AE311 Aerodynamics

Assignment-1
Shubham Maurya
Indian Institute of Space Science and Technology, Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala, 695547, India
The aerodynamic characteristics of E220-il were studied and compared with approximately similar NACA series airfoils. For this purpose, NACA 2412 and NACA 25112 were
chosen. Cp vs x/c (for selected AOA and Re), Cl vs , Cd vs , Cl/Cd vs , Cm vs ,
Clmax vs Re, Cdmin vs Re were computed and plotted using XFoil and XFLR5. In the
end applications and specialty of each airfoil were discussed.

Nomenclature
Cl
Cd
Cm
L
D
Re

Co-efficient of lift
Co-efficient of drag
Co-efficient of moment
Lift per unit span, N/m
Drag per unit span, N/m
Reynolds number
Angle of attack, degree
Displacement thickness

I.

Aerodynamic characteristics of E220-il

Figure 1: Cl vs. angle of attack for Re=50,000(blue); 100,000(yellow); 500,000(red); 1,000,000(green)

From the Cl vs plot, it is inferred that lift co-efficient increases with angle of attack. As Re increases,
Cl also increases for a given angle of attack (Fig.1). This is because of more fluid velocity and hence low
1 of 12
Aerodynamics Report, IIST

pressure on the curved surface. The flow separation at trailing edge and stall occurs at an angle of attack
of 80 -120 . The Cl at stall is higher for high Re which implies the Cl would be higher as freestream velocity
increases provided freestream density and dynamic viscosity remains constant.

Figure 2: Cd vs. angle of attack

The drag co-efficient increases with angle of attack (Fig.2). This is because of adverse pressure gradients
and subsequent flow separation on the airfoil which are significant at higher angle of attacks. Also, the Cd
increase drastically for > 10o and hence the above reasoning is justified. Moreover, the Cd decreases at
higher Re because of thin boundary layer and less effect of viscosity.

Figure 3: Cm vs. angle of attack

2 of 12
Aerodynamics Report, IIST

The co-efficient of moment is negative for all range of angle of attacks except 100 -170 where it is positive.(Fig. 3) The negative values of moment arise from the fact that lift and drag together exert negative
(nose down) torque on the airfoil. The Cm hits a maximum around = 12o 17o and again shoots down to
negative values. This sharp transitions could be attributed to boundary layer separation and so the lift and
drag co-efficient fluctuate and hence the Cm is also varying abruptly.

Figure 4: L/D vs. angle of attack

The L/D plot (Fig.4) are very important in optimizing the performance of an aircraft. In the case of
Cl
occurs at Re=1,000,000 and its value is 123. As explained earlier, Cl increases
E220-il airfoil, maximum C
d
Cl
Cl
with Re and Cd decreases with Re, resulting in increase of C
ratio with increase in Re. Therefore, the C
d
d
Cl
is least at Re=50,000. The variation of C
with results in a maxima at some angle of attack (say critical
d
). This critical angle of attack decreases as Re increases, which should mean that an airfoil kept in larger
free stream velocity is more efficient (greater L/D ratio) at smaller angle of attacks compared to the same
airfoil kept at lower freestream velocity of air.

3 of 12
Aerodynamics Report, IIST

Figure 5: Cp vs

x
c

for = 10 and Re=105

Figure 6: Cp vs

x
c

for = 10 & Re=106

Figure 7: Cp vs

x
c

for = 50 and Re=105

Figure 8: Cp vs

x
c

for = 50 & Re=106

The Cp variation over airfoil surface was plotted (Fig.5,6,7 and 8). Firstly the angle of attack was kept
constant at 10 and plot for Re equal to 105 and 106 were obtained. Comparing (Fig.5) and (Fig.6), it is
observed that the wake region is thin in case of flow with Re = 106 . The reduction in boundary layer
thickness at higher Re shows that inertia effects are dominant over viscous effects. Thus, boundary layer
reattaches itself to the surface. The Cp over airfoil near trailing edge as indicated by Fig.6, is less (magnitude)
than that in Fig.5. Therefore, a region of thin wake leads to more pressure recovery (less adverse pressure
gradient) than a region with thick wake. Hence, an airfoil at higher Re offers less pressure drag and Cd is
less.
Secondly, the angle of attack was varied from 10 to 50 and Re was kept constant at 105 or 106 . The boundary
layer thickness was almost same. However, the Cp distribution changes by large amount upon changing angle
of attack. In case of = 50 , the minimum Cp is -1.3 in contrast to -0.6 at 10 angle of attack. Therefore, the
difference of area under Cp vs. xc between upper and lower surface increases with angle of attack and as a
result Cl is high at = 50 than at 10 .

4 of 12
Aerodynamics Report, IIST

II.

Comparison with NACA airfoils

The E220-IL airfoil was compared with NACA 2412 and NACA 25112 as the geometrical aspects of these
were essentially similar.
Why only NACA 2412 and NACA 25112 were chosen for comparison?
E220-IL airfoil had maximum thickness of 11.5% at 33.1% chord and maximum camber of 2.2% at 37.7%
chord. In contrast to E220-IL, NACA 2412 had maximum thickness 12% at 30% chord and maximum
camber of 2% at 40% chord. Similarly, NACA 25112 had maximum thickness 12% at 29.5% chord and maximum camber of 2% at 27.2% chord. The geometry of the three airfoils are superimposed over each other to
get a representative idea for comparing them (Fig.9). Thus, it is clear that all three airfoils are almost similar.

Figure 9: Geometry of E220-IL, NACA 2412 and NACA 25112

Figure 10: Cl vs. for E220-il, NACA 2412 and NACA 25112 at Re = 105
The Cl vs. was compared for all three airfoils at fixed Re of 105 (Fig.10). The lift curve slope of all
three airfoils were nearly equivalent as well as the plots were almost coincident for angle of attack varying
from 00 to 80 . Both NACA 2412 and NACA 25112 airfoils stalled at = 120 in contrast to E220-IL which
stalled at 80 angle of attack. The NACA 25112 outperformed other airfoils as it had the highest value of Cl
till stall. On the other hand, E220-IL airfoil had the least coefficient of lift.

5 of 12
Aerodynamics Report, IIST

Figure 11: Cd vs. for E220-il, NACA 2412 and NACA 25112 at Re = 105
The Cd vs. plots are shown in Fig.11. Coefficient of drag increases with angle of attack due to flow
separation resulting in high pressure drag. All three airfoils exhibited similar behaviour in Cd with angle of
attack.

Figure 12: Cm vs. for E220-il, NACA 2412 and NACA 25112 at Re = 105
From the Cm vs. plot (Fig.12), the pitching moment coefficient becomes less negative as angle of
m
attack increases, which implies longitudinal stability decreases with angle of attack(upto 100 ). In short, dC
d
is positive, hence the airfoil gets more tendency to dive downwards upon increasing angle of attack. But,
this trend is reversed at higher values of angle of attack as evident from the graph.

6 of 12
Aerodynamics Report, IIST

Figure 13: L/D vs. for E220-il, NACA 2412 and NACA 25112 at Re = 105
The Cl /Cd vs. plot for Re = 105 is illustrated in Fig.13. The highest lift to drag ratio is observed to
be of E220-IL that is around 53. Now, here the practical application of E220-IL is realized. We found earlier
that Cl for E220-IL was the least among the three airfoils. But this smaller lift is compensated by smaller
drag which in a way gives a higher lift co-efficient per unit drag. Thus the efficiency and performance of a
plane is improved because the lift that has to be generated requires less propulsive power to counter the drag.

Figure 14: Cp vs
The Cp vs.

x
c

x
c

for = 30 and Re=105

Figure 15: Cp vs

x
c

for = 30 & Re=105

graph is plotted at = 30 and Re = 105 for each of the three airfoils (Fig.14,15,16)

7 of 12
Aerodynamics Report, IIST

Figure 16: Cp vs

x
c

for = 30 & Re=105

Clearly the boundary layer appears to be similar for all the three airfoils. However, the NACA 25112
airfoil due to location of maximum camber near to leading edge exhibits early transition from laminar to
turbulent.
The Clmax and Cdmin vs. Re were tabulated and plotted (Fig.17, 18)
Airfoil Re
E220-IL
NACA 2412
NACA 25112

50000
1.072258
1.125334
0.8355122

Clmax
100000
500000
1.043403 1.141882
1.202066 1.338982
1.229343 1.356918

1000000
1.181957
1.491072
1.473096

Table 1: Comparison of Clmax with Re for E220-IL, NACA 2412 and NACA 25112 airfoils

Airfoil Re
E220-IL
NACA 2412
NACA 25112

50000
0.02540813
0.02136979
0.02286631

Cdmin
100000
500000
0.0182169
0.007364166
0.01576447 0.006297085
0.01456981 0.007588354

1000000
0.005360507
0.005464215
0.005995777

Table 2: Comparison of Cdmin with Re for E220-IL, NACA 2412 and NACA 25112 airfoils

8 of 12
Aerodynamics Report, IIST

Figure 17: Clmax vs. Re for E220-IL, NACA 2412 and NACA 25112 airfoils

Figure 18: Cdmin vs. Re for E220-IL, NACA 2412 and NACA 25112 airfoils
The airfoils tend to follow a general trend; Clmax for all the airfoils effectively increases with Re and
Cdmin decreases as Re is increased. The increase in Clmax with Re can be attributed to higher flow velocity and hence more negative Cp over upper surface. The decrease in Cdmin with Re is due to sufficient
pressure recovery by inertial effects causing thinner wake region. This causes less pressure drag on the airfoil.

9 of 12
Aerodynamics Report, IIST

Figure 19: Cp vs.

x
c

for E220-IL airfoil at = 50 and Re = 106

The location of laminar to turbulent transition is also plotted for E220-il at 50 angle of attack and
Re = 106 (Fig.19). The transition of flow to turbulent helps in reducing the drag at higher Re compared to
that at lower Re. As is increased, transition region moves towards leading edge and the adverse pressure
gradient causes the Cd to increase.

III.
A.

Specialty and applications

E220-il (11.48%)

The Eppler E 22x series airfoils have reflex camber lines. The reflexed camberlines bend upwards or straight
to the chord line at the trailing edge. The reflexed and cambered airfoils have special importance in 5 digit
NACA airfoil series nomenclature, where 3rd digit denotes simple cambered by 0 and reflex camber by 1.
The reflex camber lines concentrate or shift resultant lift towards leading edge. This helps in stabilizing some
plane or gliders while pitching. The Eppler E 22x series airfoils are extensively used in sailplanes, gliders
and as spoilers in racing cars.
B.

NACA 2412

NACA 2412 airfoil has a maximum camber of 2% located 40% (0.4 chords) from the leading edge with a
maximum thickness of 12% of the chord. Four-digit series airfoils by default have maximum thickness at
30% of the chord (0.3 chords) from the leading edge. NACA 2412 is a low speed airfoil; this airfoil is used
in single engine Cessna 152, 172 and 182 airplanes.
C.

NACA 25112

NACA 25112 is a reflex camber airfoil. Intended applications of this airfoil are yet to be worked out.

References
1 E220

(11.48%) (e220-il), www.airfoiltools.com/airfoil/details?airfoil=e220-il

10 of 12
Aerodynamics Report, IIST

IV.

Appendix on Displacement thickness

Data of displacement thickness (D ) for NACA 2412 airfoil at 60 angle of attack and Re = 106 is tabulated
along with VUe , momentum thickness and skin friction coefficient (Cf ). The displacement thickness at all
the co-ordinates of airfoil section were obtained by XFoil.(TABLE 3)
The displacement thickness is more near trailing edge of upper surface which clearly imply presence of
slightly thick boundary layer compared to that at point of maximum curvature. The displacement thickness
increases as we move from leading edge to trailing edge which mean that boundary layer grows and its
maximum thickness occurs at the trailing edge.

11 of 12
Aerodynamics Report, IIST

Table 3: NACA 2412 airfoil datasheet generated by XFoil at 60 angle of attack and Re = 106

Ue/Vinf

1.00008
0.95654
0.89344
0.81142
0.72897
0.64638
0.56383
0.48154
0.39989
0.32014
0.24188
0.16626
0.09707
0.04637
0.01988
0.0067
0.00071
0.00052
0.00632
0.01913
0.04364
0.09206
0.16381
0.24391
0.32706
0.41166
0.49606
0.58104
0.66643
0.75205
0.83772
0.92272
0.99362
1.02244
1.09412
1.25321
1.60602
1.9995

0.00126
0.01006
0.02189
0.03571
0.0479
0.0584
0.06708
0.07373
0.07803
0.07913
0.07618
0.0685
0.05559
0.03989
0.02682
0.01625
0.00652
-0.0027
-0.01177
-0.02014
-0.02854
-0.03677
-0.04154
-0.04227
-0.04054
-0.03758
-0.03367
-0.02892
-0.02368
-0.01817
-0.01251
-0.00672
-0.00171
-0.00117
-0.00307
-0.00303
0.00679
0.02583

0.90856
0.96093
1.02698
1.09159
1.14358
1.19003
1.23508
1.28152
1.33422
1.38694
1.43277
1.50379
1.56827
1.6589
1.75307
1.80753
1.64174
0.97691
0.14792
-0.35644
-0.63737
-0.80126
-0.87572
-0.90484
-0.91742
-0.92733
-0.93339
-0.93473
-0.93453
-0.9336
-0.93127
-0.92434
-0.90936
0.90398
0.93345
0.96383
0.98345
0.99075

Displacement
thickness
Dstar
0.011567
0.008095
0.005694
0.004229
0.003364
0.002735
0.00222
0.001768
0.001341
0.000955
0.000645
0.000871
0.000658
0.000433
0.000263
0.000148
0.000084
0.000069
0.000088
0.00014
0.000223
0.000355
0.00052
0.000682
0.00083
0.000937
0.001064
0.001192
0.001311
0.001423
0.001546
0.001756
0.002344
0.013705
0.009288
0.00668
0.005426
0.005073

Momentum
thickness
Theta
0.005728
0.004585
0.003538
0.00276
0.002243
0.001842
0.001501
0.001196
0.00091
0.000655
0.000429
0.000284
0.000214
0.000145
0.000094
0.000058
0.000036
0.000031
0.00004
0.000062
0.000096
0.000149
0.000214
0.000275
0.000332
0.000378
0.000423
0.000468
0.00051
0.000551
0.000592
0.000642
0.000711
0.0066
0.005843
0.005235
0.004909
0.004799

12 of 12
Aerodynamics Report, IIST

Skin friction
coefficientCf
0.00075
0.001371
0.002165
0.002942
0.00357
0.004145
0.004734
0.0054
0.006337
0.007679
0.008663
0.000987
0.001367
0.00255
0.005828
0.014595
0.02919
0.022922
0.002708
0.003923
0.004209
0.003146
0.002222
0.001673
0.001356
0.001243
0.001059
0.000912
0.000811
0.000735
0.000651
0.000491
0.000142
0
0
0
0
0

Shape
factor
H
2.019
1.766
1.609
1.532
1.5
1.485
1.479
1.478
1.473
1.46
1.504
3.069
3.069
2.977
2.787
2.526
2.305
2.217
2.22
2.271
2.32
2.376
2.431
2.475
2.501
2.478
2.516
2.549
2.569
2.584
2.614
2.736
3.297
2.076
1.59
1.276
1.105
1.057