6.

0 RESULT

No. Velocity Reynolds Rigid Body base surface facing Body base surface facing Net Drag
(m/s) No. Rod upstream downstream Coefficient,
Drag Body diameter: 0.065 m Body diameter: 0.065 m CD
Force,
FD
(N) Drag Net Drag Drag Net Drag
Force, Drag Coefficient, Force, Drag Coefficient,
FD Force, CD FD Force, CD
(N) FD (N) FD
(N) (N)
1. 8 23769.648 0.014 0.141 0.127 1.445 0.089 0.075 0.853 0.592

2. 10 29712.061 0.034 0.239 0.205 1.493 0.136 0.102 0.743 0.750

3. 12 35654.473 0.050 0.338 0.288 1.456 0.219 0.169 0.855 0.601

4. 14 41596.885 0.060 0.469 0.409 1.519 0.310 0.250 0.929 0.590

5. 16 47539.297 0.076 0.609 0.533 1.516 0.404 0.328 0.933 0.583

6. 18 53481.709 0.103 0.798 0.695 1.562 0.539 0.436 0.980 0.582

7. 20 59424.121 0.125 0.978 0.853 1.553 0.668 0.543 0.988 0.565

Average 1.506 Average 0.897 0.609

Table 1 : Result of Drag Force in Flow Over a body test.

Characteristic length for triangular prism, LC = D = 0.08m Density of

air, ρ = 1.184 kg/m3 (at 25°C, 1 atm pressure)

Dynamic viscosity of air, μ = 1.849 × 10-5 kg/m‧s (at 25°C, 1 atm pressure)

Velocity, V = 8m/s

Reference area of prism body, A

𝐴 = 𝑏𝑎𝑠𝑒 × ℎ𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡

= 0.08 m × 0.029 m

= 2.32 × 10−3 𝑚2

Hydraulic diameter of prism body, DH

𝐴 = 𝐜𝐫𝐨𝐬𝐬𝐬𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐚𝐥 𝐚𝐫𝐞𝐚, 𝐏 = 𝐰𝐞𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐝 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐟𝐢𝐥𝐞

𝐴
𝐷𝐻 = 4
𝑃

2.32 × 10−3
=4×
0.2

= 0.0464

Reynolds Number,Re

𝜌𝑉𝐷𝐻
𝑅𝑒 =
𝜇

1.184 × 8 × 0.0464
=
1.849 × 10−5

= 23769.648

Rigid Rod Drag Force

𝐹𝐷 = 0.139 − 0.125
= 0.014
Upstream

Drag Force
FD = 0.202 - 0.061

= 0.141 N

Net Drag Force

FD = FD (Upstream) – FD (Rigid Rod)

= 0.141 - 0.014

= 0.127 N

Drag Coefficient

𝐹𝐷
𝐶𝐷 =
1 2
2 𝜌𝑉 𝐴
0.127
=
1 2 −3
2 (1.184)(8) (2.32 × 10 )

= 1.444

Downstream

Drag Force

FD = 0.150 - 0.061

= 0.089 N
 Net Drag Force
FD = FD (Downstream) – FD (Rigid Rod)

= 0.089 - 0.014

= 0.075 N

Drag Coefficient

𝐹𝐷
𝐶𝐷 =
1 2
𝜌𝑉 𝐴
2
0.075
=
1 2 −3
2 (1.184)(8) (2.32 × 10 )

= 0.853

Net Drag Coefficient

CD = CD (Upstream) – CD (Downstream)

= 1.444 – 0.853

= 0.591

Percentage Error CD for open end facing upstream

CD, theory = 2.0 CD, experimental = 1.506(average)

𝐶𝐷 (𝑒𝑥𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡) − 𝐶𝐷 (𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑜𝑟𝑦)
Percentage error, % = | | × 100%
𝐶𝐷 (𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑜𝑟𝑦)

1.506 − 2.0
=| | × 100%
2.0

= 24.7%
Percentage Error CD for open end facing downstream

CD, theory = 1.55 CD, experimental = 0.897

𝐶𝐷 (𝑒𝑥𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡) − 𝐶𝐷 (𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑜𝑟𝑦)
Percentage error, % = | | × 100%
𝐶𝐷 (𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑜𝑟𝑦)

0.897 − 1.55
=| | × 100%
1.55

= 42.13%

1.8
Drag coefficient vs velocity
1.6

1.4
Drag coefficient,Cd

1.2

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0
8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Velocity Upstream
Rigid Rod
Downstream
Graph 1:Drag coefficient vs velocity
 Drag coefficient vs Reynold number
1.8
1.6
1.4
Drag coefficient

1.2
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
35654.473 41596.885 47539.297 53481.709
Reynold number

Upstream Downstream Rigid Rod

Graph 2: Drag coefficient vs Reynold number

Net drag coefficient vs velocity

0.7

0.6
Net drag coefficent

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Velocity

Graph 3: Net drag coefficient vs velocity

0.7

0.6
Net drag coefficent

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
23769.648 29712.061 35654.473 41596.885 47539.297 53481.709 59424.121
Reynold number

Graph 4: Net drag coefficient vs Reynold number