Abstract
The following work is the CFD analysis of NACA 23024 airfoil. The analysis is carried out for a free stream Reynolds number of 6 million for which the wind tunnel results are available. The CFD analysis is carried out using Ansys Fluent Solver. The analysis is carried out using Spalart Allmaras turbulence model, K-omega SST turbulence model with flow transition capabilities, Standard K-Epsilon Turbulence model and K-omega SST turbulence model.It is to be noted that each turbulence model employs different mathematical approach to model boundary layer. The analysis results are then compared with the wind tunnel results and the performance of the turbulence models are discussed. This study recommends an accurate methodology to conduct CFD analysis for external aerodynamic flows.
Highlights
The Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) analysis on the chosen airfoil NACA 23024, where first digit when multiplied by 3/2 yields the design lift coefficient in tenths of chord, the two digits when divided by 2 gives the position of the camber in tenths of chord and the final two digits indicate the maximum thickness in percentage of chord that is NACA 23024 airfoil has maximum thickness of 24%, a design lift coefficient of (2 X 3/2) 3 in tenths and maximum camber located (30/2) 15% back from the leading edge is carried out using the ANSYS package
Spalart allmaras turbulence model does not employ any approximations in the boundary layer region
The boundary layer region need to be resolved with very fine layer of mesh elements (10 to 15 layers)
Summary
The CFD analysis on the chosen airfoil NACA 23024, where first digit when multiplied by 3/2 yields the design lift coefficient in tenths of chord, the two digits when divided by 2 gives the position of the camber in tenths of chord and the final two digits indicate the maximum thickness in percentage of chord that is NACA 23024 airfoil has maximum thickness of 24%, a design lift coefficient of (2 X 3/2) 3 in tenths and maximum camber located (30/2) 15% back from the leading edge is carried out using the ANSYS package. The construction and testing of many prototypes is often needed to meet a stringent design requirement This can turn into an expensive process with the potential to delay the entire development cycle. Anil Kumar et al.: Computational Investigation of Flow Separation over Naca 23024 Airfoil at 6 Million Free Stream Reynolds Number building and testing of prototypes can yield accurate performance measurements, it sheds little light on the internal flow conditions that determine why the design does or does not work. Virtual prototyping can be performed at a much lower cost and in much less time than physical prototyping, and has the additional advantage that engineers can determine important flow variables, such as velocity, pressure, and temperature at any point in the design, making it easier to optimize the design. On the other hand the total expense associated with CFD capability is considerably lower than that of a high quality experimental facility
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: International Journal of Science, Technology and Society
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
