Nick Renda

ME 163 Project 3

November 11, 2013

Abstract
For this project I used MATLAB to create a function that calculates the ow past a two-dimensional closed body using the vortex panel method. I tested my functions on a NACA 0012 and 4412 airfoil, and was able to plot the Cp values as a function of the bodys x coordinate, as well as coecients of lift and drag versus angle of attack, and compare them to the thin airfoil theory. I was also able to calculate the stall angles using the Stratford boundary layer criterion and compare them to values in the literature.

Problem Description

For the rst portion of the project I was presented with two airfoils asked to solve for the pressure coecient distributions. To do this, I implemented the vortex panel method with linearly varying panels. I used the exact same code that was implemented in project 2, so for space-saving purposes I am omitting it. For more details, see the Problem Description section of the previous project.

Code Formulation

To implement my code, I computed the panel start and endpoints given M panels where M is the number of data points I was given. Based on these points, I calculated the coordinates of the control points and the distances between each set of points. I also used the same function as I did in Project 2, so I will be omitting it as I did in the previous section. A detailed description of the code can be found in my Project 2 Code Formulation section. My code generates the Cp values at the locations of each vortex panel, which I then used to calculate the force on the airfoils by integrating the pressures force around them. F = (D, L) = where n is the unit normal vector on the airfoil surface. p n dA (1)

Results

I ran my code using as many vortex panels as my data permitted to obtain the most accurate results.

3.1

Pressure Distribution

The following plots describe the Cp values as a function of x coordinate on a NACA 0012 and 4412 airfoil.

Because the NACA 0012 airfoil is symmetric, it behaves identically at negative and positive angles of attack. The plot shows the magnitude of the Cp values being highest at the extremes of 16 and 16 , and the graph as a whole decreasing as alpha goes to zero and then increasing back to its original value. The NACA 4412 airfoil is not symmetric, and thus exhibits slightly dierent behavior. Its Cp values peak at 16 and the graph as a whole becomes smaller with increasing angle of attack, but the plot does not reach its lowest at 0 like the other airfoil. When the angle of attack increases back up to 16 , the average Cp value across the wing becomes much higher. In addition, the graphs for this plot were slightly unstable as they moved past the leading edge.

3.2

Lift and Drag

I used the values from my Cp plots to then calculate the coecients of lift and drag with respect to angle of attack for both airfoils:

The results of the CL plot make sense intuitively: the NACA 0012 symmetric airfoil has a CL value of 0 at a 0 angle of attack, and behaves the same above and below this value with only a change in sign. This is veried by plotting it against the thin airfoil solution derived below: CL = L cU 2 = 1 2 = 2 qc 2 U c (2)

The theoretical analysis of the NACA 4412 airfoil is a bit more complicated because it is a cambered thin airfoil, but it is shown simplied here: L U 1 CL = = 1 2 = 2 (A0 + A1 ) (3) qc 2 2 U c where A0 = 2 A1 = 1
0 0

dz ()d dx (4)

dz ()cos()d dx

When the values are plugged in and simplied, equation (3) solves to be 2 + 0.46 (5)

which match the calculated values for a NACA 4412 airfoil. The plots for coecient of drag are shown as well, and it can be seen that drag is a much smaller component of the overall force than lift is. These values have been veried by solutions calculated by Abbott and Doenho, and their results are shown in the graphs below for NACA 0012 and 4412 airfoils at high Reynolds numbers:

To calculate the lift and drag force, I used the values from my plots and put them into the following equations for lift and drag: 1 2 FL = CL U (6) 2 1 2 FD = CD U (7) 2 where = 0.905, calculated from the given height of 10000 feet, and U = 250m/s. I decided not to include plots for force versus angle of attack for the airfoils because they look exactly the same as the CL and CP plots, as they are just being multiplied by a constant. The following table shows a selection of values for dierent angles of attack: Table 1: Values of Lift and Drag Force Angle of Attack -16 -8 0 8 16 NACA 0012 Lift (kN) -45.04 -25.91 0.16 26.61 46.81 Drag (N) 553 142 0 155 584 NACA 4412 Lift (kN) -35.04 -12.67 14.41 39.81 57.41 Drag (N) 402 67 0 214 672

3.3

Boundary Layer Separation

I used Strafords method to calculate the stall angles for both airfoils. Given the point of maximum velocity (xm , Um , pmin ), the pressure coecient at separation p pm in U2 Cp = 1 2 = 1 2 (8) Um 2 Um satises the equation [x (xm xm ] C p where xm =
0 xm 2

dC p dx U Um
5

= 0.0104

(9)

dx

(10)

I plugged in my values from my MATLAB code into these equations, and obtained the following results: For a NACA 0012 airfoil: Stall = 15 For a NACA 4412 airfoil: Stall = 12

(11) (12)

Our values agree with angles found in aerodynamic literature: while stall angle varies somewhat with dierent values of Re , most texts agree that NACA 0012 airfoils stall in the range of 14 16 , while NACA 4412 airfoils stall in the range of 11 12 .

Conclusions

This project allowed me to utilize my programming skills to calculate the pressure distribution along the surfaces of dierent airfoils using the vortex panel method. I was then able to use these results to calculate lift and drag distributions, and compare them to thin airfoil theory. Using Stratfords method, I was nally able to calculate the stall angles for both airfoils. Over the course of this project I was able to gain a much better understanding of vortex-panel method and how it can be implemented in MATLAB to calculate pressure, lift, and drag distributions.