RESULT AND DISCUSSION

Upstream (0.0285*0.0795) Downstream (0.0285*0.0795)

Net Net
Rigid Rod Drag Drag Drag Drag Drag Drag Net Drag
No Velocit Drag Force Force, Force, Coefficient Force, Force, Coefficient Coefficient
. y (m/s) Rey. No. Fd(N) Fd Fd , Cd Fd Fd , Cd , Cd
1 8 2869.4505 0.019 0.140 0.121 1.2907 0.095 0.076 0.8113 0.4794
2 10 3586.8132 0.028 0.230 0.202 1.3790 0.150 0.122 0.8335 0.5455
3 12 4304.1758 0.032 0.322 0.290 1.3748 0.210 0.178 0.8445 0.5303
4 14 5021.5385 0.044 0.423 0.379 1.3201 0.282 0.238 0.8296 0.4905
5 16 5738.9011 0.067 0.575 0.508 1.3547 0.381 0.314 0.8380 0.5167
6 18 6456.2637 0.086 0.728 0.642 1.3527 0.474 0.388 0.8182 0.5346
7 20 7173.6264 0.098 0.910 0.812 1.3858 0.593 0.495 0.8455 0.5404

RIGID BODY DRAG FORCE VS VELOCITY

0.12

0.1

0.08
Drag Force

0.06

0.04

0.02

0
6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22

Velocity
 UPSTREAM DRAG FORCE VS VELOCITY
0.900
0.800
0.700
0.600
Drag Force

0.500
0.400
0.300
0.200
0.100
0.000
6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22

Velocity

DOWNSTREAM DRAG FORCE VS

VELOCITY
0.600

0.500

0.400
Drag Force

0.300

0.200

0.100

0.000
6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22

Velocity

COEFFICIENT DRAG(UPSTREAM) VS
VELOCITY
1.4000
1.3800
1.3600
Coefficient Drag

1.3400
1.3200
1.3000
1.2800
1.2600
1.2400
6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22

Velocity
 COEFFICIENT DRAG(DOWNSTREAM)VS
VELOCITY
0.8500

0.8400
Coefficient Drag

0.8300

0.8200

0.8100

0.8000

0.7900
6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22

Velocity

SAMPLE CALCULATION
Area of the surface= 0.0285*0.0795= 0.02266 m²
Diameter of rigid body=0.0048m
1) Calculate the Reynold Number
⍴ VD
ℜ=
μ
Density for air is, ⍴=¿1.292kg/mᶟ.

Dynamic Viscosity for air, 𝜇=1.729× (10^-5) Pa s

Calculate Renold Number for velocity 8m/s:

(1.292)(8)(0.0048)
ℜ=
1.729 ×(10−5 )
ℜ=2869.4505
2) Calculate for Drag Coefficient, Cd
Fd
C d=
1
( )⍴ V ² A
2
Calculate Coefficient Drag Force for 8m/s Upstream:
0.121
Cd=
1
( )(1.293)(82 )(0.02266)
2
Cd=1.2907
DISCUSSION
MUHAMMAD ASMADI BIN ABDUNKARIM YAKOH@AB KARIM (2022475128)

In this study, the trend seen in the Reynolds numbers, which rise with increasing
velocities, marks a crucial shift in fluid dynamics from smooth laminar flow to turbulent flow
regimes. This shift holds significant importance in understanding how fluid dynamics impact
the drag forces acting on the rigid rod. In laminar flow, where fluid movement is orderly and
smooth, drag forces are generally more predictable and lower. However, as velocities increase
and the flow becomes turbulent, the fluid behavior becomes chaotic, leading to higher drag
forces due to increased resistance experienced by the rigid rod. This understanding of the
transition from laminar to turbulent flow is fundamental for analyzing and optimizing designs
in fluid environments, highlighting the importance of recognizing how different flow regimes
can greatly affect the performance, efficiency, and structural integrity of objects moving
through fluids.

The drag forces experienced by a rigid rod moving through a fluid were investigated
at various velocities ranging from 8 m/s to 20 m/s. The data collected includes both upstream
and downstream drag forces, as well as the corresponding drag coefficients. Additionally, the
difference between upstream and downstream net drag coefficients was calculated for further
analysis. The first notable observation is the consistent increase in drag forces with increasing
velocity. This trend aligns with established principles in fluid dynamics, where higher
velocities lead to greater resistance and drag on objects immersed in the fluid . For instance, the
upstream net drag force ranged from 0.121 N at 8 m/s to 0.812 N at 20 m/s, while the downstream net
drag force ranged from 0.076 N to 0.495 N over the same velocity range.
 A key finding is the significant difference between upstream and downstream drag
forces. Across all velocities tested, the upstream drag force consistently exceeded the
downstream drag force. This disparity is attributed to the opposing directions of motion
relative to the fluid flow. The net drag forces and drag coefficients for upstream motion were
consistently higher than those for downstream motion, indicating that more force is required
to move against the flow compared to moving with the flow. When examining the net drag
coefficient (Cd) differences between upstream and downstream motions, interesting trends
emerge. The difference in Cd ranges from 0.4794 to 0.5404 across the velocities tested. This
highlights the impact of flow direction on the efficiency of the rigid rod in overcoming drag.
The higher Cd differences signify a more pronounced difference in drag efficiency between
upstream and downstream motions, which is crucial information for designing systems to
minimize drag in specific flow conditions.

These findings have significant implications for engineering design and optimization
in fluid environments. Understanding how drag forces vary with velocity and direction, as
well as the corresponding differences in drag coefficients, is critical for designing efficient
structures, vehicles, or equipment. Engineers can use this data to inform decisions regarding
shape optimization, speed adjustments, or the implementation of drag-reducing strategies to
enhance energy efficiency and performance.
CONCLUSION

MUHAMMAD ASMADI BIN ABDUNKARIM YAKOH@AB KARIM (2022475128)

For the conclusion, the comprehensive analysis of drag forces and drag coefficients on
a rigid rod in fluid flow, several key conclusions can be drawn. Firstly, the study clearly
demonstrates the significant impact of velocity and directionality on drag forces, with higher
velocities leading to increased drag and upstream motion resulting in higher drag forces
compared to downstream motion. This highlights the importance of considering both factors
in fluid dynamics analysis and engineering design. Secondly, the comparison of upstream and
downstream net drag coefficients reveals important insights into the efficiency of the rigid
rod in overcoming drag in different flow conditions. The calculated differences in drag
coefficients between upstream and downstream motions provide valuable quantitative data
that can guide design decisions aimed at minimizing drag and optimizing performance. In
terms of the objectives set for the study, which were to measure drag coefficient and compare
experimental results with published data, the analysis indicates a satisfactory fulfillment of
these objectives. The measured drag coefficients align with theoretical expectations and
demonstrate consistency with established principles of fluid dynamics. Furthermore, the
comparison of experimental results with published data validates the accuracy and reliability
of the experimental setup and measurements.