VICOUS FLOW

Irene Diez Alonso

NOVEMBER 24, 2023

AERODINÁMICA
Universidad Rey Juan Carlos

0
FIRST SESION: REALISATION OF THE MESH.

The program used for the realization of the mesh is ICEM. After following the next steps a mesh will be ready for the
study of the airfoil.

Firstly, some points need to be chose. They will delimit the future study zone.

o Those points need to be far away enough of the airfoil for appreciating the aerodynamic phenoms.

Ater matching the points for making a close circuit, different lines will be created. After, they have to be classified in
different parts.

o airfoil
o far-field
o outlet

Once the problem is divided in different parts a surface needs to be created by selecting the far-field and the outlet.
After having the surface created it is time to create as many blocks as needed for getting a mesh of a high-rate quality.
In my case I have created two blocks for having the wake the most refined as possible

Next step is calculating the size of each cell of the mesh. For getting that number is necessary to figure out the
parameter ‘y’ which depends on the y+, this value must be less or equal to one.

For calculating the ‘y’ it has been used the following formula

𝑦+ · 𝜇
𝑦=
𝜌 · 𝑢+
The unknown parameters have been worked out with the isa values and the Mach = 0.15. In my case the ISA values
are
𝑘𝑔
• 𝜌 = 0.933406 𝑚3
• 𝑇 = 270.319 𝐾
• P = 72428.5 Pa
• a = 329.597 m/s
• 𝜇 = 0.0000172171
Finally the y has a value of y = 9.4086e-006

To continue perfectioning the mesh, and adjustment of the edges of each block is needed. To have the most similar
sizes between the cells near the foil and near the outlet or the far-field. In my case I selected 90 nods for the oblique
and vertical edges. 80 nods for the horizontal edges and 80 nods for the edges inside the nearest block to the airfoil

Finally, the quality of my mesh is 0.863.

1
 After having the mesh done it is time to analyze it with the software fluent, to know the drag coefficient and the lift
coefficient. Once those values are obtained for different angles.

SECOND SESION: FLUENT ANALISYS

Once the mesh is as perfect as possible its time to use the software fluent to analyze the airfoil in different angles.
Furthermore, fluent has the option of studying the airfoil in several different model. For this project it has been used
the model Spalart-Allmaras and SST k-omega. Both turbulent models but that have different equations of solution.

The following tables shows the drag coefficient and the lift coefficient of the airfoil.

Alpha (°) Cd Cl
0 0.013043454 0.085970563
3 0.014335881 0.3574203
6 0.017628335 0.6050837
9 0.024194073 0.80348691
11 0.03292191 0.84927537
13 0.04557726 0.87796713
14 0.053698065 0.86251981
15 0.065693369 0.80645299
17 0.095197868 0.72606736
20 0.14600649 0.66014901
25 0.26110899 0.61255741

2
Alpha (°) Cd Cl
0 0.013543607 0.013543607
3 0.014547137 0.4082066
6 0.017528418 0.6659527 Table 2: Values for SST k-omega
9 0.023523752 0.8703338
11 0.030767089 0.95367672
13 0.037207348 1.0422807
14 0.042395911 0.96768383 The following graphs show more crearly the behavour of the foil
for different angles. Comparing the two models of fluent.
15 0.061855616 0.9113161
17 0.086108438 0.85417907 Comparing the Cd, it can be seen that both curves are very similar
20 0.13365652 0.76451776 specially between the 0 and 10 degrees after that values it can be
apreciated two values of the Spalart-Almaras simulation[(13;0,037)
25 0.22891837 0.70330128
& (14; 0.04)] do not follow a curve tendency as the rest of the values.
Table 1: Values for Spalart-Allmaras
Comparing the Cl graph there is more difference. However they share the
same angle of stall α = 13° though the Cl is different. For the spalart is has a
Cl of 1.0422807 and for sst k-omega the Cl is 0.87796713. Furthermore, another aspect to highlight is the smoother
tendency of the sst k-omega rather than the Spalart.

It is ease to see the stall angle because from that angle onwars the Cp decrease at a considerably high speed.

In conclusion de stall angle is 13°, value mentioned before.

3
STUDY OF THE BOUNDARY LAYER SST K-OMEGA
SPALART-ALLMARAS

Ilustration 1: Pressure Coefficient Ilustration 2: Pressure Coefficient

Ilustration 3: Turbulent Viscosity Ilustration 4: Turbulent Viscosity

Ilustration 6: Velocity Ilustration 5: Velocity

Focusing on the illustration one which represents the pressure coefficient it can be noticed that the pressure is higher
where the air has it first contact with the airfoil. Moreover, in that point the Cp = 1 because the speed has a value of
cero, consequently the Cp reaches its highest value.

Due to the asymmetry of the airfoil the cp in the upper surface and the lower surface has a difference.

In the case of the Cp there is not a big difference between the two models of simulation. However, comparing the
other illustrations there is a huge difference between simulations. In the case of the viscosity there ir a bigger
current. Comparing the velocity, it is also bigguer in the sst k-omega simulation which means that the the turbulence
is bigguer in the second simulation this will suppor the illustration 4 where it is shown a bigger turbulence.

4
Finally, the boundary leyer will separe after in the second simulation. Because the turbulence is bigguer, so the flow
will remain near the surface more time.

THIRD SESSION : POSTPROCESING

The last sofware used for the study of the airfoil is the Ensight. Parameters as the Cp and the toal forces have been
calculated using this program.

SPALART-ALLMARAS

In my case I have chosen the angle of 6 and 17 degrees.

For 6 degrees
• Cp = -3.02932 this value is theoricaly wrong because the lowest Cp is supossed to be -3. However this shows
that in reality the Cp can have even lower values.
• Ft = -1049.17 N
• STREAMLINES

For 17 degrees

• Cp = -1.69435
• Ft = -919.353
• STREAMLINES

5
SST K-OMEGA
For 17 degrees

• Ft = -963.196N This force calculated with fluent has a value of 936.195N. It should be the same
• Cp = -2.6608

For 6 degrees