Set up your own cloud-native simulation in minutes.Start Simulating Now
1 Geometry
3 Meshes
1 Simulation setup
2 ResultsWe need to test a classic NACA profile, in this case 2410; that's the first time using SimScale, so it's a way to start CFD. We used a tool on OnShape to generate a NACA2410 starting from a CSV file, generated on Airfoil Tools. The model used was a classic k-omega SST, the standard in Aeronautical sector. In the first run, I did a little mistake by not limiting the boundaries of the fluid volume; because we need to test the 2D capabilities of my profile, we need to build the fluid cube the exact same width of our NACA2410 to avoid the air to pass on the side of the profile (the profile is modeled as a square with a 10cm chord and a 10cm width extension). The 1st run gave us good results for a profile of this dimension (5N in the upper direction) but not the result we expect from a 2D profile of this kind: in fact from the theory we can expect from this type of profile a lift at least of 14.7N, so we are loosing all the potential lift on the extremities (theory of downwash). The second run was a better approssimation of reality, probably better then theory: we obtained a 13.9N of lift at 100m/s which is exactly what we were trying to achive. The difference in the value is due to viscosity tensor which isn't properly considered while applying 2D equations (considering air as our test fluid, we obtain high Reynolds number values: that brings to have Inertial forces bigger than Viscous forces, so to make calculations easier we can neglect viscous contribution). So, we can consider our theory valideted by the model
1
0
by slilbaekslilbaek
riccio created this project
about 1 month ago
1 Geometry 3 Meshes 1 Simulation setup 2 ResultsWe need to test a classic NACA profile, in this case 2410; that's the first time using SimScale, so it's a way to start CFD. We used a tool on OnShape to generate a NACA2410 starting from a CSV file, generated on Airfoil Tools. The model used was a classic k-omega SST, the standard in Aeronautical sector. In the first run, I did a little mistake by not limiting the boundaries of the fluid volume; because we need to test the 2D capabilities of my profile, we need to build the fluid cube the exact same width of our NACA2410 to avoid the air to pass on the side of the profile (the profile is modeled as a square with a 10cm chord and a 10cm width extension). The 1st run gave us good results for a profile of this dimension (5N in the upper direction) but not the result we expect from a 2D profile of this kind: in fact from the theory we can expect from this type of profile a lift at least of 14.7N, so we are loosing all the potential lift on the extremities (theory of downwash). The second run was a better approssimation of reality, probably better then theory: we obtained a 13.9N of lift at 100m/s which is exactly what we were trying to achive. The difference in the value is due to viscosity tensor which isn't properly considered while applying 2D equations (considering air as our test fluid, we obtain high Reynolds number values: that brings to have Inertial forces bigger than Viscous forces, so to make calculations easier we can neglect viscous contribution). So, we can consider our theory valideted by the model
