SESA 6070 : EXPERIMENTAL METHODS FOR AERODYNAMICS

STUDY OF PRESSURE DISTRIBUTION OVER A NACA0015

AIRFOIL
SUBMITTED BY:
MICHAEL VARGHESE THOMAS
27298841

OBJECTIVE:
In this experiment, the objective was to calculate the pressure distribution around a NACA0015 airfoil
using pressure taps placed chordwise on the upper and lower surfaces of a single cross section of the
wing. Using this data, the lift and drag generated by the airfoil was calculated at various angles of attack.
In addition to this, a pitot probe was used to study the wake profile of the wing at the same angles of
attack. Using this the wake drag of the airfoil was calculated.

SETUP:
The setup consisted of a NACA0015 wing placed in the wind tunnel at a set angle. The wing contained
the pressure taps placed chordwise along the surface. The chord length is 120mm.

The pressure taps are placed at a set distance from each other, and this distance can be calculated by
placing a scale as reference next to these taps. These taps are connected to numbered tubes on the
manometer. These are used to measure the pressure across the airfoil.

The measurement setup consists of mainly two devices:

1. Multitube Manometer
This works on the principle that air flowing across an airfoil is subject to pressure changes. The pressure
can be represented by the height of a liquid column and the changes in pressure would be translated as
according changes in the column height. The pressure difference is caused by the difference in pressure
across taps on the airfoil and the freestream pressure.The manometer contains a liquid of specific
gravity 0.784 and is placed at a 51 degree angle to the horizontal.

2. Pitot Tube
The wake profile is measured using this device. A pitot probe is used to measure the velocity of the flow
at any given point. The probe consists of two measuring ports, one to measure total pressure and one to
measure static pressure. The difference between them would give the dynamic pressure which can be
used to calculate the velocity at the point.

METHODOLOGY:
In this section, the experimental procedure will be outlined. The experiment begins by setting the wind
tunnel to a specific speed, which can be chosen previously. Along with this, the airfoil has to be fixed at
the angle of attack of choice. Once this is done, the pitot probe measuring the wake profile is attached
to the digital read. Now the experiment can begin.
As the wind speed picks up, the levels on the multimanometer change according to the location of the
ports. This has to recorded, and care should be taken to read the meniscus carefully. When fluids are
placed in tubes of very small diameters, due to surface tension and capillary rise the surface of the fluid
can get distorted. As a rule, for clear liquids we read the lower meniscus and for opaque liquids we read
the upper meniscus, but this is also subjective to the fluid being used.

Once the readings are taken, the focus is shifted to the pitot traverse. A certain point is chosen as the
zero and the digital read is setup. Movements are made above and below this zero at specific intervals
and readings of dynamic pressure are taken. Care should be taken to use enough points to get a smooth
curve.
Tufts are placed on one end of the wing to give a visual representation of the state of the flow around
the airfoil.

Fig 5: Image showing the movement of tufts.

RAW DATA:
These are the readings from the multimanometer. All readings are in millimeters.
AoA
Point
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20

0
5
8
Rep.1
Rep.2
Rep. 3
Rep.1
Rep.2
Rep. 3
Rep.1
Rep.2
23.8
23.8
23.8
23.8
23.8
23.8
23.7
23.7
24
24
24
23.6
23.6
23.6
23.6
23.6
23.8
23.8
23.8
24
24
24
23.9
23.9
24
24
24
23.7
23.7
23.7
23.7
23.7
23.8
23.8
23.8
24.2
24.2
24.2
24
24
24
24
24.1
23.7
23.7
23.8
23.7
23.7
23.8
23.8
23.9
24.2
24.2
24.2
24.2
24.2
24.2
24.2
24.2
23.8
23.8
23.8
23.7
23.7
24
24
24
24.3
24.3
24.3
24.3
24.3
24.2
24.2
24.2
23.8
23.8
23.8
23.7
23.7
24
24
24
24.4
24.4
24.4
24.4
24.4
24.2
24.2
24.2
23.7
23.7
23.7
23.6
23.6
24
24
24
24.5
24.5
24.5
24.6
24.6
24.4
24.4
24.4
23.6
23.6
23.6
23.5
23.4
23.8
24
24
24.6
24.6
24.6
24.7
24.7
24.4
24.4
24.4
23.4
23.5
23.5
23.2
23.2
23.8
23.8
23.9
24.8
24.8
24.8
25.3
25.3
24.4
24.4
24.4
23.2
23.2
23.2
22.9
22.9
23.8
23.7
23.8
25.1
25.1
25.1
25.4
25.4
22.5
22.6
22.6
23.1
23.1
23.1
24
24

Before the wind tunnel was turned on, it was noted that the zero of the manometer was 24mm. Using
this the pressure head was calculated and hence the coefficient of pressure values at each point.
From the scale reference placed next to the pressure taps, the distance between adjacent taps can be
determined, also because we know the details of the NACA0015 airfoil the y/c ratios can also be
determined.

X/C(Top)
point
0.0000
20
0.0466
19
0.0933
17
0.1968
15
0.3022
13
0.4123
11
0.5140
9
0.6231
7
0.7164
5
0.8181
3
0.9123
1
X/C(bottom)
point
0.0000
20
0.0455
18
0.0974
16
0.1931
14
0.3015
12
0.4053
10
0.5055
8
0.6075
6
0.7168
4
0.8151
2

y/c
0
0.0054
0.0071
0.0089
0.0094
0.0090
0.0081
0.0068
0.0055
0.0038
0.0020
y/c
0.0000
0.0053
0.0072
0.0089
0.0094
0.0090
0.0082
0.0070
0.0055
0.0038

The above data is used to calculate the lift and drag using the panel method. The surface of the airfoil is
split into panels at the points where pressure readings were taken. Each of these panels can be
considered having an effective circulation as they can be approximated as vortex sheets. This can be
integrated over the entire surface using the airfoil co-ordinate data and the overall force can be
computed.

DATA PROCESSING AND UNCERTAINTY ESTIMATES:

From the pressure data obtained the coefficient of pressure distribution can be drawn along the chord.
This can be compared with the results obtained from CFD simulations in XFOIL or other programs.

cp 0 aoa
1.4

Coeffiecient of Pressure

1.2
1
0.8
0.6

top cp

0.4

bottom cp

0.2
0
0.0000
-0.2

cfd result
0.2000

0.4000

0.6000

0.8000

1.0000

1.2000

-0.4
-0.6

x/c

cp 5 aoa
x/c

-2

Coefficient of Pressure

-1.5
-1
top cp
-0.5
0.0000
0
0.5
1
1.5

0.2000

0.4000

0.6000

0.8000

1.0000

1.2000

bottom cp
cfd result

cp 8 aoa
x/c

-3

Coefficient of Pressure

-2.5
-2
-1.5

top cp

-1

bottom cp

-0.5
0.0000
0

0.2000

0.4000

0.6000

0.8000

1.0000

1.2000

cfd result

0.5
1
1.5

From the above diagrams it is clear that the experimental results closely mirror the CFD results. Using
these data and the panel method calculation the lift and drag values calculated are:
AoA
Runs
L (N)
D (N)

0
1
-2.162
0.00396

2
-2.006
0.00347

Cl
Cd
Cl/Cd

-0.219
0.000401
-546.134

-0.203
0.00035
-659.09

3
-1.893
0.00305

5
1
6.592
0.5721

2
6.521
0.5657

-0.191
0.000308
-620.13

0.667
0.05794
11.512

0.660
0.05730
11.518

3
6.420
0.5571

8
1
7.556
1.0489

2
7.653
1.0626

0.650
0.05642
11.34

0.765
0.1062
7.203

0.775
0.1076
7.202

Study of wake profile:

Using the data of the dynamic pressures recorded while traversing the pitot probe, we can generate a
velocity profile behind the wing. This can show us the behavior of the wake.

AOA 0
h(mm)
Pitot Position (mm) Rep 1
Rep2
Rep3
Average p
Velocity (m/s)
80
8.05
8.5
8.05
8.2
80.442
11.46
60
8.05
8.35
8.05
8.15
79.9515
11.425
20
8.3
10.3
8
8.86
86.982
11.916
15
9.5
10.08
10.25
9.943
97.544
12.619
10
9
9.61
9.85
9.486
93.064
12.326
0
8.6
8.83
9.5
8.976
88.061
11.99
-10
9.13
10.15
10.2
9.826
96.399
12.545
-15
9.57
10.58
10.55
10.23
100.389
12.802
-20
9.9
10.7
10.75
10.45
102.514
12.937
-60
10.85
11.44
11.34
11.21
109.97
13.399
-80
10.95
11.46
11.5
11.303
110.885
13.455
Wave drag (N)
30.512
Cd
3.0871
AOA 5
80
8.05
8.05
8.12
8.073
79.199
11.371
20
8.1
8.1
8.13
8.11
79.559
11.397
10
8.05
8.1
7.9
8.016
78.643
11.331
0
8.03
8.05
7.25
7.776
76.289
11.16
-5
7.9
7.93
7.55
7.793
76.452
11.172
-10
7.7
7.75
7.8
7.75
76.027
11.141
-15
7.5
7.5
8
7.66
75.21
11.081
-20
7.23
7.2
8.1
7.51
73.673
10.967
-40
7.85
7.83
8.13
7.936
77.858
11.274
-60
8.1
8.1
8.12
8.106
79.526
11.394
-80
8.1
8.1
8.1
8.1
79.461
11.39
Wave drag(N)
-0.677
Cd
-0.0686
AOA 8
80
8.15
8.1
8.125
79.706
11.407
20
8.2
8.12
8.16
80.049
11.432
10
8.8
8.1
8.45
82.894
11.633
0
9.08
8.09
8.585
84.218
11.726
-5
9.2
8.1
8.65
84.856
11.77
-10
9.33
8.1
8.715
85.494
11.814
-15
9.25
7.93
8.59
84.267
11.729
-20
8.93
7.6
8.265
81.079
11.505
-40
9.2
7.75
8.475
83.139
11.65
-80
9.9
9.24
9.57
93.881
12.38
Cd
0.9427 Wave drag(N)
9.329

As can be seen, three runs were made for all except the final angle of attack, for which only two were
done. This helps to decrease repeatability errors. The measured head was converted to a pressure head
and then to the corresponding velocity.
These readings are plotted below with the pitot probe moving along the X axis.

Wake velocity profile (0 deg)

13.5
13
12.5
12
11.5
11
-50

12.6

Wave velocity (m/s)

14

Wave velocity (m/s)

-100

Wake velocity profile (5 deg)

50

12.4
12.2
12
11.8
11.6
11.4
11.2

-100

100

-50

50

Distance moved in Y axis

Distance moved in Y axis

Wave velocity (m/s)

Wake velocity profile (8 deg)

-100

11.5
11.4
11.3
11.2
11.1
11
10.9
-50

50

100

Distance moved in Y axis

As can be observed, for the 0 degree angle of attack, the profile is almost symmetric about the Y axis
which was the chord plane. This is because there is very little wake at this small angles of attack. For 5
degrees of attack, there is a wake which remains connected to the airfoil and gets pushed down and
downstream. Hence most of the disturbance occurs in the negative region.
The accuracy of this study could have been improved if a larger number of samples were taken, thus
reducing the t value in the student-t distribution.

100

Performance Parameters:
Based on the coefficients computed above the performance parameters of the airfoil can be calculated.
These include the range and endurance of the aircraft under two different powerplants, jet and
propeller engines.

ENDURANCE

RANGE

0 deg

5 deg

8 deg

0 deg

5 deg

8 deg

JET

6.15

5.326

5.194

250

186.877

177.269

PROP

0.14

0.1227

0.1203

6.15

5.326

5.194

Uncertainties:
The major sources of uncertainties were:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

The scale used as reference for measuring y/c has an error of +/- 0.1mm
The manometer markings have an error of +/- 0.2mm
The digital traverse as a margin of error of 0.01mm
The protractor used to measure the bank of the manometer has a margin of error of 1 degree.
There werent enough reruns of the experiment to reduce repeatability errors.

All this translates as errors in reading and calculating the lift and drag values. These have been recorded
below.
error
Lift (N)
Drag (N)
cl
cd

0
5
8
rep 1
rep 2
rep 3
rep1
rep2
rep3
rep1
rep2
1.494
1.494
1.494
1.499
1.498
1.498
1.503
1.503
0.242
0.241
0.24
0.281
0.28
0.279
0.289
0.29
0.1513
0.0246

0.1513
0.0244

0.1513
0.0243

0.1518
0.0285

0.1518
0.0284

0.1518
0.0283

0.1522
0.0293

0.1522
0.0294

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION:

COMPARISON WITH ANALYTICA DATA
It can be seen that the pressure distribution in each case closely mirror the trend of the analytical
solution. The only deviation that is noticeable is that the CFD results tend to over-estimate the
maximum suction pressure on the top side. This can been seen in both 5 and 8 degrees of attack. This
can be attributed to the CFD results not taking into account finite wing span corrections.
COMPARISON WITH PREVIOUS EXPERIMENT
Since the objective of the first two experiments are the same, their results can be compared. The overall
errors in the second experiment are drastically lower than the same in the first experiments and similar
results have been obtained on multiple reruns. The trends that were observed in the force balance
experiment, although marred by large errors, have been compounded by this experiment, with similar
trends in lift and drag being observed.
OTHER SOURCES OF ERROR
The major sources of error reported have been instrumental errors, ie, errors inherent in the
measurement process. Other errors that could have arose were fluctuations caused by changing room
temperature and ambient conditions, interpolation errors caused due to low number of reading taken
(wake profile study), and general human error
Another major source of error is the error involved in the panel integration method used to calculate the
forces generated by the wing. In general, the larger the number of panels the closer the approximation
is to an actual airfoil. Since we are fitting straight panels onto the airfoil surface, approximation errors
are unavoidable but reducible. It has to be noted that the results obtained from XFoil use the panel
method, but with a very large number of panels.
An important point to be noted is that there is an upper limit to the number of panels that can be used.
As the panel number increases, the panel size decreases and adjacent vortices become closer giving rise
to glaring discontinuities.
OVERALL QUALITY OF EXPERIMENT
The experiment has been carried out fairly successfully with the objectives being completed. Definitive
trends have been observed and the performance parameters of the wing have been studied. A larger
effort has been made to reduce error compared to the force balance experiment.