International Journal of Engineering and Advanced Technology (IJEAT)

ISSN: 2249 – 8958, Volume-9 Issue-1, October 2019

Research onFlows for NACA 2412 Airfoil using

Computational Fluid Dynamics Method
Liyana Kharulaman, Abdul Aabid, Fharukh Ahmed Ghasi Mehaboobali, Sher Afghan Khan

The Spallart-Allamaras model when the flow has chaos is

ABSTRACT--- The comparison between incompressible and used to solve the flow field with constant density since it has
compressible flow for aerodynamic coefficients and flow been demonstrated to have the closest covenant to the
characteristics has been made for NACA 2412 airfoil. The FEM investigational results compared to k-epsilon and k-omega
is used to obtain results. The fluid domain of 10C has been
constructed to initialize the boundary conditions of
SST turbulence models. Generally, the k-ɛ and k-ωSST
incompressible and compressible flow conditions. The structured models for chaos are found for the investigation of the
mesh has been applied in order to achieve accurate results. The internal flow domain of convergent-divergent nozzle using
Spallart-Allmaras turbulence model has been used to solve both the CFD method [4]–[14] and this type of model found in
incompressible and compressible flow conditions. The method experimental work [15]–[22], and few in the external
validation that has been conducted at incompressible flow has domain such as 2-D wedge [23], [24] and cylinder having
shown close agreement between numerical and experimental lift
coefficient. From velocity magnitude and static pressure,
non-circular cross-sections [25]. Ives [26] have analyzed
contours, the compressible flow has the highest-pressure both incompressible and compressible flow the airfoil both
distribution compared to incompressible flow. Therefore, it has at Mach numbers of and 0.8, respectively. The fluid domain
been proven that the coefficient of force at ninety degrees to the of 20C has been built surrounding the airfoil. In a case
direction of the flow direction of the airfoil subjected to a where the density of the flow is changing at a high Mach
variable density flow was much higher compared to number of 0.8, it has been proven that the k-epsilon
incompressible flow.
turbulent model is in good agreement with the
investigational results.
Keywords: Finite element method, CFD, NACA 2412, airfoil,
incompressible, compressible, flow, Spalart Allmaras This study aims to compute the incompressible flow at an
inertia level of Mach M = 0.02 and compressible flow at M
I. INTRODUCTION = 0.4 over NACA 2412 airfoil for comparison purposes.
Based on the literature survey that has been done, the fluid
The flow condition determines the flow characteristics
domain of 10C and the Spallart-Allmaras turbulence model
and performance of the airfoil. As the airfoil has been placed
was an excellent choice to be implemented to solve both
within a freestream flow, the aerodynamics forces have been
flow conditions. The contours of velocity magnitude, static
produced [1]. The airfoil that is subjected to compressible
pressure, and dynamic pressure have been simulated. The
flow has a higher lift compared to incompressible flow due
Mach number contour of compressible flow has also been
to higher freestream velocity experienced by the airfoil. The
provided for further analysis.
incompressible and compressible flow can be determined
through the Reynolds number, where the freestream velocity
II. GEOMETRY AND MODELLING
has been varied. Anagha [2] has computed the
incompressible flow over NACA 2412 airfoil by using a The XY plane has been chosen to build the airfoil and
pressure-based solver and k-omega SST turbulence model fluid domain models. The Cartesian coordinates of NACA
by assuming of steady flow. He has incorporated structured 2412 aerofoil have been imported from the UIUC airfoil
mesh on the fluid domain in order to solve the flow database. The airfoil has approximately 1 m of chord length.
conditions. Merryisha [3] has conducted a study of The C-type fluid domain of 10C has been constructed in the
incompressible flow over NACA 2412 airfoil, where the Design Modeler of ANSYS workbench. In order to have
fluid domain of 10C has been constructed. Both greater control over the mesh generation, the domain has
unstructured and structured mesh has been applied to been sliced into four surfaces by drawing a horizontal line
eliminate the skewness near the airfoil. through the airfoil and vertical line at the straggling edge of
the airfoil. The projection tool has been selected to project
the four surfaces onto the fluid domain.

Revised Manuscript Received on October 15, 2019

Liyana Kharulaman, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Faculty
of Engineering, International Islamic University, Selangor, Malaysia
Abdul Aabid, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Faculty of
Engineering, International Islamic University, Selangor, Malaysia
Fharukh Ahmed Ghasi Mehaboobali, Department of Mechanical
Engineering, Bearys Institute of Technology, Mangalore, Karnataka, India,
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Government Engineering College,
Huvinahadagali, Karnataka, India Malaysia, 53100, Kuala Lumpur,
Malaysia.
Sher Afghan Khan, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Faculty of
Engineering, International Islamic University, Selangor, Malaysia.
(Email: [email protected])

Published By:
Retrieval Number: A3085109119/2019©BEIESP Blue Eyes Intelligence Engineering
DOI: 10.35940/ijeat.A3085.109119 5450 & Sciences Publication
 Research onFlows for NACA 2412 Airfoil using Computational Fluid Dynamics Method

range of Mach numbers [31]. The Spallart-Allamaras

turbulence model has been chosen due to high accuracy with
the benchmark data besides considering the computational
cost [32]. The turbulence intensity has been set as 10% due
to the simplicity of the geometry of the aerofoil under the
investigation [33]. The airfoil has been initialized as no-slip
and treated as wall boundary as the flow energy has been
lost into dissipation and brought to rest as it approached the
surface [34], [35].
4.1 The Flow with unchanged density (i.e.,
Figure 1: The construction of the fluid domain Incompressible flow, ρ = Constant)
The flow whose density remained unchanged is defined
III. MESH GENERATION & BOUNDARY
as the incompressible flow is defined as the flow that has
CONDITIONS
constant density and Mach number M <= 0.3. Therefore,
The fluid domain has been initialized by exhausting the the constant air density has been set as the material of the
periphery circumstances of the flow field, as can be seen in fluid. The velocity inlet has been set at 7.23 m/s, which was
Figure 2. In the finite element method, the fluid domain equivalent to a Mach number of 0.02. The flow
discretized into smaller elements based on a specific shape. specifications for the flow with the above properties are
The quadrilateral structured mesh has been applied in the shown in Table 1.
fluid domain as it can provide better accuracy compared to Table 1: The incompressible flow specifications
the unstructured mesh. A fine mesh has been obtained by Materials Constant air (ρ= 1.2256
implementing the integer of partitions [27] of 100, with the kg/m3)
preference element of 50 has reduced the skewness to 0.36. Operating Conditions Pressure= 101 325 Pa
The bias factor has been used to provide high mesh density Temperature= 288.16 K
around the airfoil for greater accuracy and better flow Boundary Conditions Velocity Inlet, V= 7.35
visualization [28]–[30]. Therefore, the fluid domain has the m/s
number of nodes of 40 400 and the number of elements of No-slip Airfoil
40 000. Pressure Outlet
Controls of Solution Coupling of the Pressure
Velocity
SIMPLE
Discretization method of PRESTO
Pressure
Momentum 2nd Order Upwind
Scheme
Initialization Values at the Inlet
Monitoring of the Force Normal, and axial force
Moment due to pitch at
¼c
Reference data Values at the Inlet
Limit for the Convergence 1x10-07
4.2 Flow with variable density
The compressible flow is that flow where the density is
Figure 2: The boundary conditions of the fluid domain
not constant and having the Mach number of more than 0.3.
Therefore, the ideal-gas material has been chosen. The level
of inertia M = 0.4 is decided by initializing the field for far-
field as the boundary condition at the inlet. The flow
specifications for compressible flow can be seen in Table 2.

Figure 3: The mesh generation of the fluid domain

IV. FLOW SPECIFICATIONS

The flow has been assumed to be steady, absolute
velocity formulation, and 2D-space planar. The pressure-
solver based has been used due to its applicability in a wide

Published By:
Retrieval Number: A3085109119/2019©BEIESP Blue Eyes Intelligence Engineering
DOI: 10.35940/ijeat.A3085.109119 5451 & Sciences Publication
 International Journal of Engineering and Advanced Technology (IJEAT)
ISSN: 2249 – 8958, Volume-9 Issue-1, October 2019

Table 2: The compressible flow specifications

Materials Ideal Gas, Cp= 1006.43 J/Kg
°K
K = 0.242 W/m °K
Dynamic stickiness, µ=
1.789x10-05
Operating Conditions Pressure= 101 325 Pa
Conditions at wall Pressure Far-Field
(Pressure)gage = 101 325 Pa
M = 0.4
Turbulent-Viscosity Ratio=
10
Temperature= 288 K
No-Slip Airfoil
Pressure at exit
Management of flow Pressure Velocity Coupling Figure 4: The convergence of incompressible flow
SIMPLE
Digitization PRESTO
Mass times speed Level2 solution with upwind
Initial input Inlet Values
Force consideration Normal, and axial force
Moment due to pitch at ¼ c
Bench Mark Values Inlet Values
Boundary of the 1x10-07
convergence

V. METHOD VALIDATION
The numerical lift coefficient of incompressible flow at a
low level of inertia M = 0.095 (the Reynolds number of
2.2x106) has been validated with the experimental lift
coefficient at the Mach number and Reynolds number at 0° Figure 5: The convergence of compressible flow
angle of attack [40]. From Table, it has been established that 6.2 Aerodynamic Coefficients
numerical outcomes are in reasonable covenant to the
All aerodynamic coefficients have been computed at a 0°
investigational result. Therefore, the construction of the
angle of attack. For both incompressible and compressible
fluid domain, the mesh generation, as well as the turbulence
flow. The aerodynamic coefficients have shown steady
model used, has been correctly chosen.
behavior against iteration as they reached convergence. The
Table 3: The validation between numerical result and
table and plotted graphs have been provided for comparison
experimental result
purposes.
Parameter Numerical Experimental Percentage
Result Result Error 6.2.1 Non-dimensional value of the Normal Force
Lift 0.163 0.165 1.21% Table 4 contains the factor of the force normal to the flow
Coefficient for compressible flow was much higher likened to the
coefficient of lift for the case when the density is constant
VI. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION (incompressible flow ρ = constant). The freestream velocity
experienced by the airfoil was higher for compressible flow.
6.1 Solution Convergence Thus, the lift coefficient was higher as well.
The SIMPLE scheme for coupling of pressure-velocity Table 4: The comparison of lift coefficient
with 2nd-order pressure three-dimensional discretization has Incompressible Flow Compressible Flow
been chosen for the solution methods for both the cases of 0.157 0.171
the flow where the compactness of the flow is either
persistent or varying. All the residuals have been converged
successfully at 10-7 as have been set in the flow
specifications for both the flow everywhere the compactness
of the flow is either constant or varying. The incompressible
flow has been converged at 617 iterations while the
compressible flow has been converged at 691 iterations.

Published By:
Retrieval Number: A3085109119/2019©BEIESP Blue Eyes Intelligence Engineering
DOI: 10.35940/ijeat.A3085.109119 5452 & Sciences Publication
 Research onFlows for NACA 2412 Airfoil using Computational Fluid Dynamics Method

Figure 9: The The opposing force coefficient for a flow

where density is variable
Figure 6: The lift coefficient of incompressible flow 6.2.3 The moment coefficient
There was no significant difference in the moment
coefficient for the constant density flow and compressible
flow of the aerofoil. Therefore, the variation of freestream
velocity experienced by the airfoil at zero angle of incidence
did not affect the moment coefficient massively.
Table 6: The comparison of moment coefficient
Incompressible Flow Compressible Flow
-0.193 -0.008

Figure 7: The lift coefficient of compressible flow

6.2.2 Drag Coefficient
The drag coefficient for compressible flow was much
higher compared to incompressible flow due to a higher lift
coefficient. Therefore, increasing freestream velocity
resulted in a more significant non-dimensional normal force,
and a dimensionless axial force is experienced by aerofoil.
Figure 10: The moment coefficient of incompressible
Table 5: The comparison of drag coefficient
flow
Incompressible Flow Compressible Flow
-0.169 0.008

Figure 11: The moment coefficient of compressible

flow

Figure 8: The opposing force coefficient for a flow

where density is constant

Published By:
Retrieval Number: A3085109119/2019©BEIESP Blue Eyes Intelligence Engineering
DOI: 10.35940/ijeat.A3085.109119 5453 & Sciences Publication
 International Journal of Engineering and Advanced Technology (IJEAT)
ISSN: 2249 – 8958, Volume-9 Issue-1, October 2019

6.3 Contours 6.3.1 Velocity Magnitude

The contours of velocity magnitude, static pressure, and Figure 12(a) and 12(b) represents, the flow has been
dynamic pressure have been provided for comparison separated from the higher and lower seeming smoothly at 0°
purposes between the incompressible and compressible flow incidence angle. The velocity magnitude for compressible
of the aerofoil. The Mach number contour can be simulated flow was much higher compared to the velocity magnitude
for variable-density flow since the pressure-flow field has for incompressible flow due to higher freestream velocity
been initialized as the inlet boundary condition. imposed on the compressible flow airfoil. The effect of
freestream velocity variation can be seen in pressure
distribution, as portrayed in Figures 13 and 14.

(a) (b)
Figure 12: The contour of the velocity values (a) Constant density flow (b) Variable density flow
incompressible flow was much higher compared to
6.3.2 Pressure Contours
compressible flow, thus, creating an upward lift coefficient
Based on Bernoulli’s equation, increasing freestream at a more significant value [39]. Hence, the lift coefficient
velocity could result in raising the stress owing to the comparison in Table 4 has been validated. The stagnation
kinematic force and lessening the compression of the flow point has been identified at the nose of the airfoil, where it
when it is static. Therefore, variating the freestream velocity has the highest static pressure for both incompressible and
affecting the pressure distribution over the airfoil. The stress compressible flow.
variance amongst the top and bottom shallow

(a) (b)
Figure 13: The dynamic pressure contour of (a) constant density flow (b) variable-density flow

Published By:
Retrieval Number: A3085109119/2019©BEIESP Blue Eyes Intelligence Engineering
DOI: 10.35940/ijeat.A3085.109119 5454 & Sciences Publication
 Research onFlows for NACA 2412 Airfoil using Computational Fluid Dynamics Method

(a) (b)
Figure 14: The static pressure contour of (a) For flow with constant density (b) Variable density flow

6.3.3 Contour for Inertia Level

“CFD Analysis of an Aerofoil,” Int. J. Eng. Res., vol. 3, no. 3, pp.
The inertia level contour is vividly portrayed, as seen in 154–158, 2015.
Figure 15, due to pressure-far field initialization. The 2 A. S. Gowda, “Comparison of Aerodynamic Performance of NACA
maximum Mach number over the upper surface of the airfoil 4412 and 2412 using Computational Approach,” Int. J. Eng. Trends
Technol., vol. 67, no. 4, pp. 73–75, 2019.
was 0.39, which did not exceed freestream Mach number 3 S. Merryisha and P. Rajendran, “CFD Validation of NACA 2412
and precarious Mach number. Airfoil,” 2019.
4 M. N. Akhtar, E. A. Bakar, A. Aabid, and S. A. Khan, “Numerical
Simulations of a CD Nozzle and the Influence of the Duct Length,”
Int. J. Innov. Technol. Explor. Eng., vol. 8, no. 9S2, pp. 622–630,
2019.
5 A. Aabid, N. M. Mazlan, M. A. Ismail, N. Akhtar, and S. A. Khan,
“Numerical Simulation of Suddenly Expanded Flow at Mach 2.2,”
Int. J. Eng. Adv. Technol., vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 457–462, 2019.
6 K. A. Pathan, P. S. Dabeer, and S. A. Khan, “Optimization of area
ratio and thrust in suddenly expanded flow at supersonic Mach
numbers,” Case Stud. Therm. Eng., vol. 12, no. July, pp. 696–700,
2018.
7 S. A. Khan, A. Aabid, F. A. Mehaboobali Ghasi, A. A. Al-Robaian
and A. S. Alsagri, “Analysis of Area Ratio In a CD Nozzle with
Suddenly Expanded Duct using CFD Method,” CFD Lett., vol. 11,
no. 5, pp. 61–71, 2019.
8 A. G. M. Fharukh, A. A. Alrobaian, A. Aabid, and S. A. Khan,
“Numerical Analysis of Convergent-Divergent Nozzle Using Finite
Element Method,” Int. J. Mech. Prod. Eng. Res. Dev., vol. 8, no. 6,
pp. 373–382, 2018.
9 S. A. Khan, A. Aabid, and M. A. Ali Baig, “CFD Analysis of CD
Figure 15: The Mach number contour of compressible Nozzle and Effect of Nozzle Pressure Ratio on Pressure and Velocity
flow for Suddenly Expanded Flows,” Int. J. Mech. Prod. Eng. Res. Dev.,
vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 1147–1158, 2018.
10 K. A. Pathan, S. A. Khan, and P. S. Dabeer, “CFD Analysis of Effect
VII. CONCLUSION of Mach number , Area Ratio, and Nozzle Pressure Ratio on Velocity
In conclusion, the incompressible and compressible flow for Suddenly Expanded Flows,” in 2nd International Conference for
Convergence in Technology (I2CT) CFD, 2017, pp. 1104–1110.
has been successfully compared through aerodynamics 11 K. A. Pathan, S. A. Khan, and P. S. Dabeer, “CFD Analysis of Effect
coefficient, velocity magnitude, static pressure, and dynamic of Flow and Geometry Parameters on Thrust Force Created by Flow
pressure contours by exhausting the Spalart-Allmaras from Nozzle,” in 2nd International Conference for Convergence in
Technology (I2CT) CFD, 2017, pp. 1121–1125.
disorder theoretical prototypical. The velocity magnitude for 12 K. A. Pathan, S. A. Khan, and P. S. Dabeer, “CFD analysis of the
compressible flow was much higher compared to effect of flow and geometry parameters on thrust force created by
incompressible flow; thus, led to more considerable pressure flow from nozzle,” 2017 2nd Int. Conf. Converg. Technol. I2CT,
2017, vol. 2017-Janua, pp. 1121–1125, 2017.
difference compressible flow. Therefore, the lift coefficient 13 K. A. Pathan, P. S. Dabeer, and S. A. Khan, “Investigation of base
for airfoil at compressible flow was much higher. However, pressure variations in internal and external suddenly expanded flows
the higher lift coefficient caused a higher drag coefficient, as using CFD analysis,” CFD Lett., vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 32–40, 2019.
14 K. A. Pathan, P. S. Dabeer, and S. A. Khan, “An Investigation to
well. The Mach number contour simulated for compressible Control Base Pressure in Suddenly Expanded Flows,” Int. Rev.
flow has shown that the local Mach number did not exceed Aerosp. Eng., vol. 11, no. August, pp. 162–169, 2018.
freestream Mach number and critical Mach number. Hence, 15 Z. I. Chaudhary, V. B. Shinde, M. Bashir, and S. A. Khan,
the airfoil was safe from drag divergence phenomena. “Experimental Investigation on the Effectiveness of Active Control
Mechanism on Base Pressure at
Low Supersonic Mach
REFERENCES Numbers,” in Innovative Design
& Development Practices in
1 K. S. Patel, S. B. Patel, U. B. Patel, and P. A. P. Ahuja, Aerospace and Automobile

Published By:
Retrieval Number: A3085109119/2019©BEIESP Blue Eyes Intelligence Engineering
DOI: 10.35940/ijeat.A3085.109119 5455 & Sciences Publication
 International Journal of Engineering and Advanced Technology (IJEAT)
ISSN: 2249 – 8958, Volume-9 Issue-1, October 2019

Engineering, Lecture Notes in Mechanical Engineering, 2016, pp. 37 A. K. Saraf, M. P. Singh, and T. E. J. S. Chouhan, “Aerodynamics
195–207. Analysis of NACA 0012 Airfoil using CFD,” Int. J. Mech. Prod.
16 S. A. Khan, A. Aabid, and Z. I. Chaudhary, “Influence of Control Eng., vol. 5, no. 12, pp. 21–25, 2017.
Mechanism on the Flowfield of Duct at Mach 1.2 for Area Ratio
2.56,” Int. J. Innov. Technol. Explor. Eng., vol. 8, no. 6S4, pp. 1135–
1138, 2019.
17 M. H. Azami, M. Faheem, A. Aabid, I. Mokashi, and S. A. Khan,
“Inspection of Supersonic Flows in a CD Nozzle using Experimental
Method,” Int. J. Recent Technol. Eng., vol. 8, no. 2S3, pp. 996–999,
2019.
18 [M. H. Azami, M. Faheem, A. Aabid, I. Mokashi, and S. A. Khan,
“Experimental Research of Wall Pressure Distribution and Effect of
Micro Jet at Mach,” Int. J. Recent Technol. Eng., vol. 8, no. 2S3, pp.
1000–1003, 2019.
19 M. N. Akhtar, E. A. Bakar, A. Aabid, and S. A. Khan, “Control of CD
Nozzle Flow using Microjets at Mach 2.1,” Int. J. Innov. Technol.
Explor. Eng., vol. 8, no. 9S2, pp. 631–635, 2019.
20 M. N. Akhtar, E. A. Bakar, A. Aabid, and S. A. Khan, “Effects of
Micro jets on the Flow Field of the Duct with Sudden Expansion,”
Int. J. Innov. Technol. Explor. Eng., vol. 8, no. 9S2, pp. 636–640,
2019.
21 S. A. Khan, Z. Ahmed, A. Aabid, and I. Mokashi, “Experimental
Research on Flow Development and Control Effectiveness in the Duct
at High Speed,” Int. J. Recent Technol. Eng., vol. 8, no. 2S8, pp.
1763–1768, 2019.
22 M. Faheem, M. Kareemullah, A. Aabid, I. Mokashi, and S. A. Khan,
“Experiment on of Nozzle Flow with Sudden Expansion at Mach
1.1,” Int. J. Recent Technol. Eng., vol. 8, no. 2S8, pp. 1769–1775,
2019.
23 S. A. Khan, A. Aabid, and A. S. C, “CFD Simulation with Analytical
and Theoretical Validation of Different Flow Parameters for the
Wedge at Supersonic Mach Number,” Int. J. Mech. Mechatronics
Eng. IJMME-IJENS, vol. 19, no. 01, pp. 170–177, 2019.
24 S. A. Khan, A. Aabid, I. Mokashi, A. A. Al-Robaian and A. S.
Alsagri, “Optimization of Two-dimensional Wedge Flow Field at
Supersonic Mach Number,” CFD Lett., vol. 11, no. 5, pp. 80–97,
2019.
25 M. F. M. Sajali, A. Aabid, S. A. Khan, F. A. G. Mehaboobali, and E.
Sulaeman, “Numerical investigation of the flow field of a non-circular
cylinder,” CFD Lett., vol. 11, no. 5, pp. 37–49, 2019.
26 R. Ives, A. S. Keir, E. Bassey, and F. A. Hamad, “Investigation of the
Flow around an Aircraft Wing of Section NACA 2412 utilizing
ANSYS Fluent,” in Aerospace Europe CEAS 2017 Conference, 2018,
vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 95–104.
27 A. Aditya and S. G, “The Numerical Analysis of Naca 0018 Airfoil:
Studying The Effect of Flap,” Int. J. Mech. Prod., vol. 9, no. 4, pp.
1087–1094, 2019.
28 C. Velkova, N. Vaptsarov, and N. Academy, “The Impact of Different
Turbulence Models at ANSYS Fluent over the Aerodynamic
Characteristics of Ultra-Light Wing Airfoil NACA 2412,” no.
September 2016, 2017.
29 D. C. Eleni, T. I. Athanasios, and M. P. Dionissios, “Evaluation of the
Turbulence Models for the Simulation of The Flow over a National
Advisory Committee for Aeronautics ( NACA ) 0012 Airfoil,” J.
Mech. Eng. Res., vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 100–111, 2012.
30 A. J. M. Jawad and A. Y. Abdulla, “Determination of the Pressure
and Velocity of the flow around an Airfoil using Finite Element
Method,” in 1st International Conference for Engineering, 2007, pp.
1–6.
31 H. Q. Yang and J. Dudley, “High-Order Pressure-based Solver for
Aeroacoustic Simulations High-Order Pressure-based Solver for
Aeroacoustics Simulations,” in Aeroacoustics Conferences, 2017, no.
May 2013, pp. 1–23.
32 S. M. A. Aftab, A. S. M. Rafie, N. A. Razak, and K. A. Ahmad,
“Turbulence Model Selection for Low Reynolds Number Flows,”
PLoS One, vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 1–15, 2016.
33 M. T. Islam, A. M. E. Arefin, M. Masud, and M. Mourshed, “The
Effect of Reynolds Number on the Performance of a Modified NACA
2412 Airfoil,” in International Conference on Mechnanical
Engineering, 1980, no. 040015, pp. 1–6.
34 A. Abdullah, A. A. Roslan and Z. Omar, “Comparative Study of
Turbulent Incompressible Flow Past Naca Airfoils,” ARPN J. Eng.
Appl. Sci., vol. 13, no. 21, pp. 8527–8530, 2018.
35 M. O. Petinrin and V. A. Onoja, “Computational Study of
Aerodynamic Flow over NACA 4412 Airfoil,” Br. J. Appl. Sci.
Technol., vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 1–11, 2017.
36 H. C. Seethararn, E. J. Rodgers, and J. W. H. Wentz, “Experimental
Studies of Flow Separation of the NACA 2412 Airfoil at Low
Speeds,” 2019.

Published By:
Retrieval Number: A3085109119/2019©BEIESP Blue Eyes Intelligence Engineering
DOI: 10.35940/ijeat.A3085.109119 5456 & Sciences Publication