CW1 Wind Tunnel Lab Report

Student Details
Name Student Number Course
MEng Aerospace Engineering

Date of Submission:
Word Count: 1597

Contents
- PAGE 1 Contents, Introduction,
- PAGE 2 Fundamentals
- PAGE 3 Results
- PAGE 4 Discussion
- PAGE 5 Conclusion
- PAGE 6 Critical Reflection References

• Introduction
• This report aims to collect data on how the angle of attack changes values such as lift, drag
velocity’s of the air around the wing and pressures across the wing. After collecting the data
it will be used to compare the properties of the wing at different angles of attack.
• Aims and Objectives
the aim of the lab is to find the best glide ratio and investigate the properties of the wing at
different angles of attack to be able to compare pressure differences and investigate the when
the wing at all ranges from optimum efficiency to stall.
• Methodology
The AF100 wind tunnel will measure the static pressure with a wall tapping and the peto
probe at the front of wind tunnel will measure the total pressure. which means by misusing
the static pressure from the total pressure the dynamic reassure can also be calculated from
these values. The drag force is measured by the force exerted in the horizontal direction on
the wing being measured by the wind tunnel. The lift is also measured by two sensors on the
wing holder measuring the vertical component off the force exerted on the wing. The wind
speed is found using the Ptot=Pstat+Pdym rearranged like shown in the fundamentals section
will give the wind speed. After recording the results, it was found that the aerofoils angle of
attack was actually roughly 8 degrees different to the measurement which means all the
graphs with an angle of attack need to be translated about 6degrees in the positive direction
• Apparatus used
An AF102 which is an aerofoil with pressure sensors along it, was placed in a AF100
wind tunnel. the tunnel works by using a high speed fan to move the air at he required
velocity and then the air has to pass through a diffuser, which spreads the air to give a
consistent density and pressure. The pressure sensors placed along the aerofoil allow the
user to see the pressure distribution along the wing. Which can allow us to measure and
calculate the static pressure and dynamic pressure. The static probe works by having an
intake on the side of the probe, so the wind speed does not affect the measurement. The
normal probe is a tube facing the wind direction which allows the probe to measure the
total pressure. The pressure is measured by the probes by displacing fluid and that
displacement shows the pressure strength.
• Procedure
The AF102 aerofoil was placed inside the wind tunnel and the pressure measurements are all
measured and recorded, this was repeated for many different angles of attack to show the
properties of aerofoil at the different angles this showed how the air around the aerofoil
behaved differently and how different amounts of lift and drag are generated at the different
angles.

• Fundamentals
A. Pdyn+ Pstat=Ptot
B. ∴ v= √ 2 ¿ ¿ ¿
2 2
C. P1 +0.5 ρ v 1=P2 +0.5 ρ v 2
L
D. Cl= 2
ρ v A 0.5

The wind speed is calculated by rearranging equation A to make velocity the subject of the
equation (as shown above) now using the peto probe measurements wind speed can be
found. Using the graph, it will be visible when the flow enters stall as it stops following the
direct proportionality like in Bernoulli’s equation as friction begins to take effect causing stall.
Bernoulli’s equation only works for frictionless flow therefore it cannot be used in the stall
phase.
The graph of the drag coefficient and lift coefficient can be used to find the optimum glide
ratio as a tangent to the curve that goes through the origin should give the optimum glide
ratio.

(Hall, May 05 2015)

• Results
From the angle of attack compared with lift graph, the stall appeared to begin at 5 ° and at
with a windspeed of 20m/s acting on the wing generates roughly 12N of lift with little to no
decrease of lift as the angle of attack increases. Whereas when windspeed was 30m/s stall
again occurred around the angle however the lift generated is roughly 22N with a slight
decrease in lift as the angle increases.
30.00

20.00
Lift (Newtons)

10.00
lift/N - 30m/s
0.00 Polynomial (lift/N -
-40.0 -20.0 0.0 20.0 40.0 30m/s)
-10.00 Lift/N- 20m/s
Polynomial (Lift/N-
-20.00 20m/s)

-30.00

AOA(Degrees)

Lift and AOA GRAGPH (AOA is not inaccurate)

Using the lift coefficient graph the aerofoil produces the same Cl at the same angle of attack
with the different windspeeds both experiencing stall around 5 ° and giving a Cl value around
1.1.
0.70
0.60
0.50
CD- (Newtons)

0.40
0.30 CD/N - 30m/s
0.20 Polynomial (CD/N -
30m/s)
0.10 CD/N- 20m/s
0.00

AOA(Degrees)

Cl AOA graph (AOA is not inaccurate)

The drag to AOA graph shows that at 20m/s wind speed the drags increase seems to slow at
14 degrees while only showing max drag of 6N whereas, the aerofoil when experiencing
30m/s wind speeds the drags increase is extremely higher but also begins to increase slower
round 14 degrees however, the slowing of the increase seems slower.
 14.00
12.00

Drag (Newtons) 10.00

8.00
Drag/N - 30m/s
6.00 Polynomial (Drag/N -
4.00 30m/s)
Drag/N- 20m/s
2.00
Polynomial (Drag/N-
0.00 20m/s)

AOA(Degrees)

Drag/aoa (AOA is not inaccurate)

The CL does not change when the wind speed is changed for the same angles of attack.
However, the whole graph seems off to the right more than would have been predicted.
0.70
0.60
CD- (Newtons)

0.50
0.40
0.30 CD/N - 30m/s
0.20 Polynomial (CD/N -
30m/s)
0.10
CD/N- 20m/s
0.00
-30.0 -20.0 -10.0 0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0

AOA(Degrees)

Cl/AOA (AOA is not inaccurate)

The graph shows the ratio remains very similar till Cl is around 0.6 where the drag coefficient
seems to increase dramatically and carry on increasing faster and faster. This is a
representation of how the rag
increases dramatically while lift 0.70
stagnates or decreases during stall. 0.60
Optimum glide ratio was found by the 0.50
CD- (Newtons)

tangent to be 0.28/0.01=L/D=28 0.40

0.30 CD/N - 30m/s
Polynomial (CD/N -
0.20 30m/s)
CD/CL 0.10 CD/N- 20m/s
0.00
-2.00 0.00 2.00

CL(Newton)
• Discussion
• Error in the data
After processing the data, it was found to be different to what was expected, and after
inspecting the data, it was found that the aerofoil angle seemed 8∙ wrong consistently. This
could be caused by a sensor being zeroed wrong or the aerofoil being placed in the wind
 tunnel incorrectly making it consistently that same amount different to the true value. This
was noticed because when a symmetric aerofoil is used at 0 angle of attack the lift generated
should be 0N.
Results- Velocity’s relationship to lift
The students hypothesised that the lift and drag would increase with speed as well as drag,
however, the magnitude of the increase was not expected as with a 50% increase the lift
almost doubled. After further research the student found this was due the fact “ L=k v 2 (Hall
N. , 2018) this fact means that if the velocity was doubled then the lift would be quadrupled
giving these results found in the tests.
Results- Stall
By plotting all the data, the researcher has gained a great insight into how the aerofoil will
behave in and when it will reach stall. Stall is what occurs when the flow separates from the
aerofoil or wing due the pressure acting against the flow overcomes the friction from the air
particles above pulling the particles across the wing. During stall the Cl and CD graph showed
that lift became stagnate, while the drag increased significantly in a short period of time. The
AOA and lift graph shows that even at greater speeds the angle of attack for which stall occurs
remains in a small region. However, the 30m/s readings are a lot more spaced out so more
readings at this value could have been extremely useful.
Limits of the data
The data gave a good insight into how the aerofoil acts at different angles of attack however,
different wind speeds could have been a very interesting data set given the differences
between 20m/s and 30m/s.
uncertainty’s
To compensate for the fact that the AOA was recorded wrongly the student should introduce
error bars to compensate for that fact, also error bars can compensate for any other errors
made during the recording process and the to compensate for the uncertainty’s of the
instruments used.
Glide ratio
After drawing a graph plotting the lift coefficient against the drag coefficient a tangent was
used that intercepted the origin of the graph and it showed the ratio to be 0.28:0.01 which
gives a glide ratio of 28 which compares to commercial airliners having “glide ratio to a Boeing
747 of 17:1” (Eller, 2013)

• Conclusion
To conclude, the aerofoil data showed that at different speeds the aerofoil had the same stall
angle, however the data for the faster speed was more spread out, so more data would of
been useful if done again however, the stall at higher speed seemed to have a more rapid
effect where as the stall at 20m/s was a more gradual flattening of the lift. Once worked out
the systematic error didn’t cause much of an issue however, to prove the results are
conclusive they should have been remeasured accurately. But, the glide ratio and CL to CD
graph weren’t affected by this and the results gained from those was great. The aerofoil had a
high glide ratio which is extremely useful in making an aircraft more economically viable and
fuel efficient.
 Critical Reflection
My overall opinion is I have learned a lot from the practical and the practice in working out all
these different values and understanding how they’re all related has been invaluable.
However, I’m sadly not sure if I had to do the practical myself over and been able to collect
the data myself that I would be able to collect it all accurately and efficiently. The time
management element has been an immense factor though as I’ve had another assignments
due at the same time so targeting my research and focus has improved greatly after this
assignment, all things considered I think it went quite well and with Covid going on I couldn’t
of been given better support to complete it to a high standard

References
Eller, A. (2013). Energy and Power of Flying. Stanford: Stanford University.

Hall, N. (2018). velocity effects on aerodynamic forces. Cleveland: NASA.

Hall, N. (May 05 2015). The drag coefficent. Glens reasearch centre: Nasa.