Numerical Analysis of the Aerodynamic Characteristics of NACA 2413 Airfoil

Authors

  • Md Ramijul Alam Department of Mechanical Engineering, Khulna University of Engineering & Technology, Khulna-9203, BANGLADESH
  • Arnob Dey Department of Mechanical Engineering, Khulna University of Engineering & Technology, Khulna-9203, BANGLADESH
  • Md. Golam Kader Department of Mechanical Engineering, Khulna University of Engineering & Technology, Khulna-9203, BANGLADESH

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.38032/scse.2025.1.13

Keywords:

Airfoil, SST k- ω Model, k- ε Model, Lift Coefficient, Drag Coefficient

Abstract

The current investigation primarily focuses on the variability of the aerodynamic characteristics of the NACA-2413 airfoil for different turbulent models (Realizable k-ε Model, Standard k-ε Model, and Shear-Stress Transport (SST) k-ω Model) in different Reynolds Numbers. The aerodynamic characteristics such as lift force, drag force, lift-to-drag ratio, and pressure distribution were evaluated at several angles of attack for different Reynolds numbers (Re = 7×105, 3×106, and 6×106) using Ansys Fluent 2020R2. The numerical results indicate that the lift coefficient increased with the angle of attack up to the stalling point. Though the different turbulent models exhibited nearly the same value at a lower angle of attack, however, produced different values for the higher angles of attack (at ????=10° for Re = 3×106), which is also visible in the velocity and pressure contours. Again, at the lower Reynolds number, the different turbulent model shows considerably different value but this difference is reduced with the increase in Reynolds number. For all the conditions, the k-ε model produces a higher lift value in comparison to the SST k-ꞷ model. However, in the SST k-ꞷ model, separation occurs at a smaller angle of attack as compared to the other two models, because the SST k-ꞷ model more accurately resolves the viscous layer and flow separation for high-pressure gradients than the other two models. Furthermore, with the increase in Reynolds number, the deviation between these three turbulent models decreases significantly. At high Reynolds numbers, the realizable k- ε model and the standard k- ε model produce nearly identical results.

Downloads

Downloads

References

[1] Kevadiya, M., & Vaidya, H. A. (2013). 2D analysis of NACA 4412 airfoil. International Journal of Innovative Research in Science, Engineering and Technology, 2(5), 1686-1691.

[2] Anderson Jr, J. D. (2010). Fundamentals of aerodynamics. Tata McGraw-Hill Education.

[3] Sumaryada, T., Jaya, A. M., & Kartono, A. (2018). Simulating the Aerodynamics Profiles of NACA 4312 Airfoil in Various Incoming Airspeed and Gurney Flap Angle. Omega: Jurnal Fisika dan Pendidikan Fisika, 4(1), 1-1. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31758/OmegaJPhysPhysEduc.v4i1.1

[4] http://airfoiltools.com/airfoil/naca4digit

[5] Sarkar, S., & Mughal, S. (2017). CFD Analysis of Effect of Flow over NACA 2412 Airfoil through the Shear stress Transport Turbulence Model. Int J Mech Pro Eng, 5(7), 58-62.

[6] Mehdi, H., Gaurav, S., & Sharma, M. (2016). Numerical investigation of fluid flow and aerodynamic performance on a 2D NACA-4412 airfoil. International Journal of Research in Engineering and Innovation, 1(1), 1-5.

[7] Ashraf, M. A., Young, J., & Lai, J. C. S. (2011). Reynolds number, thickness and camber effects on flapping airfoil propulsion. Journal of Fluids and structures, 27(2), 145-160. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfluidstructs.2010.11.010

[8] Cengel, Y. A., & Cimbala, J. M. (2017). Fluid mechanics: fundamentals and applications.

[9] Hassan, G. E., Hassan, A., & Youssef, M. E. (2014). Numerical investigation of medium range re number aerodynamics characteristics for NACA0018 airfoil. CFD letters, 6(4), 175-187.

[10] Versteeg, H. K., & Malalasekera, W. (2007). An introduction to computational fluid dynamics: the finite volume method. Pearson education.

[11] Marshall, J., & Plumb, R. A. (1989). Atmosphere, ocean and climate dynamics: an introductory text. Academic Press.

[12] Launder, B. E., & Spalding, D. B. (1983). The numerical computation of turbulent flows. In Numerical prediction of flow, heat transfer, turbulence and combustion (pp. 96-116). Pergamon. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-030937-8.50016-7

[13] Ansys Inc. (2013). Ansys fluent theory guide. Canonsburg, PA, Release 15.0.

[14] Shih, T. H., Liou, W. W., Shabbir, A., Yang, Z., & Zhu, J. (1995). A new k-ϵ eddy viscosity model for high reynolds number turbulent flows. Computers & fluids, 24(3), 227-238. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0045-7930(94)00032-T

[15] Menter, F. R. (1994). Two-equation eddy-viscosity turbulence models for engineering applications. AIAA journal, 32(8), 1598-1605. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2514/3.12149

[16] Seetharam, H. C., & Rodgers, E. J. (1997). Experimental Studies of Flow Separation of the NACA 2412 Airfoil. NASA CR, 197497.

[17] Ladson, C. L. (1988). Effects of independent variation of Mach and Reynolds numbers on the low-speed aerodynamic characteristics of the NACA 0012 airfoil section (Vol. 4074). National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Scientific and Technical Information Division.

Published

07.05.2025

How to Cite

[1]
M. R. Alam, A. Dey, and M. G. Kader, “Numerical Analysis of the Aerodynamic Characteristics of NACA 2413 Airfoil”, SCS:Engineering, vol. 1, pp. 68–74, May 2025, doi: 10.38032/scse.2025.1.13.

Similar Articles

1-10 of 18

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.