Yusuf IŞIKER, Zeynel Abidin FIRATOĞLU, Yusuf İLHAN, Hakkı KESKİN

Bir Naca Kanat Profilinin Etrafındaki Akış Alanının OpenFoam ve Fluent CFD Yazılımları ile Araştırılması

Son yıllarda hem akademik hem de endüstride farklı akış alanlarının simülasyonlarında en yaygın kullanılan, güvenilir iki CFD yazılımı Fluent ve OpenFoam’dir. Bu çalışmada referans olarak seçilen bir akış alanı için aynı sınır koşularında, söz konusu iki CFD simülasyon yazılımın birbirine göre performansı araştırılmıştır. OpenFoam CFD yazılımının öne çıkan özelliği açık kodlu ücretsiz bir yazılım olmasıdır. Bu kapsamda birincil hedefimiz ülkemizde mühendislik süreçlerinin yürütülmesinde açık kodlu ve ücretsiz yazılımlarını yaygınlaştırılmasında ön ayak olmaktır. Akış alanı olarak, Teknofest yarışması için Harran-Ravens takımı tarafından imalatı yapılan, Naca 2415 kesitine sahip, bir kanat seçilmiştir. Yürütülen simülasyonlar sonucunda söz konusu kanata etki eden aerodinamik kuvvet ve momentler tespit edilmiştir. Kaldırma kuvveti açısından iki simülasyon arasında sapma %6 olurken sürükleme kuvvetin de söz konusu sapma %15.5 kadar çıkmaktadır. Ayrıca her iki simülasyon sonucu hesaplanan kaldırma ve sürüklenme katsayıları Airfoil Tools veri tabanı ile örtüşmektedir.

Investigation of Flow Field Around a Naca Airfoil with OpenFoam and Fluent CFD Software

In the last years, Fluent and OpenFoam are the two most reliable CFD software used in simulations of different flow fields in both academic and industry. In this study, the performance of these two CFD simulation software relative to each other was determined for the same boundary conditions for a selected flow area. The highlight of OpenFoam CFD software is that it is free software with open source. In this context, our primary goal is to lead the spread of open-source and free software in the implementation of engineering processes in our country. As the flow area, an airfoil with Naca 2415 section manufactured by Harran-Ravens team was selected for Teknofest competition. As a result of the simulations carried out, the aerodynamic forces and moments that affect the airfoil have been determined. In terms of lift force, the deviation between the two simulations is 6%, while in the drag force the said deviation increases up to 15.5%. Also, the lift and drag coefficient calculated by both simulation results are in good agreement with Airfoil Tools database.

PDF

___

[1] Feng L.-H., Choi K.-S., Wang JJ., “Flow control an airfoil usuing virtual gurney flaps,” Journal of fluid Mech., vol. 767, pp. 598-626, March 2015.
[2] Harran. [Online]. Available: http://etasarim.harran.edu.tr/harrancfd/ . [Accessed: Jan. 11 2020].
[3] Ansys Fluent. [Online]. Available: https://www.ansys.com/products/fluids/ansys-fluent . [Accessed: Jan. 25 2020]
[4] Openfoam [Online]. Available: https://www.openfoam.com/ [Accessed: Jan. 12 2020].
[5] N. T. P. Le, A. Shoja-Sani, E. Roohi, “Rarefied gas flow simulations of NACA 0012 airfoil and sharp 25– 55-deg biconic subject to high order nonequilibrium boundary conditions in CFD”, Aerospace Science and Technology, vol. 4, pp. 274-288, February 2015.
[6] B.S.A. Kumar, Ramalingaiah, S. Manjunath, R. Ganganna, “Computational Investigation of Flow Separation over NACA 23024 Airfoil at 6 Million Free Stream Reynolds Number Using k-Epsilon Turbulence Model,” Materials Today: Proceedings, vol. 5, pp. 12632-12640, February 2018.
[7] A. E Ockfen, K. I. Matveev, “Aerodynamic characteristics of NACA 4412 airfoil section with flap in extreme ground effect,” International Journal of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering. vol 1, pp. 1-12, September 2009.
[8] P. M. Radhakrishnan, M. Dheepthi, “CFD Analysis of NACA 2415 and 23012 Airfoil”, International Journal of Research in Aeronautical and Mechanical Engineering, vol 7, pp. 11-17, April 2019.
[9] A. Saleem, M.-H. Kim, “Aerodynamic analysis of an airborne wind turbine with three different aerofoil- based buoyant shells using steady RANS simulations”, Energy Conversion and Management, vol 177, pp. 233- 248, December 2018.
[10] Y. M. Patel, S. V. Jain, V. J. Lakhera, “Thermo- hydraulic performance analysis of a solar air heater roughened with reverse NACA profile ribs”, Applied Thermal Engineering, vol. 170, pp. 1-18, April 2020.
[11] A. Srivastava, V. Tiwari, R.K. Singh, “Numerical Simulation of NACA2415 Airfoil: At Different Low Reynolds Numbers and Angles of Attack”, International Journal of Research in Mechanical Engineering & Technology, vol 7, pp. 33-37, October 2017.
[12] H. Sogukpinar, I. Bozkurt, “Calculation of Aerodynamic Performance Characteristics of Airplane Airfoil and Comparing with the Experimental Measurement”, International Journal Of Engineering Technologıes, vol. 1, No. 2, pp. 83-87, June 2015.
[13] H. Parashar, “Calculation of Aerodynamic Characteristics of NACA 2415, 23012, 23015 Airfoils Using Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD)”, International Journal of Science, Engineering and Technology Research, vol. 4, pp. 610-614, March 2015.
[14] M. Soylak, “Experimental investigation of aerodynamic performance of oscillating wings at low Re numbers”, Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part G: Journal of Aerospace Engineering, vol. 230, pp. 1882-1902, August 2016.
[15] Airfoiltool [Online]. Available: www.airfoiltool.com . [Accessed: Jan. 12 2020]