Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Roll No:
M.Karthick
AE12M009
2nd Group
Name :
Roll No:
M.Karthick
AE12M009
2nd Group
monitored and they are recorded when the readings are stable. Since it is a symmetric arifoil for = 0O the
pressure distribution for the lower portion of airfoil is also symmetric. The tunnel is stopped.
For other angles of attack ( = 2O, 4O, 6O & 8O) the above procedure is repeated with an additional
step. The static pressures of the bottom region of airfoil will be different for these angles of attack. To capture
the pressures at the lower regions of the airfoil, the airfoil will be tilted to negative corresponding angles of
attack ( = -2O, -4O, -6O & -8O) and once again the readings will be recoreded.
Analysis and results:
The measured static gauge pressures in mm of H2O from airfoil for all the angles of attack are
tabulated in table -1.
Lower
Upper
Region
Location From
Leading Edge
(mm)
0
3
5
7
9
22
29
36
43
50
0
3
5
7
9
22
29
36
43
50
( = 2O)
mm of H2O
( = 0O)
mm of H2O
1.00
27.90
39.10
38.20
37.60
35.40
34.00
32.10
30.60
29.90
1.00
27.90
39.10
38.20
37.60
35.40
34.00
32.10
30.60
29.90
( = 4O) mm
of H2O
2.80
11.90
18.00
10.40
28.50
19.60
30.00
22.80
31.70
26.40
30.70
26.50
30.20
26.80
28.60
25.80
27.00
24.60
26.30
23.70
1.50
8.30
34.40
46.40
44.70
55.20
42.10
49.60
39.70
44.20
36.60
40.00
34.80
38.40
32.90
36.10
31.70
30.60
29.00
28.30
Table -1 Measured values
( = 6O)
mm of H2O
( = 8O)
mm of H2O
22.10
7.00
15.60
19.80
24.60
25.50
26.30
25.90
25.00
24.30
16.30
53.90
61.10
53.80
46.90
42.90
39.70
34.80
31.00
28.70
30.30
6.40
13.60
17.80
22.70
23.80
24.90
24.70
24.10
23.80
39.00
68.80
71.40
61.30
57.50
44.00
38.90
35.50
31.90
28.90
*g*H
Name :
Roll No:
Lower
Upper
Region
Location
From Leading
Edge (mm)
0
3
5
7
9
22
29
36
43
50
0
3
5
7
9
22
29
36
43
50
( = 0O)
( = 2O)
( = 4O)
Pressure
Pressure
Pressure
(Pa)
(Pa)
(Pa)
100529.6
100511.9
100422.7
100265.7
100362.8
100437.4
100155.8
100259.8
100347.1
100164.6
100245.1
100315.7
100170.5
100228.4
100280.4
100192.1
100238.2
100279.4
100205.9
100243.1
100276.5
100224.5
100258.8
100286.3
100239.2
100274.5
100298.1
100246.1
100281.4
100306.9
100529.6
100524.7
100458
100265.7
100201.9
100084.2
100155.8
100100.9
99997.88
100164.6
100126.4
100052.8
100170.5
100149.9
100105.8
100192.1
100180.3
100147
100205.9
100198
100162.7
100224.5
100216.6
100185.2
100239.2
100228.4
100239.2
100246.1
100254.9
100261.8
Table -2 Absolute Pressure values
( = 6O)
Pressure
(Pa)
100322.6
100470.7
100386.4
100345.2
100298.1
100289.2
100281.4
100285.3
100294.1
100301
100379.5
100010.6
99940
100011.6
100079.3
100118.5
100149.9
100198
100235.3
100257.8
M.Karthick
AE12M009
2nd Group
( = 8O)
Pressure
(Pa)
100242.1
100476.6
100406
100364.8
100316.7
100305.9
100295.1
100297.1
100303
100305.9
100156.8
99864.46
99838.96
99938.04
99975.32
100107.8
100157.8
100191.1
100226.5
100255.9
1 2
2
The Co-efficient of Lift CL is calculated by subtracting the upper portion CPU from Lower region CPL and
integrating for the full chord length
1
= 0 ( )
=1,2,3..
( ) + ( )+1 +1
Table -3 &4 presents the calculation done for estimating the CL for ( = 0O, 2O, 4O, 6O & 8O).
Theoretical CL values are calculated using the following formula
= 2
3
Name :
Roll No:
Location From
Leading Edge
(mm)
0
3
5
7
9
22
29
36
43
50
61.5
0
3
5
7
9
22
29
36
43
50
61.5
Lower
Upper
Region
( = 0O)
C
( = 4O)
( = 6O)
( = 8O)
C
0.901
0.821
0.417
-0.035
-0.293
0.146
0.484
0.634
-0.790
-0.319
0.075
0.253
-0.750
-0.386
-0.067
0.067
-0.723
-0.461
-0.226
-0.146
-0.626
-0.417
-0.231
-0.186
-0.563
-0.395
-0.244
-0.222
-0.479
-0.324
-0.200
-0.204
-0.413
-0.253
-0.146
-0.164
-0.382
-0.222
-0.106
-0.133
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.901
0.878
0.577
0.222
-0.293
-0.581
-1.114
-1.446
-0.790
-1.038
-1.504
-1.766
-0.750
-0.923
-1.256
-1.442
-0.723
-0.816
-1.016
-1.136
-0.626
-0.679
-0.830
-0.958
-0.563
-0.599
-0.759
-0.816
-0.479
-0.515
-0.657
-0.599
-0.413
-0.461
-0.413
-0.430
-0.382
-0.342
-0.311
-0.328
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
Table 3 Calculated CP Values at each location.
( = 2O)
( = 0O)
X/C
( = 2O)
CPL - CPU
( = 4O)
CPL - CPU
-0.399
0.661
0.342
0.155
-0.062
-0.111
-0.160
-0.151
-0.124
-0.111
0.000
-0.785
-2.107
-2.223
-1.775
-1.606
-1.007
-0.781
-0.630
-0.470
-0.337
0.000
( = 6O)
CPL - CPU
M.Karthick
AE12M009
2nd Group
( = 8O)
CPL - CPU
CPL - CPU
0.00
0.000
0.000
-0.058
0.016
-0.160
0.035
-0.257
0.044
0.386
0.077
0.05
0.000
0.000
0.728
0.024
1.597
0.052
2.081
0.067
2.768
0.087
0.08
0.000
0.000
0.719
0.020
1.579
0.045
2.019
0.057
2.564
0.073
0.11
0.000
0.000
0.537
0.015
1.189
0.032
1.508
0.041
1.930
0.056
0.15
0.000
0.000
0.355
0.065
0.790
0.147
0.989
0.186
1.544
0.258
0.36
0.000
0.000
0.262
0.027
0.599
0.063
0.772
0.078
0.896
0.086
0.47
0.000
0.000
0.204
0.022
0.515
0.055
0.595
0.056
0.621
0.063
0.59
0.000
0.000
0.191
0.023
0.457
0.041
0.395
0.038
0.479
0.047
0.70
0.000
0.000
0.209
0.019
0.266
0.027
0.266
0.026
0.346
0.033
0.81
0.000
0.000
0.120
0.011
0.204
0.019
0.195
0.018
0.226
0.021
1.00
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
CL
(Experiment)
0.0000
0.2415
0.5163
0.6115
0.8008
CL (Theory)
0.0000
0.2193
0.4386
0.6580
0.8773
Table 4 Calculation of CL
=
( ) + ( )+1 +1
,
2
=
4
Name :
Roll No:
= 0O
= 2O
= 4O
= 6O
5
M.Karthick
AE12M009
2nd Group
Name :
Roll No:
M.Karthick
AE12M009
2nd Group
= 8O
Figure 2 CP - Vs x/C
Figure -2 shows the CP distribution versus the x/C ratio on the left side as well as the CP distribution on the
airfoil surface on the right side.
Figure 3 shows the comparison between the theoretical and experiment values.
Table 5 gives the % of deviation of experimental values from the theoretical values
% =
() ()
100
()
CL
(Experiment)
0
2
4
6
8
CL
(Theory)
% of deviation
from theory
0.0000
0.0000
0.2415
0.2193
0.5163
0.4386
0.6115
0.6580
0.8008
0.8773
Table 5 % of deviation
Figure 3 CL Vs -
6
0.00
-10.13
-17.71
7.07
8.72
Name :
Roll No:
M.Karthick
AE12M009
2nd Group
Conclusion:
The experimental data is analysed. The comparison between theoretical and experimental CL values
(shown in figure 3) shows that the experimental curve typically follows the theoretical trend.
The maximum deviation at = 4O (17.71%).The variation may be resulted due to the various
experimental uncertainties and errors in the experimental calculations (numerical integration). More number
of port locations are required to predict more precise pressure distribution and CL values.
Ref -1: Armfield Wind Tunnel Instruction Manual C 15 Issue 8, dated July 2010.