Aerodynamic Performance Analysis of A

Non Planar C Wing using Experimental

and Numerical Tools
Mano Prakash R., Manoj Kumar B., Lakshmi Narayanan
Applied Aerodynamics Conference
Modelling & Simulation In The Aerodynamic Design Process
BRISTOL / 17 - 19 JULY 2012

1/28

Outline
1

Introduction

Computational Fluid Dynamics

Wind tunnel Testing

Induced drag comparison

Radio Controlled model

Conclusions and Recommendations

2/28

Outline
1

Introduction

3/28

Introduction

Accounts for 80% 90% of

the aircrafts climb drag.
Possible ways of reduction:

Increased span (Weight!)

Non planar concepts Winglets, C wing, etc.
Thrust required curve for jet aircraft
4/28

Objective
To perform force (lift and drag) measurements on a

C-wing with a NACA 0012 profile at different angles

of attack and compare the results obtained to those
corresponding to a conventional plane rectangular wing.
To incorporate a C-wing into a remote controlled aircraft that

can be maneuvered using the ailerons mounted on the

C-wing.

5/28

Methodology
To carry out CFD analyses on C wing geometries to finalize

the wind tunnel model based on optimum lift/drag ratio.

Front view

Right side view

6/28

Outline
2

Computational Fluid Dynamics

7/28

CFD
3D Inviscid flow simulation
Tools employed:
CATIA V5 is used for 3D models.
Grid generation for the models is carried out using

ANSYS Workbench.
Flow computations are performed using ANSYS CFX.
Postprocessing is carried out using CFD Post.

8/28

Initial Geometry
Model 1
Selection Criteria: Reference wing dimensions Span = 500mm, Chord = 150mm, Aspect Ratio = 3.33

9/28

Surface grids

Coarse
Elements: 5626709

Medium

Fine

8757321

12782950

10/28

Grids -Cut Section at 50% of span

Growth
rate

Coarse

Medium

Fine

1.2

1.1

1.05
11
/28

Flow Field Conditions

Reynolds Re = 3 105 based on chord, c = 0.13m and Number
flow velocity, V = 35m/s
Mach number, M = 0.1
Turbulence model = Laminar
Inlet = Velocity, V = 35m/s
Outlet = Pressure, P = 0atm
Walls = Free slip wall
12/28

CFD Results
Force convergence
M = 0.1, Re = 3 105, = 5o

Force coefficients do not asymptote on fine grid.

13/28

Final model
Lift / Drag Vs. Angle of attack

14/28

Outline
3

Wind tunnel Testing

15/28

Wind tunnel
Subsonic wind tunnel
Hindustan College Of Engineering, Anna University, Chennai,
India.
Tunnel type :
Open loop tunnel
Test section :
60cm 60cm 200cm
Velocity range:
0 80m/s
16/28

Experimental set up
Model
Material used:
Fiberglass
Total pressure
taps: 32
Manufacturing
accuracy:
0.00012mm

17/28

Results

18/28

Outline

Induced drag comparison

19/28

Planar wing

20/28

C-wing

21/28

Interference factor
b1 = 435mm
b2 = 140mm
h = 85mm
b2/b1 = 0.32
h/b1
= 0.2
= 0.197
* = 0.98

22/28

Comparison curve

23/28

Outline

Radio Controlled model

24/28

Model
Materials:
Fuselage Spad board
reinforced with
balsa wood.
Wing and tail
plane - Coroplast
reinforced with
balsa wood.
Controls:
Speed, aileron,
elevator and
rudder
25/28

Outline

Conclusions and Recommendations

26/28

Conclusion and
Recommendations
Conclusions
High L/D ratio is achievable.
Significant reduction in induced drag.
Height (vertical separation) and span ratio has a direct influence on the

overall efficiency.

Recommendations
Appropriate airfoil should be selected.
Design optimization should be coupled with CFD studies.
CFD studies should include viscous effects.
Coupled aerodynamics, stability and structural analyses should be

conducted.

27/28

THANK YOU

28/28