Supercritical Airfoils With Fluent

International Journal of Engineering Research & Technology (IJERT)
ISSN: 2278-0181
Vol. 3 Issue 8, August - 2014
Simulations of Supercritical Aerofoil at

Different Angle of Attack With a Simple
Aerofoil using Fluent
1
Ravi shankar P R,
Mtech scholar, Department Mechanical
Engineering,
PDA college of Engineering
Gulbarga, Karnataka, India
H. K. Amarnath
Professor, Department of
Mechanical Engineering,
Gogte Institute of Technology,
Belgum, Karnataka, India
Omprakash D Hebbal
Professor, Department Mechanical
Engineering,
PDA college of Engneering
Gulbarga, India
Fig 1: Supercritical Aerofoil.
A. Features of supercritical aerofoil

1. Trailing edge thickness
The design philosophy of the supercritical aerofoil
required that the trailing-edge slopes of the upper and lower
surfaces be equal. This requirement served to retard flow
separation by reducing the pressure recovery gradient on the
upper surface so that the pressure coefficients recovered to
only slightly positive values at the trailing edge. Increasing the
trailing-edge thickness of an interim 11-percent-thick
supercritical aerofoil from 0 to 1.0 percent of the chord
resulted in a significant decrease in wave drag at transonic
Mach numbers [3];
IJE
RT
Abstract This In this project flow over supercritical aerofoil

and simple aerofoil is compared at Mach number 0.6
parameters which are observed are pressure drag and strength
of shockwave as they are one of the parameters which are
prominent in transonic speed. These parameters decide the
efficiency of the aerofoil. In this project NACA SC (02) 0714 and
NACA 4412 aerofoil profiles is considered for analysis. Software
tools used are GAMBIT and FLUENT. Gambit is used for
preparing the geometry and meshing and FLUENT is used for
analyzing the flow. Computational fluid dynamics is used
because preparing a model of aerofoil is a lengthy and difficult
process and wind tunnel capable of 0.6 Mach number is not
available and difficult to produce accurate results In
supercritical aerofoil, thickness of an aerofoil near trailing edge
of lower surface is reduced, so that increase in pressure at
lowers surface and helps in lift of an aircraft easily compared to
simple aerofoil. At 15o angle of attack, pressure drag is 12000
Pascal lower in case of supercritical aerofoil compared to simple
aerofoil.
Keywords Fluent simulation; supercritical aerofoil; pressure

drag; shock waves; Temperature distribution
I.
INTRODUCTION
Transonic jet aircrafts fly at speed of 0.8 to 0.9 Mach

number. At these speeds speed of air reaches speed of sound
some were over the wing and compressibility effects start to
show up. The free stream Mach number at which local sonic
velocities develop is called critical Mach number. It is always
better to increase the critical Mach number so that formation
of shockwaves can be delayed. This can be done either by
sweeping the wings but high sweep is not recommended in
passenger aircrafts as there is loss in lift in subsonic speed and
difficulties during constructions. So engineers thought [1] of
developing an aerofoil which can perform this task without
loss in lift and increase in drag. They increased the thickness
of the leading edge and made the upper surface flat so that
there is no formation of strong shockwave and curved trailing
edge lower surface which incr
eases the pressure at lower surface and accounts for lift.
The Fig 1.1 shows sketch of a typical supercritical aerofoil [2].
IJERTV3IS081073
2. Maximum thickness
For the thinner aerofoil, the onset of trailing-edge
separation began at an approximately 0.1 higher normal-force
coefficient at the higher test Mach numbers, and drag
divergence Mach number at a normal-force coefficient of 0.7
was 0.01 higher. [3]
3. Aft upper surface curvature
The rear upper surface of the supercritical aerofoil is
shaped to accelerate the flow following the shock wave in
order to produce a near-sonic plateau at design conditions.[4]
4. Aerofoil data
There are two aerofoils chosen for this analysis one Super
critical aerofoil chosen for this project is NACA SC(2)0714
and other NACA 4412 which is conventional aerofoil. The
specification of NACA SC (02) 0714 and simple aerofoil
NACA 4412 [5] are shown in Table 1 and 2.
www.ijert.org
(This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.)
1393

ISSN: 2278-0181
Table 1: Specification of supercritical aerofoil NACA SC (2)

0714.
II RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
A. Governing equation in CFD
Particulars
Dimensions with respect to

chord length / chord line.
Thickness
13.9%
Camber
1.5%
Lower flatness
9.4%
Leading edge radius
2.9%
CL max
1.442
Max. CL angle
15 degree
Max L/D
27.881
Max L/D angle
4.5 degree
Stall angle
4.5 degree
Zero lift angle of attack
-5 degree
Material
Aluminum
The governing equations for computational fluid dynamics

(CFD) are based on conservation of mass, momentum, and
energy. FLUENT uses a finite volume method (FVM) to
solve the governing equations. The FVM involves
discretization and integration of the governing equation over
the control volume. The following is a summary of the theory
involved in the FLUENT analysis and is based on the
FLUENT Users Manual [16].
The basic equations for steady-state laminar flow are
conservation of mass and momentum. When heat transfer or
compressibility is involved the energy equation is also
required. The governing equations are, [5]
IJE
RT
The continuity equation (3.1) expresses the conservation

of matter. If matter flows away from a point, there must be a
decrease in the quantity remaining. By definition, the
continuity equation should be recognized as a statement of
mass conservation. The continuity equation relates the speed
of a fluid moving over an aerofoil.
Table 2: Specifications of simple aerofoil NACA 4412.

Particulars
Dimensions with respect to

chord length / chord line.
Thickness
12%
Camber
4%
Lower flatness
76.1%
Leading edge radius
1.7%
CL max
1.507
Max. CL angle
11 degree
Max L/D
57.2
Max L/D angle
5.5 degree
Stall angle
6 degree
Zero lift angle of attack
4 degree
Material
Aluminum
Continuity Equation:
.(3.1)
Momentum equation:
The momentum equation (3.2) is statement of

Newtons second law and relates the sum of the forces acting
on an element of fluid to its acceleration or rate of change of
momentum. The Newtons second law of motion F = ma,
forms the basis of the momentum equation. In fluid mechanics
it is not clear what mass of moving fluid we should use, such
that we use different forms of equation. The Navier-Stokes
equations are the fundamental partial differentials equations
that describe the flow of incompressible fluids.
.(3.2)
Energy equation:
The energy equation (3.3) demonstrates that, per unit
volume, the change in energy of the fluid moving through a
control volume is equal to the rate of heat transferred into the
control volume plus the rate of work done by surface forces
plus the rate of work done by gravity.
.(3.3)
IJERTV3IS081073
www.ijert.org
1394

ISSN: 2278-0181
2. Approach using FLUENT
D. Mesh geometry in Gambit
The continuity and momentum equations, along with the

realizable k- model with pressure gradients effects for
turbulent flows, are solved using the FVM in FLUENT. A
pressure based solver is used since the flow is incompressible
and separation is caused by adverse pressure gradients.
B. Import edge
To specify the aerofoil geometry we will import a file
containing a list of vertices along the surface and have
GAMBIT join these vertices to create edge, corresponding to
the surface of the aerofoil [17]. Fig 2 shows the importing
edges of an aerofoil.
Mesh edges
Operation Toolpad >Mesh Command Button >Edge
Command Button >Mesh Edges
Taking interval count 50 we mesh the edges AB, BC, CD,
DA. Fig 3 shows meshing of aerofoil geometry.
Mesh face
Operation Toolpad >Mesh Command Button >Face

Command Button >Mesh Faces
Taking interval count 100 we mesh the face Farfield
Main Menu >File >Input >ICEM input
C. Crete farfield boundary
IJE
RT
Fig 2: Import Edges
We will create the farfield boundary by creating vertices

and joining them appropriately to form edges.
Operation Toolpad >GeometryCommand Button
>Vertex Command Button >Create Vertex
Operation Toolpad >Geometry Command Button >Edge
Command Button >Create Edge
Create edges AB, BC, CD, DA by selecting the vertices
Create Face
We will create the face by selecting the edges AB, BC,

CD, DA naming the face Farfield.
Operation Toolpad > Geometry Command Button >
Face Command Button >Form Face
By selecting the aerofoil edges make an aerofoil face
naming Aerofoil.
Before proceeding to the next step we will subtract the
faces, subtracting face Aerofoil from Farfield.
Operation Toolpad > Geometry Command Button > Face
Command Button
Click on the Boolean Operations Button and select
Subtract Face Box select Farfield
in upper box and Aerofoil in lower box click apply.
IJERTV3IS081073
Fig 3: Meshing
E. Specify boundary types in Gambit

a. Define boundary types
Operation tool pad >Zone Command button >Specify
boundary types
Under entity select edges and select AB, CD as Pressure
Farfield, DA as velocity Inlet, BC as Pressure Outlet.
Save the work and Export Mesh.
Main Menu >File >Save
Main Menu >File >Export >Mesh
F. Set up problem in Fluent
Table 3 shows the properties of fluid that are given in
FLUENT flow.
Import File[19]
Main Menu >File >Read Case
Check Grid
Main Menu >Grid >Check
Define Properties
Table 3: Properties of fluid
Fluid
(kg/m3)
Air
1.185
(kg/m-s)
0.0000183
K
(W/m-K)
Cp
(kJ/kg-K)
0.0261
1.004
Define >Model >Solver
www.ijert.org
1395

ISSN: 2278-0181
Fig 6: Defining Boundary condition

Fig 4: Model Solver
G. Solver
Under Solver select Density based Solver and in Gradient
option select Green-Gauss node based.
Define >Model >Viscous
Fig 5 shows flow under viscous select K-epsilon[20]
Solve >Control >Solution

Set Discretization to be Second Order Upwind for Flow,
Turbulent Kinetic Energy,
Turbulent Dissipation Rate
Solve >Initialize >Initialize
Set Velocity_Inlet under compute form
Main Menu >File >Write >Case
Solve Iterate
IJE
RT
IV RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

A. Supercritical aerofoil at zero degree angle of attack
1.
Contours of static pressure
Fig 5: Model Viscous
Define >Model >Energy

Fig 5 shows defining boundary conditions for velocity
inlet.
Turn On the Energy equation
Define >Materials
Make sure that air is selected under Fluid Material and set
Density to Ideal Gas
Define >Operating Conditions
Set Operating Pressure to be 101325 Pascal
Define >Boundary Conditions
Fig 6 showa the applying boundary conditions
Fig 7: Contours of static pressure
Fig 7 shows static pressure contour at 0.6 Mach number. It

can be observed that there is high pressure of 35100 Pascal
and at trailing edge pressure is -18200 Pascal. Resultant
pressure is 53300 Pascal.
2.
Contours of dynamic pressure
Set the Velocity Magnitude to be 250 m/sec i.e around 0.6

Mach
Fig 8: Contours of dynamic pressure
IJERTV3IS081073
www.ijert.org
1396

ISSN: 2278-0181
Fig 8 shows dynamic pressure contour at 0.6 Mach

number. It can be observed that a weak shock is formed near
the trailing edge of the aerofoil. And at the lower surface of
the trailing edge high pressure region is there which
compensates for lift loss due to flat upper surface.
3.
velocity is maximum around 379 m/s and minimum at

leading edge and trailing edge.
B. Supercritical aerofoil at fifteen degree angle of attack
1.
Contours of static temperature

Fig 9: Contours of static temperature
Fig 9 shows static temperature contours at 0.6 Mach

number. It can be observed that a temperature at leading
edge is maximum about 340 K.
2.
Contours of velocity magnitude
IJE
RT
4.
Fig 12 shows static pressure contour at 0.6 Mach number.

It can be observed that there is high pressure of 35100 Pascal
and at trailing edge pressure is -27700 Pascal. Resultant
pressure is 62800 Pascal.

Fig 10: Contours of velocity magnitude
5.
Fig 13 shows dynamic pressure contour at 0.6 Mach

number. It can be observed that a weak shock is formed near
the trailing edge of the aerofoil. And at the lower surface of
the trailing edge high pressure region is there which
Velocity vectors
3.
Fig 11: Velocity vectors
Fig 10 and 11 shows Velocity magnitude and Velocity

vectors at center of pressure that is maximum camber point
IJERTV3IS081073
www.ijert.org
1397

ISSN: 2278-0181
Fig 14 shows temperature is maximum at center of

pressure after the separation point from laminar to turbulent
flow.
71200 Pascal and at trailing edge pressure is 35000 Pascal.

Resultant pressure is 106200 Pascal.
2.
4.
Fig 15 and 16 shows velocity magnitude and velocity

vectors. It shows the flow separation after maximum
camber point velocity maximum at leading edge 512 m/s
.
5. Velocity vector
Fig 18 shows dynamic contour at 0.6 Mach number. It can

be observed that a weak shock is formed near the trailing edge
of the aerofoil. And at the lower surface of the trailing edge
high pressure region is there which compensates for lift loss
due to flat upper surface.
IJE
RT
3.
Fig 16: velocity vector
C. Supercritical aerofoil at thirty degree angle of attack
1.
Fig 4.13 shows effect on static temperature and it shows

same result as static pressure. Formation of shockwave leads
to rise in temperature near the leading edge 384 K.
4.
Fig 17 shows static pressure contour at 0.6 Mach

number. It can be observed that there is high pressure of
IJERTV3IS081073
www.ijert.org
1398

ISSN: 2278-0181
5.
Fig 23 shows dynamic contour at 0.6 Mach number. It can

be observed that a weak shock is formed near the trailing edge
of the aerofoil. And at the lower surface of the trailing edge
high pressure region is there which compensates for lift loss
due to flat upper surface.
Velocity vectors
3.

Fig 20 and 21 shows velocity magnitude and velocity

vectors of supercritical aerofoil at 0.6 Mach number. It can
been seen that flow separation starts at immediate to the
leading edge and maximum at leading edge 517 m/s.
Fig 24 shows effect on static temperature and it shows

same result as static pressure and shows effect on dynamic
temperature the formation of shockwave leads to rise in
temperature at leading edge surface around 331 K.
D. Simple aerofoil at zero degree
IJE
RT
1.
4.

number. Iit can be observed that there is high pressure of
39200 Pascal and at trailing edge pressure is -18200
Pascal. Resultant pressure is 57400 Pascal.
2.
Fig 24 and Fig 25 shows velocity magnitude and velocity

vectors of a simple aerofoil at 0.6 Mach number. Form Fig
4.20 can be observed that velocity is maximum at maximum
camber point as high as 400 m/s greater than supercritical
aerofoil 384 m/s at 0o angle of attack.
5.
Velocity vectors
Fig 25: velocity vectors

IJERTV3IS081073
www.ijert.org
1399

ISSN: 2278-0181
E. Simple aerofoil at fifteen degree

1.
also shows effect on the formation of shockwave leads to

rise in temperature.

4.


number and it can be observed that there is high pressure of
41000 Pascal and at trailing edge pressure is -35100 Pascal.
Velocity vectors
IJE
RT
2.
5.
Fig 27 shows dynamic contour at 0.6 Mach number. It

can be observed that a weak shock is formed near the
trailing edge of the aerofoil. And at the lower surface of the
trailing edge high pressure region is there which
3.
Fig 29 shows velocity magnitude and Fig 30 shows

direction of velocity vectors the contours behave same as plots
of dynamic pressure. And separation of flow after the trailing
edge. Maximum velocity at upper surface of aerofoil about
550 m/s.
F. Simple aerofoil at thirty degree
1.

same result as static pressure. The formation of shockwave
leads to rise in temperature. It shows effect on static
temperature and it shows same result as static pressure. It
IJERTV3IS081073
www.ijert.org
1400

ISSN: 2278-0181

number. It can be observed that there is high pressure of
41900 Pascal and at trailing edge pressure is -28800 Pascal.
2.
Fig 34 and 35 shows the velocity magnitude and velocity

vectors distribution of a simple aerofoil at 0.6 Mach number
at 30o angle of attack. From Fig 35 can we observe that foe
separation starts immediately to the leading and maximum
velocity vector at leading edge only around 630 m/s which is
much greater than supercritical aerofoil at 30o.
5.
Velocity vectors

Fig 35: Velocity vector
Fig 33 shows dynamic contour at 0.6 Mach number. It

can be observed that a weak shock is formed near the
trailing edge of the aerofoil. And at the lower surface of the
trailing edge high pressure region is there which
G. Comparison
IJE
RT
3.
Fig 35 shows velocity magnitude and 4.30 shows direction

of velocity vectors the contours behave same as plots of
dynamic pressure.
1.
Drag pressure versus Angle of attack

same result as static pressure. The formation of shockwave
leads to rise in temperature at lower surface of leading edge
350 K.
4.
Fig 36: Drag pressure versus angle of attack for supercritical aerofoil and
simple aerofoil.
Fig 36 shows that supercritical aerofoil had pressure drag

less when compared to simple aerofoil at 0 degree and 15
degree angle of attack. And at 30 degree angle of attack
pressure drag is greater in case of Supercritical aerofoil
compared tosSimple aerofoil due to maximum surface area
facing opposite to relative wind direction.
IJERTV3IS081073
www.ijert.org
1401

ISSN: 2278-0181
2.
3.
Velocity decrease versus Angle of attack
REFERENCES
Fig 37: Decrease in Velocity versus Angle of attack for Supercritical

aerofoil and Simple aerofoil.
Fig 37 shows magnitude of velocity decrease in the

flow field in supercritical aerofoil is less when compared
on a simple aerofoil in all cases.
Percentage decrement versus angle of attack
IJE
RT
4.
[1] Anderson, J.D (2001), Introduction to flight, New York, Tata Mc

Grawhill.
[2] Jenkins et al., NASA SC (2)-07 14 Airfoil Data Corrected for Sidewall
Boundary-Layer Effects in the Langley 0.3-Meter Transonic Cryogenic
Tunnel,1989
[3] Ravikumar T et al., Aerodynamic analysis of supercritical NACA sc
(2)-0714 airfoil using CFD, IJATES.
[4] Michael Iovnovich et al., Shock-buffet Instability of 3D Wings,
Technion, IIT 2013.
[5] www.airfoilstools.com.
[6] Anderson, John, D (2007). Fundamentals of Aerodynamics. McGrawHill, wikipedia
[7] AE 429 - Aircraft Performance and Flight Mechanics Aerodynamics of
the Airplane.
[8] Groundschool Theory of Flight- Aerofoils and wings 18 August 2012
[9] Acta Math. Univ. Comenianae Vol. LXX, 1(2001), pp. 5173
Proceedings of Algorithm 2000
[10] Anderson, John D., Computational Fluid Dynamics New York, 1989.
[11] S. Rajakumar. et.al. / International Journal of Engineering Science and
Technology Vol. 2(11), 2010, 6474-6484
[12] Juan P. Murcia et al., CFD Analysis of Blunt Trailing Edge Aerofoils.
Tecnica
[13] Senthil kumar et al., Proceedings of the 37th National & 4th
International Conference on Fluid Mechanics and Fluid Power
December 16-18, 2010, IIT Madras, Chennai, India.
[14] Anderson, J.D (2005), Introduction to Aerodynamics, New York, Tata
Mc Grawhill.
[15] Stengel, R. (2004), Flight Dynamics, Princeton University Press, ISBN
0-691- 1407-2.
[16] ANSYS FLUENT Users Guide 2009.
[17] GAMBIT User manual 2007.
[18] Fluent Inc., May- 2003
[19] www.cornelluniversitylectures.com
[20] www.aerospacelectures.co.cc
Fig 38: Percentage decrease in drag pressure and velocity in supercritical

aerofoil when compared to simple aerofoil versus angle of attack.
V CONCLUSION
Summarized conclusions
The modified supercritical aerofoil NACA SC (02)

0714 i.e., upper surface of a aerofoil 70 % of chord
length is made flat or parallel to chord line. So it
reduces decrease in velocity over an aerofoil and so
strength of shock waves decreases.
Less decrease or variation in velocity around
aerofoil, less number of shock waves raises and poor
shock waves.
In supercritical aerofoil, thickness of an aerofoil near
trailing edge of lower surface is reduced, so that
increase in pressure at lowers surface and helps in lift
of an aircraft easily compared to simple aerofoil.
At 15o angle of attack, pressure drag is much lower
in case of supercritical aerofoil compared to simple
aerofoil.
And it limits the angle of attack up to 22o to
supercritical aerofoil because pressure drag increases
drastically.
IJERTV3IS081073
www.ijert.org
1402

Supercritical Airfoils With Fluent

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Supercritical Airfoils With Fluent

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Supercritical Airfoils With Fluent

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

International Journal of Engineering Research & Technology (IJERT)

Simulations of Supercritical Aerofoil at

Fig 1: Supercritical Aerofoil.

A. Features of supercritical aerofoil

Abstract This In this project flow over supercritical aerofoil

Keywords Fluent simulation; supercritical aerofoil; pressure

Transonic jet aircrafts fly at speed of 0.8 to 0.9 Mach

International Journal of Engineering Research & Technology (IJERT)

Table 1: Specification of supercritical aerofoil NACA SC (2)

Dimensions with respect to

Leading edge radius

Max L/D angle

Zero lift angle of attack

The governing equations for computational fluid dynamics

The continuity equation (3.1) expresses the conservation

Table 2: Specifications of simple aerofoil NACA 4412.

Dimensions with respect to

Leading edge radius

Max L/D angle

Zero lift angle of attack

The momentum equation (3.2) is statement of

International Journal of Engineering Research & Technology (IJERT)

2. Approach using FLUENT

D. Mesh geometry in Gambit

The continuity and momentum equations, along with the

Operation Toolpad >Mesh Command Button >Face

Main Menu >File >Input >ICEM input

C. Crete farfield boundary

Fig 2: Import Edges

We will create the farfield boundary by creating vertices

We will create the face by selecting the edges AB, BC,

E. Specify boundary types in Gambit

Define >Model >Solver

International Journal of Engineering Research & Technology (IJERT)

Fig 6: Defining Boundary condition

Solve >Control >Solution

IV RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

Contours of static pressure

Fig 5: Model Viscous

Define >Model >Energy

Fig 7: Contours of static pressure

Fig 7 shows static pressure contour at 0.6 Mach number. It

Contours of dynamic pressure

Set the Velocity Magnitude to be 250 m/sec i.e around 0.6

Fig 8: Contours of dynamic pressure

International Journal of Engineering Research & Technology (IJERT)

Fig 8 shows dynamic pressure contour at 0.6 Mach

velocity is maximum around 379 m/s and minimum at

Contours of static pressure

Contours of static temperature

Fig 12: Contours of static pressure

Fig 9 shows static temperature contours at 0.6 Mach

Contours of velocity magnitude

Contours of dynamic pressure

Fig 12 shows static pressure contour at 0.6 Mach number.

Fig 13: Contours of dynamic pressure

Fig 13 shows dynamic pressure contour at 0.6 Mach

Contours of static temperature

Fig 11: Velocity vectors