You are on page 1of 140

External Flow Experiment for an Introductory Fluid Mechanics Course Angel Chacon & Steve Fernandes

A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of


Supervisor: Professor P.E. Sullivan

Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering University of Toronto

March, 2009

AREVA NP INC. PROPRIETARY This document and any information contained here used in any way that is or may be detrimental to AREVA NP. This document and any copies that may

This paper presents the development, design and construction of a laboratory apparatus and its corresponding lab handout for the purposes of studying External Flow in an Introductory Fluid Mechanics course for the University of Torontos Mechanical and Industrial Engineering department. The lab is broken up into three sections. The first section will deal with the development of a computer simulation utilizing ANSYS to help predict what will occur in the lab, as well as reinforce material taught throughout the course. The second component consists of experimentally determining the coefficient of drag on a NACA 0016 airfoil at varying angles of attack in a hydraulic flume. The third part uses a dye injection apparatus to help visualize boundary layer flow around the airfoil. With approval, this external flow lab can be integrated into an introductory fluid mechanics course for use in the 2009-2010 school year and beyond.


The completion of this paper was made possible with the assistance of our supervisor, Professor P. E. Sullivan and two former UTMIE students, Mark Richards and Karthik Senthilnathan, who first proposed the ideas and lab discussed throughout this paper. We would like to also thank our esteemed colleagues, family, and in particular: Andrew Llewellyn, to who we are indebted for aiding in the design and construction of the airfoil; Mr. Harold Fernandes, whose support helped build the apparatus; Mark Richards, for his continued help and support throughout this project; and to Mark Morreale, who always had the right tools at the right time to aid in the construction of our apparatus; Without the aid of everyone around us, and the aforementioned people, we would not have completed this thesis. For their support, we dedicate this thesis to them.


Table of Contents
Page ABSTRACT................................................................................................................. I ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .......................................................................................... II LIST OF SYMBOLS .................................................................................................VII LIST OF FIGURES .................................................................................................VIII LIST OF FIGURES CONTINUED...............ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. LIST OF TABLES.......................................................................................................X 1.0 2.0

INTRODUCTION .................................................................................. 1 BACKGROUND THEORY [1]............................................................... 1

VISCOUS FLOW IN DUCTS ........................................................................... 1 2.1.1 2.1.2 2.1.3 2.1.4 2.1.5 2.2 2.2.1 2.2.2 2.2.3 2.2.4 2.3 2.3.1 2.3.2 2.3.3 2.3.4 2.4 2.5 HYDRAULIC DIAMETER ............................................................... 1 REYNOLDS NUMBER ................................................................... 2 HEAD LOSS AND THE FRICTION FACTOR ................................ 3 THE MOODY DIAGRAM [1]........................................................... 4 BOUNDARY LAYER ...................................................................... 5 AIRFOILS ....................................................................................... 6 EFFECTS OF BOUNDARY LAYER ON AN IMMERSED BODY... 7 FORCES ON AN IMMERSED BODY ............................................ 8 STALL [3] ..................................................................................... 11 INTRODUCTION [1]..................................................................... 12 HYDRAULIC FLUME ................................................................... 14 FLOW CLASSIFICATION [7] ....................................................... 14 HYDRAULIC JUMP [7]................................................................. 15

FLOW PAST IMMERSED BODIES ................................................................. 5

OPEN CHANNEL FLOW............................................................................... 12

NACA AIRFOILS [5] ...................................................................................... 17 COMPUTATIONAL FLUID DYNAMICS (CFD) ............................................. 18

3.1 3.2 3.3

DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION ....................................................... 20

APPARATUS BODY................................................................................... 20 LOAD MEASUREMENT................................................................................ 22 ANGULAR ADJUSTMENT ............................................................................ 23

Table of Contents

3.4 3.5 3.6

INITIAL TESTING MOCK UP ..................................................................... 23 DYE INJECTION ........................................................................................... 24 AIRFOIL CONSTRUCTION........................................................................... 25 3.6.1 3.6.2 WOODEN BASE .......................................................................... 25 FIBERGLASS COATING ............................................................. 26


FUTURE CONSTRUCTION (AIRFOILS) ...................................................... 28

4.1 4.2

APPLICATION TO STUDENTS ......................................................... 29

ANSYS CFD LAB .......................................................................................... 29 FLUIDS LABORATORY FOR NEXT YEAR .................................................. 30

5.1 5.2

TEST RUNS ....................................................................................... 32

ORIGINAL DESIGN....................................................................................... 32 WOODEN STRUCTURE AND STYROFOAM AIRFOIL................................ 33 5.2.1 5.2.2 5.2.3 5.2.4 5.3 5.3.1 5.3.2 5.3.3 5.4 MATERIALS ................................................................................. 33 BUOYANCY ................................................................................. 33 DEFLECTION BEAM FEASABILITY............................................ 34 CRITICAL MEASUREMENTS...................................................... 34 FRICTION FROM LACK OF LUBRICATION ............................... 35 SPRING DEFLECTION................................................................ 36 EXCESSIVE FLOATING PLATFORM WEIGHT .......................... 36

METAL STRUCTURE AND WOODEN AIRFOIL TEST I ........................... 35

METAL STRUCTURE AND WOODEN AIRFOIL TEST II .......................... 37


EXPERIMENTAL ANALYSIS ............................................................. 38

ASSUMPTIONS ............................................................................................ 38 6.1.1 6.1.2 6.1.3 6.2 6.3 PLATFORM ONLY MOVES HORIZONTALLY ............................ 38 STEADY AND FULLY DEVELOPED FLOW................................ 39 AIRFOIL IS THE ONLY CAUSE OF DRAG ................................. 39

RESULTS ...................................................................................................... 40 SOURCES OF ERROR................................................................................. 42 6.3.1 6.3.2 6.3.3 6.3.4 SPRING CONSTANT................................................................... 42 MEASUREMENT ERRORS ......................................................... 42 TANK LEVELS ............................................................................. 43 INDUCED DRAG ERRORS ......................................................... 43

Table of Contents

7.1 7.2 7.3 7.4

LIMITATIONS ..................................................................................... 45
TANK DEPTHS ............................................................................................. 45 MOVING THE APPARATUS ......................................................................... 46 DYE INJECTION ........................................................................................... 47 HYDRAULIC JUMP RELIABILITY................................................................. 48

8.1 8.2 8.3 8.4 8.5


JOINTS AND LUBRICATION ........................................................................ 50 AIRFOIL SAFETY AND STORAGE .............................................................. 51 AIRFOIL DYE CHANNEL MAINTENANCE ................................................... 53 LOAD SPRING MAINTENANCE................................................................... 54 RUST PROOFING OF APPARATUS............................................................ 54

9.1 9.2 9.3 9.4

FUTURE CONSIDERATIONS............................................................ 55
THE STRUCTURE ........................................................................................ 55 THE AIRFOIL ................................................................................................ 55 THE SPRING................................................................................................. 56 THE HYDRAULIC FLUME WATER QUALITY .............................................. 57


CONCLUSION ................................................................................... 57

APPENDIX A : REFERENCES ........................................................................................................... 60 APPENDIX B : FIGURES AND TABLES ............................................................................................ 61 APPENDIX C : SPRING FORCE MEASUREMENTS AND CALCULATIONS ................................... 73 APPENDIX D : AIRFOIL CONSTRUCTION METHODOLOGY .......................................................... 74 APPENDIX E : MIE312 ANSYS CFD LAB: FLOW VISIUALIZATION ................................................ 87 APPENDIX F : BEAM DEFLECTION................................................................................................ 101 APPENDIX G : COEFFICIENT OF DRAG CALCULATIONS ........................................................... 102 APPENDIX H : FLOATING BASE ONLY MOVES HORIZONTALLY ............................................... 108 APPENDIX I : EXPERIMENTAL ANALYSIS OF THE AIRFOIL...................................................... 109

APPENDIX J : THEORETICAL ANALYSIS OF HYDRAULIC FLUME ............................................ 111 APPENDIX K : EXPERIMENTAL ANALYSIS OF HYDRAULIC FLUME.......................................... 114 APPENDIX L : LAB EXPERIMENT .................................................................................................. 117

Table of Contents
(continued) APPENDIX M : DIVISON OF WORK................................................................................................. 127


List of Symbols
cross-sectional area (m2) planform area of airfoil (m2) angle of attack (degrees) length of base (m) coefficient of drag coefficient of lift pipe diameter (m) hydraulic diameter pipe roughness (m) force in direction i (N) Darcy-Weisbach friction factor acceleration due to gravity (9.81 m/s2) head loss due to friction (m) total head loss (m) height of fluid at point i (m) pipe length (m) pressure at point i (Pa) fluid density of fluid i (kg/m3) wetted perimeter volumetric flow rate (m3/s) Reynolds number deflection or displacement (m) fluid viscosity (N s/m2)z kinematic viscosity (m2/s) Vi zi velocity at point i (m/s) height at point i (m)

A Ap b Cd Cl d dh Fi f g Hfriction Hloss hi l pi i Pw Q Re


List of Figures


List of Tables

o o

71 72 72 73 73 73 88 99 99 99 99 100 100 100 100 101 101 102 102 103 103 115 115 116 120
o o



Lab experiments are an essential part of the engineering curriculum. The University of Toronto Introductory Fluid Mechanics Course, MIE312, has several labs to help understand concepts introduced in the course but it lacks a lab demonstrating external fluid flow. A lab that helps to validate and visualize the ideas presented in the external fluid flow sections would be paramount to the curriculum. Due to the complexity of topics such as boundary layers and streamlines, it is helpful to be able to see and become familiar with these topics through computer simulations first and then experience them experimentally in a hydraulic flume.

It is our goal to produce a lab with three distinct parts to help piece together different concepts within external fluid flow. The first part will consist of a National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics (NACA) 0016 airfoil that will be immersed within the hydraulic flume and studied to determine the amount of drag that is induced on the airfoil with a new apparatus that we will develop. The second part will consist of a dye wand injecting a solution of cream and food colouring into the airfoil so that the boundary layer separation can be visualized over the airfoil; and the third component will involve the comparison of the boundary layer separation that is seen through the dye wand and the numerical solution obtained through ANSYS. Utilizing this new lab within the engineering curriculum will help to further the education of the students and continue to show that the University of Toronto is one of the leading schools in Canada.


The following section will provide detailed background theory on the most basic and important concepts on viscous flow in ducts, flow past immersed bodies, and open channel flow. There will be a variety of topics discussed within these main concepts.



This section will cover basic fluid mechanics dealing with fluids of varying velocity and viscosity flowing within ducts of various sizes. This is known as internal flow and will be covered because open channel flow and flow past immersed bodies are an extension of this relatively well known phenomenon.



The hydraulic diameter is a term that is used to study flow within non-circular channels. It is defined as:

dh =

4A P W


As a note, the wetted perimeter is the perimeter of the surface that is exposed to a fluid. In internal pipe flow, the entire perimeter of the pipe is exposed to fluid whereas in open channel flow, only the bottom and sides are exposed to fluid.

In the trivial case of a circular duct, the hydraulic diameter reduces to: 4 A 4R 2 = = 2R = d P 2R W

dh =


For our purposes, the hydraulic diameter for an open, rectangular channel is:

dh =

4A 4bh = P b + 2h W




The single most important parameter when studying flow within ducts is the Reynolds number. It is a dimensionless value that correlates the density, velocity, and viscosity of the fluid with the hydraulic diameter of the duct. The Reynolds Number can be expressed as follows:

Reh =



The Reynolds number can be used to determine the type of flow occurring through the channel: Re < 103 103 < Re < 104 Laminar Flow Transitional Flow

Re > 104

Turbulent Flow

These values are only general values and can vary based on many factors including flow geometry, surface roughness, and surrounding noise.



It is typical to use a control volume analysis when attempting to solve pipe flow problems. Refer to Figure B-1. In a pipe, assuming incompressible steady flow between sections 1 and 2, the energy equation can be applied: p1 V12 p V2 + + z1 = 2 + 2 + z2 + h f g 2 g g 2 g


Since the pipe has constant cross-sectional area, which in turn, produces a constant velocity, V1=V2=V, the above energy equation reduces to:
p p p h f = (z 1 z 2 ) + 1 2 = z + g g g


Therefore, the pipe head loss is a summation of the gravitational and pressure changes. Julius Weisbach, a German professor, who published the first modern textbook on hydrodynamics in 1850, proposed the following correlation for head loss [2]: L V2 Dh 2 g

hf = f


The parameter f is called the Darcy friction factor. It is named after Henry Darcy, who was the French engineer that first established the effect of roughness on the resistance of flow. [2]

If the wall shear stress is known for a particular flow, and it is established to be laminar, the friction factor can be obtained from the following relationship:

flam =

8 w 8(8 V d ) 64 64 = = = V 2 V 2 V d Re




It is the most famous and useful chart in all of Fluid Mechanics. Please refer to Figure B-2 for the Moody Diagram. It is a combination of Prandtls smooth wall equation:
1 f Colebrooks transition equation:
1 2 1

= 2.0 log(Re d f 2 ) 0.8 ;


1 f
1 2

= 2.0 log( d + 3.7

2.51 Re d f
1 2



and the fully rough equation:

1 f
1 2

= 2.0 log( d ) . 3.7


It is useful for design calculation in circular and noncircular pipe flow, as well as for open channel flow. It can also be used to approximate boundary layer flow.



The boundary layer is a direct result of the no slip condition. The no slip condition refers to the fact that the velocity of a fluid adjacent to the wall must have the same relative velocity as the wall. For example, in a pipe, the velocity of the fluid at the pipe walls is zero. The boundary layer is caused by the rapid deceleration of a fluid from the free stream velocity to zero at the walls in a very short distance. Within this boundary layer, the viscous effects become very important because viscous shear stresses are proportional to velocity gradients as seen from du dy


Please refer to Figure B-3 for an illustration of boundary layer development.



Flow past an immersed body is also known as external flow. This differs from internal flow because these flows are confined by the walls of a duct. This results in boundary layers that begin at the walls and converge at the centre, thereby filling the pipe. External flow however contains unconfined boundary layers that begin at the surface of the body and dissipate the

further away from the surface body. This will help one to understand what occurs when an airfoil is submerged in a fluid such as water or air. [1]



An airfoil is an aerodynamic body that creates lift as it moves through a fluid. The shape of the airfoil strongly influences the lift and drag that it creates and its flight characteristics. For the purposes of this paper, and to simplify the external flow analysis, it will be assumed that the airfoil utilized is of a symmetric nature and will contain no flaps. Due to the symmetry, this airfoil will also contain no camber.

Referring to Figure B-4, the distance between the leading edge of the airfoil and the trailing edge is known as the chord length, c. The length of the wing, b, is referred to as the wingspan. The thickness, t, is the largest distance between the top and bottom surfaces of the airfoil. It is normally expressed as a percentage of the chord length. The planform area is the projected area of the chord and span, given by:
AP = b c .


An airfoil can have lift induced in two different methods. The first method consists of a pressure differential that is caused by the two different surfaces. The second method of inducing lift involves the tilting of the airfoil relative to the fluid causing a pressure

differential. This angle is known as the attack angle. The experimental apparatus that has been designed relies on the latter principle. [1]



In section 2.1.5 Boundary Layers, the concept of the boundary layer was introduced. Recall, that the boundary layer is formed due to the large velocity gradient that occurs as the fluid nears the wall of a body and the no slip condition is met. As this velocity gradient increases, the shear stresses increase within the boundary layer, especially as the fluid begins to approach zero velocity (when the fluid is close to the wall). This shear stress is the cause of a frictional drag force that acts in the direction of the fluid flow, known as skin friction.

For blunt objects or objects that are not very well streamlined, the fluid must accelerate over the top and bottom surfaces. Once it has made it around the top and bottom surfaces, it begins to slow down again but the rapid deceleration is often not an achievable task by the fluid and the boundary layer cannot remain attached and tends to separate from the surface resulting in large pressure gradients. The front end will have a higher pressure due to the oncoming fluid whereas the tail end will have a low pressure because the boundary has detached itself. This creates a pressure drag.

During laminar boundary layer flow, the velocity gradient is not as steep indicating that the skin friction is not apparent. During turbulent flow, the boundary layer is less likely to separate, making it more resilient to pressure drag. In some applications, such as in a golf ball, the golf ball is dimpled to induce turbulence and delay boundary layer separation, thereby reducing the overall drag that the ball encounters. [3]



When a body of any shape or size is immersed in a fluid stream, the body will be subjected to forces and moments along and about the 3 principle axes; one axis that is parallel to the direction of travel for the fluid stream, one axis that is perpendicular to this which supports the weight of the body, and a third axis perpendicular to both of these. These are known as drag, lift, and side force, respectively. [1] Please refer to figure B-5 for an illustration of boundary layer separation.

LIFT [10]

The lift coefficient of an airfoil is a dimensionless number that is associated with the airfoil type that characterizes the amount of lift that it can produce under specific conditions. Every airfoil has its own unique lift coefficient that is usually determined experimentally. The lift coefficient is defined as:
L 1 V 2 AP 2

C L ( ) =


An effective tool in analyzing and characterizing an airfoil is a Lift Coefficient (CL) vs. Attack Angle () plot. These plots will vary based on the shape of the airfoil and the

characteristics of the fluid medium. In a typical plot, the lift coefficient increases as a function of the angle of attack until stall is reached. Upon stall, there is a dramatic drop off in lift and this is the point where drag forces completely dominate over lift forces. Please refer to Table B-1 for an illustration of the development of lift. For the purposes of this paper, the lift coefficient will not be experimentally determined. Rather, the drag coefficient will be used to determine the lift coefficient through a predetermined Lift Coefficient vs. Drag Coefficient plot. [10]


Drag is a second crucial dimensionless parameter that is used to characterize an airfoil and it acts in the direction parallel to that of the fluid stream. It is a force that must be overcome and essentially is a loss. The coefficient of drag is a non-dimensional number that is used to characterize the amount of drag that an immersed body develops under certain conditions. It is usually determined experimentally because it is largely determined by the shape of the body. It is composed of two components: pressure drag and friction drag. [1]

Pressure drag is the difference between the front end higher pressure region and the tail end low pressure region caused by the separation of the boundary layer from the object. It is a function of an objects size and shape. The less streamlined the object is, the greater pressure differential it causes between the high pressure front and low pressure rear end. The pressure differential opposes the motion of the fluid and slows down the object. [3]


Friction drag is the drag that is associated with the velocity gradient between the free fluid stream velocity and the object. It is associated with the boundary layer viscosity of the flow. The total drag coefficient is defined as:

C D = C D ,Pr essure + C D , Friction


The geometry of the airfoil influences the relative contribution of each of the components. When the thickness of the airfoil is zero, the total drag coefficient is composed purely of friction drag. Conversely, at a thickness equal to the chord length, the coefficient of drag is composed of approximately only 3% friction drag. Pressure drag and friction drag are equal at

t = 0.25 . [1] c

Friction drag and pressure drag must be accounted for in low speed flow conditions. The total coefficient of drag is also greatly influenced by the angle of attack of the object. The relationship for total drag is: C D ,Total ( ) = FD ( ) 1 V 2 A p 2 . (2.16)

For the airfoil that we will be utilizing, the boundary layer flow will be laminar indicating that the pressure drag will dominate. In addition, the NACA 4-digit series airfoil profiles are known to be resilient to surface effects making the friction drag less evident. [5]




When a blunt object such as a sphere is placed in a free flowing stream, the boundary layer forms on the leading edge but tends to separate towards the rear. This causes a pressure differential resulting in pressure drag. However, an aerodynamic object such as an airfoil tends to have a boundary layer that adheres to the surface. When the angle of attack for an airfoil is increased beyond its critical angle, stall occurs. There are three different types of stall associated with different wing types. Please refer to Figure B-6 for explanations on the different types of stall.


Trailing edge stall is common amongst airfoils that have a thickness to chord ratio of 15% or higher. As the angle of attack of this type of airfoil is steadily increased to about 10 degrees, when immersed in a free fluid stream, the boundary layer begins to thicken and becomes progressively more turbulent. Above 10 degrees, the boundary layer begins to separate from the top surface at the trailing edge causing an increase in pressure drag. Maximum lift occurs when the angle of attack coincides with the separation occurring at mid-chord length. Increasing the angle of attack further results in the boundary layer separation, slowly creeping towards the leading edge, corresponding decrease in lift. For the purpose of this thesis, this is the type of stall that will be examined during the ANSYS modeling because the NACA 0016 airfoil stalls in this fashion.

Leading Edge Stall

Leading edge stall is the type of stall that occurs when the thickness to chord ratio of an airfoil is between 9% and 12%. This type of stall is characterized by the separation of the


laminar boundary layer at the leading edge from the top surface of the airfoil. As the angle of attack increases, the boundary layer transitions from laminar to turbulent and continues to seperate and creep towards the trailing edge creating a bubble along the top surface. When the boundary layer separation reaches the trailing edge of the airfoil, the separation bubble bursts and complete separation of the fluid with the top of the surface occurs. Maximum lift will occur just before the separation bubble reaches the trailing edge.

Thin Airfoil Stall

For airfoils with thickness to chord length ratios less than 6, stall begins to occur at very small angles. At small angles, a small separation bubble forms at the leading edge and slowly begins to move towards the trailing edge as the angle of attack is increased. At a particular angle of attack, this bubble bursts, and redistributes itself in a thin bubble over the top surface. As it reaches the trailing edge once again, maximum lift is achieved and further increase in the attack angle results in complete stall.




Open channel flow is identified as flow that contains a free surface touching atmosphere like a river, canal, or the flume that will be used to test the airfoil. While internal flow is driven by pressure gradients along the pipe, open channel flow is driven by gravity. This is due to the fact that all points along the channel are exposed to the atmosphere and the pressure can therefore be considered constant. Although this simplifies solving for certain parameters, it


also complicates things because the depth of the channel is variable and affected by many parameters such as flow rate. An open channel will always have flow that exposes one surface to atmosphere meaning that there will be a bottom and two sides that satisfy the no slip condition at those surfaces. To approach the problem in a practical manner, it will be assumed that there is only flow in the downstream direction of the channel, thereby reducing this to a one dimensional problem. In addition, it will also be assumed that the density of the fluid remains constant throughout the channel and that there is steady flow. Therefore, the flow rate of an open channel is simply: Q = V ( x) A( x) = const.


In addition, one can utilize the previously derived energy equation to derive a second relation between the velocity and geometry of the channel.


Assuming that P1=P2=Pa and that there is steady flow, the energy equation reduces to:
V12 V2 + z1 = 2 + z 2 + h f 2g 2g




The hydraulic flume is an artificially created structure designed to simulate open channel flow. It utilizes a tank with an adjustable sluice gate to control the flow rate of the water. It has an open nearly horizontal channel with an adjustable gate at the end to control the height of the fluid within the channel. The fluid then empties into a reservoir where a pump moves the fluid back into the tank. Please refer to Figure B-7 for an illustration of the hydraulic flume. Due to the horizontal nature of the channel, z1=z2=z, which results in the following simplified energy equation:
V12 V22 = + hf 2g 2g




There are different ways to classify flow within an open channel. The first method is by the rate of change of the free surface depth. For the purposes of this paper, this method will not be utilized. Rather, the Froude number will be used.


It is a dimensionless value that is a ratio of the channel velocity and the speed propagation of a small wave in a channel.
V gz

Fr =


The flow will behave differently depending on the flow regimes: Fr < 1 Fr = 1 Fr > 1 Subcritical flow Critical flow Supercritical flow



A hydraulic jump typically occurs when a shallow region of fast moving fluid encounters a deeper region of slow moving fluid. A hydraulic flume can be used to simulate a hydraulic jump by adjusting the tank sluice gate such that a high water velocity is obtained. Simultaneously, the gate that is used to adjust the height of the channel is then raised substantially to create a deeper, slower moving region of water. The two regions then collide forming a wave that moves back or forth along the channel depending on the velocity achieved out of the sluice gate. In summary, when a subcritical flow in a reservoir is accelerated to a supercritical flow, and this supercritical flow interacts with a subcritical flow, a hydraulic jump is formed.


The collision of these waves can result in 3 different possibilities. First, if the sluice gate is too shallow with a high velocity while the exit gate is set too high, the resulting motion is that the hydraulic jump moves towards the sluice gate. This backward movement of the hydraulic jump, relative to the direction of fluid flow, is known as choke and it occurs because the jump does not have sufficient energy to overcome the exit gate height. However, if the sluice gate has a high velocity and the exit gate is not high enough, then the hydraulic jump will move towards the exit gate. A third possibility is that either the sluice gate is not achieving a high enough velocity and/or the exit gate is too low, in which case, there will be no hydraulic jump achieved whatsoever. In conclusion, the creation of a standing wave can be summarized mathematically by the following:
2 v0 <1 gh0

Fr 2 =

A jump is impossible without an external force


2 v0 =1 Fr = gh0 2

There will be no jump


2 v0 >1 Fr = gh0 2

A positive jump is obtained


In addition to determining whether a hydraulic jump is possible, one can also calculate the height downstream of the hydraulic jump based on the upstream height and corresponding Froude number.


It is possible to show that the downstream height of a hydraulic stream is:

yh 2 =

yh1 2 ( 1 + 8Frh1 1) 2


Conversely, if the downstream conditions are known, and the upstream conditions are required, the upstream height can be determined by: yh 2 2 ( 1 + 8Frh 2 1) 2

yh1 =


Dimensions for all variables shown in this section are represented in Figure B-8.



The National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics (NACA) published a report in the 1930s that detailed findings relating to the success of airfoils in generating lift. They concluded that the two most important factors in the success of an airfoil were the slope of the camber line and the thickness of the wing. Utilizing these findings, they were able to develop a series of equations to model families of airfoils that would be successful and adhered to these parameters.

The most basic of these families was the 4-digit series airfoils. The first digit represents the maximum camber in percentage of the chord. The second indicates the position of the maximum camber, in tenths of the chord. The last two digits represent the thickness as a


percentage of the chord. Please refer to Table B-2 for a more detailed description of the NACA 4-digit series airfoils.

For the purposes of this experiment, students will be utilizing the NACA 0016 wing. This means that the airfoil will have zero camber and the maximum thickness is 16% of the chord length. The 4-digit series was chosen because this style of airfoil is symmetric, has good stall characteristics and roughness has little effect. Please refer to Table B-3 for a list of advantages and disadvantages to NACA 4-digit series airfoils. A NACA 0016 was chosen in particular due to the ease of mathematical analysis and manufacturability. A symmetric foil allows one to use relatively simple mathematics because it has a constant chord length. A smaller airfoil would be harder to construct with accuracy. This allows this airfoil to be built simply and easily without having to worry about the ill effects that surface roughness may cause.



Computational Fluid Dynamics, CFD for short, is a method of studying the dynamics and behaviour of a fluid using a computer that utilizes complex mathematical equations that have been derived from first principles to render numerical results and graphical imaging. These equations usually consist of partial differential equations that cannot be solved by hand and require rather powerful computing processors. In the past, people would write their own codes to solve the equations required to model their particular case but today, many CFD


packages such as FLUENT or ANSYS can be utilized that have been developed by programming experts and are thoroughly tested. [8]

CFD packages offer many advantages. It serves as an important research tool because it allows for the construction and development of the equations that govern fluid dynamics such as the Navier-Stokes Equations. It also serves as a digital form of experimentation if the means of creating a physical model are not readily available, thereby reducing the amount of time and money spent researching a topic. From an engineering perspective, a CFD package allows one to conduct a preliminary analysis of the problem that is being encountered. Many engineers use these programs to effectively design and optimize engineering solutions in a variety of industries such as aerospace, automotive and blood flow. From a teaching perspective, CFD can serve as a visual aid to the many topics that are encountered in a typical fluid mechanics course. [9]

In this thesis, CFD will be used as both a visual aid to reinforce the concepts learned throughout the MIE 312 Fluid Mechanics Course and as a predictive tool. The lab portion of this project will consist of utilizing ANSYS for the purpose of developing models of the NACA airfoil, or any shape required, and reinforcing concepts such as boundary layer separation and streamlines. Simultaneously, it will serve to help the students understand what they are observing during the laboratory.



This apparatus is designed to illustrate the concepts of lift, drag and boundary layer separation by external flow over an airfoil. Since it is not possible to illustrate these concepts using an air tunnel, the water channel in the Fluids Laboratory in MC225 will be used instead. The design for the apparatus holding the airfoil comes from a previously written thesis by Karthik Senthilnathan, working under Professor Sullivan. However, the design and airfoil specifications have been modified to aid in the construction of the apparatus by including design changes based on lessons learned from testing a mock-up apparatus made out of wood. A major part of this thesis involves the construction of the apparatus. Therefore, this section will detail its construction and possible considerations for expansion of the laboratory.



The body of the apparatus consists of three major parts: the fixed base, the floating base and the airfoil. Minor parts include the vertical and horizontal support and limiter arms, the load measurement device (a spring) and the dye injection setup. A picture of the apparatus operating in the flume is shown in Appendix B, Figure B-9. The fixed base consists of a 13 x 16 rectangular frame made entirely out of extruded 1 x 1 square steel tubing welded together to form a stable support structure for the floating base. This piece of the apparatus holds three vertical support arms and two horizontal support arms, all attached to the floating base. These arms bear the weight of the floating base, while


at the same time keeping it aligned during airfoil loading, eliminating any lift force caused by the buoyancy of the wood airfoil and lift caused by the flow of water under the airfoil when tilted. It is much more complicated to measure the lift and drag forces on the airfoil at the same time. Subsequently, a formula can be used to link the drag coefficient to the lift coefficient, therefore only one force need be measured and the other can be derived from it. In this case, the drag force is measured using a loading spring, described in the next section.

The floating base has a relatively similar structure to that of the fixed base, but has dimensions 18 x 9 and is meant to hang above the water. The design is such that the fixed base and floating base are connected by means of the five support arms. Other than these arms and the point where the floating base meets the spring that is attached to the fixed base, there is no connection between the fixed and floating base. The support arms are rigid and will therefore eliminate any lift caused by the water running under the airfoil. The design is to ensure that the flow of water over the airfoil causes motion only in the direction of water flow. The substantial weight of the floating base is also to negate the buoyancy of the wooden airfoil. The effective hanging of the device over the water, with the airfoil immersed, allows the device to rock freely back and forth, only transferring the horizontal force from the airfoil to the loading spring in one direction. A 2-D schematic of the concept is shown in Figure B-10.




In order to measure the horizontal force caused by the water flowing over the airfoil, a compression spring is used. The spring was tested using fixed weights to determine its spring constant by measuring the deflection in the spring caused by the loading. Four different springs were tested for consistency in order to get a variety of spring constants before experimental application. The results were initially puzzling; the graph of the spring constants would show drastic parabolic changes in the region where a very small force was applied (1 N), but would give a constant slope when the force was increased to larger values around 4 to 6 N. In all four cases, the last three (higher) weight trials showed a consistent slope when compared to the parabolic slopes of the first two lower-weight trials. Since these are compression springs, testing them in tension might have been the reason that the values were initially off. In order to confirm that the last three higher weight tests were the right ones, a compression test was done on one of the four springs. This test involved clamping the spring and increasing the compression by closing the clamp. The clamp was attached to a force-displacement gage that had an internal spring with pre-set gradations in Newtons based on its own extension. Therefore, by compressing the spring and holding the clamp fixed, a force measurement can be taken and a compressed spring length can be measured with calipers. Based on this experiment, the lower load values with skewed results are not being utilized and only the three higher load values that give consistent results will be used. The forces applied on the airfoil in the laboratory are relatively small, measuring around 1 Newton. Therefore the spring with the lowest spring constant is appropriate, which is spring 4 with a K-value of approximately 330 N/m. The results of all these experiments can be found in Appendix B.




In order to measure the load forces over the airfoil at various angles of inclination and declination, an angular adjustment bar is attached to the floating base. This bar, along with a connecting rod to the airfoil, performs the function of changing the angle of attack of the airfoil from -15o to +15o, in order to visualize flow at angles other than zero. The connecting rod can be placed in any one of the holes spaced 3o apart, and will directly turn the airfoil based on the change of angle. This connection at the angular adjustment bar allows a person to easily modify the angle of attack of the airfoil even under full flow conditions and can be useful to demonstrate boundary layer separation caused by changes in angle with a continuous fluid flow.



Before constructing a model out of steel, a mock up model made of wood was tested. This model used a few different elements in comparison to the final product, and the lessons learned from the mock up were used to improve the final design before construction. The original design called for a cantilever beam that would deflect based on the airfoil loading. This deflection would be measured by a deflection gage mounted at the rear of the fixed base, connected to the floating base. Using this deflection reading along with the elastic modulus of the cantilever beam, a load force can be determined and used to calculate the coefficient of drag and corresponding coefficient of lift. However, due to the varied results


caused by a cantilever beams deflection reading, a more reliable and simplified spring system is desired. Testing using the mock up also allowed us to view potential problems with the hydraulic flume. In order to get sufficient flow such that the hydraulic jump starts closer to the front while providing sufficient depth for the airfoil, water was added to the pump tank. The minimum acceptable water depth dimensions for the hydraulic flume in the running and shutoff case are shown in Figure B-8. Furthermore, the buoyancy of the airfoil combined with the reduced weight of a wooden floating base meant that the weight of the structure needed to be increased to compensate for the lift caused by the running water. Another important fact about the hydraulic flume is that at maximum, the water depth in the channel reaches 6 inches. The initial design, which focused on the dimensions provided, did not allow the airfoil to be submerged to an adequate depth. Therefore the final design has increased the length of the three vertical support arms from 8 to 10 to allow for the airfoil to be fully submerged even at different angles of attack.



In order to properly view and understand flow around the airfoil, students will have the opportunity to see dye being injected out through the airfoil. This dye will be made of a mixture of cream and water and will be thick enough to hold its shape for a few seconds after release. This will allow students to connect theory to reality between their ANSYS laboratory section and the flow they see over the airfoil. The dye injection is incorporated into the airfoil through a series of independent channels mounted to the side of the airfoil. Once drilled, the channels in the airfoil are then used to encase polyethylene tubing, sealed off at the


extreme interior end. A hole is then drilled from the top of the airfoil directly into the polyethylene tubing from the outside of the airfoil, ensuring no seal break is possible. The dye will flow by pressing on a syringe connected to the polyethylene tubing.



Construction of the airfoil began with individual sections of inch plywood and a 1:1 scaled printout of the airfoils coordinates, plotted in Excel in graph format. Once the scaled airfoil shape was printed onto paper, it was glued onto the inch plywood. Once dry, the plywood was then used as a master wood block to mark and cut all other sections. A rough cut using a band saw was followed by precise sanding work on a circular belt sander until the section of wood was aligned onto the printout that was pasted onto the wood.

The master section then had holes drilled in its front and rear, which serve as guide holes for alignment of all future sections that are cut and sanded. Once the guide holes have been drilled out, the master airfoil section was used to trace out a new set of airfoil sections onto plywood, holding it steady until the guide holes were also etched into the piece of plywood. The plywood was then drilled so that all the holes were made in the wood before cutting it into sections. Numerous sections were cut and sanded down until they met the marking requirements, then aligned using two steel rods standing vertically and placed in the holes of the first piece. The master block was not used as one of the rest of the airfoil sections because the markings using the master block are larger than the master block itself.


Once all sections were cut, sanded and aligned using the vertical rods as guide pins, the entire assembly was taken apart and wood glue was applied evenly between every layer. The sections were then replaced onto the vertical alignment arms and clamped down for a few hours (or overnight) to allow for the glue to dry. Once hardened into one solid block, the airfoil was placed back on the sanding belt to smooth out any discrepancies between individual sections due to human craftsmanship.



Once the airfoil had been sanded and smoothed down to a solid section, a fiberglass coating was added to the wood in order to protect it during its underwater runs. Fiberglass coatings were done by layering the fiberglass over the airfoil and then saturating the fiberglass in an epoxy. The fiberglass-epoxy combination acts as a waterproof coating for the airfoil. Once the fiberglass is saturated in epoxy, all air bubbles must be removed from the mixture so that once dry there is no fiberglass left uncoated. In order to accomplish this, the fiberglass-coated wooden airfoil was placed into a vacuum bag and sealed shut, leaving the vacuum running for close to two hours. At the same time, a length of PVC pipe was rolled over the airfoil to dislodge any air bubbles that are still in the epoxy-fiberglass mixture. After 8-12 hours of set time, the fiberglass coated airfoil was removed from the vacuum bag and was examined for imperfections. Sandpaper was used to sand down any peaks in the airfoils fiberglass coating and to obtain a relatively smooth finish to the airfoil. For any


small craters or pits found in the airfoil due to miniscule air bubbles, a further coating of epoxy on the sanded surface was required, but was done at a later date.

Since the coating had only been applied to the face of the airfoil and not the sides (due to work being done on the sides of the airfoil for holes for dye channel and support arm additions), the entire airfoil was then be sanded and sprayed with gloss paint to ensure that it is waterproof. Any water creeping in through the sides would allow the wooden base to expand and contract over time, eventually severing the connection between the coating and the wood. 8 coats of gloss paint were sprayed onto the airfoil, with light sanding between every layer to allow for the next layer to stick. The gloss paint was added only after the dye channel holes were drilled and tubing inserted into the holes.

In order to design for minimal leakage, the dye channels were drilled horizontally through the airfoil, but not vertically to meet them at the desired connection point. Instead, the horizontal dye channels had polyethylene tubing inserted into them. The tubing was sealed at one end with a fast-drying epoxy that will block any dye from escaping. Once the epoxy dried, the tubing was sanded on the other end in order for it to be attached to a 1/4 by 1/8 90o brass elbow joint, protruding from the side of the airfoil. These elbow joints have been added to improve the reliability of the dye injection system. These joints have the ability to allow the vertical pipe (coming out of the joint and leading to the dye syringe) to be removed and replaced at the users convenience, in the case of blockage or if the pipe wears or tears near the connection.


The other section of pipe inserted into the airfoil will be fitted to the elbow joint, the joint then completely sealed to the airfoil using a slow-drying wear resistant epoxy. This section of the pipe can possibly have problems with clogging, and therefore Section 7.3 of this report is dedicated to the proper maintenance of the dye channels in the airfoil to ensure maximum life.



This airfoil was designed and built using a specific method. This generalized method is listed in Appendix D and can be used in the future to expand the ability of this apparatus by creating different shapes with or without dye injection that will allow students to gain knowledge of how streamlining an object changes the flow around the object. In the future, different objects such as cylinders, flat or shaped plates and many other shapes can be constructed based on this method, using a combination of sheet metal, wood, fiberglass, epoxy and gloss paint. If sheet metal is used, an appropriate filler material will have to be used inside the outer sheet, in order to facilitate any sort of support structure for the dye channels and associated screws.



The design of this laboratory is to enhance the learning aspect of the hands-on part of the MIE312 Fluid Mechanics Course. This section will explain how this thesis connects to theory, and will explain the different elements of the actual laboratory and the ANSYS CFD laboratory. Both the laboratory and the computer element are designed to work together, to let students compare the theoretical flow prediction to the realistic flow when there are noises added to the system. Students working on this laboratory will also be able to witness the flow around an object through the introduction of dye injected through the airfoil.



The ANSYS CFD portion of this laboratory will give students the ability to use a Computational Fluid Dynamics solver to assess the flow around an object using real laboratory values and actual measurements for the shape of the airfoil. The lab has been designed to mimic the conditions experienced by the airfoil in the lab. Students will start out by creating a 1.5 m by 0.16 m rectangle simulating the water that the airfoil is immersed into. Next, students will create 25 nodes which can be converted into keypoints so that they can be the basis for the top and bottom spline. An airfoil area can then be created using the interconnected splines. Once the area is created and is subtracted from the simulated water, element properties can be allocated to the remaining area to set up for FLOTRAN analysis. The simulated water is created by inputting values for density and viscosity. The next step allows the student to create a mesh around the airfoil to allow for


more detailed analysis closer to the airfoil and a less detailed analysis further away. Element edge lengths set around the airfoil are at 0.05 cm, 20 times smaller than those further away. Students will then add boundary conditions to simulate the flow of water around the airfoil. The fluid velocity of the water flowing through the 1.5 m x 0.16 m rectangle is set at 50 cm/s to approximate the flow of water in the flume. Boundary conditions are also set on the airfoil so that the fluid velocity on the edges of the airfoil is zero. Once set up, the CFD solver can be run to approximate the flow around the object. For more information regarding the ANSYS lab, please refer to Appendix E for the detailed student instruction manual.



The hydraulic flume portion of this laboratory will give students the opportunity to study the effects of drag on an airfoil. In addition to having already seen a numerical solution of flow over an airfoil in ANSYS, they will also be granted the opportunity to utilize a dye wand to see true fluid flow over the airfoil over three distinct locations across the airfoil, and see the boundary layer separation as the angle of attack is increased.

The students will first begin by ensuring that the hydraulic flumes tank has a sufficient amount of fluid in it so that the optimal velocities can be achieved. The teaching assistant will then insert the apparatus towards the rear end of the hydraulic flume such that the leading edge of the airfoil is facing the sluice gate. The students will then ensure that the sluice gate is approximately at 1 6/16. They will then ensure that the exit gate is of optimal


level 9 measured from the top. These conditions will spark the occurrence of a hydraulic jump. Before starting the pump, the length of the spring will be recorded. The pump to the flume will then be turned on and allowed to fully start up. The purpose of the hydraulic jump is to obtain fully developed turbulent flow in the region of the airfoil so that the entrance length is decreased and uniform flow is achieved. The optimal hydraulic jump is very hard to obtain and may require small modifications by adjusting the height of the sluice gate and exit gate. The closer that the hydraulic jump can be created to the sluice gate, the less the turbulence within the jump itself affects the flow around the airfoil.

Once a hydraulic jump is achieved and set past the midway point of the channel, the airfoil will be set at fifteen degrees and the new length of the spring will be obtained. Given a spring constant of 330 N/m, the drag force can be calculated and inserted into the drag coefficient equation. The students may also choose to utilize the dye wands at each angle and take notice of the boundary layer over the airfoil. They may take note of when the boundary layer begins to separate and when the airfoil stalls (if possible). The students will proceed to the rest of the attack angles, measure the length of the spring, and obtain drag force information. This information is useful because it can be compared to already existing experimental data for airfoils and the lift coefficients can be determined from these plots. The students will also utilize the information obtained from the ANSYS computations and compare them with the boundary layers that they saw with the dye wands. The discussion questions will also be sure to involve critical thinking skills that will relate the concepts learned in class and reinforce them with visuals.



Throughout the year, three test models were developed. The following sections will discuss the results of the test runs, the challenges that were encountered, and how they were overcome.



The design that was first proposed was made up of two platforms: one fixed platform that acted as the structural support; and a floating platform that was supported by the fixed platform by three vertical arms and was able to move back and forth in the direction of the free fluid stream. There are two support arms perpendicular to the free fluid stream that prevent any motion in that direction. The airfoil was to be supported by the floating platform in such a manner that allowed the airfoil to move back as it encountered the free fluid stream. To determine the amount of force that was being induced on the airfoil, an aluminum alloy beam was attached from the fixed base and allowed to sit against the floating platform in its natural state. As the fluid induced force on the airfoil and the floating platform was pushed back, the beam would deflect. The deflection would then be measured using a displacement gauge. This deflection, along with the characteristics of the beam, could be used to determine the amount of force. Refer to Figure B-11 for a detailed schematic.





The first mock up that was built was constructed of wooden stirring sticks, nails and glue. The structure was designed according to the specifications that were laid out in last years thesis. An aluminum alloy beam was also bought to satisfy the design requirements of the previous thesis. The tests that were used to determine the Youngs Modulus can be found in Appendix F. The Styrofoam airfoil was purchased from a local hobby store and it matched the size specifications that were laid out prior. The airfoil could also be adjusted to multiple angles of attack.



Upon the initial testing of this wooden mock-up, the first setback became very clear. The light weight wooden structure coupled with the Styrofoam airfoil provided for a very buoyant structure and it immediately began to lift off the hydraulic flume. To counteract this effect, the fixed base was clamped down to the hydraulic flume. At this point, the floating platform began to lift off and started to separate from the fixed base at the vertical supports. This problem was corrected by applying various parts of scrap metal on the floating base until the floating base no longer lifted upwards.




Now that the weight issues had been dealt with and the floating base could only move back and forth, the beam was checked for feasibility. This was achieved by determining whether a deflection measurement could actually be obtained. At this point in time, the displacement gauge was not accessible from the UTMIE department and so a ruler was the only tool of use. If the beam had been too strong, the deflection would not be measurable with a ruler. However, if the deflection beam had been too weak, the vertical support columns that attached the floating base to the fixed platform would have angled such that the fixed platform would have interfered with their movement, thereby interfering with the drag forces and skewing the results. The beam deflected enough that a measurement could be taken at the millimeter scale and even at the highest drag forces that were encountered at a 15 degree attack angle, it would not be forced back enough to interact with the fixed platform.



Having a fully sized mockup also aided in determining critical measurements such as the sluice gate height and exit gate height that were required to develop a hydraulic jump. The depth of the flume reservoir was also determined such that the maximum head before the level switch cut off could be achieved at the holding tank. It took many attempts to develop a semi-stable hydraulic jump and even at the end of this session, a stable jump was not achieved.




The final structure was constructed of tubular steel and sheet metal. The airfoil was a home made wooden NACA 0016 airfoil. Once the final apparatus was created and assembled, it was tested in the flume with the weakest compression spring that had been acquired and used for load bearing. The initial results were disappointing; the floating base did not move at all when water was flowing over the airfoil, even at maximum angular conditions of 15 degrees inclination or declination. There were many reasons for this, which were discovered one by one.



The first major issue was that there was a lot of friction between the support arms and its connection points on both the vertical and horizontal supports. In order to eliminate this problem and to counteract the weight of the object, lubrication on all connection points between the fixed and floating bases was needed. Furthermore, the spacing between the support arms and their holders was increased to allow approximately 1/16 of clearance on either side to completely remove friction when moving in a straight line. All points including the screw connection were lubricated with thick oil to further reduce any contact friction caused by motion of the arms other than in a straight line.




With all 10 points of contact lubricated, the assembly was sliding a more easily, but still did not cause any deflection in the spring that was used. Upon examination, it was determined that the compression spring bought had a length that was approximately 1.5 times the space allocated for its location, and therefore was already compressed. The spring needed to be cut to the appropriate length to achieve success.



Another major issue was the weight of the structure itself. Due to the entire base being constructed of sheet metal and tubular steel that had been welded together, there was a considerable amount of weight that was presented in the downward direction when the airfoil was in its neutral position. Since the floating base acts like a pendulum with three supports that rocks back and forth, the normal force that is encountered in the neutral position is converted into a force that is parallel with the direction of the free fluid stream as the base moves away from the neutral position. Therefore, the actual drag force on the airfoil is equivalent to the x-component of the weight of the airfoil plus the drag force of water running over the airfoil. It is then useful to eliminate excess weight on the floating base to allow the spring to be compressed as much as possible only by the drag force acting on the airfoil without being opposed.




Many lessons had been learned from the first metal structure test including excessive friction due to the lack of lubrication, improper spring deflection, and excessive weight. For this particular test, it was ensured that these three main components had been eliminated. Prior to beginning this round of tests, every joint was lubricated to ensure that the friction caused between any rubbing parts was minimized. The spring was cut down to a length that was appropriate; meaning that the new original length fit in perfectly between the floating base and fixed platform. This helped to assure that there was no initial compression on the spring and that all the force that was applied on the spring was due to the water inducing drag force on the airfoil. In addition, about 90% of the sheet metal that originally provided a cover on the floating base was removed with a plasma cutter. This helped to shave off much needed weight from the floating base and helped to substantially reduce the effects of gravity. All of these factors combine to create 4 successful test runs. Data was obtained for height measurements upstream and downstream of the hydraulic jump. The coefficient of drag was determined for various angles using the deflection of the spring as a marker. Complete data and calculations can be found in Appendix G.



The following section will involve the analysis of the various data that was obtained. Assumptions will be listed, along with key data that was gathered, and possible sources of error in the methodologies used.



The assumptions that have been made, along with explanations, will be stated within this section. It is important for the students to understand the assumptions that are necessary to complete the laboratory.



To determine the drag forces that are induced on the airfoil, we have assumed that the floating platform moves only in a plane parallel to the fluid velocity. This is not entirely true. The floating platform acts like a pendulum with three supports. Therefore, at rest, it hangs only in the vertical direction but as a horizontal force is applied to the base, the base rotates about the fixed platform in a circular fashion forming a rotation angle. However, this angular rotation is small so that the difference in height that it causes is negligible.

The same principle is applied at the point of contact between the spring on the fixed base and the floating base. The beam that applies the force to the spring rotates in a circular fashion


and therefore, does not apply an evenly distributed force onto the spring. However, the angle is so small that it can be considered negligible. For further proof, refer to Appendix H.



The apparatus will be placed as far away from the hydraulic jump as possible. The flow through this section will be turbulent as calculated in Appendix I. By placing the apparatus towards the rear of the channel, it allows time for fully developed flow to be obtained. Fully developed flow allows the assumption of uniform flow to hold because the boundary layer developed on the walls of the flume during turbulent flow will be thinner than those developed during laminar flow.



We have assumed that the airfoil is the only source of drag on the entire structure. However, there is also drag that is induced on the three support arms that hold the airfoil in place, as well as in the pipe fittings for the dye injection mechanisms. The coefficient of drag is divided by the total drag area: the planar area for the airfoil, the support arms, and the pipe fittings. It is important to note that ignoring these areas increases our drag coefficient and slightly skews results.




The sluice gate was set up at a height of 0.0381m and the exit gate had a height, as measured from the top, of 9 inches. After the pump was started up, the tank reservoir obtained a height of 13.5 inches, 1.5 inches after the sluice gate, and 6 inches downstream of the hydraulic jump. Through various experimental calculations, it was determined that the velocity achieved downstream of the hydraulic jump was 0.492 m/s. Our theoretical data showed that we were looking to achieve approximately 0.473 m/s. Please see Appendix J for theoretical data and Appendix K for experimental data. The discrepancy in these values arises from an assumption made upstream of the hydraulic jump. It was assumed that the height of the liquid after the sluice gate was approximately the same height as the sluice gate. In reality, the height of the fluid is slightly lower. By assuming an elevated height, the velocity appears to be slower because a greater area is achieved for the same flow rate. Therefore, at the hydraulic jump less energy needs to dissipate, resulting in a slower flow downstream of the hydraulic jump.

Downstream of the hydraulic jump, the velocity measurement achieved a trailing Reynolds number of 118,129 and the open channel Reynolds number was 131,885. Please refer to Appendix I for more information. The trailing Reynolds number is under 106, which indicates that the boundary layer flow is laminar. This signifies that the boundary layer will be thicker around the airfoil and that the skin friction on the airfoil will tend to dominate over the pressure drag because of the greater velocity gradients. The open channel Reynolds number is greater than 2,300. This shows that the open channel conditions are turbulent in


nature. This is helpful in such a small channel because the boundary layer around the walls will be thinner in nature than those of laminar flow. The airfoil is only approximately 2 inches off the bottom wall and less than half an inch on the side walls so the wall effects could play a significant role in adding skin friction if a relatively high Reynolds number is not achieved.

Subsequently, the deflection of the spring was measured at each of the different angles of attack. This deflection was then used in conjunction with the spring constant to determine the spring force (Hookes Law). Since the floating platform only moves in a direction parallel to the direction of the fluid velocity, the spring force is equivalent to the drag force by a summation of forces. This drag force could then be used to determine the drag coefficient of the airfoil at different angles.

The drag obtained, when compared to tabulated values, were substantially higher. However, it is still possible to determine the characteristics of the airfoil because the experimental data appeared to be shifted upwards. In other words, the experimental coefficient of drag data still had the same characteristics as the tabulated values except all the values were slightly raised. This indicates that there is some constant drag data that has yet to be accounted for that is causing the deviation in the data. From examining the experimental Coefficient of Drag vs. Angle of Attack plot, the onset of stall can be seen where the drag suddenly begins to rise at a much higher slope. This occurs at approximately 11 degrees which closely relates


to the tabulated values of approximately 12 degrees. Please refer to Appendix G for calculations related to the coefficient of drag.



There are many sources of error that can be attributed to drag coefficient results that may differ from tabulated data. Many of these sources of error compound on one another and it is important to attempt to minimize these errors.



The spring constant was calculated using tensile tests and the deflection was measured using a ruler. However, the spring is a compression spring and should have been tested in compression but the lack of equipment accessibility resulted in the next best thing. The extension of the spring was measured using calipers. However, the calipers needed to be placed at the same location on the spring every time or else the data would be incorrect. To correctly determine the spring constant, a much better instrument with accurate load and compression measurement would be necessary.



Many errors will arise from simple measurement errors. If the tank depth, hydraulic jump upstream fluid depth, or hydraulic jump downstream fluid depth are not measured correctly, many of the associated velocities will be skewed. This will result in varying Reynolds


Numbers and coefficients of drag. Exact measurements are also hard to obtain for the spring deflection. It will normally vary between a couple of different points and may result in taking an average of the measurements. It is extremely important to look directly overhead to measure the deflection if the ruler method will be carried through. Any sort of error in reading may cause big changes in the force that is induced resulting in varying drag coefficients.



The bottom reservoir must meet the minimum levels in terms of height before the pump is turned on. This ensures that the pump is able to maintain a minimum level of head in the upper reservoir that feeds the channel. Without this head, the speeds that are necessary to produce the hydraulic jump are not possible. In addition to not meeting the velocity requirements, the height downstream of the hydraulic jump will be lower than necessary. This might produce results that are not accurate because the airfoil may stick out of the free surface.



Due to one of the assumptions that was made earlier regarding the omission of the planar areas of the support arms and pipe fittings, the coefficient of drag is not entirely representative of the airfoil itself. In addition, the weight of the structure also acts against the


drag force and compounds with the spring force when the floating base rotates. The small degree change adds a small percentage of weight in the opposing fluid flow direction and causes a small force.


There are many factors that influence the design and reliability of the apparatus and its ability to provide reliable results when run with water in the hydraulic flume. This section will address concerns and future options related to the running and operation of the flume, hydraulic jump and the limitations of the lab apparatus itself. Furthermore, any areas for equipment or apparatus improvement will also be listed to supplement the factors of concern.



The only limitation of the pump that runs water through the hydraulic flume apparatus is its input capacity. Since the flow rate of the pump is fixed at 0.1809 m3/s, circulation of water is ultimately based on the main tank that the pump takes water from. The calculation for the pump flow rate can be found in Appendix K. The flume consists of three tanks: the main tank, the exit tank and the running tank, referred to in Figure B-7. The water level in each tank is crucial to the creation of the hydraulic jump. In experimental test runs with lower water levels (below 18 main tank depth), the hydraulic jump cannot be created to an acceptable height of 6 and more water must be added to the main tank. This is because the pump transfers a lot of water to the running tank, dropping the water level in the main tank, limiting the pump from running at capacity. Additionally, the exit tank must also be at a depth of 30 to drain water into the main tank at a rate sufficient enough to compensate for water drainage.


At very low water level conditions (less than 12 of water), it will take more than half an hour to add enough water to the main tank from an external source to create the hydraulic jump. Therefore, the water level must always be checked and kept consistent to ensure consistency in the creation of the jump. A recommended solution for this problem is to have a direct connection from the water tap located beside the hydraulic flume to the main tank, which can be turned on ahead of time to ensure enough water is in the tank. This will compensate for the water loss through evaporation when the water tunnel is not being used. This method will require that a Teaching Assistant be available to monitor the fill-up of water in the tank, and add more water if necessary when approaching the appropriate levels.



The apparatus is constructed of carbon steel and is relatively heavy. Moving this apparatus on and off the railings will be dangerous if done by a single individual. In order to change airfoils (in the future) it is necessary to remove the apparatus from the water tunnel in order to ensure that the new airfoil or object inserted is properly attached and sealed to eliminate any problems associated with alignment or otherwise. Furthermore, when lubricating the entire device before or after experiments, it is important to remove the device from the railings to avoid personal injury which may occur when a person is balancing on a block to gain enough height to properly lubricate the device. Since the proportions of the object are large, it is important to always have two people on hand to remove and replace the apparatus when necessary. One lift point is the front end of the fixed base, in between the two support arms. Another lift point is at the rear of the fixed base, with a person protecting the airfoil


during the lifting process. In this way, two people can hold and support the airfoil, floating base and fixed base properly when lifting the apparatus out of the water tunnel during maintenance of the apparatus.



Dye is injected into the water from holes in the airfoil. One of the major concerns about dye injection is that the mixture dissipates into the water and cannot be cleaned out. The hydraulic flume in the fluids laboratory does not have a system for cleaning or filtering the water. Therefore, the concentration of the dissipated dye will increase as the experiment is run over time. This will be problematic for the pump, since the water is not being filtered, and particulate matter from the thick dye will begin to attach itself to the impeller of the pump over time. The dye will also create potential problems through decomposition over time since the dye is an organic based mixture of cream and food coloring.

There are a few possible options for the cleanup of the water. In the future, an important addition to the hydraulic flume is a double-layer wire mesh filter (1/4 square matrix wire mesh) added before the water reaches the exit tank. This will allow the cream solids to be filtered out of the water before entirely dissipating into the large volume of water in the main tank. This filter will allow the cream solids to be removed from the water without impeding the flow between the exit of the water tunnel and the exit tank. These filters can be bought at Home Depot at low cost much to replace. Currently, there is one large filter located at the


running tank which has an approximately 1 square matrix, but this will not work for removal of finer particulate matter. The filter is also located after the pump and before the running tank so any cream particulate matter will have already passed through the pump before reaching the filter. In order to keep the proposed filters clean, the mesh can be placed on a slider that allows it to be removed, cleaned and replaced with minimal effort.

Another option instead of dye being injected is to inject compressed air into the channels. Using a compressed air cylinder instead of a dye syringe will create tiny bubbles of air flowing out in the same streamlined path that dye will take. This will eliminate any contamination issues in the water and will still provide a similar experience to that of dye injection. One drawback of this method is that the resulting streamlines will be skewed due to the buoyancy of air versus the buoyancy of cream. Furthermore, since the air bubbles cannot be dyed or colored in any way, it might be hard for students to view these air bubbles flowing unless the water is clear of any debris, which is a problem with the current lab since the water is full of particulate matter and cannot be dumped or drained at this point.



Construction of the hydraulic jump remains one of the major limitations of this project. Creating a reliable jump takes patience and the correct water levels in the tanks. Through experimental testing, different hydraulic jumps can be created by setting two parameters beforehand, assuming the pump has enough water to run continuously. The two parameters


that control the jump are the sluice gate height from the base of the water tunnel and the exit gate height. If set before the laboratory, the airfoil and apparatus can be placed in the empty water tunnel, the gates adjusted and the pump started in this sequence. In order to attain the 6 depth of water for runtime, a setting where the sluice gate is at 1 6/16 from the base and the exit gate at 9 from the top of the glass can be preset to obtain a reasonable hydraulic jump. Once the jump has been created and reaches steady state, the entire apparatus holding the airfoil can be moved backwards or forwards just by sliding across the rails of the tunnel to place the airfoil in fully developed turbulent flow. Small adjustments may be needed to help the jump reach steady state.

By raising the exit or sluice gate, the hydraulic jump will move forward, towards the sluice gate. Lowering either of the two will perform the reverse action. The best way to create the jump and fine-tune it is to set the sluice gate to the recommended value of 1 6/16 using a ruler or measuring tape and then adjust only the exit gate to compensate for any jump movements. Moving both gates will cause confusion and will adversely affect the height of the water after the jump.



In order to ensure the reliability of the apparatus, proper maintenance procedures must be followed so that the apparatus stays clean and contaminant free. This section will detail the proper maintenance procedures involved with taking care of the lubrication of the apparatus and keeping it rust proofed, along in care and maintenance for the airfoil and its dye channels.



Currently the entire apparatus has been lubricated with tapping oil used in machining processes. This is very viscous oil whose industrial purpose is for cutting through metals. Since there is constant friction between the support arms and their relative holders, the thick lubricating oil will provide excellent coverage, reduce friction substantially and eliminate wear between the support arm and the holder. All five support arms have the same lubrication and move in the same way. Over time, the oil will wear out and dry up and will need to be replaced. In order to do this, the entire apparatus must be removed from the flume and dismantled. Every connecting screw between the arms and their holders must be removed and the entire assembly dismantled. Before lubricating the joints, ensure that the airfoil has been removed from the holding arms and is placed away from the work. Remove each support arm and lubricate the contact faces of the arm with at least 0.5mm of lubricant on each. Lubricant should remain consistent between maintenance cycles to eliminate contamination. Once the support arms are pressed back into their location, the oil or lubricant will be transferred onto the contact area between the holder and the


support arm and will act as a medium between the two. In total, there will be 10 points of lubrication, two corresponding to each of the support arms.

After all arms are lubricated, the apparatus must be reassembled. The proper way to reassemble the apparatus is to align the horizontal support arms without connecting them, then align and connect the vertical support arms first. If any point is not lubricated sufficiently, the contact surface will be tight and immediately noticeable. The joints where the airfoil is connected to the angular arm or the support structure for the floating base do not need to be lubricated since these do not have friction as a factor in load determination.



The airfoil is constructed out of a wooden base with a fiberglass coating and multiple layers of gloss spray paint covering the entire surface area. As long as the airfoil stays sealed and water does not seep into the wood, there will be no damage to the wood. The dye injection ports are sealed with a polymer epoxy and are completely waterproof. However, if the airfoil is ever dropped by accident, it is entirely possible that the epoxy will crack upon impact. During the construction phase of the airfoil, the epoxy has previously cracked when the airfoil was dropped. In this state, the sealing capability of the epoxy cannot be guaranteed, and must therefore be removed and re-sealed. In order to do this, a sharp knife was used to shred and flake the cracked epoxy from the surface until flush with the wood surface or (deeper if necessary). The best option is to dig the epoxy entirely out and remove


the 90o brass elbow joint and the attached tubing, and then use a drill press to remove any epoxy left behind in the hole drilled for the elbow joint. This will leave clean wood or a small layer of epoxy. The elbow joint must be cleaned of any hardened epoxy as best as possible before the re-insertion of dye tubing into the airfoil. Once inserted, a slow-drying epoxy (1 hour dry time) must be used for a sealant and must be layered around the brass elbow joint with a toothpick until liquid epoxy is flush with the airfoils wooden surface. This method of fixing cracked epoxy will also remove the gloss coating around the area of work, therefore two coats of gloss paint will be required over the worked-on surface after the epoxy is completely dry in order to seal off any wood that has become exposed in the process.

Another possible method of damage from the airfoil being dropped is a chip or crack in the fiberglass coating. This will generally not happen anywhere near the middle of the airfoil due to the strength and thickness of the fiberglass along with the numerous layers of gloss coating. If the chip occurs on the side of the airfoil, it can be sealed with a slow-drying epoxy. The epoxy of choice for work done when the airfoil was damaged after an impact is Lepage Regular Epoxy by Henkel Products, found at any Canadian Tire retailer. This epoxy consists of a slow-drying solution that takes 1 hour to partially dry, with full strength in 8 hours. It is water resistant and dries clear and can be used for touch-up work on top of fiberglass. During the touch up process, it is important to sand down the dried surface with fine sandpaper (300 to 400 grade) and then gloss the entire area after the work is done. It is


recommended that the sanding and gloss be applied to the entire airfoil as opposed to on specific sections to ensure consistency. After every laboratory experiment, the airfoil must be dismounted from the assembly and dried with a soft cloth. This will ensure that the gloss does not wear down and that any contaminants in the water do not adversely affect the surface of the airfoil. Special attention is needed at the mounting points, since these will have some water entry and will need to be dried with a small piece of cloth or a q-tip to remove moisture and water droplets. The dye apparatus will also have to be removed from the airfoil and maintained separately.



Maintenance of the dye channels in the airfoil must be done after every run to ensure no contamination and residue buildup. In order to keep the channels clean and completely sealed, the vertical pipes attached to the brass elbow joint must not be disconnected after the run. This is because the vertical pipe is attached to the brass elbow joint through a compression fitting that seals the connection when the nut is tightened down on it.

Instead of opening the nut and removing the pipe, water should be injected or run through the top of the pipe which connects to the syringe joint. The person cleaning must run the water through the dye injection channels until clear water is seen escaping from the injection holes. The person cleaning must make sure that a steady flow of water streams out of the small dye injection holes made on the airfoil, otherwise there is a blockage. In a situation where a


blockage occurs in one of the pipes, pressurized air can be run in reverse through the small holes to relieve any clogging particles.



The load spring of choice is a compression spring bought at Canadian tire, which is easy to replace in case it bends, breaks or is lost. The spring length was originally double of its current length, since it was cut and shortened in order to fit the allowable space. Since the loading of the spring during operation of the apparatus compresses the spring only a few millimeters and is nowhere near the springs limit, there is no concern in regards to degradation due to wear.



In order to avoid corrosion, the entire apparatus has been coated repeatedly with the same gloss coating as the airfoil. Even though there is only a small section of metal that is immersed in water at the maximum running depth of 6, the gloss coating is to protect from any splashing that occurs when the hydraulic jump is running directly underneath the floating base. It is sensible to wipe down any water splashes on the apparatus after operation in order to keep it clean.



This section will list possible upgrades to the hydraulic flume and to the external flow apparatus in order to improve upon the current design.



The structure should be constructed using a heavy material such as carbon steel. This would ensure that the platform did not lift off the flume or slide back and forth. However, the floating base should be made of an aluminum alloy or other light alloy. This would ensure that the floating base would make the least amount of impact as possible and reduce the error in the calculations. The supporting arms that connect the floating base to the airfoil should also be made as thin as possible as to produce the least amount of drag force. The floating base should not be as wide as it is. By making the floating base thinner, the supports move away from the walls and reduce the amount of wall effects that the foil experiences.



The airfoil can be hand made due to the resilience against surface effects that the NACA 4digit series airfoils have. The fiberglass that is applied to the airfoil should be one layer at a time and done with extreme care as to prevent any air bubbles from appearing under the surface and weakening the fiberglass. However, if possible, the airfoil should be machined or constructed professionally as to ensure the highest quality product. Having it constructed


professionally would increase the symmetry and decrease surface defects. In addition, the airfoil should be reduced in size. A smaller span would reduce the amount of wall effect that the airfoil experiences. The chord length should also be reduced, but maintaining the same thickness to chord ratio is a suitable design.



If a spring is acquired from a store without knowing the spring constant, the spring should be tested using a machine such as an INSTROM. This would allow for very precise loads to be applied and very precise compression measurements to take place. This would ensure that the most accurate results would be obtained when determining the drag forces.

One step further would be to eliminate the spring all together and use a force gauge on the apparatus. The force gauge would be able to accurately determine the amount of force being applied in the drag direction and would minimize drag errors. It would ensure that the focus of the lab would be to practice fluid mechanics rather than wonder why the drag forces seem so high.




The flume should be drained and cleaned at some set interval. This would prevent any buildup of paint or particles from potentially clogging up the dye injection ports on the airfoil or contaminating the water. The dye injection ports are very small and can be easily plugged up. Presently, there are many chunks of paint flowing through the water and the water is not clear. There should be no particles in the water to accurately depict boundary layer and its separation using dye injection techniques. The water should be as clear as possible so that the dye can be seen clearly.

This thesis consisted of the creation of a laboratory experiment designed to illustrate external flow of a fluid over a streamlined cylinder. In order to create a fully functional laboratory experiment using a design from a previous thesis, a test model was initially created to learn more about the hydraulic flume and how external flow over an object is different from pipe flow experiments.

Research on the subject of external flows has provided a myriad of concepts related to the flow of water over an airfoil, and the characteristics of NACA airfoils. In order to give students a larger understanding of the concepts of drag, lift, stall and boundary layer separation and how each of these relates to the angle of attack of an airfoil in a fluid stream, a practical laboratory experiment was designed and built using three major components: an airfoil, a support structure and a load measurement device. The apparatus can be used to


adjust the angle of attack of the airfoil in order to demonstrate concepts of lift, drag and stall to students. The airfoil has also been modified to incorporate dye injection holes to allow for a visual demonstration of streamlines over the object itself.

In order to allow students to connect between physical experimentation and computer simulation, a computational fluid dynamics solver is used as a complement to the lab. This allows for flow visualization from a completely different perspective, showing contour plots of how the velocity of water changes as it flows over the streamlined cylinder. Experimental testing of the physical model is an integral part of this thesis. There are many factors of error that offset the measured values of the coefficient of drag and coefficient of lift when compared to the theoretical values. Through multiple test runs and continuous improvement of the external flow apparatus, the measurement error has been significantly reduced.

Experimental testing has shown that the hydraulic flume produces water at a velocity of approximate 0.49 m/s which is very close to the theoretical value of 0.47m/s, with discrepancy coming only from assumptions about the flow. Using a spring with a calculated coefficient of approximately 330 N/m, displacements are measured in mm and calculated forces on the airfoil range from 0.1 N to approximately 1.5 N, with a drag coefficient ranging from 0.0375 at a 0-degree incline up to 0.37 at a 15-degree incline. It is important to note that the actual data shows a range of 0.026 at 0 degrees up to 0.15 at a 15 degree incline. At


inclines close to the stall value of approximately 12 to 13 degrees, the drag coefficient of the constructed airfoil is approximately twice that of a theoretical airfoil. Although the experimental data does not match the tabulated data numerically, it is still important to note that the airfoil characteristics remain in tact and that stall remains at approximately the same angle. Sources of error include a larger amount of skin friction on the sides of the airfoil due to the lack of space between the sides and the flumes walls. Other sources include increased surface area from the dye injection elbows and the supports. Every lab experiment will have flaws. The discrepancy with this experiment can run from very small in some cases to moderately large, even twice as large. However, the stall characteristics when the experiment is run are almost exactly the same as the theoretical airfoil. In the end, the purpose of a laboratory experiment is not to be exceedingly specific with numbers, but rather to teach the student the physical relation to the concepts being taught in class. Therefore, as long as the student uses critical thinking to understand that there are sources of error leading to the data being somewhat skewed, the concepts behind the data are still sound. Therefore, we conclude that this experiment ready to be run. With care taken when running the airfoil through water, this experiment will serve students well for years to come.



[1] [2] [3] [4]

White, Frank M. Fluid Mechanics. 5th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill Companies, The, 2002. 478-519. Richards, Mark, and Karthik Senthilnathan. "Development of a Design Competition & External Flow Experiment for an Introductory Fluid Mechanics Course." Thesis. Schlichting, Hermann. Boundary-layer theory. Berlin: Springer, 2000. 38-48 Torenbeek, Egbert. Synthesis of subsonic airplane design an introduction to the preliminary design, of subsonic general aviation and transport aircraft, with emphasis on layout, aerodynamic design, propulsion, and performance. Delft: Delft UP, Nijhoff, Sold and distributed in the U.S. and Canada by Kluwer Boston, 1982. 229231. Marzocca, Pier. "The NACA Airfoils." Wallace H. Coulter School of Engineering. Clarkson University. 15 March 2009. < df> Nakamura, Mealani. "How an Airfoil Works." Airfoil. 1999. Massachusetts Institute of Technology. 26 Feb. 2009 <>. Akan, A. Osman. Open channel hydraulics. Amsterdam: Elsevier/BH, 2006. 54-64 TU, Jiyuan, Guan Heng YEOH, and Chaoqun LIU. Computational Fluid Dynamics A Practical Approach. Chicago: Butterworth-Heinemann, 2007. 1-7. Friedman, Avner. Mathematics in Industrial Problems Part 8 (The IMA Volumes in Mathematics and its Applications). New York: Springer, 1996. Fluid mechanics and dynamics problem solver a complete solution guide to any textbook. Piscataway, N.J: Research and Education Association, 2000. 563A-563C Hepperle, Martin. "JavaFoil." Willkommen / Welcome. 26 Mar. 2009 <>.



[7] [8] [9] [10] [11]



The following is a collection of the figures referred to in the text of this report.

Figure B- 1: Pipe Flow with Control Volume [1]



Figure B- 2: Moody Diagram [1]


Figure B- 3: Boundary Layer Development [1]

Figure B- 4: Airfoil Dimensions [5]


Figure B- 5: Boundary Layer Separation [3]


Figure B- 6: The Three Different Types of Stall [4]


Figure B- 7 : Illustration of the Hydraulic Flume


Figure B- 8: Hydraulic Flume Stopped and Running Water Depth Dimensions


Figure B- 9 : External Flow Apparatus in Hydraulic Flume

Figure B- 10: A 2-D Schematic of the Apparatus


Figure B- 11: Original Design [2]




The following is a collection of the tables referred to in the text of this report.
Stage Description
Upon start-up of forward motion, a stagnation point briefly exists near the rear of the upper surface. Zero Lift


1 [1]

2 [1]

Streamline on trailing edge is very sharp and cannot be maintainedthus, causing a starting vortex. Slight Lift

3a [6]

The principle of angular momentum demands that the momentum of the vortex is equal and opposite to the rotational flow around the airfoil The rotational flow around the airfoil is known as circulation. By completing a vector sum of the fluid velocity above and below the airfoil, it is clear that the velocity above the airfoil is greater than the velocity below the airfoilthus causing a pressure difference which can induce lift. Starting vortex is shed away from the airfoil

3b [6]

4 [1]

Lift is 80% Developed

Starting Vortex shed far behind the trailing edge of the vortex. 5 [1] Lift is fully developed The circulation shown in 3a sustains itself after the starting vortex is shed and this allows the airfoil to maintain a constant level of lift.

Table B- 1: Development of Lift [2]


Digit(s) Chord Length First Digit

Property Independent Variable (c) Maximum Camber (m)

Interpretation Designer may choose chord length as required Indicated in percentage of chord length (ex. 0.02c) Indicated in tenths of chord and represents the position of the maximum camber from the leading edge of the airfoil (ex. 0.4c from leading edge) Indicates the maximum thickness of the airfoil in percentage of chord length (ex. 0.15c)

Second Digit

Position of Max Camber (p)

Third & Fourth Digits

Maximum Thickness (t)

Table B- 2 : Characteristics of the NACA 4-digit Series Wings [2]


Advantages 1. Roughness has little effect 3. Good stall characteristics 1. Roughness has little effect 2. Low pitching moment 3. Higher maximum lift coefficient

Disadvantages 1. Low maximum lift coefficient 2. Relatively high pitching moment 3. Relatively high drag


Typical Applications 1. General Aviation 2. Supersonic Jets (Symmetric) 3. Helicopter Blades (Symmetric) 4. Missile Fins (Symmetric) 1. General Aviation 2. Business Jets


1. Poor stall behaviour 2. Relatively high drag

Table B- 3 : Advantages and Disadvantages of the NACA 4-Digit Series Airfoils



Force (N) 5.95 5.30 4.36 2.71 1.93

1 (L = 53.9mm) 0.0025 0.0022 0.00176 0.0006 0.00027

Spring Delta Length (m) 2 3 (L=45.9mm) (L=51.2mm) 0.0027 0.00234 0.00232 0.00158 0.00169 0.00074 0.00059 0.00014 0.00037 0.00007

4 (L=70.8mm) 0.01864 0.0158 0.01303 0.00608 0.00333

Table C- 1: Spring Force vs. Displacement

Force (N) 5.95 5.30 4.36 2.71 1.93 Average Min Max

Spring Calculated K-Values: Tensile Testing 1 (L = 2 3 4 53.9mm) (L=45.9mm) (L=51.2mm) (L=70.8mm) 2380.69 2204.34 2543.47 319.30 2407.02 2282.52 3351.54 335.15 2478.14 2580.78 5893.95 334.73 4510.96 4587.42 19332.71 445.16 7143.13 5212.56 27552.09 579.17 2421.95 2355.88 3929.66 329.73 2380.69 2204.34 2543.47 319.30 2478.14 2580.78 5893.95 335.15

Table C- 2: Adjusted K-Values using Green Shaded values Only

Spring 2 Compression Testing Delta (cm) Force K-Value 0.1 2.2 2200.00 0.12 2.75 2291.67 0.21 4.4 2095.24

Table C- 3: Compression Tests

The results shown above confirm the assumption that test measurements at low load conditions provide skewed spring coefficient values.




This document will address the creation of new shapes and different NACA airfoils for use in the hydraulic flume with the external flow apparatus. Specific focus will go towards the fiberglass coating section, since that is the most crucial part of the construction process. The steps listed are designed for a streamlined airfoil shape, but can be used equally to create any simple shape that does not need a complicated system of points.


The external flow apparatus is a robust structure that will last for a very long time in the fluids laboratory. In order to better understand flows over different objects, more airfoils will need to be built. Due to the limited amount of time, only one airfoil could be constructed. However, it is very expensive to have a specialized shape manufactured. Therefore, it is much easier for a person or a team of two or three people to build these by hand. The time it takes to make these structures is longer when hand made, but is significantly cheaper and ultimately more customizable to personal preference.

Construction Steps

Part 1: Generating a Shape Part 2: Wooden Base Construction Part 3: Gluing the Airfoil Sectionals Together Part 4: Fiberglass Coating Part 5: Fiberglass Drying Cycle Part 6: Final Sanding, Glossing and Dye Channels


Part 1: Generating a Shape

In order to generate a shape, a 1:1 scaled profile of the shape must be cut out first. Plot the coordinates of the shape into Microsoft Excel and create a graph. If a NACA wing is being created, the coordinates can be found from: The coordinates recieved will range between 0 and 1 for the x-value and 1 and -1 for the y-value. These will have to be multiplied by a scale factor in order to create the wing. o For example, if you want a wing with a chord length of 8 inches and a NACA0020 profile is desired, this will mean that the maximum height is 20% of the chord length, i.e. 2 inches. o The coordinates given will need to be multiplied by whatever the chord length chosen is, for both the x and y cases. Once graphed, scale the graph to 1:1 so that the chord length of the graph (visually) measures exactly the same size as a straight line drawn on a piece of paper. Print out the graph and measure for consistency. If the graph is wrong, resize it appropriately until the numbers for height and width of the airfoil stay consistent.

Sample Picture of what the graph should look like in Excel when created:

Figure D- 1: NACA 0009 Coordinates plotted in Excel


Part 2: Wooden Base Construction

Start off by printing a copy of the airfoil template and copying its shape onto a piece of plywood. It is recommended to use either or 1 thick plywood when cutting out a shape in order to reduce the number of sections that have to be glued together. Using a bandsaw, cut out a rough profile of the airfoil. Once cut, label the initial cut piece Master. o This piece will be used to cut every future piece, but will not be used in the actual design since it is the outline piece for the future. Drill a small hole somewhere through the front of the master section. o Hole thickness should be approximately the thickness of a coat hanger. o Note: the wire needs to be rigid. Thicker wire is better. o This will perform two functions: it will ensure that every section you make out of the master section has a hole in the same place in order to stack the sections in a straight line. o Second, it is used as a supporting structure when more airfoil sections are added. The master section is now ready to be sanded down to precise values. A belt sander is recommended. Once the master section is finished with a hole placed for marking purposes, it can be used to carefully trace out the same shape repeatedly onto the plywood. Trace out the shape by holding the master section to the plywood and marking an outline with a pencil. Hold the master down onto the plywood after tracing is complete. Insert the straight piece of wire through the tiny hole in the front and press down to make a mark onto the plywood. o This creates an exact duplicate of the master, with a hole marking at the front for alignment purposes. Drill the small alignment hole, roughly cut the piece with a bandsaw and then sand it down to the proper shape.

A sample picture of what the sectional should look like with the hole in the front for alignment is shown on the next page.


Figure D- 2: Sample Sectional of Wood with Alignment Hole

Repeat this process until you have enough pieces to form a proper airfoil of desired thickness.

Part 3: Gluing the Airfoil Sectionals Together

Once enough sectionals are built to create the airfoil, insert the straight coat hanger wire into the small hole in the front of the airfoil. Spread wood glue between layers, insert through alignment hole and press onto adjoining sectional. Repeat the process until all sectionals have been stacked together to form an airfoil shape. o At this point, it may be noticed that every sectional has its own unique shape contours and they do not match entirely. This is acceptable. o Align the front of the airfoil sectionals using a T-square and clamp down the entire section to a table and let dry overnight.


Figure D- 3: Solid Airfoil Shape after Drying

Once the airfoil is dry, it has to be re-sanded with a belt sander to maintain a uniform shape throughout. Run the airfoil smoothly across the large belt to remove any areas that are different from one section to the next.


Figure D- 4: Sanding the wooden base to eliminate any differences between sections

The next section will provide instruction on how to fiberglass the airfoil. What is required beforehand: (Can be bought at Canadian Tire) 1. Fiberglass Coating for repairs 2. 1-hour epoxy for saturating the fiberglass a. For an 8 x 8 airfoil, at least 80 ml of epoxy will be required. 3. Rubber gloves for protection 4. Scrap paper cup and scrap piece of wood for mixing epoxy 5. Vacuum bag for sealing Room temperature conditions for the drying process and a well ventilated area is ideal.


Part 4: Fiberglass Coating

Start off by laying the wooden airfoil onto the fiberglass as shown:

Figure D- 5: Starting the Fiberglass Coating Process

Pour the epoxy into a mixing container. Once all the epoxy resin and hardener is poured, mix thoroughly for one to three minutes until mixture takes on a thick milky composition. Note: It is very important to mix equal parts of epoxy hardener and resin. If the mixture quantities are not equal, the epoxy will not harden or will have very poor strength. Make sure to put on rubber gloves before working with epoxy and fiberglass. Before placing any fiberglass on the wooden base, place a layer of epoxy on the wood itself. See figure D-6 on the next page as a guide.


Figure D- 6: Coating the base with epoxy to start

Once the epoxy is spread over the wood on both sides, double layer the fiberglass for extra strength and place on top. Start by placing the fiberglass underneath the wood and the end of the fiberglass at the front of the airfoil. This will allow it to be completely coated and sealed over later. Press down to soak the epoxy into the fiberglass.

Figure D- 7: Layering the fiberglass onto the airfoil

Wrap the top and bottom of the airfoil with fiberglass. See Figure 8 below.


The sides of the airfoil can also be coated in fiberglass, but is optional. In the end, a gloss coating will seal the sides from water if it is not fiberglassed.

Figure D- 8: Wrapping the airfoil in fiberglass

Once the airfoil is coated in fiberglass, apply the remaining epoxy to the top and bottom of the airfoil and spread evenly until the airfoil looks like the Figure 9 below.


Figure D- 9: Finishing the coating

Part 5: Fiberglass Drying Cycle

The fiberglass used for this job has a drying time of 1 hour at room temperature with full strength in 8 hours. This means the actual drying time is 8 hours before any work can be done on it. Place the structure carefully inside a vacuum bag. Close up the vacuum bag onto the airfoil and start the vacuum. This seal will allow equivalent pressure on all sections of the airfoil and will hold the epoxy and fiberglass coating tightly to the wooden base. If possible, once the vacuum seal is complete, hang the bag to avoid resting one side of the airfoil on any flat surface.


Figure D- 10: Vacuum sealing to press fiberglass to wooden base

Use a roller on top of the vacuum bag to eliminate any air bubbles in the fiberglass. Leave the airfoil overnight to dry. Once dry, remove the vacuum bag from the fiberglass layer if possible. If it is not possible, then it can be sanded off without any issues. The last thing to do once the fiberglass is done drying is to sand it down to eliminate any regions where there is more epoxy than necessary or the fiberglass has been misshapen.

Part 6: Final Sanding, Glossing and Dye Channels

Once the initial sanding is done, dye channels can be drilled into the sides of the airfoil. Using a drill bit to match diameter polyethylene tubing, drill holes into the sides of the airfoil at any chosen distance apart to the chosen depths. Around the hole, drill to approximately depth with a larger diameter drill bit (1/2 bit or smaller) to allow for a brass elbow joint to fit into the hole in the airfoil as well. Seal off the end of the tubing that is being inserted into the airfoil with a waterproof epoxy and let it dry. Once complete, insert the unsealed end into a brass elbow joint or any joint that will direct the flow into the airfoil.


Finally, insert the entire length of tubing into the airfoil as shown in the Figures 11a and 11b below. Press the brass elbow into the wood and seal off the spacing around the joint and the wood with epoxy. This will eliminate any water seepage. Finally, spray a layer of gloss over the freshly dried area as a waterproof coating. Sand the layer of gloss and repeat the coating between 6-8 times to ensure complete coverage.


Figure D- 11: Airfoil with dye channels being inserted

Figure D- 12: Dye channel insertion with Brass elbow joint




PART A: MODELING CREATING THE SIMULATED WATER Start by creating a rectangular block, 1.5 m long by 0.16 m high. This will simulate the water flow over the airfoil. Do this by Selecting: Preprocessor Modeling Create Areas Rectangle By 2 Corners

Figure E- 1: Creating a Rectangle

WP X and WP Y are the starting coordinates of the rectangle. Notes: In this case, the Width of the rectangle will be a 150 cm long simulated field of water. With the hydraulic jump, a water Height of 16 cm will be used into which the airfoil is immersed. There will be a simulated 50 cm space in front of the airfoil. The WP Y position of -8 cm is done so that the airfoil is placed in the centre of the flow of water (Airfoil starts at 0,0,0, so 8 cm below and 8 above is desired). Click OK to create the rectangle.


CREATING THE AIRFOIL Start off in ANSYS by creating Nodes using the following Data points: Note: if you are creating the airfoil is being created at an angle other than 0o, see Appendix A at the end of this paper for your set of coordinates. Airfoil Angle from Horizontal: 0o X Y 20.320 0.000 20.147 0.066 18.798 0.306 16.283 0.707 12.940 1.151 9.223 1.507 7.380 1.604 4.037 1.552 1.522 1.137 0.686 0.811 0.173 0.427 0.000 0.000 0.173 -0.427 0.686 -0.811 1.522 -1.137 4.037 -1.552 7.380 -1.604 9.223 -1.507 12.940 -1.151 16.283 -0.707 18.798 -0.306 20.147 -0.066

Table E- 1 : Coordinates at Angle of Attack = 0o

Select Preprocessor Modeling Create Nodes In Active CS


Figure E- 2: : Creating Nodes

Every Node must have a node number. Start the node numbers at 1. Input the X and Y coordinates for the node, and always use a Z-coordinate of 0 always. Instead of Clicking OK after inputting a nodes coordinates, click Apply. This will keep this screen up while continually adding nodes. Increment the node number up by 1 every time a new node is added.

The end result will look like this:

Figure E- 3: Airfoil made out of Nodes

The Nodes must be converted into Keypoints before splines can be created to model the airfoil. Select Preprocessor Modeling Create Keypoints On Node Use the mouse to select every node, then click OK. After all the nodes have been selected, click into the empty space a few more times to ensure all nodes are selected. This will not unselect any nodes.

CREATING AN AIRFOIL SHAPE Select Preprocessor Modeling Create Lines Splines Spline thru KPs

There is a maximum number of keypoints allowed on for a spline, so the top and bottom of the airfoil will be splined separately. To create the top spline, zoom in and select Node 12 (at the front of the airfoil shape) and move backwards from Node 12, 11, 10, down to Node 1.


Click OK to create the spline. Repeat the process for Nodes 12, 13, 14, all the way back to Node 1 again to create the bottom spline for the airfoil.

Figure E- 4: Splined Airfoil

Once both the splines have been created, create an area in 2-D space out of the lines. Select Preprocessor Modeling Create Areas Arbitrary By Lines Select both the top and bottom splines and click OK to create the airfoil area. Note: Do not worry if the lines disappear after being created, they are still there. By clicking in empty space around where the lines were, ANSYS will automatically select the lines to create the area.

SUBTRACTING AREAS From the Taskbars dropdown menu on the top, select Plot areas overlapped.

Areas to see the water and airfoil

Select Preprocessor Modeling Operate Booleans Subtract Areas Select the large rectangle (it will turn pink), then click OK. Select the airfoil shape next and click OK again. This will subtract the smaller airfoil from the larger rectangle. The end result will look like this:


Figure E- 5: Airfoil immersed in water rectangle

Zoom out to see the airfoil shape immersed in the water rectangle.


PART B: PROPERTIES SETUP SETTING UP ELEMENT PROPERTIES FOR FLOTRAN ANALYSIS Select Preprocessor Element Type Click on the Add Button Add/Edit/Delete

Figure E- 6: Element Library

Scroll down and select FLOTRAN CFD and the 2D FLOTRAN 141 setting. Leave the Element Type Reference Number at 1. Flotran Set Up Fluid Properties

Next, Select Preprocessor

Figure E- 7: Fluid Properties

Adjust the first two fields, Density and Viscosity to Liquid Leave the last two, Conductivity and Specific Heat as Constant and click OK. In the window that opens up (see below), input the value of Density as 0.001. This is because units are in cm, so the density of water is 1000 kg/m3 = 0.001 kg/cm3. Similarly, enter Viscosity as 8.9E-008 which represents Viscosity = 8.9X10-8 N/cm2s.


Figure E- 8: CFD Flow Properties


SETTING UP THE MATERIAL PROPERTIES Select Preprocessor Material Props Material Models

Figure E- 9: Defining Material Behaviour

Select CFD and Select Density in the dropdown menu. Input the value of 0.001 for Density. Similarly, select Viscosity and enter in a value of 8.9E-008.


PART C: MESHING When creating a mesh, it is important to understand what is actually going on. Want to create tiny elements around the airfoil to analyze the flow at incremental divisions. In this case, we will mesh the flow so that the water far away from the airfoil is analyzed over every 1 cm whereas the area around the airfoil is analyzed at a much more detailed level, at every 0.05 cm. This is because the flow of water around the airfoil and behind it is what is important and so should be focused on.

Select: Preprocessor Meshing Size Cntrls Manual Size Lines Picked Lines Use the arrow to pick the top and bottom splines of the airfoil and click OK. Input the Element Edge Length for the selected lines at 0.05.

Figure E- 10: Element Size Length

Zoom out to see the entire rectangle encompassing the airfoil and repeat the procedure for the outer 4 lines of the rectangle, with 1 as the Element Edge Length.

Once this is done, select: Preprocessor Meshing Mesh Areas Free Select the entire rectangle by clicking anywhere inside its area.


The computer will now create a mesh to analyze the airfoil. The following picture is a zoomed-in view of the mesh that can be seen once meshing is complete. (Meshing Process takes approximately 30 seconds) Mesh of the Airfoil in Water:

Figure E- 11: Meshed Airfoil


PART D: BOUNDARY CONDITIONS AND LOADING Now apply loading conditions to the airfoil. To simulate real loading, values similar to those demonstrated in the laboratory will be used. Take velocity of the water to be 50 cm/s. Select Preprocessor Loads Define Loads Apply Fluid CFD On Lines Select the line on the left edge (where water will start flowing from) and click OK. Apply a velocity of 50 in the X-direction, leaving the Y and Z direction blank. Select Constant Value for the application of the load in the dropdown box.

Arrows pointing in the direction of the flow should appear on the left edge of the rectangle. Similarly, Apply velocities in the X and Y direction of 0 on the airfoil itself. Select the top and bottom lines of the airfoil and input 0 in the VX and VY fields. The end result should look something like this:

Figure E- 12: Final Result

Finally, Select Preprocessor Loads Define Loads Apply Fluid CFD On Lines Select the top, bottom and right side of the rectangle and click OK. Click OK when the Pressure box opens. No Pressure input is needed.

Pressure DOF

Figure E- 13: Applying Pressure


PART E: RUNNING THE FLOTRAN CFD SOLVER Before running the solver, we must set up the amount of iterations the solver will run through before it stops. Select Preprocessor FLOTRAN Set Up Execution Ctrl Input a value of 200 in the Global Iterations field.

This will allow the software to run 200 iterations before providing an answer. Note: Increasing the number of iterations improves the accuracy of the solution, but will increase the runtime of the solver and the amount of memory required. Finally, select Solution Run FLOTRAN to start the solver. The process should take between 1 to 2 minutes to complete. Once the message Solution is done! appears, click OK. Select General Postproc Read Results Last Set

CFD FLOW VISUALIZATION To plot a contour plot of the fluid velocity around the airfoil, select General Postproc Plot Results Contour Plot Nodal Solution Select DOF Solution and Fluid Velocity The contour plot will look something like this:

Figure E- 14: FLUENT Solver Solution

What is seen from this flow visualization is the different velocities of water at different points. This shows what cannot be seen in plain water flow; the increase in velocity in front of the airfoil. ANSYS also outputs the position where the max and min velocities of water occur, at the MX and MN values.


APPENDIX A: Coordinates for Airfoil angles other than 0o

Coordinates with Angle of Attack at 3o x y 20.292 -1.063 20.123 -0.989 18.788 -0.678 16.298 -0.146 12.983 0.472 9.289 1.022 7.454 1.216 4.113 1.339 1.579 1.056 0.728 0.774 0.195 0.417 0.000 0.000 0.150 -0.435 0.643 -0.846 1.460 -1.215 3.950 -1.761 7.286 -1.988 9.131 -1.988 12.862 -1.827 16.224 -1.558 18.756 -1.289 20.116 -1.120

Coordinates with Angle of Attack at 6o x y 20.209 -2.124 20.044 -2.040 18.727 -1.661 16.268 -0.999 12.989 -0.208 9.330 0.535 7.507 0.824 4.177 1.122 1.633 0.972 0.767 0.735 0.217 0.407 0.000 0.000 0.127 -0.443 0.597 -0.878 1.395 -1.290 3.853 -1.965 7.172 -2.367 9.015 -2.463 12.749 -2.497 16.120 -2.405 18.663 -2.269 20.030 -2.172

Coordinates with Angle of Attack at 9o x y 20.070 -3.179 19.909 -3.086 18.614 -2.638 16.193 -1.849 12.961 -0.887 9.345 0.046 7.540 0.430 4.230 0.901 1.681 0.885 0.804 0.694 0.238 0.395 0.000 0.000 0.104 -0.449 0.551 -0.908 1.325 -1.361 3.745 -2.164 7.038 -2.739 8.874 -2.931 12.601 -3.161 15.972 -3.246 18.519 -3.243 19.889 -3.217

Coordinates with Angle of Attack at 12o x y 19.876 -4.225 19.720 -4.124 18.451 -3.609 16.074 -2.694 12.897 -1.565 9.335 -0.444 7.552 0.035 4.271 0.679 1.725 0.796 0.840 0.651 0.258 0.382 0.000 0.000 0.080 -0.454 0.502 -0.936 1.252 -1.429 3.626 -2.357 6.885 -3.103 8.708 -3.392 12.418 -3.816 15.780 -4.077 18.324 -4.208 19.693 -4.253

Table E- 2 : Coordinates for Angle of Attack at 3o

Table E- 3: Coordinates for Angle of Attack at 6o

Table E- 4: Coordinates for Angle of Attack at 9o

Table E- 5: Coordinates for Angle of Attack at 12o


Coordinates with Angle of Attack at 15o x y 19.628 -5.259 19.478 -5.151 18.237 -4.570 15.911 -3.531 12.797 -2.237 9.299 -0.931 7.544 -0.361 4.301 0.454 1.764 0.704 0.873 0.606 0.278 0.368 0.000 0.000 0.057 -0.457 0.453 -0.961 1.176 -1.492 3.498 -2.544 6.713 -3.459 8.519 -3.843 12.201 -4.461 15.545 -4.897 18.078 -5.161 19.443 -5.278

Coordinates with Angle of Attack at 18o x y 19.325 -6.279 19.181 -6.163 17.973 -5.518 15.705 -4.359 12.662 -2.904 9.237` -1.417 7.514 -0.755 4.319 0.229 1.799 0.611 0.903 0.559 0.296 0.353 0.000 0.000 0.033 -0.460 0.402 -0.983 1.096 -1.552 3.360 -2.724 6.523 -3.806 8.306 -4.283 11.951 -5.093 15.268 -5.704 17.783 -6.100 19.141 -6.289

Coordinates with Angle of Attack at 21o x y 18.970 -7.282 18.832 -7.158 17.659 -6.451 15.455 -5.175 12.493 -3.563 9.150 -1.898 7.465 -1.147 4.325 0.002 1.828 0.516 0.931 0.511 0.315 0.337 0.000 0.000 0.008 -0.461 0.350 -1.003 1.013 -1.607 3.213 -2.896 6.315 -4.142 8.070 -4.712 11.668 -5.712 14.948 -6.495 17.440 -7.022 18.785 -7.282

Coordinates with Angle of Attack at 24o x y 18.563 -8.265 18.432 -8.134 17.297 -7.366 15.163 -5.977 12.289 -4.212 9.039 -2.375 7.394 -1.536 4.319 -0.224 1.853 0.420 0.957 0.462 0.332 0.320 0.000 0.000 -0.016 -0.460 0.297 -1.020 0.928 -1.658 3.057 -3.060 6.090 -4.467 7.813 -5.128 11.353 -6.315 14.588 -7.269 17.048 -7.925 18.378 -8.255

Table E- 6: Coordinates for Angle of Attack at 15o

Table E- 7: Coordinates for Angle of Attack at 18o

Table E- 8: Coordinates for Angle of Attack at 21o

Table E- 9: Coordinates for Angle of Attack at 24o



Deflection Beam - Young's Modulus Experimental Data Load Length Deflection Young's Modulus kg M m Pa 0.455 0.2020 0.00400 5.787E+10 0.909 0.2020 0.00900 5.144E+10 0.455 0.2977 0.01700 4.359E+10 0.909 0.2977 0.03600 4.117E+10 0.455 0.2500 0.00800 5.485E+10 0.909 0.2500 0.01950 4.501E+10

Trial 1 2 3 4 5 6

lbs 1 2 1 2 1 2

Table F- 1: Beam Deflection Experimental Data

Beam Data: Material Width [m] Height [m] Area [m2] I [m4] Average E: Aluminum Alloy 0.0185 0.00325 0.000060125 5.29225E-11 4.899E+10

Table F- 2: Deflection Beam Data

Experimental Young's Modulus

7.000E+10 Young's Modulus [Pa] 6.000E+10 5.000E+10 4.000E+10 3.000E+10 2.000E+10 1.000E+10 0.000E+00 1 2 3 Trial # 4 5 6

Figure F- 1: Calculating the experimental Youngs Modulus



Part A: Experimental loading at different angles of attack

Angle Original Length [cm] Spring Constant [Nm] 330 330 330 330 330 330 330 330 330 330 330 Compressed L (cm) 4.65 4.8 4.83 4.9 4.95 5 4.95 4.89 4.83 4.81 4.7 Force exerted 1.485 0.99 0.891 0.66 0.495 0.33 0.495 0.693 0.891 0.957 1.32 Drag Force (N) 0.3377 0.2252 0.2026 0.1501 0.1126 0.0751 0.1126 0.1576 0.2026 0.2177 0.3002

15 5.1 12 5.1 9 5.1 6 5.1 3 5.1 0 5.1 -3 5.1 -6 5.1 -9 5.1 -12 5.1 -15 5.1 Actual velocity = 0.492 m/s

Table G- 1: Drag force versus Angle of Attack, Trial Run 1

Trial 2
Angle Original Length [cm] Spring Constant [Nm] 330 330 330 330 330 330 330 330 330 330 330 Compressed L (cm) 4.7 4.8 4.89 4.94 4.98 5.05 5 4.91 4.86 4.8 4.73 Force exerted 1.32 0.99 0.693 0.528 0.396 0.165 0.33 0.627 0.792 0.99 1.221 Drag Force (N) 0.3002 0.2252 0.1576 0.1201 0.0901 0.0375 0.0751 0.1426 0.1801 0.2252 0.2777

15 5.1 12 5.1 9 5.1 6 5.1 3 5.1 0 5.1 -3 5.1 -6 5.1 -9 5.1 -12 5.1 -15 5.1 Actual velocity = 0.492 m/s

Table G- 2: Drag force versus Angle of Attack, Trial Run 2


Trial 3
Angle Original Length [cm] Spring Constant [Nm] 330 330 330 330 330 330 330 330 330 330 330 Compressed L (cm) 4.6 4.75 4.9 4.95 5 5.01 4.96 4.91 4.89 4.83 4.73 Force exerted 1.65 1.155 0.66 0.495 0.33 0.297 0.462 0.627 0.693 0.891 1.221 Drag Force (N) 0.3753 0.2627 0.1501 0.1126 0.0751 0.0675 0.1051 0.1426 0.1576 0.2026 0.2777

15 5.1 12 5.1 9 5.1 6 5.1 3 5.1 0 5.1 -3 5.1 -6 5.1 -9 5.1 -12 5.1 -15 5.1 Actual velocity = 0.492 m/s

Table G- 3: Drag force versus Angle of Attack, Trial Run 3

Trial 4
Angle Original Length [cm] Spring Constant [Nm] 330 330 330 330 330 330 330 330 330 330 330 Compressed L (cm) 4.8 4.9 4.95 5 5.03 5.05 4.99 4.93 4.9 4.88 4.81 Force exerted 0.99 0.66 0.495 0.33 0.231 0.165 0.363 0.561 0.66 0.726 0.957 Drag Force (N) 0.2252 0.1501 0.1126 0.0751 0.0525 0.0375 0.0826 0.1276 0.1501 0.1651 0.2177

15 5.1 12 5.1 9 5.1 6 5.1 3 5.1 0 5.1 -3 5.1 -6 5.1 -9 5.1 -12 5.1 -15 5.1 Actual velocity = 0.492 m/s

Table G- 4: Drag force versus Angle of Attack, Trial Run 4


Part B: Graphical Representation of Experimental Results (Spring 4)


Drag force Versus Angle of Attack for a NACA0016 Airfoil





Drag Force (N)





0.0000 15 12 9 6 3 0 -3 -6 -9 -12

Angle of Attack (Degrees)


Figure G- 1: Graphical Representation of Experimental Results (Spring 4)

Overall Spring Length Versus Angle of Attack


Spring Length (cm)





4.4 15 12 9 6 3 0 -3 -6 -9 -12 -15

Angle of Attack (Degrees)


Figure G- 2: Spring Displacement Vs Angle of Attack


Force vs Spring Constant



Spring Constant (N/m)





0 0.00








Force (N)
Spring 1 Spring 2 Spring 3 Spring 4

Figure G- 3: Force measurement vs. spring constant

Lift vs Drag for a NACA0016

1.4 1.2 Lift Coefficient 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 Drag Coefficient 0.2 0.25 0.3 Re=100,000 Re=105,000 RE=110,000 RE=115,000 RE=120,000 RE=125,000 RE=130,000

Figure G- 4: Lift vs. Drag Chart for a NACA0016 Airfoil [12]

The figure below shows a comparison of the theoretical results versus the laboratory test results for plots of Coefficient of Drag vs. Coefficient of Lift.


In most cases, it is easily seen that stall occurs at a range of 10 13 degrees based on the change in ratio of Cd vs. Cl

Drag Coefficient Vs. Angle of Attack for a NACA0016 Airfoil

0.4000 0.3500 Drag Coefficient 0.3000 0.2500 0.2000 0.1500 0.1000 0.0500 0.0000 -20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 Angle of Attack (degrees) Test 1 Test 2 Test 3 Test 4 RE=105,000

Figure G- 5: Drag Coefficient vs. Angle of Attack for a NACA00016 Airfoil



The floating base can represented as a pendulum with three supports that can be assumed to hold about 1/3 of the weight. Alternatively, the floating base can be represented by a solid mass that is held by one support at the centre to support all of the weight. This case is shown in the figure below and is slightly exaggerated for a better understanding.

Figure H- 1: Representing the fixed base a pendulum

The length of the support arm is 0.254m. This represented by the normal shadow line in the above figure. As a worst case scenario, the maximum angle of rotation that can be achieved by the floating base is 5 degrees based on the design of the apparatus. At this angle, the projection of the support onto its normal shadow line is: Projected Length, LP = L cos = 0.254m cos 5 = 0.253m Therefore, the change in height, h, is given by:
h = L LP = 0.254m 0.253m = 0.001m

For the purposes of this thesis, a 0.001m change in height may be neglected.



Firstly, the open channel Reynolds Number will be determined. r Vd h Re = (a)

However, since it is a non-circular duct, the hydraulic diameter must be determined: dh = 4A 4bh 4(0.2413m)(0.1524m) = = = 0.2694m Pw b + 2h 0.2413m + 2(0.1524m) (b)

Substituting (b) into (a)

(0.492 m )(0.2694m) s = 131,885 2 6 m 1.005 10 s

Re =

This Reynolds number indicates that the flow through in the downstream side of the hydraulic jump is of turbulent. This turbulence flow serves the advantage of allowing for a much shorter entrance length than a laminar flow and consequently, the boundary layer is not as thick along the walls resulting in a more uniform flow field.

Secondly, the trailing edge Reynolds Number will be determined. This Reynolds Number indicates whether the boundary layer is laminar or turbulent.
r VL

Re x =


m 0.2143m s = 118,129 1.005 10 6


Since Rex < 106, the boundary layer is laminar. This indicates that there is a thicker boundary layer and that the predominant cause of drag friction is skin friction due to the greater velocity gradients.

The coefficient of drag can also be determined for the airfoil. Here is a sample calculation for an attack angle of 6 degrees with the above conditions.


The spring is measured to displace approximately 1.5 103 m (the original length is 0.051m and the compressed length is 0.0495m. Therefore, by Hookes Law: F = kx = 329.7 N 1.5 10 3 m = 0.495 N m

Since the only force acting in that direction is drag force that is induced by the free flowing fluid, the drag force must be equivalent to the spring force.

The drag coefficient can be determined: CD ( ) = F ( ) 0.495 N = = 0.12179 1 1 kg V 2 Ap (998 3 )(0.473) 2 (0.0364) 2 2 m



Figure J- 1: Hydraulic Flume with labels

It is necessary to solve for the velocity downstream of the hydraulic jump. First, the velocity V1 will be determined. Next, the Froude Number of that section will be calculated and utilized to determine the height of the fluid after the hydraulic jump. The principle of mass flow conservation is then used to determine the velocity of that section. Simplifying Bernoullis Equation, P V12 P V2 1 + + h1 = 2 + 2 + h2 g 2 g g 2 g


Because P = P = Patm , resulting in: 1 1 V12 V2 + h1 = 2 + h2 . 2g 2g


Using the conservation of mass flow, solve for V1 as a function of V2,


& & m1 = m2

A1V 1= A2V 2
A1V 1= A2V 2

V 1=

A2V2 V2 h2 = A1 h1


Determine the velocity, V2, by substituting (c) into (b): ( h2V2 2 ) V2 h1 + h1 = 2 + h2 2g 2g 2 gh12 h1 + h2

V2 =


V2 =

m )(0.3429m) 2 2 s 0.3429m + 0.0381m V2 = 2.46 m s

Using the Froude Number, V Fr 2 = 2 = gh2 2.46 m s

m (9.81 2 )(0.0381m) s

= 4.02 ,

Find the height of the fluid just downstream of the hydraulic jump: h3 = h2 ( 1 + 8( Fr 2 ) 2 1 2
h3 = 0.0381m ( 1 + 8(4.02) 2 1 2


h3 = 0.198m


It is then possible to determine the velocity of the fluid through this section by once again using the conservation of mass flow equation:
& & m2 = m3

A2V 21= A3V 3

A2V 2= A3V3 (2.46 m )(0.0381m) m s = 0.473 s 0.198m

AV V h V 3= 2 2 = 2 2 = A3 h3

The theoretical flow that the hydraulic flume can achieve is V3 = 0.473

m . s



Figure K- 1: Hydraulic Flume with Steady State Measurements

To experimentally determine V3, several measurements must be made prior to starting the pumps. Firstly, the exit tank and main tank must be sufficiently full. The sluice gate and exit gate should be calibrated to make the creation of a hydraulic jump easier.


Measurements Prior to Experiment Component Measurement [m]

Sluice Gate Height (as measured from the bottom) Exit Gate Height (as measured from the top) Exit Tank Height (as measured from the bottom) Main tank height (as measured from the bottom) Main tank width ( inside edges to inside edge) Main tank length (inside edge to inside edge)

0.0381 0.235 0.914 0.635 0.889 2.88

Table K- 1: Measurements prior to experiment

Once these measurements were taken, a tape measure was inserted into the main tank. To experimentally determine the flow rate through the system, the pump was turned on and the level of the main tank was recorded for 23 seconds (arbitrarily chosen). Any time value can be used as long as the time used is less than the time it takes for the water to travel through the system and back into the main tank. The following measurements were noted:

Time (s) 0 10.90 23.33

Height (m) 0.635 0.589 0.470

Table K- 2: Time vs. Tank Level

The volumetric flow rate can now be determined:

Q= V t = l w h t = 2.88m 0.889m (0.635 0.470)m 23.33 = 0.0181 m3 s

The correct calibration of the sluice gate and exit gate should result in a hydraulic flume that is that rather stable and would require very little, if any, manipulation. The dimensions of the channel itself were then determined.


Open Channel Component (after jump)

Dimension [m]

Water level height, h Base, b

0.1524 0.2413

Table K- 3: Hydraulic Jump Measurements

The velocity of the fluid downstream of the hydraulic jump could now be determined using the volumetric flow rate equation: v Q = V3 A3
m3 r Q Q m s V3 = = = = 0.492 A bh 0.2413m 0.1524m s 0.0181



The lab handout provided is a copy of the one provided under last years thesis by Karthik Senthilnathan. However, since many aspects of the lab have been modified from last year, this lab represents an updated version of the older 2008 version. Background Theory, Discussion and some diagrams have been kept the same, while the Procedure, Apparatus and Results sections have been changed to accurately reflect the new apparatus and airfoil.


External Flow over Airfoils

Introduction The development of the design of aircraft wings has paralleled the theoretical and experimental study of fluid dynamics; however, the first engineers to study airfoils relied on solely on experimentation to determine the characteristics of various airfoils.

When fluid flows over an airfoil, various forces are produced and an analysis of these forces can be difficult to conceptualize using only theory. Lift and drag forces are the primary concepts associated with airfoil experimentation. The second major concept associated with external flow is flow separation. This is typically analyzed using smoke streams in air tunnels or dye streams in water tunnels in order to visualize the flow characteristics around an airfoil. Experimental fluid dynamics is still prominent today due to the complex shapes and geometries that are often difficult and costly to model using standard equations and computer software.
Objective The objective of this laboratory is to provide students with exposure to external flow analysis over airfoils to understand the concepts of lift, drag, angle of attack, stall and flow separation. Background For this experiment, the NACA0016 airfoil is going to be tested in the hydraulic flume located in MC214 to determine the resultant force on the airfoil. In addition, dye will be injected through the airfoil to simulate streamlines in the flow and to give students a better understanding of boundary layer separation in fully developed turbulent flow.

Bernoullis Equation Bernoullis equation is useful in determining the flow characteristics of an open-channel flow at any point of the channel after taking relatively simple measurements. It is shown below in Equation (a). It is important to note that Equation A does not account for energy loss in the channel.

Reynolds Number The Reynolds number is a ratio of inertial forces to viscous forces and indicates whether or not a flow is turbulent or not. The Reynolds number is particularly important in airfoil theory because the lift and drag coefficients are a function of the Reynolds number. The Reynolds number is shown below in Equation B.


NACA Airfoils The National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics (NACA) has developed a list of standard airfoil shapes for aircraft wings. A typical airfoil, with relevant terminology, is shown in Figure L-1. Each NACA airfoil is described using a set of coordinates to represent the upper and lower surfaces of the cross-section of the airfoil in percentage of chord length. The naming system for the simplest NACA airfoil series, the Four-Digit Series, is described in Table L-1.


Figure L- 1: Airfoil Cross Sectional View

Table L- 1: NACA Four-Series Airfoil Properties

Lift The lift coefficient is a non-dimensional number that is used to characterize the amount of lift that an airfoil can produce under particular conditions. The amount of lift on an airfoil can be determined with knowledge of the angle of attack, lift coefficient, projected airfoil surface area (planform area), and flow characteristics such as density and velocity. The coefficient of lift is given by Equation C.


Drag There are two major types of drag that act in a direction opposite to the motion of the airfoil: pressure drag and friction drag. Pressure drag forces are attributed to the fluid that makes contact to the frontal surface of an airfoil. Friction drag, on the other hand, is the drag force that results due to the friction along the surface of the airfoil. The summation of these drag forces is often referred to as parasite drag. For this experiment, parasite drag can be considered the total drag for the airfoil since the airfoil is fixed. By fixing the airfoil, induced drag from the upwards movement of the airfoil is eliminated.

A useful tool for describing the total amount of drag on an airfoil is the coefficient of drag. The coefficient of drag is a dimensionless number that is typically determined experimentally for a particular object or airfoil. The coefficient of drag is best described for airfoils in equation (x).

Similar to the coefficient of lift versus angle of attack plot, experimental data to determine the coefficient of drag with respect to a particular airfoil and Reynolds number. These curves account for the summation of the drag on the airfoil and are useful in determining the total drag force on an airfoil.


Spring Theory For this experiment, it is necessary to measure the deflection of a spring caused by the load force on the airfoil and translate that deflection into a force. The spring used in this laboratory is a normal spring with a spring constant of K = 330 N/m.

The load force, F in Newtons on a spring can be defined by Hookes Law: F = Kx, where K = spring constant (N/m) x = spring deflection from original length
Apparatus The apparatus used in this experiment consists of a few major components: a fixed base, a floating base, an airfoil and a compression spring used for load measurement. The floating base effectively hangs from the fixed base, representing force being transferred on a straight bar across a roller from a rigid point (airfoil) to a load measurement point (spring). A 2-D schematic diagram of the apparatus is shown in Figure L-2 below.

Figure L- 2: 2-D schematic model of the experimental apparatus


A simplified sketch of the hydraulic flume is shown below:

Figure L- 3: Sketch of Hydraulic Flume

Technical Data Compression Spring K = 330 N/m Original Length: 5.1 cm NACA0016 Airfoil Chord Length: 8.25 inches = 20.96 cm Thickness: 1.32 inches = 3.35 cm Width: 6.75 inches = 17.14 cm


Experimental Procedure

1. Check the calibration of the spring. The compression spring should be just touching the support arm of the apparatus, not compressed. 2. Check the main tank to see that the water depth is at least 18 20. a. If water depth is below 18, the hydraulic jump cannot be created to the desired height. Add a hose pipe to the main tank and fill it with water. b. If the water depth is between 18 and 35, the apparatus is ready to be run. 3. Adjust the height of the sluice gate to 1 6/16 from the base using a ruler or measuring tape. This height has been pre-measured to create a hydraulic jump close to the sluice gate. 4. Place a ruler or measuring tape on the exit gate. Raise the gate until the level of the gate is 9 measured from the top of the structure. 5. Ensure that the external flow apparatus is placed near the rear of the water tunnel and is secured. The weight of the apparatus resists tipping, however it will need to be held secure while the water is starting to flow. 6. Start the pump by pressing the start button. 7. Wait until the pump has reached steady state and water is flowing. The hydraulic jump will create itself. 8. In order to adjust the location of the hydraulic jump, slightly raise the exit gate to make the jump move closer to the sluice gate. 9. Lower the exit gate to make the jump move closer to the exit gate if it gets too close (within 1 2 feet) of the sluice gate. a. Small adjustments of the exit gate may be needed to stabilize the jump. Do not touch the sluice gate once set. 10. Once the hydraulic jump is running, two students will work together to take measurements. a. One student will adjust the angle of attack of the airfoil by moving the angular arm while the other student will take a measurement on the scale based on spring deflection. b. After all 11 values are tabulated, another group can take measurements. 11. When all students are done taking measurements, step back and prepare a camera to take pictures of the dye injection process


12. Inject the dye by pressing down on the syringe. Dye will simultaneously come out of all three points. 13. Set the camera to ISO100 or the highest sensitivity setting for fast moving objects and take pictures of the airfoil at angles of 15, 12, 9, 6, 3 and 0 degrees. 14. Stop the pump and let the water drain out of the water tunnel. 15. Adjust the airfoil angle back to zero degrees (6th hole from either end).

Tabulated Results
Angle of Attack -15o -12 o -9 o -6 o -3 o 0o 3o 6o 9o 12 o 15 o Compressed Spring Measurement (mm) Spring Delta (mm) Calculated Force (Drag Force)

Discussion Questions

Determine the theoretical and experimental resultant force on the airfoil Note: the experimental lift force is not measured in this lab. In lieu of this, use the theoretical lift force instead of the experimental lift force. Plot a CD vs. curve for the airfoil. Can you predict the angle at which stall occurs? If so, does the stall angle match with the stall angle produced with the theoretical CL vs plot?


Discuss the results of the flow visualization experiment, referring to the photographs of the experiment. Label any important sections you see. Explain in a short paragraph how airfoils create lift. Use a diagram if necessary. List and explain sources of error for this experiment.

Lift vs Drag for a NACA0016

1.4 1.2 Lift Coefficient 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 Drag Coefficient 0.2 0.25 0.3 Re=100,000 Re=105,000 RE=110,000 RE=115,000 RE=120,000 RE=125,000 RE=130,000

Figure L- 4: NACA0016 Data


White, Frank M. Fluid Mechanics. 5th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill Companies, The, 2002. 478-519. Hepperle, Martin. "JavaFoil." Willkommen / Welcome. 26 Mar. 2009 <>.



This thesis report was completed by two authors and as requested in the Thesis Handbook the name of the author of each section is written in brackets next to the chapter title. Below is a table outlining each persons contributions to this thesis paper:
Name Sections Written/Work Completed

Angel Rafael Chacon (993798958)

Steve Fernandes (993813566)

1.0 Introduction 2.0 Background Theory 4.2 Fluids Lab For Next Year 5.0 Test Runs 6.0 Experimental Analysis 9.0 Future Considerations Appendix F: Beam Deflection Appendix H: Floating base only moves horizontally Appendix I: Experimental Analysis of the airfoil Appendix J: Theoretical Analysis of the hydraulic flume Appendix K: Experimental Analysis of the Hydraulic Flume 3.0 Design and Construction 4.1 ANSYS CFD Lab 7.0 Limitations 8.0 Proper Usage, Maintenance, and Precautions 10.0 Conclusion Appendix C: Spring Force Measurements and Calculations Appendix D: Airfoil Construction Methodology Appendix G: Coefficent of Drag Calculations Report Formatting and Compilation

The References, List of Symbols, Figures and Tables, as well as the Table of Contents was completed by both authors. Editing of the entire report was also completed by both authors.