University of Central Florida

STARS

Honors Undergraduate Theses UCF Theses and Dissertations

2023

An Optimization Study of Small-Scale Propeller Blade

Fahad M. Nabid
University of Central Florida

Part of the Aerodynamics and Fluid Mechanics Commons

Find similar works at: https://stars.library.ucf.edu/honorstheses
University of Central Florida Libraries http://library.ucf.edu

This Open Access is brought to you for free and open access by the UCF Theses and Dissertations at STARS. It has
been accepted for inclusion in Honors Undergraduate Theses by an authorized administrator of STARS. For more
information, please contact [email protected].

Recommended Citation
Nabid, Fahad M., "An Optimization Study of Small-Scale Propeller Blade" (2023). Honors Undergraduate
Theses. 1393.
https://stars.library.ucf.edu/honorstheses/1393
AN OPTIMIZATION STUDY OF SMALL-SCALE PROPELLER BLADE
BY
FAHAD NABID

A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements

for the Honors in the Major Program in Aerospace Engineering
in the College of Engineering and Computer Science
at the University of Central Florida
Orlando, Florida

Spring Term, 2023

Thesis Chair: Michael Kinzel, Ph.D.

 ABSTRACT

This research paper aims to investigate the optimization of smaller propeller blades to

achieve maximum efficiency by studying the effect of the twist angle on reducing drag, increasing

thrust, and preventing rapid wear on the blade. Inefficient propellers consume a significant amount

of energy, particularly during low-speed flights. The low Reynolds number regime challenges

aviation engineers to design propellers with the highest possible efficiency to minimize energy

losses. The primary objective of this thesis is to optimize smaller propeller blade shapes to enable

them to produce maximum efficiency. The advanced ratio of a propeller blade heavily influences

the blade's performance efficiency. The analysis uses the modified Blade Element Momentum

Theory (BEM) and the Betz optimization method, with an analytical approach for comparing

methods. The results show that the aerodynamic twist angle plays a vital role in propeller blade

performance in a low Reynolds number regime. An optimized twist angle can improve efficiency

up to eight times, as per the preliminary data, highlighting the critical role of optimization in

achieving maximum efficiency in propeller blades.

 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The author would like to thank the University of Central Florida’s Computational Fluid

Dynamics laboratory and, along the way, who helped with the thesis.
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER 1: BACKGROUND ..................................................................................................... 7

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW ........................................................................................ 9

CHAPTER 3: EXPERIMENTAL SETUP AND PROCEDURE ................................................. 12

CHAPTER 4: RESULTS & DISCUSSION ................................................................................. 21

CHAPTER 6: CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................................... 26

REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................. 27

1
 LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Cl/Cd Curve vs 𝛼. .......................................................................................................... 14

Figure 2: Propeller view................................................................................................................ 15

Figure 3:Twist angle vs Local radius (Generate through Qblade Advance Blade design) ........... 16

Figure 4:𝑐𝑡 vs 𝑐 𝑝 curve ................................................................................................................ 17

Figure 5:Efficiency vs wind-speed ............................................................................................... 18

Figure 6: Blade View (pre-twist) .................................................................................................. 19

Figure 7:The positions, chord length airfoil polar. ....................................................................... 20

Figure 8:CL/CD value over range of Re ....................................................................................... 23

Figure 9: Wind vs Efficiency (2000RPM) .................................................................................... 23

Figure 10:Advance Ratio vs Efficiency (2000RPM) .................................................................... 24

Figure 11: Wind vs Efficiency (3000RPM) .................................................................................. 24

Figure 12: Wind vs Efficiency (4000RPM) .................................................................................. 25

Figure 13: Propeller Efficiency vs Advance Ratio [13]................................................................ 25

2
 LIST OF TABLES

Table 1:Chord Length and Reynold Number................................................................................ 22

3
 LIST OF EQUATIONS

Equation 1: 𝜙 (𝑟) = tan−1 (2𝑅 /3𝑟𝜆) + 𝛼 ................................................................................... 12

Equation 2: 𝜆 = 𝑅Ω/𝑉0 ............................................................................................................. 12

Equation 3: 𝐽 = 𝑉0 / 𝑛𝐷 ................................................................................................................. 13

Equation 4: 𝜂 = 𝐶𝑇*𝐽/ (𝐶𝑝 *2π) ..................................................................................................... 13

Equation 5: 𝑅𝑒 = 𝜌𝑉𝑐/𝜇 ................................................................................................................ 14

4
 NOMENCLATURE

𝐴 = amplitude of oscillation 𝑎 = cylinder diameter

𝐶𝑝 = pressure coefficient

𝐶𝑡 = thrust coefficient

𝐶𝑥 = force coefficient in the x direction

𝐶𝑦 = force coefficient in the y direction

𝑐 = chord

d𝑡 = time step

𝐷 = Diameter

𝐹𝑥 = 𝑋 component of the resultant pressure force acting on the vehicle

𝐹𝑦 = 𝑌 component of the resultant pressure force acting on the vehicle

𝑓 , 𝑔 = generic functions

ℎ = height

𝜂 = Efficiency

𝑖 = time index during navigation

𝐽 = Advance ratio

𝐾 = trailing-edge (TE) nondimensional angular deflection rate

5
𝜙 = twist angle

𝛼 = Attack angle

𝜆 = Tip speed Ratio

𝑅 = Total Blade radius

𝑟 = Local length

𝑉0 = free stream velocity

Ω = Rotational Speed in RPM 𝑅

𝑒 = Reynolds Number

𝜌 = Density

𝜇 = Dynamic Viscosity

𝑛 = Rotation in rev/s

6
 CHAPTER 1: BACKGROUND

Despite being designed for over a century, the study of propellers' performance and design

remains as relevant as ever. The continued interest in propeller propulsion is due to the propellers

being more efficient at low and modest flight speeds when compared to turbofan propulsion.

Propeller design has recently seen advancements in predicting and optimizing propeller blades,

particularly in the Low Reynolds Number (LRN) regime. The unsteadiness of the propeller blade

characterizes this regime, and researchers are investigating ways to drive it effectively. Today, the

military focuses on efficiency by introducing low-flying Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) for

reconnaissance missions normally operating in the LRN regime due to their small geometric

scales. Furthermore, due to the growing demand for military and commercial applications, small

unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) have gained significant popularity in academic circles. [1].

Small unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) have significant advantages because they can operate

in environments that are considered dull, dirty, or dangerous, making conventional large-scale

aircraft or UAV operations impractical. Furthermore, small UAVs are relatively inexpensive to

manufacture, whereas larger UAVs can cost millions of dollars. It is worth noting that UAVs

generally travel at slower speeds than conventional aircraft. The Cl/Cd curve undergoes substantial

changes in this regime, particularly within the Reynolds range of 104 to 105. As a result, the effects

of LRN can have a negative impact on propeller performance and reduce the accuracy of general

numerical methods used to predict their performance. In comparison, propeller performance for

full-scale airplanes has been well documented, and propellers at low Reynolds numbers have been

scarce [3].

7
 Achieving adequate propeller performance in the LRN regime requires adjusting the

propeller's twist to produce effective thrust while minimizing power consumption. Noise control,

interaction control, and efficiency improvement through re-shaping are all variables that can be

optimized in rotary wings. The authors of the Cho and Lee paper emphasize the importance of

optimizing the overall propeller shape to achieve effective propeller thrust optimization. [4].

Because of this, In the paper, only the propeller shape will be optimized to find the optimum

efficiency. In the future, multi-disciplinary investigations maybe be conducted. The thesis paper

can be split into three major areas, those are 1) propeller geometry determination, 2) aerodynamic

analysis, and 3) optimization scheme.

The section on propeller geometry determination will focus on identifying the small-scale

geometry relevant to the project. Subsequently, this paper will describe the development of two

types of propeller designs. The first design underwent preliminary calculations, while the second

was created using design learning curves. An analysis of the aerodynamics of the unoptimized

blade will follow, using software specifically designed for this purpose.

8
 CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW

Optimizing low Reynolds number propeller blade designs has been a topic of considerable

interest for researchers and engineers alike, given its significant implications for improving

propulsion system efficiency. Chang and Sullivan's 1984 study, published in the AIAA Journal,

sheds light on an alternative technique for optimizing the propeller twist angle using nonlinear

programming. This approach is particularly valuable for predicting the optimum twist angle for

both simple and complex blade shapes, which is critical for enhancing the performance of low

Reynolds number propellers.

The authors use the vortex lattice method to represent the propeller blade as a curving

lifting line and then determine the optimal twist angle based on this representation. Chang and

Sullivan compared optimized and unoptimized propeller blades in their study, discovering that the

former was 6% more efficient than the latter. This result emphasizes the importance of optimizing

propeller blade design to improve efficiency, reduce fuel consumption, and increase range,

particularly for propellers with low Reynolds numbers.

As a result, this paper focuses on the importance of optimizing propeller blades for low

Reynolds number applications and the efficacy of nonlinear programming as an alternative method

for achieving optimal blade twist angles. The study's findings show that this approach can

significantly improve propeller performance and, by extension, the overall efficiency of propulsion

systems, making it an important area of research and development for the aviation and marine

industries.

9
 The study, titled "Propeller Performance Data at Low Reynolds Numbers," conducted by

Brandt and Selig, delves into the significance of optimizing propeller blades for small unmanned

aerial vehicles (UAVs) operating at low Reynolds numbers. Based on the 75% propeller-blade

station chord, the authors investigated the efficiency of various propellers with Reynolds numbers

ranging from 50,000 to 100,000. Their experiments, which were carried out in a physical wind

tunnel with constant rotational speed and varying wind speeds, discovered that propeller blades

have a range of efficiencies, with the most efficient achieving 65% efficiency and the least efficient

achieving only 28% efficiency.

This research highlights the importance of proper propeller selection in improving the

overall performance of UAVs, particularly those operating at low Reynolds numbers. As a result,

the findings of this study can be used to guide the selection and design of propellers for small

UAVs, resulting in improved performance and overall efficiency.

The paper by Cho and Lee, titled "Propeller blade shape optimization for efficiency

improvement," sheds light on the importance of propeller optimization for high efficiency in low

Reynolds number applications. The authors proposed a new technique for propeller optimization

called the Extended Linear Interior Penalty Function Method (EIPM), which transforms

constrained optimization problems into a series of unconstrained optimization problems. The

authors argue that the EIPM method is particularly well-suited for validating well-designed

propellers and can be used as a design tool for achieving high-efficiency propellers. In their

investigation, the authors found that when efficiency improvements are set as the objective

function, the propeller blade shape varies to some extent after optimization.

10
 These findings highlight the importance of propeller optimization in achieving high

efficiency in low Reynolds number applications. Furthermore, the data generated through propeller

optimization can be utilized to obtain another set of optimum propellers, which can be compared

and contrasted with the model propeller blade. Propeller optimization is crucial for improving

small UAVs' overall performance and efficiency, which is a critical consideration in developing

unmanned aerial technology.

11
 CHAPTER 3: EXPERIMENTAL SETUP AND PROCEDURE

The propeller twist angle will be optimized with the help of the open-source code Qblade,

which is widely used for turbine blade optimization. But if the twist angle can be taken inversely,

it implies the actual propeller blade rotational angle. The Qblade integrates the XFLR5

functionality that rapidly designs custom airfoils, computes their performance polars, and directly

integrates them into a wind turbine rotor design to optimize and simulate. Jblade is the modified

QBlade for the propeller blade. The Qblade blade twist angle can be calculated with the help of

the Betz optimization technique given by [5] and [6].

Equation 1: 𝜙 (𝑟) = tan−1 (2𝑅 /3𝑟𝜆) + 𝛼

Equation 2: 𝜆 = 𝑅Ω/𝑉0

The Tip speed 𝜆 will vary because the experimental propeller’s total blade radius R and

rotational speed Ω will be fixed with assumed velocity 𝑉0 range from 10m/s to 20 m/s. After getting

the optimized twist Angle 𝜙, it will compare with the numerical method calculated twist angle to

validate the outcome data from Qblade. Then the propeller blade will be analyzed with the help of

Jblade, which is a modified QBlade, where an investigator can rotate the propeller clockwise rather

than counterclockwise, which topical wind turbines usually operate. Then the extracted Cp and Ct

values will be used to calculate propeller efficiency [7].

12
 Equation 3: 𝐽 = 𝑉0 / 𝑛𝐷

Equation 4: 𝜂 = 𝐶𝑇*𝐽/ (𝐶𝑝 *2π)

By equation [3] and [4], the propeller efficiency can be calculated respected to any parameters.

For the preliminary Investigation, the propeller efficiency has been calculated against different

wind velocities.

Preliminary Investigation

The preliminary investigation is done by the open-sourced Qblade and Jblade software.

A. Propeller Modeling: Obtaining designs for the small UAV propellers was difficult because this

was proprietary. For this simulation, a comparable dimension has been taken from Brandt Selig

[3]. They stated that the typical small UAVs have 9 into 11- inch diameter blades, but for this

simulation, 16- in radius has been taken due to dealing with the LRN curve under 35,000. The

proposed paper will take close to the real data, and the hub size is 3 inches. The simulated propeller

has 3 blades. The chord length of the propeller will be set at 4 inches to determine the optimized

twist angle effectiveness. NACA 4412 has been chosen for the blade because it is one of the well-

documented and researched airfoils [8]. For the proposed paper, the chord length also will be

optimized.

B. Airfoil: The airfoil has to be simulated for the propeller blade to get the cl/cd curve with

respect to the attack angle. The propeller chord length is the same as the root, so the Reynolds

number with respect to the chord will be the same. By taking an average flow speed of 15 m/s,

13
the propeller will have 103,624 Re at sea level. The Re has been calculated with the given

formula-

Equation 5: 𝑅𝑒 = 𝜌𝑉𝑐/𝜇
In the equation [5] length is the chord length 𝑐, altitude dependent viscosity 𝜇, and density 𝜌, the

free stream velocity 𝑉. After Finding the 𝑅𝑒 the airfoil has been simulated and the highest peak

[figure 1] can be seen at a 9◦ attack angle. Which result is given below-

Figure 1: Cl/Cd Curve vs 𝛼.

Next, the propeller has been created with the airfoil. The images are below [2] and [3]. The

propeller airfoil can be seen inversely positioned in figure [3], this problem can be solved by

rotating the propeller clockwise rather than the default counterclockwise. The airfoil extrapolates

14
polarly can be seen below in figure [4]; through this extrapolation, the propeller cl/cd curve can be

predicted extensively.

C. Twist Angle Calculation: Calculated 𝜆 Tip speed ratio (TSR) from equation [2] which is about

27.06, which has been used to find the twist angle 𝜙 with respect to the suitable attack angle 9◦. In

Figure 3, the calculated twist angle against the variable local radius is shown. The twist angle has

been calculated with the help of the Qblade simulator.

Figure 2: Propeller view

15
 Figure 3:Twist angle vs Local radius (Generate through Qblade Advance Blade design)

In the paper written by Chang and Sullivan, they took linear initial twist angle of 10◦; they

also said " Other infeasible values could also be used for this method" [9]. They were uncleared

how they took it. To ensure the right twist angle, in this paper, both 10◦ increments and decrements

have been taken and compared with no twist angle.

16
D. BEM data: The propeller has been simulated under the condition of fix Ω, zero pitch, and

varied win speed. The rotation has been performed counterclockwise. The simulation didn’t

account for any of the tip loss because it is unknown how much tip loss JBlade accounted for. In

the c p vs ct simulated curve shown in figure 4, the most left curve is for an optimized propeller

blade. It can be shown that the thrust coefficient is much higher than the rightest curves.

Additionally, from the equation 4, 𝑐𝑡 is in proportion to the efficiency and 𝑐_𝑝 inversely

proportion to the efficiency.

Figure 4:𝑐𝑡 vs 𝑐 𝑝 curve

17
 Figure 5:Efficiency vs wind-speed
In figure [7], the plot efficiency range is much higher than the normal range of 1. It is because

the rotation rate is fixed for this propeller and rotated at the same rate for all points of the wind

speed range [10,20]. The motor choice fixes the rotational rate, so this paper’s solo focus was to

improve the twist angle. Figure [7] shows that the plot from linearly decreases and increases

have the same efficiency, and the differences between linear and zero degree also slightly. Also,

in this experiment, the tip loss wasn’t considered, which can affect overall efficiency. Tip losses

is an important factor in Blade Element Momentum (BEM) to determine optimum blade design

for efficiency [10]. The result can be improved by taking in account the tip losses. Moreover, it is

important to perform uncertainty analysis. [11]. The main sources of uncertainty are the

quantization error and uncertainty arising from the standard deviation. By taking those accounts,

it is possible to get more refined data.

18
Secondary analysis:

In this study, the methodology involves using an E63 airfoil for propeller design, which

has been reported to perform better in low Reynolds number (LRN) conditions compared to the

previously studied NACA 4412 airfoil [12]. The baseline propeller design involved calculating

the chord lengths along the propeller radius from the tip to the 30% radius using the optimal

chord length equation, where the chord length at the corresponding radius location (C𝑟) is equal

to the tip chord length (C𝑡𝑖𝑝) divided by the non-dimensional radial distance (r). The non-

dimensional radial distance, which is 0 at the rotating center and 1 at the tip, was converted from

millimeters to inches for this study. The tip chord length was set at 8 mm, and the radius was set

at 6 inches (152 mm) from the root, while the root radius was set at 1 inch (25.4 mm). In this

model, the rotation rate of the propeller blade is between 2000RPM to 4000 RPM and the wind

velocity is from 10 to 20 m/s.

Figure 6: Blade View (pre-twist)

19
 Figure 7:The positions, chord length airfoil polar.
In figure 7, the twist angle has been generate based on the suitable blade CL/CD value

which can be found from figure 8. For E63 airfoil, Reynold number 10,000 to 30,000 suitable

attack angle is 3.1°.

20
 CHAPTER 4: RESULTS & DISCUSSION

In this chapter of the paper, all the results obtained from the final design analysis will be

presented. The first section of the results will focus on the data calculated using Qblade and

Jblade. Following this, the result will be discussed. Below the calculated Reynold number

depending on the chord length has been shown, which has been calculated with equation 5. The

table shows the relationship between the chord length and the Reynolds number, which is a

dimensionless quantity used to describe fluid flow.

The results obtained in this study have shown that the optimized propeller design

outperforms other propeller designs across a range of wind speeds, as demonstrated in Figures 9,

11, and 12. The efficiency of the propeller was found to increase as the rotational speed of the

propeller increased, with the highest efficiency being achieved at an RPM of 4000. This is

consistent with the theoretical prediction that higher rotational speeds lead to higher aerodynamic

efficiency. These findings are also in line with the results of previous experimental studies on

propeller efficiency, as reported in the literature review by Brandt and Selig. They found that the

range of propeller efficiencies varied from 28% to 65%, with the most efficient propellers

achieving efficiencies of up to 65%. This range of efficiencies is also reflected in the

experimental results presented in the figures. The optimized propeller design in this study

achieved an efficiency of approximately 62%, which is near the upper end of the efficiency range

reported in the literature. This demonstrates that the design optimization process used in this

study was successful in producing a highly efficient propeller design, Although the blade

perform better in lower rotational speed.

21
 The results of this study have shown that the relationship between advance ratio and

efficiency can be clearly visualized in Figure 10. The optimized propeller design exhibited a high

level of efficiency across a range of advance ratios, with peak efficiency being achieved at an

advance ratio of approximately 6. This finding is consistent with previous experimental studies

on propeller efficiency, as reported in the literature review. In particular, Figure 13 from a related

article was found to be highly comparable to our results. At an advance ratio of 1 (j value of 1),

the efficiency value reported in the literature was approximately 0.85, which is very close to the

efficiency value obtained from our Figure 10. This consistency between the two studies further

validates our findings and suggests that the optimized propeller design in our study has achieved

a high level of efficiency.

chord length (m) Reynold number

0.01 10621.38728

0.011 11683.52601

0.02 21242.77457

0.027 28677.74566

0.02 21242.77457

0.013 13807.80347

0.0114 12108.3815

0.01 10621.38728

0.0088 9346.820809

0.008 8497.109827

Table 1:Chord Length and Reynold Number

22
 Figure 8:CL/CD value over range of Re

Blade Efficiency vs Wind Speed for 2000 RPM

1.80E+00
2000 RPM Blade 2000 RPM Twisted Blade
1.60E+00

1.40E+00

1.20E+00
Efficency (𝜂)

1.00E+00

8.00E-01

6.00E-01

4.00E-01

2.00E-01

0.00E+00
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
Windspeed (m/s)

Figure 9: Wind vs Efficiency (2000RPM)

23
 Blade Efficiency vs Advance Ratio for 2000 RPM
1.80E+00
2000 RPM Blade 2000 RPM Twisted Blade
1.60E+00

1.40E+00

1.20E+00
Efficency (𝜂)

1.00E+00

8.00E-01

6.00E-01

4.00E-01

2.00E-01

0.00E+00
0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7
Advance Ration (J)

Figure 10:Advance Ratio vs Efficiency (2000RPM)

Blade Efficiency vs Wind Speed for 3000 RPM

1.20E+00
3000 RPM Blade 3000 RPM Twisted Blade

1.00E+00

8.00E-01
Efficency (𝜂)

6.00E-01

4.00E-01

2.00E-01

0.00E+00
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
Windspeed (m/s)

Figure 11: Wind vs Efficiency (3000RPM)

24
 Blade Efficiency vs Wind Speed for 4000 RPM
1.50E+00
3000 RPM Blade 3000 RPM Twisted Blade

1.00E+00
Efficency (𝜂)

5.00E-01

0.00E+00
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

-5.00E-01

-1.00E+00
Windspeed (m/s)

Figure 12: Wind vs Efficiency (4000RPM)

Figure 13: Propeller Efficiency vs Advance Ratio [13]

25
 CHAPTER 6: CONCLUSIONS

Optimizing the twist angle of propeller blades can significantly improve the efficiency of

low-speed propellers. This was demonstrated through simulations using Betz optimization

technique and BEM theory, which showed up to eight times greater efficiency than linear or no-

twist angles. It is crucial to optimize both the twist angle and the chord length of the propeller

blade for maximum efficiency, focusing on high solidarity and relatively large chord length

during blade construction. The secondary geometry, which enhances the lift distribution along

the blade, has also produced even more thrust due to its aerodynamically advantageous

properties. Overall, the presented analysis is a valuable tool for future research on propeller blade

optimization, enabling the development of power-efficient propellers with improved

aerodynamic performance.

Furthermore, the results of the study also revealed that the performance of the optimized

propeller was significantly better at lower rotational speeds compared to other designs. This

finding is of particular importance for LRN propeller blade systems, where low wind speeds are

common and the ability to generate power efficiently at low rotational speeds is crucial. To

further advance our understanding of propeller design and optimization, future research could

include benchmark studies using computational fluid dynamics (CFD) simulations and Chord

Optimization Study (CHORS) techniques. These methods could provide more in-depth insights

into the aerodynamics of propellers and enable the development of even more efficient designs.

26
 REFERENCES

[1] Tracy, I. P., Hansman, R. J., Wilson, T., Stems, A., Lienhard V, J. H., and Collins, S. C.,

“Propeller Design and Analysis for a Small, Autonomous UAV,” Tech. rep., 2011.

[2] Shrestha, R., Benedict, M., Hrishikeshavan, V., and Chopra, I., “Hover performance of a

small-Scale helicopter rotor for flying on mars,” Journal of Aircraft, Vol. 53, No. 4, 2016, pp.

1160–1167. https://doi.org/10.2514/1.C033621.

[3] Brandt, J. B., and Selig, M. S., “Propeller Performance Data at Low Reynolds Numbers,”

Tech. rep., 2011. URL https: //www.ae.illinois.edu/m-selig.

[4] Cho, J., Lee, S., “Propeller blade shape optimization for efficiency improvement,”

Computers Fluids, Vol. 27, No. 3, 1998, pp. 407– 419.

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/S0045- 7930(97)00035-2, URL

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/ S0045793097000352.

[5] Islam, M. R., Bin Bashar, L., and Rafi, N. S., “Design and Simulation of A Small Wind

Turbine Blade with Qblade and Validation with MATLAB,” 2019 4th International Conference

on Electrical Information and Communication Technology, EICT 2019, Institute of Electrical

and Electronics Engineers Inc., 2019. https://doi.org/10.1109/EICT48899.2019.9068762.

[6] Günel, O., Koç, E., and Yavuz, T., “Mini-Scaled Horizontal Axis Wind Turbine Analysis By

Qblade And Cfd Academic,” Journal of Energy Applications and Technologies, Vol. 3, 2016, pp.

87–92. URL www.academicpaper.orgwww.academicpaper. org/index.php/IJEAT.

27
[7] Toman, U. T., Hassan, A. K. S., Owis, F. M., and Mohamed, A. S., “Blade shape

optimization of an aircraft propeller using space mapping surrogates,” Advances in Mechanical

Engineering, Vol. 11, No. 7, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1177/1687814019865071.

[8] Coles, D., and Wadcock, A. J., “Flying-hot-wire study of flow past an NACA 4412 airfoil at

maximum lift,” AIAA Journal, Vol. 17, No. 4, 1979, pp. 321–329.

https://doi.org/10.2514/3.61127

[9] Chang, L. K., and Sullivan, J. P., “Optimization of propeller blade twist by an analytical

method,” AIAA Journal, Vol. 22, No. 2, 1984, pp. 252–255. https://doi.org/10.2514/3.48441.

[10] El Khchine, Y., and Sriti, M., “Tip Loss Factor Effects on Aerodynamic Performances of

Horizontal Axis Wind Turbine,” Energy Procedia, Vol. 118, Elsevier Ltd, 2017, pp. 136–

140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2017.07.028.

[11] Pelletier, A., and Mueller, T. J., “Low Reynolds Number Aerodynamics of Low-Aspect-

Ratio, Thin/Flat/Cambered-Plate Wings,” https://doi.org/10.2514/2.2676, Vol. 37, No. 5,

2012, pp. 825–832. https://doi.org/10.2514/2.2676, URL

https://arc.aiaa.org/doi/abs/10.2514/2.2676.

[12] Ning, Z., Wlezien, R. W., & Hu, H. (2017). An experimental study on small UAV propellers

with serrated trailing edges. 47th AIAA Fluid Dynamics Conference.

https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2017-3813

28
[13] Roger, D. F. (2010). Propeller Efficiency - Nar Associates. American Bonanza Society.

Retrieved April 20, 2023, from https://nar-associates.com/technical-

flying/propeller/cruise_propeller_efficiency_screen.pdf

29