freestream, the Reynolds number was also low. This low Reynolds number caused significant error when

determining the maximum values. This error happens because the low Reynolds number does not allow the air to

gain much energy. This lack of energy causes a premature stall angle for the wing. Even with the premature stall
angle it is still possible to determine the performance of the wing section. There are three types of stall; these are the

trailing edge stall, leading edge stall, and the thin-airfoil stall. In this lab it is possible to see two of these. These are

the trailing edge stall and the thin-airfoil stall. These trailing edge stalls are visually illustrated in Fig 1:

Figure 1: Trailing edge laminar flow separation (stall)

Using the freestream, it was possible to find the pressure distribution on the top surface of the wing section.

Once the pressure distribution was found, it was used to calculate the CP. This was done using the equation (1).

P  P
CP  (1)
q

These calculated values were then used to solve the CL and CD for the location of each pressure tap on the wing

surface. To calculate these, the panel method was used. To use the panel method the wing section was divided into

segments where the end point of each panel is located in the center of two port points on the x axis. The end point

was then placed onto the profile of the wing section. This placed the pressure tap very close to the center of the

panel. The only exception was for panel number 2. This was because of the wing section profile which does not

allow for a simple division at this point due to its parabolic shape. The panels can be seen super imposed on the

airfoil in Fig. (2).

 0.4
port location
port location
0.3 panel end point location
wing section surface
0.2

0.1
z

-0.1

-0.2

-0.3

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1

x

Figure 2: Wing panels superimposed on the wing surface

Once the panels were determined it was then possible to calculate the lift and drag for each of these panels. For

this calculation the equations were (2) and (3):

Fx   Pi ( z (i 1)  zi ) (2)

Fy   Pi ( x(i 1)  xi ) (3)

This calculation provided the lift and drag data for each panel. These values when plotted show how the pressure

coefficient changed as the angle of attack changed. Once these values were found it was then possible to calculate

the force per unit span of the wing section. This was done by summing the values for each port. When these values

were calculated it was then possible to determine the total lift and drag for the wing section at each angle by using

the equations (4) and (5):

C L  C y cos   C x sin  (4)

C D  C x cos   C y sin  (5)

When doing these calculations it was necessary to leave out any wing surface beyond the wing panels. Because the

calculations from these sections did not follow the wing profile, or have any pressure data it created very large

errors. The coefficients of lift and drag showed that as the angle of attack increased, so did the lift and drag. The

drag increased continuously while the lift dropped once the stall condition appeared. This stall happens at a lower
than expected angle of attack because the low Reynolds number does not allow the freestream to attain the amount

of energy it would at normal operating speeds. The polar plot that this data provides is what was expected from the

wing section. The results of these calculations make it possible to evaluate the lift and drag on this wing section.

II. Procedure for Experiment

The Equipment used to perform the lab:

NACA 0012 wing section with pressure taps

Multiple manometer

Pitot-static tube

Pressure Transducer

Low speed wind tunnel

Computer with LABView program

The experiment was conducted by first measuring the chord length of the wing section. At this time the location

of the pressure taps was also measured. The location measurement was from the leading edge of the wing section to

the center point of the pressure tap. The next step was to setup and calibrate the Pitot-static tube, pressure

transducer, and the multiple manometer in the test section of the wind tunnel. After this was done the wing section

was then placed into the test section of the wind tunnel on a gimble that allowed it to have its angle of attack

adjusted. The pressure taps were then connected to the multiple manometer with rubber hoses. One of the multiple

manometer ports was then connected to a pressure tap located on the floor of the wind tunnel test section. This

pressure tap provided the data for the static gauge pressure in the test section. All of the gauges were then connected

to the computer for LABView to record the readings that were acquired. Next the ambient room temperature and

pressure were recorded using a barometer and thermometer. The values from these measurements were then entered

into the LABView computer program. This completed the setup of the experiment.

Once the setup was complete the wind tunnel was started and set to a speed of 40 Hz. The wing section was then

set to an angle of attack at 0 degrees. Once the wind speed had settled, static pressure and velocity of the wind

tunnel test section were recorded. Data from the pressure taps on the wing section surface were also recorded at this
time. This provided the data for the pressure distribution on the wing sections surface. It was assumed that because

the wing section is symmetrical that the pressure on the lower surface was identical to the upper surface.

The wing section was then rotated through the angles of attack of 5, 9, and 13 degrees. At each of these angles

the wind velocity was allowed to stabilize. After it stabilized the data for the gauges was measured and the wing

section was rotated to the next angle of attack. The data collected from these measurements was then used to

calculate the lift and drag the wing section created.

III. Results

The results of this experiment very closely matched what was expected of this wing section at a low Reynolds

number. The only place where error was substantial is in the first and second panels. This is possibly because of

the panel shape. The first panel was very small in size and the pressure coefficient was very large at the leading

edge. This would make the pressure appear higher than it should be. The second panel was very large and the

port was not centered on this panel. The large size probably made the calculation appear abnormally low. The

values for the upper surface were calculated using equation (1). These values are shown in Table (1):

0 degree angle of 5 degree angle of 9 degree angle of 13 degree angle of

attack attack attack attack
-0.2468 -1.2361 -1.8866 -0.3497
-0.2094 -0.6829 -0.8294 -0.2681
-0.3398 -0.5663 -0.7119 -0.3168
-0.1867 -0.321 -0.4816 -0.3597
-0.1505 -0.2587 -0.2688 -0.362
-0.1191 -0.2012 -0.146 -0.361
-0.1031 -0.1291 -0.0793 -0.3656
-0.0556 0.0282 0.1271 -0.3506
0.0392 0.0919 0.1616 -0.332
Table 1: CP at the pressure tap for each angle evaluated on the upper surface
The values for the lower surface were calculated with equation (1) and are shown in table (2):

0 degree angle of 5 degree angle of 9 degree angle of 13 degree angle of

attack attack attack attack

-0.247 0.5502 0.8566 0.6789

-0.2094 0.2507 0.5002 0.4658
-0.3398 0.0631 0.1595 0.137
-0.1867 0.023 0.0902 0.0459
-0.1505 -0.0124 0.0301 0.0223
-0.1191 -0.0128 0.1046 -0.0716
-0.1031 -0.0116 -0.024 -0.1437
-0.0556 -0.0193 -0.0304 -0.1338
0.0392 0.0724 0.0488 -0.1392
Table 2: CP at the pressure tap point along the x axis for each angle evaluated on the lower surface

The results from these calculations are what were to be expected with the exception of the first 2 panels. These show

a very high coefficient of pressure at the leading edge and almost zero press on the trailing edge. This data is

displayed in Fig. (3):

-0.35

-0.3

-0.25

-0.2
Cp

-0.15

-0.1

-0.05

0.05
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8
x/c

Figure 3: Coefficient of Pressure vs. x for 0 degrees angle of attack

The next results for the angle of attack of 5 degrees were also very close to expected values. The coefficient of

pressure went down for all locations on the upper surface. At the same time the coefficient of pressure on the lower

surface increased. Because the lower surface did not increase as much as the upper surface decreased, the net result

was the wing section had more lift than it had at zero degrees angle of attack. With this data it is possible to see the

trailing edge stall start to form on the last two panels. On the data plot this is the area where the pressure lines cross.

The pressure coefficients for this angle of attack can be seen in Fig 4:
 -1.4
Bottom Surface
-1.2 Top Surface

-1

-0.8

-0.6

Cp
-0.4

-0.2

0.2

0.4

0.6
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8
x/c

Figure 4: Coefficient of Pressure vs. x for 5 degrees angle of attack

As the angle of attack increased to 9 degrees the coefficient of pressure reached its lowest value on the leading edge

of the upper surface. The lower surface pressure also increases but not as much as the upper surface. At this angle of

attack the wing section provided its highest lift. Also at this angle of attack the trailing edge stall has increased from

in size with the change in angle of attack. The pressure coefficients for this angle of attack can be seen in fig (5):

-2
Lower Surface
Upper Surface
-1.5

-1
Cp

-0.5

0.5

1
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8
x/c

Figure 5: Coefficient of Pressure vs. x for 9 degrees angle of attack

The final angle of attack was 13 degrees. At this angle the wing section was in stall and was not producing as much

lift. This is the stage when the freestream has separated from the top surface of the wing section. The upper surface

was producing far less negative pressure than the lower surface was producing positive pressure. The pressure

coefficients can be seen in Fig. 6:

 -0.4

-0.2

0.2

Cp
0.4

0.6

0.8 Lower surface

Upper Surface

1
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8
x/c

Figure 6: Coefficient of Pressure vs. x for 13 degrees angle of attack

When the total CD and CL were calculated for each angle of attack, the numbers were within the expected range.

The calculated lift and drag coefficients when plotted made a polar plot in the general form that it should have been.

The values for the integrations are provided in table (2).

angle of
attack Lift Drag
0 0 -0.0106
5 0.2751 0.0099
9 0.3639 0.0396
13 0.2971 0.0921
Table 2: CD and CL as functions of angle of attack

This plot has shows the premature stall due to the low Reynolds number. The maximum coefficient of lift is at a 9

degree angle of attack instead of the expected 12 degrees. The drag acted as expected and increased as more surface

area was exposed to the freestream. The data can be seen in Fig. (7). The data for the CL/ CD vs. angle of attack

shows that the highest lift was at 9 degrees angle of attack. This data is plotted in Fig (8).
 0.4
Coefficient of Lift
0.35 Coefficient of Drag

0.3

0.25

0.2

Cp
0.15

0.1

0.05

-0.05
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
Angle of attack

Figure 7: Polar plot of CD and CL vs. α

30

25

20
Cp

15

10

0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
Angle of attack

Figure 8: CL/ CD vs. angle of attack.

IV. Conclusion

The lab showed that the maximum Cp was at a 9 degree angle of attack. This is not the same as the expected

value. The reason for this is that the Reynolds number is too low to simulate actual conditions and model scaling

also affects the performance of the wing section. This lab could be made to be more accurate by increase the wind

velocity. With an increased Reynolds number the freestream would have more energy. This higher energy would

keep the boundary layer on the wing section at higher angles of attack. This would have the effect of increasing the

Reynolds number. This increase would delay the stall until the expected angle of attack. Although the results are not
quite the same as the expected, they are close enough to describe what is happening to the wing section as it changes

angles of attack.

When this data is compared to lab 2 at a similar Reynolds number, the maximum lift is at the same angle of

attack, but the Cp for the maximum lift is about half or slightly less. The slope of the maximum lift is what would be

expected from the data. The data only differs beyond the maximum lift region. This is probably due to the low

Reynolds number not accurately modeling the wing section in a stall condition.

The lift-to-drag ratio reaches a maximum ratio at a 5 degree angle of attack. This is not the same as the angle of

attack for maximum lift. This is because beyond 5 degrees the drag increases faster than the lift decreases. It would

be possible to change this to a higher expected angle of attack again by increasing the Reynolds number.

A problem with the lab was accurately modeling the Cp over the surface of the airfoil. This could be solved with

more time invested in tinkering with the panels and extrapolating the data over the ends of the profile.

Appendix A

Table A.1: Port locations on the wing section

Distance of each port from
leading edge of airfoil
x xnondim
Port0 0.4 0.04
Port1 1 0.1
Port2 2 0.2
Port3 3 0.3
Port4 4 0.4
Port5 5 0.5
Port6 6 0.6
Port7 7 0.7
Port8 8 0.8

Chord 10.0 cm 10

Table A.2: Calculated lift and drag coefficients

angle of
attack Lift Drag
0 0 -0.0106 0
5 0.0392 0.0099 3.959596
9 0.013 0.0396 0.328283
 13 0.0046 0.0921 0.049946

Table A.3: Calculated Cp for the pressure taps

Scan
P_trans α P_scan P_scan port V P_atm P_atm P P_inf CP
Pa ° inH2O Pa # m/s kPa Pa Pa Pa []
- -
697.94276 0 -3.494 870.31662 0 35.377 96.2 96200 95329.683 95502.057 0.2469742
- -
700.07592 0 -3.399 846.65317 1 35.547 96.2 96200 95353.347 95499.924 0.2093734
- -
704.07559 0 -3.787 943.29966 2 35.489 96.2 96200 95256.7 95495.924 0.3397704
- -
705.67546 0 -3.362 837.43688 3 35.693 96.2 96200 95362.563 95494.325 0.1867167
- -
706.87536 0 -3.265 813.27526 4 35.666 96.2 96200 95386.725 95493.125 0.1505214
- -
703.5423 0 -3.161 787.37001 5 35.576 96.2 96200 95412.63 95496.458 0.1191509
- -
704.07559 0 -3.118 776.65919 6 35.533 96.2 96200 95423.341 95495.924 0.1030906
- -
708.60856 0 -3.003 748.01397 7 35.725 96.2 96200 95451.986 95491.391 0.0556096
-
706.74204 0 -2.726 679.01634 8 35.667 96.2 96200 95520.984 95493.258 0.0392303
-
757.13791 5 -6.797 1693.0573 0 37.011 96.2 96200 94506.943 95442.862 -1.236128
- -
763.13742 5 -5.156 1284.3024 1 37.053 96.2 96200 94915.698 95436.863 0.6829241
- -
759.67104 5 -4.777 1189.8977 2 36.91 96.2 96200 95010.102 95440.329 0.5663328
-
756.87126 5 -4.014 999.84284 3 37.011 96.2 96200 95200.157 95443.129 -0.321021
- -
759.93768 5 -3.84 956.50138 4 37.055 96.2 96200 95243.499 95440.062 0.2586577
- -
762.07084 5 -3.675 915.40171 5 37.009 96.2 96200 95284.598 95437.929 0.2012029
- -
760.60429 5 -3.448 858.85853 6 36.919 96.2 96200 95341.141 95439.396 0.1291792
-
762.33748 5 -2.974 740.79039 7 36.993 96.2 96200 95459.21 95437.663 0.0282645
-
760.60429 5 -2.773 690.72352 8 36.985 96.2 96200 95509.276 95439.396 0.0918753
- -
805.2673 9 -9.332 2324.4976 0 38.04 96.2 96200 93875.502 95394.733 1.8866162
- -
805.93391 9 -5.919 1474.3572 1 38.099 96.2 96200 94725.643 95394.066 0.8293773
- -
808.73368 9 -5.558 1384.4361 2 38.153 96.2 96200 94815.564 95391.266 0.7118566
- -
807.80042 9 -4.805 1196.8722 3 38.136 96.2 96200 95003.128 95392.2 0.4816434
-
803.5341 9 -4.093 1019.5209 4 38.067 96.2 96200 95180.479 95396.466 -0.268796
- -
801.80091 9 -3.689 918.88895 5 38.025 96.2 96200 95281.111 95398.199 0.1460313
 - -
798.7345 9 -3.461 862.09668 6 38.076 96.2 96200 95337.903 95401.266 0.0793282
-
803.26746 9 -2.815 701.18525 7 37.948 96.2 96200 95498.815 95396.733 0.1270837
-
801.00098 9 -2.696 671.54367 8 37.968 96.2 96200 95528.456 95398.999 0.1616194
- -
773.66989 13 -4.192 1044.1807 0 37.166 96.2 96200 95155.819 95426.33 0.3496463
- -
774.3365 13 -3.942 981.90844 1 37.26 96.2 96200 95218.092 95425.664 0.2680643
- -
775.00311 13 -4.097 1020.5172 2 37.282 96.2 96200 95179.483 95424.997 0.3167911
-
774.73647 13 -4.229 -1053.397 3 37.389 96.2 96200 95146.603 95425.264 0.3596842
-
769.40357 13 -4.207 -1047.917 4 37.317 96.2 96200 95152.083 95430.596 0.3619861
- -
776.86962 13 -4.245 1057.3824 5 37.437 96.2 96200 95142.618 95423.13 0.3610809
-
774.46982 13 -4.246 1057.6315 6 37.288 96.2 96200 95142.369 95425.53 -0.36562
- -
776.06969 13 -4.208 1048.1661 7 37.304 96.2 96200 95151.834 95423.93 0.3506082
- -
781.66923 13 -4.18 1041.1916 8 37.47 96.2 96200 95158.808 95418.331 0.3320105
-
650.21334 -5 -1.174 292.43037 0 34.123 96.2 96200 95907.57 95549.787 0.5502547
-
646.61364 -5 -1.945 484.47791 1 34.065 96.2 96200 95715.522 95553.386 0.2507459
-
647.14693 -5 -2.434 606.28238 2 34.075 96.2 96200 95593.718 95552.853 0.0631457
-
645.81371 -5 -2.533 630.94218 3 33.991 96.2 96200 95569.058 95554.186 0.0230276
- -
646.08035 -5 -2.626 654.10745 4 34.041 96.2 96200 95545.893 95553.92 0.0124243
- -
644.08051 -5 -2.619 652.36383 5 34.015 96.2 96200 95547.636 95555.919 0.0128607
- -
644.6138 -5 -2.618 652.11474 6 33.985 96.2 96200 95547.885 95555.386 0.0116363
- -
643.68055 -5 -2.634 656.10016 7 34.001 96.2 96200 95543.9 95556.319 0.0192947
-
642.34732 -5 -2.392 595.82065 8 34.02 96.2 96200 95604.179 95557.653 0.0724323
-
611.54985 -9 -0.352 87.679293 0 33.208 96.2 96200 96112.321 95588.45 0.8566277
-
612.48311 -9 -1.229 306.13026 1 33.136 96.2 96200 95893.87 95587.517 0.5001817
614.08297 -9 -2.072 -516.1122 2 33.222 96.2 96200 95683.888 95585.917 0.15954
-
613.28304 -9 -2.24 557.95914 3 33.265 96.2 96200 95642.041 95586.717 0.0902094
-
616.6161 -9 -2.401 598.06245 4 33.273 96.2 96200 95601.938 95583.384 0.0300895
-
616.74942 -9 -2.217 552.23009 5 33.238 96.2 96200 95647.77 95583.251 0.1046119
-
614.48294 -9 -2.526 629.19856 6 33.243 96.2 96200 95570.801 95585.517 -0.023948
617.14939 -9 -2.553 - 7 33.317 96.2 96200 95564.076 95582.851 -
 635.92396 0.0304214
-
615.14955 -9 -2.349 585.10983 8 33.259 96.2 96200 95614.89 95584.85 0.0488332
- -
638.48097 13 -0.823 205.00016 0 33.936 96.2 96200 95995 95561.519 0.6789252
- -
637.41439 13 -1.367 340.50453 1 33.865 96.2 96200 95859.495 95562.586 0.4658035
- -
639.28091 13 -2.215 551.73191 2 33.864 96.2 96200 95648.268 95560.719 0.1369492
- -
638.34765 13 -2.445 609.02236 3 33.875 96.2 96200 95590.978 95561.652 0.0459394
- -
638.48097 13 -2.506 624.21678 4 33.861 96.2 96200 95575.783 95561.519 0.0223408
- - -
638.08101 13 -2.745 683.74903 5 33.858 96.2 96200 95516.251 95561.919 0.0715709
- -
637.68104 13 -2.928 -729.3323 6 33.925 96.2 96200 95470.668 95562.319 0.1437259
- - -
639.94752 13 -2.913 725.59597 7 33.865 96.2 96200 95474.404 95560.052 0.1338367
- - -
637.81436 13 -2.917 726.59232 8 33.867 96.2 96200 95473.408 95562.186 0.1391909

Appendix B

Equations used in the lab

P  P
CP  (1)
q

Fx   Pi ( z (i 1)  zi ) (2)

Fy   Pi ( x(i 1)  xi ) (3)

C L  C y cos   C x sin  (4)

C D  C x cos   C y sin  (5)

P  Pamb  Manometer (6)

P  Pamb  q (7)

Pi  C p (8)
 Appendix C

Code used to find CL and CD:

function [L D] = lab3_cp(x,z_u, z_l, Pc, alpha)

Pc_u = zeros(1,length(Pc)/2);
Pc_l = Pc_u;

for k = 1:length(Pc_u)
Pc_u(k) = Pc(k);
Pc_l(k) = Pc(length(Pc_u)+k);
end

% Calculate constant term in pressure coefficient equation

% (Pc * const + P_atm = P_i, where const = .5 * rho * v_inf^2)
rho = 1.008;
v_inf = 35.6;

const = (1/2) * rho * (v_inf^2);

const = 1;
fx = zeros(length(Pc),1);
fz = zeros(length(Pc),1);

% Calculate force per unit length for each segment

for k=1:length(Pc_u)
Pi_u(k) = Pc_u(k) * const;
Pi_l(k) = Pc_l(k) * const;
fx_u(k) = Pi_u(k) * (z_u(k+1) - z_u(k));
fx_l(k) = Pi_l(k) * (z_l(k+1) - z_l(k));
fz_u(k) = - Pi_u(k) * (x(k+1) - x(k));
fz_l(k) = - Pi_l(k) * (x(k+1) - x(k));
end

%Calculate force per unit span (multiply by length)

Fx = sum(fx_u)-sum(fx_l);
Fz = sum(fz_u)-sum(fz_l);

% Change coordinate axis from wing to wind (angle of attack = 3°)

alpha = alpha * pi / 180;

L = Fz * cos(alpha) - Fx * sin(alpha)
D = Fx * cos(alpha) + Fz * sin(alpha)

% Debugging
for k=1:length(x)-1
x_av(k) = (x(k) + x(k+1))/2.0;
end

x_av = [0.04 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8];

x_av = zeros(length(x)-1,1);
for k=1:length(x)-1
x_av(k) = (x(k) + x(k+1))/2.0;
end

plot(x_av,Pc_l,'r-', x_av,Pc_u, 'b-'); set(gca,'YDir','reverse');

The code for the airfoil profile and the panels:

function [x z] = lab3_airfoil()
% Defines the airfoil, as defined by the NACA equations, and puts it into
% machine-readable form.

% Static port data on airfoil, as given by PortLocations.txt

x_p = [0.4; 1; 2; 3; 4; 5; 6; 7; 8];
c = 10;
% We know that the ports are in the middle of the panels; as a result, we
% need to find where the panel endpoints are. First, add x = 0 and x = 1 to
% the airfoil endpoints:
x_i(1)=0;
%(x_p(1)-x_p(2)/2)
for i = 1:length(x_p)
x_i(i+1) = x_p(i);
end
x_i(i+2) = 0.9*c;

% Now, non-dimensionalize by dividing by the chord length c

x_i = x_i / c;
x_p = x_p / c;

% Calculate the midpoints between the existing port points and edges; these
% will be the endpoints of the panels.
for i = 1:length(x_i)-1
x(i) = 0.5*(x_i(i) + x_i(i+1));
end

x(2) = x_p(2) - (x(3)- x_p(2));

x(1) = x_p(1) - (x(2) - x_p(1));

% Solving for Z's, using the NACA 0012 equation on the HW 2 handout
z_u=naca0012(x_i);
z_p=naca0012(x_p);
z = naca0012(x);

% Plot it, for debugging purposes

plot(x_i, z_u, 'ko', x_p, z_p, 'kx', x ,z, 'bo-
',0:.01:1,naca0012(0:.01:1),'k-');axis equal
%
% Exit the function, to return x and z
end

function z = naca0012(x)
% The function uses the NACA 0012 equation, as shown in HW #2's handout,
% and uses it to calculate the z-coordinate of a given x-coordinate. Works
% with array arithmetic too.
z = 0.6.*(0.2969.*sqrt(x)-0.126.*x-0.3516.*x.^2+0.2843.*x.^3-0.1015.*x.^4);
end

Code used for panles and port locations:

function [x z] = lab3_airfoil()
% Defines the airfoil, as defined by the NACA equations, and puts it into
% machine-readable form.

% Static port data on airfoil, as given by PortLocations.txt

x_p = [0.4; 1; 2; 3; 4; 5; 6; 7; 8];
c = 10;
% We know that the ports are in the middle of the panels; as a result, we
% need to find where the panel endpoints are. First, add x = 0 and x = 1 to
% the airfoil endpoints:
x_i(1)=0;
%(x_p(1)-x_p(2)/2)
for i = 1:length(x_p)
x_i(i+1) = x_p(i);
end
x_i(i+2) = 0.9*c;

% Now, non-dimensionalize by dividing by the chord length c

x_i = x_i / c;
x_p = x_p / c;

% Calculate the midpoints between the existing port points and edges; these
% will be the endpoints of the panels.
for i = 1:length(x_i)-1
x(i) = 0.5*(x_i(i) + x_i(i+1));
end

x(2) = x_p(2) - (x(3)- x_p(2));

x(1) = x_p(1) - (x(2) - x_p(1));

% Solving for Z's, using the NACA 0012 equation on the HW 2 handout
z_u=naca0012(x_i);
z_p=naca0012(x_p);
z = naca0012(x);

% Plot it, for debugging purposes

plot(x_i, z_u, 'ko', x_p, z_p, 'kx', x ,z, 'bo-
',0:.01:1,naca0012(0:.01:1),'k-');axis equal
%
% Exit the function, to return x and z
end

function z = naca0012(x)
% The function uses the NACA 0012 equation, as shown in HW #2's handout,
% and uses it to calculate the z-coordinate of a given x-coordinate. Works
% with array arithmetic too.
z = 0.6.*(0.2969.*sqrt(x)-0.126.*x-0.3516.*x.^2+0.2843.*x.^3-0.1015.*x.^4);
end
 Acknowledgments

Carlos Ballesteros for working in the coding of MATLab and the finding the final values.

The James for providing extra information to complete the lab write up

References

http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://people.eku.edu/ritchisong/554images/Eddy_flap_1.gif&imgrefur
l=http://people.eku.edu/ritchisong/554notes2.html&h=407&w=368&sz=53&hl=en&start=13&um=1&tbnid=SQUa
mVVB0EXVmM:&tbnh=125&tbnw=113&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dtrailing%2Bedge%2Bdrag%2Bon%2Ba%2Bwi
ng%26svnum%3D10%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den
Your manuscript cannot be published by AIAA if

Extra information provided by J. Villarreal AKA The James