Pelton Wheel Experiment wake measured from our Pitot tube.

After plotting the

velocity profile of the wake (zero angle of attack)
ME 436 Aerothermal Fluids Laboratory with respect to wind tunnel height, we found the free
Caleb Kreeger stream velocity, 𝑈0 , by looking at the point in our
graph where the flow speed was outside the wake.
Report 2 This value was to stay constant throughout our study.
We then picked a value for upstream and downstream
pressure from our measured data. Like the free
stream velocity, these values 𝑃𝑑 and 𝑃𝑢 were to stay
10/15/18
constant. Our next step was to calculate the
Mechanical Engineering Department momentum deficit, also known as the drag per unit
depth. We found this using the equation 𝐷′ =
The City College of New York, USA −(𝑃𝑑 𝐻 + ∫𝑑 𝜌𝑢(𝑦)2 ⅆ𝑦) + (𝑝𝑢 𝐻 + 𝜌𝑈02 𝐻).
Abstract We integrated this over the height of 70 mm. From
In this experiment we investigated the pressure the found momentum deficit we were then able to
distribution over a NACA0012 airfoil and analyzed find the coefficient of drag, using the equation 𝐶𝐷 =
𝐷′
many of its interrelating properties when immersed in 1 .
𝜌𝑈02 𝑐
a wind tunnel. From the measured pressure 2
distribution, we calculated the coefficient of lift and
Our next objective was to calculate the
drag. We then used an integral relation to calculate
pressure coefficient 𝐶𝑃 and plot it for various angles
the momentum thickness or drag force per unit depth
of attack, with respect to chord length. Our first step
from known properties. From the momentum
was to take our pressure distribution measured across
thickness we were able to calculate the coefficient of
our airfoil and convert the pressures into coefficient
drag. We also gained insight into to the relationship 𝑃−𝑃
that the angle attack of incoming flow had on the of pressures, using the equation 𝐶𝑃 = 1 𝑢2 . The
𝜌𝑈0
2
pressure coefficient of our airfoil. The pressure values for 𝑈0 and 𝑃𝑢 are the same values used earlier.
coefficient is a non-dimensional form of pressure. We then continued to plot 𝐶𝑝 vs. chord length, for
We also investigated the effect that the angle of
several different angles of attack.
attack has on both the coefficient of drag and
coefficient of lift. To find the coefficient of lift, we would
need the lift force per unit depth 𝐿′ , which in the
equation, 𝐿′ = 𝑁 ′ cos 𝛼 − 𝐴′ sin 𝛼, first requires us to
Introduction find both the normal force per unit depth 𝑁 ′ and the
axial force per unit depth 𝐴′ . To find 𝑁 ′ we
All fluids are viscous by nature, which makes them integrated our pressure distribution over the airfoil in
stick to a surface when flowing over it, known as the 𝑐
the x-coordinate, 𝑁 ′ = − ∫0 𝑃 ⅆ𝑥. For 𝐴′ , we
no slip condition. As a result, a fluid creates a layer
integrated the pressure distribution over the airfoil in
of velocity increasing outward from the surface 𝐶
known as boundary layer. This velocity gradient the y-coordinate, 𝐴′ = − ∫0 𝑃 ⅆ𝑦. We the normal
creates skin friction which is known as Profile Drag force and axial force to compute 𝐿′ . Once we had 𝐿′ ,
and acts opposite to streamline motion. As you move we calculated the coefficient of lift using the equation
further down the leading edge of an airfoil, the skin 𝐿′
𝐶𝐿 = 1 . We then plotted 𝐶𝐿 vs. 𝛼
friction becomes zero due to the negligible velocity 𝜌𝑈02 𝑐
2
gradient and a separation point occurs with an
Our last objective was to calculate the
appearance of a cluster of eddies. After the separation
point, the viscous region grows, and if there is no coefficient of drag. This time we would compute the
boundary after separation, the region is known as drag force per unit depth 𝐷′ using both the normal
“wake”. and axial force in the equation 𝐷′ = 𝑁 ′ sin 𝛼 +
𝐴′ cos 𝛼. We then used 𝐷′ to find the drag coefficient,
The first step in our analysis was to find the velocity 𝐷′
using 𝐶𝐷 = 1 , After that, we plotted
profile of the wake. The wake is a point is a point 𝜌𝑈02
2
defined as the region of recirculating flow behind our 𝐶𝐷 (𝑃𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑢𝑟𝑒 𝐷𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑏𝑢𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛) vs. 𝛼 and
2𝛥𝑃 𝐶𝐷 (Momentum Deficit) vs. 𝛼 on the same plot.
airfoil. We used the equation 𝑣 = √ to find the
𝜌
velocity profile from our pressure profile for the
 common method for measuring lift on a 2D airfoil
section in a wind tunnel. At multiple chord locations,
pressure scanners are connected to the airfoil to
Experimental Setup and Procedure accurately measure the surface pressure without
modifying the flow of the surrounding pressure field.

Results
Figure 1 shows the results we got from plotting the
velocity profile of our wake for angles of 0,3,6 and 0
degrees. I then tabulated the values for
𝐷′ and 𝐶𝐷 for various angles. In Figure 2, I plotted 𝐶𝑃
vs. chord length. I then tabulated values for average
𝐶𝑃 over the total length of the airfoil for various angle
of attacks. In Figure 5, I plotted the Coefficient of
Lift vs. Angle of Attack. In Figure 6, I plotted the
Coefficient of Drag vs. Angle of Attack. I plotted two
𝐶𝐷 ’s, one calculated using the momentum deficit
found from the wake data, and one calculated using
Figure 1- Basic Wind Tunnel Setup the pressure distribution data. I put them on the same
plot to compare the effect that different angles of
Shown in Figure 1 is a basic Wind Tunnel used for
attack have on their values.
aerodynamics analysis. The Wind Tunnel we used to
perform our experiment had a 300 mm by 300 mm
working section and was powered by a 5 kW
electrical motor. In order to provide for variable Conclusions
power output the motor is controlled by a digital
Our results give us a lot of insight into the effect that
conrtol inverter. The model tested in the win tunnel
different angles of attack have on the parameters of
was a NACA 0012 airfoil with a span of 297 mm and
our NACA airfoil. From Figure 3 we can see that as
a chord of 152 mm. It was mounted in the tunnel and
the angle of attack is increased the velocity profile of
was allowed to rotate on its axis, in order to change
the wake region decreases. From this plot we chose
the angle off attack of incoming flow.
the value for the free stream velocity as 13.82
because it is a point where all the lines intersect past
the separation point. From the table of values, I see
that as we increase the angle of attack from 0 to 3
degrees, the momentum thickness increases by 12 %,
but as we increase the angle from 3 to 6, it changes
less than 1 %. Then as we increase the angle to 9
degrees, the momentum thickness increases again by
roughly 9 %. Similar to the momentum thickness, the
coefficient of drag changes about 12 % as we
increase the angle from 0 to 3 degrees, but barely
changes as we increase the angle to 6 degrees. Then
as we further increase the angle of attack to 9 degrees
it changes by 9 %.
Figure 2- Pitot Tube used to measure streamline In Figure 4, I plotted the pressure coefficient with
velocity respect to chord length for different angles of attack,
To measure the local velocity streamlines in the wind ranging from 0 to 14 degrees, in increments of 2. We
tunnel (wake), we used a pitot tube. Shown in Figure see that for the different angles of attacks, the leading
2, the pitot tube has an opening that is parallel to the edge of the airfoil has different values for the
direction of the flow. pressure coefficient.

To measure the pressure distribution over our airfoil, In Figure 5, I plotted the coefficient of Lift vs. angle
we used pressure taps. Pressure taps are the most of attack. We see that for our case, the highest
coefficient of lift occurs at an angle of attack around
12 degrees. Also, the coefficient of lift is a minimum
at an angle of attack of 10 degrees. As we first
increase the angle of attack from 0 to 4 degrees, the
lift coefficient begins to decrease but as we continue
to increase the angle to 8 degrees it begins to increase
until it decreases again from 8 to 10 degrees. This
substantiates the difficulty in predicting the
relationship between the angle of attack and the
coefficient of lift for our case, suggesting that we
have made some type of systematic error when
recording our data.
In Figure 6 I plotted the coefficient of drag vs. angle
of attack. I had two coefficients of drag though, one
calculated using the momentum deficit and one using Figure 3- Wake velocity profile
our pressure distribution data. In the figure we can
clearly see that the coefficient of drag (momentum
deficit) is quite different than the coefficient of drag
calculated using the pressure distribution data. This
may be because we used the wake data for the 𝛼 𝐷′ 𝐶𝐷
momentum deficit, for which we only had four angles 0 3.0973 .1778
of attack, 0,3,6 and 9 degrees. For the pressure 3 3.4767 .1996
distribution data, we had data for eight different 6 3.4965 .2007
angles of attack, so that may be one reason why 9 3.8246 .2196
there’s no correlation between the two. Overall, we
can see that an angle of attack at 12 degrees would
optimize the aerodynamic performance of our NACA
airfoil. Figure 5 shows a maximum for the coefficient
of lift at an angle of attack of 12 degrees, while
Figure 6 show a near minimum for the coefficient of
drag. It is in an engineer’s interest to maximize the
amount of lift force while minimizing drag force,
substantiating the importance of using an optimum
angle of attack.

List of References
[1] Goushcha, O. Aero-Thermal Fluids Laboratory
ME43600. The City College of New York, 2018.

Figure 4- 𝑪𝑷 vs. Chord Length

Appendix A:

𝛼 𝐴𝑣𝑔. 𝐶𝑃 (over length of

airfoil)
0 -.2929
2 -.2972
4 -.3395
6 -.3943
8 -.4626
10 -.4913
12 -.3858
14 -.3281
 Figure 7- Cp vs. chord length with error bars

Figure 5- Angle of Attack vs. Coefficient of Lift

Appendix B:
Sample of all calculations from MATLAB for angle
of attack of 0 degrees

Calculation:

2𝛥𝑃
Wake Velocity (0 degrees) = 𝑣 = √ 𝜌

2∗115.16 𝒎𝟑
=√ 1.2
= 13.85
𝑺

𝐷′ = −(𝑃𝑑 𝐻 + ∫𝑑 𝜌𝑢(𝑦)2 ⅆ𝑦) + (𝑝𝑢 𝐻 + 𝜌𝑈02 𝐻)=

Figure 6- Angle of Attack vs. Coefficient of Drag
(-152.33*.07+15.6)
+(114.38*.07+(1.2*13.82^2*.07)) = 3.0973 (for 0
degrees)

𝐷′ 3.0973
𝐶𝐷 = 1 =1 = .1778 (for 0 degrees)
𝜌𝑈02 𝑐 ∗1.2∗13.82^2∗.152
2 2

𝑃−𝑃𝑢 −143.01−(−114.38)
𝐶𝑃 = 1 = 1 = -.2510
𝜌𝑈02 ∗1.2∗13.82^2
2 2

𝑐
𝑁 ′ = − ∫0 𝑃 ⅆ𝑥 = .7063
 Appendix C:
𝐶 The data was collected using MATLAB.
𝐴′ = − ∫0 𝑃 ⅆ𝑦= .6925

𝐿′ = 𝑁 ′ cos 𝛼 − 𝐴′ sin 𝛼=
𝐿′ = 0.7063 ∗ cos(0) − 0.6925 sin(0) =. 𝟕𝟎𝟔𝟑 Appendix D:

Lab 3
𝐿′ .7063) clear all;
𝐶𝐿 = 1 =1 = .0405
𝜌𝑈02 𝑐 ∗1.2∗13.82^2 clc;
2 2
close all;
cd('C:\Users\caleb\onedrive\Desktop')
Wake0=load('Group4_Drag20V_Alpha4.txt')
𝐷′ = 𝑁 ′ sin 𝛼 + 𝐴′ cos 𝛼= Wake1=load('Group4
𝐷′ = 0.7063 ∗ sin(0) − 0.6925 cos(0) =. 𝟔𝟗𝟐𝟓 @3deg_Drag20V_Alpha4.txt')
Wake2=load('Group@6degDrag20V_Alpha4.tx
t')
Wake3=load('Group4_@9degrag20V_Alpha4.t
xt')
p1=Wake0(2,:);
p2=Wake1(2,:);
𝐷′ .6925 p3=Wake2(2,:);
𝐶𝐷 = 1 =1 = .0398 p4=Wake3(2,:);
𝜌𝑈02 ∗1.2∗13.82^2
2 2 v1=sqrt((2.*Wake0(2,:))/1.2)
v2=sqrt((2.*Wake1(2,:))/1.2)
v3=sqrt((2.*Wake2(2,:))/1.2)
v4=sqrt((2.*Wake3(2,:))/1.2)
Uncertainty was found using the MATLAB code, and U=13.82;
for pressure the uncertainty was roughly 0.24. rho=1.2,
pd1=-152.33
pu1=-114.38
pd2=-150.6
pu2=-116.07
pu3=-119.11
pd3=-147.58
pu4=-121
pd4=-149
H=.07
c=.152

plot(v1,Wake0(1,:))
hold on
plot(v2,Wake1(1,:))
plot(v3,Wake2(1,:))
plot(v4,Wake3(1,:))
hold off
legend('0 degrees','3 degrees','6
degrees','9 degrees')
xlabel('Wake velocity')
ylabel('Wind Tunnel Height')
f=(1.2.*v1.^2)

m=trapz(Wake0(1,:)/1000,f)
D=(-(pd1*H+m))+(pu1*H+1.2*U^2*H)
cd=D/(.5*1.2*U*c)
D=-(pd1*H+(trapz(rho.*v1)))
% h_mean=q./(C*trapz(x,T_ss-
T_amb)a)+(Pu*H+rho*U^2*H)
cd=D'/(1/2*rho*U^2*c)

% for 0 degrees
f0=(1.2.*v1.^2) cp4=((P4(3,:)-pu1)/(.5*1.2*U^2))
m0=trapz(Wake0(1,:)/1000,f0) plot(P4(1,:)/1000,cp4)
D0=(-(pd1*H+m0))+(pu1*H+1.2*U^2*H)
cd0=D0/(.5*1.2*U^2*c)
% for 3 degress %10 degrees
f3=(1.2.*v2.^2) cp5=((P5(3,:)-pu1)/(.5*1.2*U^2))
plot(P5(1,:)/1000,cp5)
m3=trapz(Wake1(1,:)/1000,f3)
D3=(-(pd1*H+m3))+(pu1*H+1.2*U^2*H) %12 degrees
cd3=D3/(.5*1.2*U^2*c) cp6=((P6(3,:)-pu1)/(.5*1.2*U^2))
% for 6 degrees plot(P6(1,:)/1000,cp6)
f6=(1.2.*v3.^2)
% 14 degrees
m6=trapz(Wake2(1,:)/1000,f6) cp7=(((P7(3,:)-pu1)/(.5*1.2*U^2)))
D6=(-(pd1*H+m6))+(pu1*H+1.2*U^2*H) plot(P7(1,:)/1000,cp7)
cd6=D6/(.5*1.2*U^2*c) hold off
% for 9 degrees legend('0 deg','2 deg','4 deg','6
f9=(1.2.*v4.^2) deg','8 deg','10 deg','12 deg', '14
deg')
m9=trapz(Wake3(1,:)/1000,f9)
D9=(-(pd1*H+m9))+(pu1*H+1.2*U^2*H)
cd9=D9/(.5*1.2*U^2*c) N for 0 deg
N1=-trapz(P0(1,:)/1000,P0(3,:));
P0=load('Group3_Pressure_20V_Alpha0.txt 2 deg
') N2=-trapz(P1(1,:)/1000,P1(3,:));
P1=load('Group3_Pressure_20V_Alpha2.txt 4 deg
') N3=-trapz(P2(1,:)/1000,P2(3,:));
P2=load('Group3_Pressure_20V_Alpha4.txt 6 deg
') N4=-trapz(P3(1,:)/1000,P3(3,:));
P3=load('Group3_Pressure_20V_Alpha6.txt 8 deg
') N5=-trapz(P4(1,:)/1000,P4(3,:));
P4=load('Group3_Pressure_20V_Alpha8.txt 10 deg
') N6=-trapz(P5(1,:)/1000,P5(3,:));
P5=load('Group3_Pressure_20V_Alpha10.tx 12 deg
t') N7=-trapz(P6(1,:)/1000,P6(3,:));
P6=load('Group3_Pressure_20V_Alpha12.tx 14 deg
t') N8=-trapz(P7(1,:)/1000,P7(3,:));
P7=load('Group3_Pressure_20V_Alpha14.tx
t')

Ax1=-trapz(P0(2,:)/1000,P0(3,:));
% 0 degrees
cp0=((P0(3,:)-pu1)/(.5*1.2*U^2)) Ax2=-trapz(P1(2,:)/1000,P1(3,:));
plot(P0(1,:)/1000,cp0)
xlabel('Chord Length') Ax3=-trapz(P2(2,:)/1000,P2(3,:));
ylabel('Cp')
hold on Ax4=-trapz(P3(2,:)/1000,P3(3,:));

% 2 degrees Ax5=-trapz(P4(2,:)/1000,P4(3,:));
cp1=((P1(3,:)-pu1)/(.5*1.2*U^2))
plot(P1(1,:)/1000,cp1) Ax6=-trapz(P5(2,:)/1000,P5(3,:));

Ax7=-trapz(P6(2,:)/1000,P6(3,:));
% 4 degrees
cp2=((P2(3,:)-pu1)/(.5*1.2*U^2)) Ax8=-trapz(P7(2,:)/1000,P7(3,:));
plot(P2(1,:)/1000,cp2)

%6 degrees Lift Force per unit depth

cp3=((P3(3,:)-pu1)/(.5*1.2*U^2)) L1= N1*cos(0)-Ax1*sin(0)
plot(P3(1,:)/1000,cp3) L2= N2*cos(2)-Ax2*sin(2)
L3= N3*cos(4)-Ax3*sin(4)
% 8 degrees L4= N4*cos(6)-Ax4*sin(6)
L5= N5*cos(8)-Ax5*sin(8) figure(),errorbar(P1(1,:),cp0,err,'b--
L6= N6*cos(10)-Ax6*sin(10) ','LineWidth',2)
L7= N7*cos(12)-Ax7*sin(12) hold on
L8= N8*cos(14)-Ax8*sin(14) errorbar(P2(1,:),cp1,err,'b--',
'LineWidth',2)
Cl1=(L1)/(.5*1.2*U^2*c) errorbar(P3(1,:),cp2,err,'b--',
Cl2=(L2)/(.5*1.2*U^2*c) 'LineWidth',2)
Cl3=(L3)/(.5*1.2*U^2*c) errorbar(P4(1,:),cp3,err,'b--',
Cl4=(L4)/(.5*1.2*U^2*c) 'LineWidth',2)
Cl5=(L5)/(.5*1.2*U^2*c) errorbar(P5(1,:),cp4,err,'b--',
Cl6=(L6)/(.5*1.2*U^2*c) 'LineWidth',2)
Cl7=(L7)/(.5*1.2*U^2*c) errorbar(P6(1,:),cp5,err,'b--',
Cl8=(L8)/(.5*1.2*U^2*c) 'LineWidth',2)
errorbar(P7(1,:),cp6,err,'g','LineWidth
alpha=[0,2,4,6,8,10,12,14] ',2)
Ck=[Cl1,Cl2,Cl3,Cl4,Cl5,Cl6,Cl7,Cl8] hold off
plot(alpha,Ck) grid on
xlabel('Angle of Attack') legend('2°','4°','6°','8°','10°','12°',
ylabel('Coefficient of Lift') '14°')
xlabel('Chord Length (m)')
% ylabel('Cp')
%
% Drag force per unit depth
Dn1= N1*sin(0)+Ax1*cos(0)
Dn2= N2*sin(2)+Ax2*cos(2)
Dn3= N3*sin(4)+Ax3*cos(4)
Dn4= N4*sin(6)+Ax4*cos(6)
Dn5= N5*sin(8)+Ax5*cos(8)
Dn6= N6*sin(10)+Ax6*cos(10)
Dn7= N7*sin(12)+Ax7*cos(12)
Dn8= N8*sin(14)+Ax8*cos(14)

Cd1=(Dn1)/(.5*1.2*U^2*c)
Cd2=(Dn2)/(.5*1.2*U^2*c)
Cd3=(Dn3)/(.5*1.2*U^2*c)
Cd4=(Dn4)/(.5*1.2*U^2*c)
Cd5=(Dn5)/(.5*1.2*U^2*c)
Cd6=(Dn6)/(.5*1.2*U^2*c)
Cd7=(Dn7)/(.5*1.2*U^2*c)
Cd8=(Dn8)/(.5*1.2*U^2*c)
alpha=[0,2,4,6,8,10,12,14]
Ck=[Cd1,Cd2,Cd3,Cd4,Cd5,Cd6,Cd7,Cd8]
plot(alpha,Ck)
hold on
alp=[0,3,6,9]
cdd=[.1778,.1996,.2007,.2196]
plot(alp,cdd)
hold off
legend('Cd(Pressure
Distribution','Cd(Momentum Deficit)')
xlabel('angle of attack')
ylabel('Cd')

%Uncertainty Analysis
x=load('Uncertainty.txt');
N=length(x);
t95=2.807;
Xm=mean(x);
Sx= 1/(N-1)*sum(x-Xm);
Sxb=Sx/sqrt(N);
Ux=sqrt(.25^2+(2.807*Sxb)^2);
err=Ux*ones(size(cp4));