Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
I, Brandon Heukelman (555597), declare that this laboratory report is my own, unaided
work, except where otherwise acknowledged. It is being submitted for the degree of
Bachelor of Science in Mechanical Engineering in the University of the Witwatersrand,
Johannesburg.
It has not been submitted before for any degree or examination at any other university. I
further declare that I am aware that plagiarism (the use of someone else’s work without
their permission and/ or without acknowledging the original source) is wrong.
Group Number: 25
Signature:
i
ABSTRACT
The objective of this experiment was to calibrate the angle of attack of the model, to
collect accurate data on the drag forces at different angles of attack, and lastly to
compare drag coefficients against the angle of attack for different Reynolds numbers.
This was done by using a closed-circuit wind tunnel and an external balance. It was
found that drag is a minimum when no lift is produced, and this drag, called parasitic
drag, is inversely proportional to the Reynolds number. When the Reynolds number is
increased the drag coefficient is decreased throughout the range of angles tested. At low
angles of attack, the drag coefficient varies parabolically. When the stall angle is
reached, the drag coefficient varies linearly. The gradient of this linear trend is directly
proportional to the Reynolds number. The stall angle was also found to decrease with an
increase in Reynolds number.
ii
CONTENTS
Page
Declaration i
Abstract ii
Contents iii
List of Figures v
1 Introduction 1
Wind Tunnels 1
Measurement Systems 1
Terminology of Airfoils 2
Forces on an Airfoil 2
Circulation 3
Kutta-Joukowsky Theorem 3
Reynolds Number 4
Joukowski Airfoil 4
NACA0012 Airfoil 4
1.2 Objectives 5
2 Experimentation 5
2.1 Apparatus 5
2.1.1 Equipment 5
iii
2.1.2 Instrumentation 6
2.2.1 Procedure 6
2.2.2 Precautions 7
2.3 Observations 7
2.5 Results 8
3 Discussion 8
4 Conclusion 9
List of References 10
Angle of Attack 11
Density 11
Drag Coefficient 11
iv
LIST OF FIGURES
v
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Literature Review
1.1.1 Wind Tunnel Operation and Instrumentation
Wind Tunnels
A low-speed wind tunnel is, in essence, a large venturi where airflow is driven by a fan
connected to some motor. The fan draws air through the venturi, with the model placed
inside. The nozzle of the venturi increases the velocity (hence decreasing the pressure)
of the airflow, once the airflow passes the test section, the diffuser returns the airflow to
the previous velocity and pressure as efficient as possible (1).
There are two general wind tunnel types: open or closed circuit type. The closed circuit
type reuses the airflow from the exhaust forming a loop, thus reducing operating costs
but the extra ducting requires more space. The open circuit type draws air directly from
the atmosphere and is exhausted out the back.
Measurement Systems
The pitot-static probe (more commonly known as a pitot tube) is used to measure the
velocity of a fluid stream at a point. The probe causes the fluid stream to stagnate; this
pressure is then measured and is known as the total pressure (po). The static pressure (p)
is also measured through a static pressure orifice. The difference in these pressures is
known as the dynamic pressure, from Bernoulli’s equation. Once the dynamic pressure
is known, the velocity can be calculated from equation 1.
(1)
Where
= dynamic pressure, in Pascal
= fluid stream velocity, in m/s
po = total pressure, in Pascal
p = static pressure, in Pascal
ρ = fluid density, in kg/m3
1
A multi-tube manometer is created when one limb of the U-tube has a cross section
sufficiently large that the level of the fluid does not appreciably change. This limb or
reservoir can then be connected to a bank of tubes measuring different pressures. At
least one of these tubes is required for a reference. This reference level can easily be
changed by raising or lowering the reservoir. (2)
Internal or external balances measure forces on the model within the wind tunnel.
Internal balances are fixed to the model, and only indirectly give values of forces.
External balances are placed outside the wind tunnel, and require ample space.
However, external balances have three advantages over internal balances. Firstly, it can
measure large forces with a high accuracy, secondly the model may be mounted
anywhere with respect to the moment center of the balance and lastly less space is used
within the wind tunnel. (2)
Airfoils are composed of a leading edge and trailing edge. The leading edge is usually
rounded, while the trailing edge tapers off. This is seen in Figure 1 - Basic Airfoil
Terminology. The chord is the length between these two edges and is named the chord
line. The camber is the midpoint between the upper and lower edges. The angle of
attack is the angle between the chord line and the oncoming fluid stream.
Forces on an Airfoil
At small angles of attack, fluid flow around the airfoil remains attached, thus no
turbulence is formed. There is also very little induced or pressure drag during this time;
most drag is from viscous effects.
2
The lift produced by an airfoil is dependent mostly on the geometric factors of airfoil.
When the flow is symmetrical, no lift is produced, this may occur at a negative angle for
some airfoils. Lift can be calculated by equation 2.
Drag is the force that resists the motion of fluid over the airfoil. It could be due to
pressure on the leading edge or from viscous effects of the fluid. Drag can be calculated
by equation 3.
The pitching moments depend on where the moments are taken, which is calculated by
equation 4. The point usually chosen is a quarter of the chord from the leading edge.
The point where no moments are produced is called the aerodynamic center.
(2)
(3)
(4)
Where
, = Force, in Newtons
= Moments, in N·m
, , = Coefficient parameters
A = Surface area, in m2
c = Chord length, in meters
Circulation
Circulation is defined as the line integral of the velocity around any closed curve (3).
When the airfoil is placed in steady flow two stagnation points are created, one at the
leading edge and one at the trailing edge. Normal ideal calculations show the rearward
stagnation point is slightly above the trailing edge. Although in reality the rearward
stagnation point is at the trailing edge, this is known as the Kutta condition (3). The
stagnation point is moved by adding circulation, this creates a pressure difference
between the upper and lower surfaces.
Kutta-Joukowsky Theorem
This theorem states that any cross section that has circulation around it, within a fluid
stream, produces a lifting force (3). This holds for any structure as long as the region
with circulation is fully enclosed. The theorem assumes that there is smooth flow
around the airfoil, i.e. for small angles of attack when flow is still laminar.
3
1.1.3 Dimensionless Parameters
Geometric and dynamic similarity
Geometric similarity depends on size and shape of the object in question. While
dynamic similarity requires that dimensional parameters are equivalent between the
model and prototype.
Reynolds Number
The Reynolds number, in equation 5, is the measure of the ratio of inertia to viscous
forces. This parameter describes the type of flow around the object.
(5)
Where
μ = Fluid viscosity, in kg/m·s
Coefficients are dimensionless quantities, which change when the angle of attack and
Reynolds number changes. These coefficients allow the researcher to compare
aerodynamic forces of different airfoils.
NACA0012 Airfoil
This is a symmetrical airfoil with a width of 12% of the chord. As seen in Figure 2 -
Data for NACA 0012 Airfoil.a, the theoretical coefficient of lift rises linearly with the
angle of attack, until it reaches a maximum value then rapidly falls off. This occurs
because of flow separation, and the airfoil stalls.
In Figure 2 - Data for NACA 0012 Airfoil.b, how the theoretical drag coefficient rises
much faster than the lift coefficient. The lift coefficient then reaches its maximum value
then falls away while the drag coefficient continues to increase.
4
Figure 2 - Data for NACA 0012 Airfoil (8)
1.2 Objectives
2. To accurately collect data about the drag experienced on the Joukowsky airfoil.
2 EXPERIMENTATION
2.1 Apparatus
2.1.1 Equipment
A closed-circuit wind tunnel was used for this experiment, as described in Figure 3 -
Wind Tunnel Schematic.
A test rig, as show in Figure 4 - Test Rig Schematic, was used in the experiment. It
supported the model and included an external balance to measure the forces acting on
5
the airfoil. It could also change the angle of attack of the model, through the servo
motor.
2.1.2 Instrumentation
a. Aligning the inclinometer with the model, and reading the angle
3. Place the model securely within the test chamber, then seal the test chamber.
4. Start the wind tunnel, and increase motor speed until the correct airspeed is reached.
5. Insert pitot tube to find the pressure difference and then calculate airspeed.
6
7. Adjust the angle of attack of the model until stall angle is reached.
2.2.2 Precautions
2. Make sure the bubble is not touched until the reading has been taken.
3. Once the motor speed has been changed, allow a steady state to form.
2.3 Observations
Atmospheric conditions were observed at 303 K and 83.3 kPa within the wind tunnel.
Although the temperature was recorded with every measurement, there was little change
in the temperature. Hence, it was decided to take the temperature as constant.
The angle of attack was calibrated with the inclinometer, and it was found that the angle
of attack could fit equation 6.
(6)
Where
φ = Pot value
Flow visualization was in the form of tufts attached to the airfoil. These tufts were
placed in strategic locations, to allow estimates of the flow patterns produced. These
locations are places such as the trailing edge, upper surface, and lower surface.
Results were handled in spreadsheets, using Microsoft Excel. It was quickly found that
this program had very limited high-volume data handling. However, once the data had
been broken into smaller sizes, the data could be handled easily.
Data was recorded at 2.5 Hz throughout the experiment. The data was then dissected
into sections for each angle of attack, where each section held more than 3000 data
points. The mean value was taken in section and the standard error was calculated, as
seen in appendix I. The mean results are in appendix II.
7
2.5 Results
The results were plotted, in Figure 5 - Drag Coefficients against Angle of Attack, using
the values calculated in Appendix II.
3 DISCUSSION
The angle of attack was found, in degrees, by calibrating the sting. This relationship was
assumed linear. Hence, a straight-line equation could be fitted to the data. The drag
caused by the sting was assumed to be constant, through all the angles of attack
experienced. Thus it took no part in the calculations.
The coefficient of drag has a parabolic nature at low angles of attack (-10° to 14°). At
larger angles of attack (> 14°), a linear relationship forms. The minimum drag
coefficient is due to the parasitic drag only, thus no lift force is produced at these angles
of attack (-1.1° for Re = 197000 and -2.4° for Re = 273 000). The parasitic drag is
composed of form, skin friction and interference drag. Only the shape of the airfoil,
which is kept constant throughout the experiment, produces form drag. The surface
finish of the airfoil, which is also kept constant throughout the experiment, produces
skin friction drag.
When the drag coefficient is greater than the minimum, induced drag is formed. This
occurs because of the pressure gradient between the upper and lower surfaces of the
8
airfoil, which generates a lifting force. This shows that no system can be 100% efficient.
When the stall angle (± 14°) is reached, the relationship becomes linear. The gradient of
this relationship is sharply increased. This occurs because of the separation of the
boundary layer from the airfoil. Boundary layer separation occurs because of particles
reaching a pressure gradient that they cannot overcome.
It had been observed that the airfoil with a greater Reynolds number has a lower drag
coefficient throughout the range of angles tested. Parasitic drag is lower (0.132 < 0.173)
and the angle (-2.4° < -1.1°) that this minimum occurs is lower for a higher Reynolds
number.
The stall angle is lower for the high Reynolds number test (11° < 14°). This shows that
boundary layer separation occurs earlier at higher Reynolds numbers. The gradient of
the linear region is also higher for the large Reynolds number test. This shows that there
is a larger pressure gradient, for the air particles, to overcome.
4 CONCLUSION
The experiment was a success and the following conclusions could be drawn:
Above the stall angle, induced drag forces increase linearly, because of the
separation of the boundary layer.
The drag coefficients, at low angles of attack, are inversely proportional to Reynolds
number.
Parasitic drag coefficients (no lift drag coefficient) are inversely proportional to
Reynolds number.
9
LIST OF REFERENCES
3. J, Bertin J. Aerodynamics for Engineers. 4th. s.l. : Prentice Hall, 2002. 0-13-064633-
4
10
APPENDIX I – UNCERTIANTY ANALYSIS
Angle of Attack
Density
Drag Coefficient
Drag force error ( ) is the standard error calculated by the standard deviation (σ) and
the number of data points (n). The standard deviation is different for each angle of
11
attack, because of the change in the drag force and number of elements. Hence, each
data point has a different standard error, which can be seen in Appendix II.
12
APPENDIX II – MEAN DRAG FORCE RESULTS
13
APPENDIX III – RISK ASSESMENT FORM
No. What harm can it Risk Score Control Measures Harm Whose By when Controls Date finalised
cause? already implemented Reduction responsible effective
3 Electricity supplied Low Electrical cables well Isolation School Near future Yes
to motor shielded
4 Clutter around wind Moderate Cabinets used for Administrative School Next operation Yes
tunnel storage of wind tunnel
5 Accidental start up High Safety switch and Engineering Technician Immediate Unknown
of wind tunnel administrative control
during maintenance
14