Journal of Aeronautics & Aerospace Engineering
Open Access

Analysis of Wing (NACA 0012 Aero foil) with and without Winglets to Enhance Aerodynamic Efficiency

Parameshwar Banakar^{* *}Correspondence: Parameshwar Banakar, Department of Aeronautical Engineering, KLS Gogte Institute of Technology, Karnataka, India, Tel: 8970494105, Email:

Author info »

Introduction

In this work comparative and quantitative analysis of various types of winglets are done in order to achieve better aerodynamic performance for lighter aircrafts and through this analysis, identified key parameters which influences winglets efficiency [1-3].

Fuel efficiency is directly linked with aerodynamic efficiency hence fuel efficiency will be good which results in low emission and less operating cost.

Here the major concern is lift to drag ratio because as lift increases along with it drag increases. Hence higher lift does not always signify better performance as it produces high drag. Therefore, lift to drag ratio is the optimum measurement of performance and it is called as aerodynamic efficiency in this work.

In this paper analysis are made to compare and study the aerodynamic characteristics of rectangular wing and wing with winglets. A parametric study is made modifying the winglets in order to optimize aerodynamic and fuel efficiency, as well as investigate the effects of surface roughness on the turbulent boundary layer.

In this work NACA0012 aero foil’s lift and drag characteristics curves are developed. In many constructions this aero foil is used hence this aero foil is considered for the study (Figures 1-34 and Tables 1,2).

Methodology

Figure 1: Methodology.

Research starts with designing wing models with winglets of different structures using solid works software and analysis of that wing with winglets are meshed and analyzed through Ansys fluent for various angle of attacks and finally the results are compared and concluded [4-8].

Modelling and Design Parameters and Inputs

Rectangular wing

Span: 300 mm

Chord: 150 mm

Aspect ratio: 2

Figure 2: Rectangular wing.

Blended Winglet (Assembled to Main Rectangular Wing)

Span: 75 mm

Chord: 45 mm

Aspect ratio: 2.5

Cant angle: 45°

Figure 3: Wing with blended winglet.

Grid wing (assembled to main rectangular wing)

Span: 75 mm

Chord: 30 mm

Aspect ratio: 2.5

At can’t angle 45°

Figure 4: Wing with grid wing winglet at 45° cant angle.

Solver type-Pressure based

Viscous model-Spalart-Allmaras

Boundary conditions:

Inlet-Velocity based (30 m/s)

Outlet-Pressure based

Meshing:

Inflation (Total thickness):

No. of layers-10

Maximum thickness-4 mm

Edge sizing:

No. of divisions-420

Rectangular wing:

Figure 5: Meshed model of rectangular wing.

Blended winglet (assembled to main rectangular wing)

Figure 6: Meshed model for blended winglet-wing.

Grid wing (assembled to main rectangular wing)

Figure 7: Meshed model for grid winglet-wing.

Results

CFD counter plots

Wing without winglets:

At 0°-Velocity Contour

Figure 8: Velocity contour of wing at 0°.

Pressure contour

Figure 9: Pressure contour of wing at 0°.

At 4°-Velocity contour

Figure 10: Velocity contour of wing at 4°.

Pressure contour

Figure 11: Pressure contour of wing at 4°.

At 8°-Velocity contour

Figure 12: Velocity contour of wing at 8°.

Pressure contour

Figure 13: Pressure contour of wing at 8°.

Wing and Winglet

At 0°-Velocity contours

Figure 14: Velocity contours of blended wing and winglet at 0°.

Pressure contours

Figure 15: Pressure contours of blended wing and winglet at 0°.

At 4°-Velocity contours

 Figure 16: Velocity contours of blended wing and winglet 4°.

Pressure contours

Figure 17: Pressure contours of blended wing and winglet at 4°.

At 8°-Velocity contours

Figure 18: Velocity contours of blended wing and winglet at 8°.

Pressure contour

Figure 19: Pressure contours of blended wing and winglet at 8°.

Wing with grid winglet (Can’t angle 45°)

At 0°-Velocity contour

Figure 20: Velocity contours of wing with grid winglet 45° cant angle at 0° AOA.

Pressure contours

Figure 21: Pressure contours of wing with grid winglet of 45° cant angle at 0° AOA.

At 4° AOA -Velocity contours

Figure 22: Velocity contours of Wing with grid winglet of 45° can’t angle at 4° AOA.

Pressure contours

Figure 23: Pressure contours of wing with grid winglet of 45° can’t angle at 4° AOA.

At 8° AOA-Velocity contours

Figure 24: Velocity contours of wing with grid winglet of 45° can’t angle at 8° AOA.

Pressure contours

Figure 25: Pressure contours of Wing with grid winglet of 45° can’t angle at 8° AOA.

CL and CD plots

Wing without winglets

At 0° AOA

Figure 26: CL and CD plots of wing without winglet at 0° AOA.

At 4° AOA

Figure 27: CL and CD plot of wing without winglet at 4° AOA.

At 8° AOA

Figure 28: CL and CD plots of wing without winglet at 8° AOA.

Blended winglets

At 0° AOA

Figure 29: CL and CD plots of blended winglet at 0° AOA.

At 4° AOA

Figure 30: CL and CD plots of blended winglet at 4° AOA.

At 8° AOA

Figure 31: CL and CD plots of blended winglet at 8° AOA.

Grid winglet (45° Cant angle)

At 0° AOA

Figure 32: CL and CD plots of Grid winglet at 0° AOA.

At 4° AOA

Figure 33: CL and CD plots of Grid winglet at 4° AOA.

At 8° AOA

Figure 34: CL and CD plots of Grid winglet at 8° AOA.

Table 1: Result table.

Table 2: Validation.

Discussion

From the above table, it is seen those results from Ansys and results from Matchup are in good agreement with minimum variation which is less than the variation accepted i.e. ± 10%.

Analysis of rectangular wing of NACA 0012 airfoil without winglets, with blended and grid winglet has been carried out at three different angles of attacks where CL and CD values of each were drawn, subsequently finding the aerodynamic efficiency in all the cases. Hence the two conclusions are drawn from the work.

Conclusion

Firstly, it was seen that the wing with winglets showed more aerodynamic efficiency than wing without winglets concluding that usage of winglets enhances the aerodynamic efficiency of the wing.

Secondly, on comparing the results of blended winglet and grid winglet, it was found that grid winglet at 80 AOA possessed greater aerodynamic efficiency. Hence it can be concluded that Grid winglet is more efficient than Blended winglet.

References

1. Usherwood JR, Lehmann FO. Phasing of dragonfly wings can improve aerodynamic efficiency by removing swirl. J R Soc Interface. 2008;5(28):1303-1307.

   [Crossref][Google Scholar][Indexed]

2. Lai YC, Barkan CP, Onal H. Optimizing the aerodynamic efficiency of intermodal freight trains. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review. 2008;44(5):820-834.

   [Crossref][Google Scholar][Indexed]

3. Panagiotou P, Yakinthos K. Aerodynamic efficiency and performance enhancement of fixed-wing UAVs. Aerosp Sci Technol. 2020;99:105575.

   [Google Scholar]

4. Wang ZJ. Aerodynamic efficiency of flapping flight: analysis of a two-stroke model. J Exp Biol. 2008;211(2):234-238.

   [Crossref][Google Scholar][Indexed]

5. Thompson BE, Jang J. Aerodynamic efficiency of wings in rain. J Aircr. 1996;33(6):1047-1053.

   [Google Scholar][Indexed]

6. Gaunaa M, Johansen J. Determination of the maximum aerodynamic efficiency of wind turbine rotors with winglets. J Phys Conf Ser. 2007;75(1):012006.

   [Google Scholar]

7. Zhu H, Nie H, Zhang L, Wei X, Zhang M. Design and assessment of octocopter drones with improved aerodynamic efficiency and performance. Aerosp Sci Technol. 2020;106:106206.

   [Crossref][Google Scholar]

8. Johansen J, Madsen HA, Gaunaa M, Bak C, Sorensen NN. Design of a wind turbine rotor for maximum aerodynamic efficiency. J Progress App Wind Power Con Tech. 2009;12(3):261-73.

   [Crossref][Google Scholar]