Int. J. Engineering Systems Modelling and Simulation, Vol. 4, No.

3, 2012 113

Aerodynamics of airfoil sections and their influence

on wind turbine design and performance

Mohammad Abdelrahman*
Mechanical Engineering Department,
Faculty of Engineering,
International Islamic University Malaysia (IIUM),
50728, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
E-mail: m_abdelrahman@iium.edu.my
*Corresponding author

Atef Hassanein
Deceased; formerly of: Aerospace Engineering Department,
Faculty of Engineering,
Cairo University,
Giza, Egypt

Abstract: The primary goal of this work is to reflect the effectiveness of the aerodynamic
characteristics of blade airfoil-sections on the design and overall performance predictions of the
horizontal-axis wind turbines. A post-stall model has been introduced and used throughout the
work to secure reliable data in a wide range of angles of attack. It has been found that the general
performance requirement of such airfoils is to exhibit a maximum lift-coefficient which is
relatively insensitive to roughness effects and to have a low minimum drag coefficient and/or a
high lift/drag ratio. The contribution of these parameters at the blade-tip region is very high and
almost equal to the contributions of the mid and root regions together. Consequently, the airfoil
section should be designed/selected according to its location along the blade to ensure its highest
contribution to the overall performance of the rotor.

Keywords: low speed airfoils; horizontal-axis wind turbines; wind energy.

Reference to this paper should be made as follows: Abdelrahman, M. and Hassanein, A. (2012)
Aerodynamics of airfoil sections and their influence on wind turbine design and performance,
Int. J. Engineering Systems Modelling and Simulation, Vol. 4, No. 3, pp.113119.

Biographical notes: Mohammad Abdelrahman graduated from the Faculty of Engineering,

Cairo University in 1992. He received from the same university his MSc and PhD degrees in
1998 and 2002 respectively. From 2000 to 2007, he has been working as a Researcher at the
National Authority for Remote Sensing and Space Sciences Space Sciences Division. He
participated in the Egyptian Space Program and BayernSat project at TM, Germany as an
ADCS Specialist. From 2007 to 2010, he was working as a Research Professor at Astrodynamics
and Control Lab (ACL), Yonsei University. Currently, he is working as an Assistant Professor at
IIUM.

1 Introduction 2 Effects of post-stall airfoil characteristics on

It is essential to clarify the main requirements of the
airfoil characteristics that could improve the design and
performance of the wind turbine rotor. To do so, first, a
post-stall model will be introduced to ensure a reliable data
throughout the analysis and then different airfoil sections
will be used to check the sensitivity of the rotor
performance to the different aerodynamic characteristics
such as maximum lift, minimum drag coefficients, and
surface roughness.
predicted rotor performance
The basic PROPFILE code (Fairbank and Rogers, 1984)
which is used for the design of wind turbine rotors is based
on blade element or strip theory. The rotor blade is
segmented into a number of spanwise elements (or strips) at
radial stations along the blade. Each of these elements forms
an annulus as the blade rotates. PROPFILE calculates the
interference terms and by equating the forces on each blade
element with the change in momentum of wind flowing

Copyright 2012 Inderscience Enterprises Ltd.

114 M. Abdelrahman and A. Hassanein

through the annulus. The strip theory stipulates that there is
no interference between the adjacent annuli. The predicted
rotor performance depends on the lift and drag forces on the
elements. Therefore an accurate representation of the
two-dimensional airfoil characteristics in the range of angle
of attack on the element is necessary for any meaningful
result. Figure 1 shows the angle of attack spectrum for a
typical wind turbine at different wind speeds according to
segment locations, presented in Table 1, which have been
used throughout the work. Based on an application of
PROPFILE code, the wide range of angles could reach up to
70 degrees at the root.
Figure 1 Angle of attack spectrum for a typical wind turbine at
different wind speeds (see online version for colours)
Angle of Attack Spectrum
70
from zero lift angle to 2. Parameter A indicates the
extended angle of attack range of CLmax. The location of the
recovery point R is based on two parameters B and CLR and
stalled flat-plate theory is used for the region above the
recovery point. Values of A, B, and CLR are defined based on
a statistical averaging of experimental airfoil data from
various sources. Figure 4 shows lift coefficients for NACA
4415 (Abbot and Von Doenhoff, 1959), resulting from the
Eppler code with the two-dimensional post-stall model, the
Eppler code, and measured data. It is clearly apparent that
the post-stall model prevents the lift coefficient resulting
from the Eppler code alone from divergence. In addition,
the lift coefficient almost followed the measured data up to
an AOA of 35 degrees.
Figure 2 Comparison of power output given by PROPFILE
prediction and field test data for a typical wind turbine
(see online version for colours)

60
Power Output
Given by PROPFILE and Field Test
50
Angle of Attack

250
40

200
30
Power (kw)

20 150

10 100

0
50
2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Segment
0
0 5 10 15 20
Wind Speed m/s 4 7 10 14 17 20 Wind Speed (m/s)

PROPFILE Prediction Field Test

Previous code validation made by Corrigan et al. (1983)
compared the predicted rotor performance with that of the
atmospheric tests. Varying degrees of discrepancy were Figure 3 NREL 2-D post-stall model for estimating airfoil data
found in these comparisons. Turbulence and yaw errors up to 90 degrees angle of attack
were thought by Griffths (1977) to be the main causes for
such discrepancies. However, the effects of post-stall airfoil
characteristics have not been thoroughly investigated
because of the lack of three-dimensional airfoil data for
rotating blades (Tu, 1994; Hansen and Butterfield, 1993;
Snyder and Wentz, 1985; Yong and Snyder, 1988).
The present analysis shows a noticeable discrepancy
(Figure 2) in turbine performance predictions between the
PROPFILE code and the actual field test data.
In the analysis of a typical wind turbine most of the
discrepancies took place when 80% to 100% of the blade
elements had flow separation. Therefore the airfoil stall
(extending maximum lift coefficient, CLmax) and post-stall
characteristics played a critical role in performance R : Recovery point
predictions in high winds. CLmax = Maximum lift coefficient based on Eppler code
A general post-stall model proposed by Kocurek
CLR = 0.7 CLmax
has been used by NREL to estimate the post-stall
A = 5 ( CLmax ) , B = 15 ( CLmax )
1
characteristics of the airfoils configured the Micon wind
turbine (Tu, 1994). The NREL model (Figure 3) used 3 = A + 2 , 4 = B + 1 ,
Eppler code (Eppler and Somers, 1981) to calculate the lift
and drag coefficients in the lift-curve slope region ranging Source: Tu (1994)
 Aerodynamics of airfoil sections and their influence on wind turbine design and performance 115

Table 1 Segment locations for a typical wind turbine

Root Mid Tip

Segment 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Radius % 3 10 16 23 30 36 43 50 56 63 70 76 83 90 96

Figure 4 Validation of NREL 2-D post-stall model exchange of data between each other specially when
(Re = 1,000,000) (see online version for colours) tailoring the blade shape. Finally, this combination has been
used in the following analysis throughout the next sections
Lift Coefficient in the form of the BLADEFILE code (Abdel-Rahman,
NACA 4415
1998).
3

2.2
Section Lift Coefficient

3 Effects of airfoil maximum lift

1.4

The analysis in this section and in the following next two

0.6
sections are based on using a rotor which has NACA
-0.2
230XX as base line sections. The replacement will be
Re = 1,000,000 started from the tip, mid, to the root independently to check
-1 the sensitivity of each location to the change of the section
-20 0 20 40 60 80
Section Angle of Attack (degrees) characteristics and concluded by an overall replacement of
the blade profile.
EPPLER Alone EPPLER + Stall-Model Measured Data
Two sections have been chosen such that their minimum
drag coefficients are close to each other, unlike their
A comparison of wind turbine performance between
maximum lift coefficients which should be wide apart.
predicted and tested data is shown in Figure 5. It shows that
These requirements are satisfied by using two sections,
the resulting data from the PROPFILE code no longer over
NACA 230XX and 44XX. Figures 6 to 9 show the resulting
predicts the power curve relative to that shown in
power production when changing the lift coefficient
Figure 2. Although there are little discrepancies, the
distribution along the blade at the tip, mid, root, and all
resulting power curve shows a good agreement with the
sections of the blade. The analysis shows that the maximum
field test data.
lift coefficient is much more critical at the tip than at the
Figure 5 Comparison of power output given by PROPFILE
mid or at the root. The increase in the total annual energy
prediction using NREL 2-d post-stall model and field obtained by changing the tip sections reaches up to 13%
test data for a typical wind turbine (see online version while that obtained by changing the overall blade sections
for colours) results in a maximum increase in the total annual energy of
25% (Figure 10), i.e., the contribution of the tip sections
Power Output equals the contributions of the mid and root sections
PROPFILE + Stall-Model and Field Test together. Also, we can postulate that a percentage increase
120 in maximum lift coefficient produces an equal increase in
percentage total annual energy.
100
PROPFILE Prediction (kw)

80 Figure 6 Power output using sections with higher maximum lift

60
coefficient at tip sections

40
Power Output
20 Higher CLmax at Tip

0 140
0 5 10 15 20
Wind Speed (m/s) 120

PROPFILE Prediction Field Test 100

Power (kW)

80
So, according to this model the results obtained by the
60
PROPFILE code can be enhanced to a great extend, by
modifying the lift coefficient results from the Eppler code 40

up to the recovery point, and the flat plate-stall model which 20

is built in the PROPFILE code, can be used to complete the 0

post-stall characteristics up to 90 degree. The above model 0 5 10 15 20
Wind Speed (m/s)
has been added to the Eppler code and a link installed
between the PROPFILE code and Eppler code facilitated the Blade 230XX Sections Tip 44XX Sections
116 M. Abdelrahman and A. Hassanein

Figure 7 Power output using sections with higher maximum lift Figure 10 Estimated annual energy production percentage
at mid sections increase using sections with higher maximum lift
coefficient
Power Output
Higher CLmax at Mid Yearly Percentage Energy Increase
140
High Maximum Lift Sections 44XX
25
120

100 20
Power (kW)

80

% Energy Increase
60
15

40
10
20

0
5
0 5 10 15 20
Wind Speed (m/s)

0
Blade 230XX Sections Mid 44xx Sections Tip 44XX Mid 44XX Root 44XX Blade 44XX

Note: Based on Rayleigh wind speed frequency

Figure 8 Power output using sections with higher maximum lift
distribution.
coefficient at root sections

Power Output
Higher CLmax at Root 4 Effects of airfoil minimum drag
140
In an analogous procedure to that carried out in the previous
120 section, another airfoil section, having a lower minimum-
100 drag coefficient, has been chosen to replace the original
NACA 230XX, but in this case, the chosen section has a
Power (kW)

80
maximum lift coefficient close to the base line section. This
60
was achieved by using a NACA 643-XXX. Figures 11 to 14
40 show the corresponding changes in the power production
20 when changing the drag coefficient distributions along the
0
blade at the tip, mid, root, and all sections. The analysis
0 5 10 15 20 shows that the minimum drag coefficient is critical at the tip
Wind Speed (m/s)
becoming progressively less important at the root. Figure 15
Blade 230XX Sections Root 44XX Sections shows that changing the tip sections enhances the total
annual energy by 6%, while changing the overall blade
Figure 9 Power output using sections with higher maximum lift sections results in an enhancement of 10.5%, i.e., the
coefficient all over the blade contribution of the tip sections is greater than that of the mid
and root sections together.
Power Output
Higher CLmax Allover The Blade Figure 11 Power output using sections with lower minimum
200
drag coefficient at tip sections

Power Output
150 Lower Cd min at Tip
Power (kW)

120
100
100

50 80
Power (kW)

60

0
40
0 5 10 15 20
Wind Speed (m/s)
20

Blade 230XX Sections Blade 44xx Sections

0
0 5 10 15 20
Wind Speed (m/s)

Blade 230xx Sections Tip 64-xxx Sections

 Aerodynamics of airfoil sections and their influence on wind turbine design and performance 117

Figure 12 Power output using sections with lower minimum that sections with high maximum lift coefficient are the
drag coefficient at mid sections most significant especially at the tip region where their
contribution is more than double that of the lower minimum
Power Output drag coefficient.
Lower Cd min at Mid

120 Figure 15 Estimated annual energy production percentage

increase using sections with lower minimum drag
100 coefficient
80
Yearly Percentage Energy Increase
Power (kW)

60 Low Minimum Drag Sections 64-XXX

12
40

10
20

% Energy Increase
0 8
0 5 10 15 20
Wind Speed (m/s)
6

Blade 230xx Sections Mid 64-xxx Sections

4

Figure 13 Power output using sections with lower minimum 2

drag coefficient at root sections
0
Power Output Tip 64-XXX Mid 64-XXX Root 64-XXX Blade 64-XXX

Lower Cd min at Root

120
Note: Based on Rayleigh wind speed frequency
distribution.
100

80
Figure 16 Estimated annual energy production percentage
increase using sections with higher maximum lift
Power (kW)

60 coefficient compared to those with lower minimum

drag coefficient
40

20 Yearly Percentage Energy Increase

30
0
0 5 10 15 20
Wind Speed (m/s) 25

Blade 230xx Sections Root 64-xxx Sections

% Energy Increase

20

15
Figure 14 Power output using sections with lower minimum
drag coefficient all over the blade
10

Power Output 5
Lower Cd min Allover The Blade

140 0
Tip 64-XXX/44XX Root 64-XXX/44XX
Mid 64-XXX/44XX Blade 64-XXX/44XX
120
Lower Cd min NACA 64-xxx Higher Cl max NACA 44xx
100
Power (kW)

80

60
5 Effects of airfoil roughness
40

20
Roughness effects resulting from leading-edge
contamination is an important factor in performance
0
0 5 10 15 20
prediction of a wind turbine since it is a result of a
Wind Speed (m/s) combination of decrease in the lift coefficients and increase
Blade 230xx Sections Blade 64-xxx Sections
in the drag coefficients along the blade. To evaluate this
factor, smooth and rough two-dimensional data of the same
Figure 16 represents a comparison between the effects of NACA 230XX sections that tailored the blade are used to
using higher maximum lift coefficient sections and that of predict the performance using the same approach as that
lower minimum drag coefficient. This figure clearly shows used in the previous sections, i.e., the replacement of clean
118 M. Abdelrahman and A. Hassanein

sections proceeds from the tip to the root. The transition Figure 19 Power output using rough sections at root sections
criterion presented in the Eppler code, Section 4.4.3
(Abdel-Rahman, 1998), will be used to simulate smooth and Power Output
rough (dirt) conditions. A roughness factor, r = 0, will be Blade 230XX Dirty Root

used for free transition, and r = 5 for forced transition. 140

Figures 17 to 20 show the change in power production due 120
to the replacement of the clean sections with the dirty ones.
100
The analysis shows that the root region is most sensitive to

Power (kW)
80
roughness compared to the tip and mid regions. This is
60
expected since at the root region, the angle of attack reaches
large values and the effects of roughness on the 40

aerodynamic characteristics of the sections are more 20

significant. At the tip and mid regions, the angle of attack is 0

small and hence these regions are less sensitive to 0 5 10 15 20
Wind Speed (m/s)
roughness. The loss in the total annual energy when the root
sections became dirty reaches up to 10% and 23% when the Clean Blade Dirty Root

whole blade became dirty (Figure 21) while the resulting

loss due to dirty tip and mid sections is almost 6%. These Figure 20 Power output using rough sections allover the blade
results indicate that the improvements exhibited in using
sections with high maximum lift and low minimum drag Power Output
coefficients may vanish if the design of the candidate Blade 230XX Dirty Blade
sections did not take into account the roughness
140
insensitivity.
120

Figure 17 Power output using rough sections at tip sections 100

Power (kW)

80

Power Output 60
Blade 230XX Dirty Tip 40

140 20

120 0
0 5 10 15 20
100 Wind Speed (m/s)
Power (kW)

80 Clean Blade Dirty Blade

60

40 Figure 21 Estimated annual energy production percentage

20 decrease using rough sections
0
0 5 10
Wind Speed (m/s)
15 20 Yearly Percentage Energy Decrease
25
Clean Blade Dirty Tip

20

Figure 18 Power output using rough sections at mid sections

% Energy Decrease

15
Power Output
Blade 230XX Dirty Mid
10
140

120 5
100
Power (kW)

80 0
Dirty Tip Dirty Mid Dirty Root Dirty Blade
60
NACA 230XX Sections
40

20 Note: Based on Rayleigh wind speed frequency

0
distribution.
0 5 10 15 20
Wind Speed (m/s)

Clean Blade Dirty Mid

 Aerodynamics of airfoil sections and their influence on wind turbine design and performance
6 Conclusions
A post-stall model suggested by NREL for a reliable data on
a wide range of angles of attack has been introduced and
used throughout the work. Also, by the aid of the design
tools discussed previously a sensitivity analysis has been
established to explore the different effects of the
aerodynamic characteristics on a rotor performance.
Maximum lift coefficient is the most significant parameter
affecting the overall performance, also lower minimum drag
and/or high lift to drag ratio represent good contribution to
the total energy production. Soft stall characteristics reduce
the dynamic loading on the blade and roughness
insensitivity is a very important parameter and should be
considered during the airfoil design to ensure constant
power output and consequently steady level of annual
energy production.
References
Abbot, I.H. and Von Doenhoff, A.E. (1959) Theory of Wing
Sections, Dover, New York, USA.
Abdel-Rahman, M. (1998) The impact of airfoil selection and
characteristics on wind turbine design and performance, MSc
thesis, Cairo University, Giza, Egypt.
119
Corrigan, R.D., Ensworth, C.B.F. and Keith, T.G., Jr. (1983)
Performance comparison between NACA 23024 and NACA
643-618 airfoil-configured rotors for horizontal-axis wind
turbines, US Department of Energy, Conservation and
Renewable Energy, Wind Energy Technology Division,
DOE/NASA/20320-51, NASA TM-83471.
Eppler, R. and Somers, D.M. (1981) A computer program for the
design and analysis of low speed airfoils, NASA TM-80210,
Hampton, VA, NASA Langely.
Fairbank, D. and Rogers, E. (1984) PROPFILE, Jetstream Wind
Energy Designers, Lake Geneva, Wisc., USA.
Griffths, R.T. (1977) The effect of aerofoil characteristics on
windmill performance, Aeronautical Journal, July, Vol. 81,
No. 251, pp.322326.
Hansen, A.C. and Butterfield, C.P. (1993) Aerodynamics of
horizontal-axis wind turbines, AIAA Technical Library
(IAA9401), Annual Review of Fluid Mechanics, Vol. 25
(A94-1088501-34), Paloalto, CA, Annual Reviews, Inc.
Snyder, M.H. and Wentz, W.H., Jr. (1985) Characteristics of
Airfoils at Angles of Attack Beyond the Stall, Wichita State
University, Wichita, Kansas.
Tu, P.K.C. (1994) Effects of post-stall airfoil characteristics on
predicted rotor performance, ASME, Wind Energy 1995:
Proceedings of the Energy-Sources Technology Conference,
226 January, New Orleans, SED-Vol. 15.
Yong, W. and Snyder, M.H. (1988) Compilation of Characteristics
of Airfoils at High Angles of Attack, National Institute
for Aviation Research, Wichita State University, Wichita,
KS 67208, August.