See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/259739000

Experimental study of Aero Foil with Wind Tunnel Setup

Conference Paper · January 2014

CITATIONS READS
0 20,740

4 authors, including:

Prakash Ghose Akhilesh. K. Dewangan

KIIT University KIIT University
12 PUBLICATIONS   35 CITATIONS    8 PUBLICATIONS   2 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Pratik Mitra
Indian Institute of Science
5 PUBLICATIONS   1 CITATION   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

DNS/LES of Late stage Transition over flat Plate View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Pratik Mitra on 16 January 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Experimental study of Aero Foil with Wind Tunnel Setup
P. Ghosh*, Akhilesh. K. Dewangan*, Pratik Mitra*& Dr.A.K.Rout*

Abstract
The flow characteristics over a symmetrical airfoil are studied experimentally in a low speed wind tunnel. The
pressure distribution on the airfoil surface was obtained, lift and drag forces were measured and mean velocity
profiles were obtained over the surface. Experiments were carried out by varying the angle of attack, from 0 o to 120o
and ground clearance of the trailing edge from the minimum possible value to free stream velocity region. It was
found that high values of pressure coefficient are obtained on the lower surface when the airfoil is close to the
ground. This region of high pressure extended almost over the entire lower surface for higher angles of attack. As a
result, higher values of lift coefficient are obtained when the airfoil is close to the ground. The flow accelerates over
the airfoil due to flow diversion from the lower side, and a higher mean velocity is observed near the suction peak
location. The pressure distribution on the upper surface did not change significantly with ground clearance for higher
angles of attack. The upper surface suction causes an adverse pressure gradient especially for higher angles of attack,
resulting in rapid decay of kinetic energy over the upper surface, leading to a thicker wake and higher turbulence
level and hence a higher drag. The lift was found to drop at lower angles of attack at some values of ground clearance
due to suction effect on the lower surface as the result of formation of a convergent–divergent passage between the
airfoil and the ground plate.

* School of Mechanical Engineering, KIIT University, Bhubaneswar, Odisha-24

INTRODUCTION region. If the boundary layer is completely laminar in

DRAG AND LIFT
1.1.1 DRAG FORCE:
Experience shows that, when a solid body moves
through a fluid, resistance is encountered by the body.
Resistance force remains the same whether the body
moves through the fluid or the fluid flows around the
body so long as the relative motion remains same. For
the maintenance of steady motion in either case, a
force in the direction of relative motion has to be
exerted. Thus when an aero plane flies through
atmosphere or a submarine moves through water, the
propulsion you need has to exert a force sufficient
enough to balance resistance offer by the fluid. Such a
force is called the drag force. Evidently, drag is
intimately related to the effect of boundary layers,
flow separation and wakes.
1.1.2 SKIN FRICTION OR SHEAR DRAG:
In the real viscous fluid flow, motion of the fluid does
not conform to the patterns predicted with the
assumption that the fluid is ideal or perfect. Viscous
effects cause the fluid motion to be rotational and
gives rise to velocity gradient in a thin region adjacent
to the surface of the body. Since the adjacent fluid
layers move with different velocities, tangential or
shear stresses are setup in the thin boundary layer
character, only viscous effects contribute to the shear
stresses. This shear stresses lead to a drag force which
is called the skin friction drag or the shear drag.
1.1.3 PRESSURE, SHAPE OR FORM DRAG:
When fluid flows past a bluff body whose surface is
nowhere parallel to main stream, the flow pattern gets
considerably modified due to boundary layer growth
and its eventual separation from the body surface. The
pressure differential between the front and the rear side
produces a drag which is called the pressure drag.
1.1.4 LIFT FORCE:
If the solid body is symmetric about the direction of
flow or vice versa or it is like straight vertical flat plate
or straight horizontal flat plate, a resultant force called
drag force is only action on the body which resists the
motion of the body. Its direction is horizontal and
opposite of the motion. If a body is not symmetrical or
you can say a flat plate having some angle with
horizontal, a resultant force must be there but the
direction of the resultant force is having some angle
with horizontal. Now the horizontal component of that
resultant is drag force which resists the motion of the
body in horizontal direction and the vertical
component of the resultant force is known as lift force.

1

1.1.5 DRAG AND LIFT ON AN AIR FOIL:
The blade section employed for airplane wings and
propeller are of such geometrical configuration as to
produce high lifts and low drag value. This state of
affair is possible with the so called lifting vanes which
include bodied such as kite, air foil, hydro-foil and
propeller blade. An air foil is a stream line body that is
it has a rounded leading edge, is elongated and is given
a gradual curvature in the flow direction.
For an air foil oriented with relatively small angle of
attack, the zone of separation is limited to a small
region close to the rear or trailing edge. The turbulent
wake region and consequently the pressure drag are
quite small. Obviously the skin friction contributes
maximum to the total drag. Drag co-efficient of an air
foil depends necessarily on Reynolds’s number and
geometry/counter of the air foil. However, unlike
sphere and cylinders, the transition from laminar to
turbulent boundary layer state does not bring about any
marked drop in the drag co-efficient.
Favorable aerodynamic characteristics are obtained
when a wing is in close proximity to ground. Works on
development of Wing-in-Ground-effect (WIG)
vehicles for large transport purpose can benefit
immensely if the advantages of ground proximity are
fully utilized. The effects of proximity to ground for an
airfoil on the lift and drag characteristics were studied
as early as in 1920s [1,2]. For small angles of attack,
the lift force is found to increase with decreasing flight
altitude. The flow around an airfoil or a wing is
considerably modified under the influence of ground
effect. The dividing streamline and the stagnation
point move down, hence more air flows above the
wing; thus there is a decrease in velocity and an
increase in pressure below the wing. An air cushion is
created by the high pressure that builds up under the
wing when it is approaching the ground. For very
small clearances, the air tends to stagnate under the
wing, which will give the highest possible pressure, so
called ram pressure. Simultaneously, the induced drag
for a wing is lowered as the induced downwash
velocity diminishes close to the ground. The
streamline patterns over the leading and trailing edges
of a wing in ground effect can be seen. The streamline
modification has interesting consequences––the
effective angle of attack increases, resulting in an
increase in lift force; on the other hand, the absence of
downwash reduces the drag, which otherwise increases
with angle of attack. The L/D value is a measure of the
efficiency of an aircraft which can be expressed as the
amount of power (thrust) that is required to propel an
aircraft of a certain weight. Since thrust is equal to
drag and weight is equal to lift in steady flight, this
efficiency can be expressed as L/D. The increased lift
and reduced drag obtained when the ground clearance
is reduced, give much higher efficiency, which helps
to increase the flight range at a reduced specific fuel
consumption compared to the conventional aircraft.
Besides, the WIG vehicle has other advantages over a
conventional mode of air transport such as less energy
consumption during take-off, no need of pressurized
cabin, smaller infrastructure and safer runway as it is
near the ground. The great potential of the WIG
vehicles for possible application in both overwater and
overland transport necessitates a thorough
investigation of the flow characteristics over the wing.
1.1.6 METHOD TO MEASURE DRAG AND LIFT
FORCE
There is a variety of ways to measure lift. In this
experiment, the lift force, L, on the airfoil will be
determined by integration of the measured pressure
distribution over the airfoil’s surface. Typical pressure
distribution on an airfoil and its projection on the
airfoil normal are shown in figure 2.
2
A body immersed in a flowing fluid is exposed to both
pressure and viscous forces. The sum of the forces that
acts normal to the free-stream direction is the lift, and
the sum that acts parallel to the free-stream direction is
the drag. This experiment is concerned with
computation of the lift on a stationary airfoil mounted
in the test section of a wind tunnel. We will consider
only two-dimensional airfoils where tip and root
effects are neglected.
Because the velocity of the flow over the top of the
airfoil is greater than the free-stream velocity, the
pressure over the top is negative. This follows directly
from the application of Bernoulli’s equation. Similarly
the velocity along the underside of the airfoil is less
than the free-stream velocity and the pressure there is
positive. Hence, both the negative pressure over the
top and the positive pressure along the bottom
contribute to the lift.
The lift force is customarily expressed as a dimension-
less lift coefficient per unit span length
Where L is lift force on the airfoil obtained by
integration of the measured pressure distribution over
the airfoil’s surface, b is the airfoil span, and c is the
airfoil chord, as shown in Figure.
1.2 EXISTING EMPERIMENTAL
EQUIPMENTS:
A nonfunctional wind tunnel was present in the fluid
mechanics lab. We had to modify it to make it
functional in line with our experimental objective. The
 It was nonfunctional, so we had to re wire it to
following changes were made to the setup:
 There was no device/equipment present to vary
make it functional.
speed in the wind tunnel, which resulted in high
speed wind velocity. We installed a variac to vary
the speed, because our objective required the
 A load cell strain gauge was nonfunctional,
wind tunnel to be a low speed model.
 The wind tunnel was lying unused for a long time,
resulting in inability to directly measure the lift.
through our experiment we have made it
functional for future use.
2. OBJECTIVES:
The present work was undertaken with the aim of
studying the influence of angle of attack and ground
clearance of the trailing edge on an airfoil in context of
a WIG vehicle and generating data for use of vehicle
designer and for designing the runway of airplane. The
main objectives of the present work are to study the
pressure distribution over the wing surface at different
ground clearances and angles of attack and the
objectives of the experiment are also to examine the
surface pressure distribution and to compute the drag
and lift force acting on the airfoil.
Our work also included making the wind tunnel
functional, which was lying unused and nonfunctional
for a long time. We re wired the whole setup so that it
can be used for future research purposes and practical
experiments for students in our department.
3. WIND TUNNEL:
Aerodynamicists use wind tunnels to test models of
proposed aircraft. In the tunnel, it can be carefully
control the flow conditions which affect forces on the
aircraft. By making careful measurements of the forces
on the model, it can be predicted the forces on the full
scale aircraft.
Wind tunnels are designed for a specific purpose and
speed range and there is a wide variety of wind tunnel
types and model instrumentation. The model to be
tested in the wind tunnel is placed in the test section of
the tunnel. The speed in the test section is determined
by the design of the tunnel. The choice of speed range
affects the design of the wind tunnel due to
compressibility effects and the boundary layer formed
by the walls.
For subsonic flows, the air density remains nearly
constant and decreasing the cross-sectional area causes
the flow to increase velocity and decrease pressure.
Similarly, increasing the area causes the velocity to
decrease and the pressure to increase. We want the
highest possible velocity in the test section. For a
subsonic wind tunnel, the test section is placed at the
3
end of the contraction section and upstream of the remain constant throughout the test section (throat)
diffuser. and increase at diffuser.

In first case, from knowledge of the conservation of

Subsonic wind tunnel
mass for subsonic flows, we can design the test section
to produce a desired velocity or Mach number since 3.1 SELECTION OF MINIMUM VELOCITY
the velocity is a function of the cross-sectional area.
FOR GIVEN SHAPE OF WIND TUNNEL:
On the FIGURE-2 it is given the changes in Mach
number, velocity and pressure through a subsonic wind The intake part of the wind tunnel is a rectangular
tunnel design. nozzle type hollow tube and the exit part is a
For supersonic flows, the air density changes in the
rectangular diffuser type tube. The test section of the
tunnel because of compressibility. In fact, the density
wind tunnel is a rectangular shaped hollow pipe. So it
changes faster than the velocity by a factor of the
square of the Mach number. In a supersonic flow, is a throat of convergent divergent nozzle.
decreasing the cross-sectional area causes the flow to So the starting of the test section can be assumed the
decrease in velocity and increase pressure. Similarly, leading edge of boundary layer. In a rectangular tube
increasing the area causes the velocity to increase and four numbers of sides are there. The two inner sides
the pressure to decrease. which are facing to each other, two boundary layers
This change in properties is exactly the opposite of the having same boundary layer thickness with respect to
change that occurs sub sonically. In addition, the length of the test section are formed. Another two
compressible flows experience mass flow choking. As boundary layers having same boundary layer thickness
a subsonic flow is contracted, the velocity and Mach with respect to length of the test section are formed on
number increase. When the velocity reaches the speed two other inner sides which are facing to each other.
of sound (M = 1), the flow chokes and the Mach Here the main objective is that, aero foil should be not
number cannot be increased beyond M = 1. We want influenced by the boundary layer formed by the four
the highest possible velocity in the test section of the inside walls of the wind tunnel.
wind tunnel. For a supersonic wind tunnel, we contract
the flow until it chokes in the throat of a nozzle. We
then diffuse the flow which increases the speed
supersonically. The test section of the supersonic
tunnel is placed at the end of the diffuser. From a
consideration of conservation of mass for a
compressible flow, we can design the test section to
produce a desired velocity or Mach based on the area
in the test section. On the figure we note the changes
in Mach number, velocity and pressure through a
supersonic wind tunnel design.
But in our experiment we are using a subsonic wind
tunnel. Here no compressibility factor is raised. So in
this case at convergent section velocity increases and it

4

In fig.4 it is clearly shown that the airfoil is placed at
the middle position of the test section of wind tunnel.
When an angle of attack is given to the airfoil, the
leading edge of airfoil becomes nearer to top wall and
trailing edge of airfoil becomes nearer to bottom wall.
By giving maximum angle of attack (100), some gap
will be there in between the trailing edge of airfoil and
the bottom plane. That gap is the maximum boundary
layer thickness at that length (from leading edge of the
plate to trailing edge of air foil). Now it is required to
calculate the velocity by applying blausiou’s solution
with using of that maximum boundary layer thickness
discussed.
Again from the FIG. 4, it can be watched some gap is
there in between the airfoil sides and the side wall. The
gap is same for both the sides of the wall, because the
airfoil is placed at the middle.
Now the gap in between the side wall and airfoil
should be the maximum boundary layer thickness for
that plane. Again we have to calculate the another
velocity by using boundary layer thickness at length of
leading edge of the plate to trailing edge of the airfoil.
This velocity is also calculated by using blausiou’s
solution.
But it is not possible to take different velocity at the
same place and same time, so that, from the calculated
values of two velocities, we have to take the least one
to avoid the influence of the boundary layer formed by
the walls.
3.2 EXPERIMENTAL METHOD
The experiments were carried out at a velocity of 35m/
s in an open circuit, suction type, low-speed wind
tunnel. The air flow in the tunnel was generated by a
single stage axial flow fan having a rated discharge of
216m3/min at the total pressure of 101.172 kPa and
driven by a thyristor controlled 3.75kW DC motor
having a maximum speed of 2800rpm. A smooth
variation in velocity from 5m/s to 40m/s can be
achieved in the test section having dimensions of
300mm · 300mm · 1000mm. The test section is
provided with perspex windows on both sides. A
traversing mechanism is provided on top of the test
section for moving the pitot tube and the hot-wire
anemometer probe along its length. A settling
chamber, provided with honeycomb gauges and four
MS screens of 18, 30, 50 and 100 mesh, was used for
correcting the flow. A bell-mouthed inlet section
ensured smooth entry of the air to the settling chamber.
The airflow was discharged into the test section
through the square outlet of the contraction, having a
width of 900mm at the inlet. The area ratio of the
contraction nozzle is 9:1. The free stream turbulence
intensity in the test section at the above velocity was
found to be 0.8%.
There are fourteen numbers of ports are made on the
surface of the air foil shown in fig5555. Ports 1 to 14
are connected to the corresponding pressure taps
located on the airfoil and each pipe are connected to
the different U-tube manometer. The system gives the
pressure perpendicular to the surface of the air foil,
which is measured by the U-tube manometer. The
pressure obtained from particular pipe is now
multiplied by the elemental area of air foil. Now this
gives the normal force to the surface of airfoil. The
vertical component of that force is the lift fore for that
particular strip. Now the summation of the entire
vertical force component gives the total lift force. The
manometric liquid is the water mixed with some color
for better visibility.
3.2.1 MECHANISM FOR VARYING THE
GROUND CLEARANCE
To simulate the ground, a nut and bolt arrangement is
provided in the system as shown in fig 6 .the bolt is
fixed to the holder of flat plate and that bolt is passed
5
through a hole on the stand. The stand is placed over
the wind tunnel. When less ground clearance required,
the nut should be loosen, so the airfoil holder comes
down near to the face of the wind tunnel. Again to
increase the ground clearance reverse action is to be
taken. The length of the plate was 400mm and it was
as wide as the test section.
3.2.2 TEST MODEL AND EXPERIMENTAL
SET-UP
The airfoil chosen for the present work is symmetric.
The airfoil has a chord length of 100mm and span of
300mm, which is equal to the width of the test section,
thus eliminating the third (spanwise) component and
the wingtip vortices. In order to measure the pressure
distribution on the airfoil surface, pressure taps were
provided on each and every holes provided on airfoil
section, as shown in Fig.5. The airfoil was mounted
with the help of a frame inside the test section. With
the help of a round protractor, the desired angle of
attack for the airfoil was set. The airfoil was held at
this angle using a screw mechanism. Measurements of
surface pressure distribution were carried out with the
help of water manometers to which all the tapping's
were connected as shown in fig.
A slot was provided in the top wall of the test section
for traversing the impact tube and the hot wire probe to
measure the total pressure and the velocity
respectively, at the desired location. A two component
hot-wire anemometry system, consisting of two
constant temperature anemometer (CTA) units, two
signal conditioners, a mean value unit and an RMS
unit, was used for the current investigation. The
tungsten wire, used in the present investigation, has a
diameter of 5 microns and a length of 2mm. The test
section blockage was checked at the maximum angle
of attack of 120. As the WIG craft fly at low angles of
attack, most of the measurements such as those of lift
and drag forces and velocity survey over the airfoil
were limited to this angle of attack. A maximum
blockage ratio of about 6% was found. A correction
factor for the solid and wake blockage, e, equal to a
quarter of the ratio of the total frontal area and the test
section area, was employed following ref. [19,20]. The
flow was found to separate from the surface for the
angle of attack of 120 resulting in a thick wake region;
hence, for this angle, only the wake region was
explored and contours of mean velocity and turbulence
intensity were plotted.
3.2.3 EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE
The pressure was read at a U-tube having water as
manomatricfluid(shown in fig 8) and the velocity of air
is measured by a hot wire anemometer. The static
pressure was measured on the wall of the wind tunnel.
For measuring the pressure at different points on the
airfoil, a multi tube manometer was used. The tubes
were mounted on a board with adjustable inclination
and were interconnected at the bottom with the
balancing reservoir. All measurements in the present
investigation were performed at a free stream mean
velocity of 16.5m/s.
6

The model was held in the test section at the desired
angle of attack. The required velocity was set with the
help of the thyristor speed control system. The
readings from the multibank manometer were noted.
The manometer board was set horizontally most of the
pressure measurements. Experiments were performed
by varying the angle of attack, a, from 00 to 120. The
ground clearance of the airfoil (h) was varied from the
minimum possible value to 8.7cm. For lower angles of
attack, measurements at small values of h could not be
performed as the thicker part of the airfoil was
touching the ground plate. Thus, at the angle of attack
of 00, the minimum value of h obtained was 8.5mm.
Distributions of mean velocity were obtained over the
surface of the airfoil to study the accelerated flow
there. In the wake region, hot-wire probe was traversed
from 3mm above the plate to nearly 100mm at two
axial locations of 50mm and 100mm from the trailing
edge of the airfoil model. For the angle of attack of
120, the wake region was found to be much thicker
and measurements were performed up to about 160mm
above the plate.
4. FORMULAS FOR CALCULATION:
Pressure in Pa
Pressure p= ρghi
ρ=density of water(1000 kg/m3)
g= acceleration due to gravity(9.81m/s2)
h= manometer reading
Pressure Force of each pressure point normal to the surface
of air foil body Fi=Li x b x pi.
L=length of the strip in meter (0.03m)
b=width of the airfoil (0.2 m)
p=pressure at each point of air foil
Vertical component of each pressure force
F=Fi x cosi
Fi=pressure force of each point normal to the surface of aero
foil body
i=angle of pressure force line to vertical line
Lift force
FL=ΣFi
Fi=vertical component of each pressure force
Coefficient of lift
CL=FL/0.5 x A x ρ x U2
FL=Lift force A=Projected area of aerofoil body (0.05m2)
ρ=Density of air at 340 C (1.16 kg/m3)
U= Velocity of air (16.5 m/s)
5. RESULT & DISCUSSION:
From the above graph, the variation of pressure at
different pressure point from 1 to 14 is shown at a
constant ground clearance with different angle of
attack. From the first line i.e. series1 it is clearly
shown that when the angle of attack is zero the
pressure from point 1 to point 7 gradually decreasing
to zero. This is because the pressure distribution on
the top surface of the air foil is a streamline body
and from just above the leading edge the velocity is
increasing. We know from the Bernoulli’s equation
when velocity increases pressure decreases. At the
point seven, pressure is zero, because this is the
trailing edge and it is a stagnation point. Similarly
the pressure distribution on the rear side of the air
foil shows the same profile because it is a
symmetrical air foil and angle of attack is zero.
But at point 1, again the pressure is zero because it
is the leading edge and it is the stagnation point. The
air stream bifurcates equally to top and bottom side of
the airfoil. That is why the profile of pressure distribution
from point 14 to 7 at the top and from point 7 to 14 at the
bottom are nearly same in nature.
Now we consider series2 and series3 i.e. angle of
attack is 3 degree and 6 degree respectively with
constant ground clearance. In series2 it is very clear
that the pressure from point 1 to 6 slightly decrease
than the pressure of series 1. That is why when we
increase the angle of attack the velocity of the top of
the air foil increases and according to Bernoulli’s
equation pressure must decrease. This is due to better
streamlining effect on the top of the air foil. Now point
7
7 and point 14 shows some reading because now they
are not still stagnation points. The bottom of the air
foil has less velocity as compare to top. Thus bottom
portion of the air foil shows higher pressure. But like
discussion of series1 the velocity from point 1 to point
6 velocity decreases and from point 13 to point 8
velocity increases.
The nature of series 2 and series 3 are same. The
difference is that, the pressure at the top of air foil is
more at angle of attack 3 degree as compare to the
angle of attack 6 degree. Similarly the pressure at the
bottom of air foil is less at angle of attack 3 degree as
compare to the angle of attack 6 degree.
Now if we will consider the angle of attack 9 degree
and angle of attack 12 degree, pressure increases from
point 1 to 6 is more than the pressure decreases from
point 8 to 13. That shows that the net pressure of air
foil decreases. Now consider point 7 and 14. Here the
pressures at both the points are far ahead of 0 pascal.
That means both the points are nowhere near to the
stagnation point.
The nature of the pressure distribution curve and
the normal force distribution curve is similar. The
normal distribution curve is nothing but the lift force
at each strip. It is the cosine component of the
pressure force at each strip of the air foil. Angle of
each pressure force to the vertical at each angle of
attack is given in the tab le. From the first line
i.e. series1 it is clearly shown that when the angle
of attack is zero the normal force from point1 to
point 7 gradually decreasing to zero. This is
because the pressure distribution on the top surface
of the air foil is gradually decreasing from point 1
to 6. At the point seven, pressure is zero, because
this is the trailing edge and it is a stagnation point.
Similarly the normal force distribution on the rear
side of the air foil shows the same profile because it is
a symmetrical air foil and angle of attack is zero.
But at point 1, again the normal force is zero
because it is the leading edge and it is the
stagnation point. The air stream bifurcates equally
to top and bottom side of the airfoil. That is why the
profile of normal force distribution from point 14 to
7 at the top and from point 7 to 14 at the bottom is
nearly same in nature.
Now we consider angle of attack 3 degree and 6
degree with constant ground clearance. In 3 degree
angle of attack it is very clear that the normal force
from point 1 to 6 slightly decrease than the normal
force at the angle of attack 0 degree. This is due to
the nature of pressure distribution on the top of the
air foil. Now point 7 and point 14 shows some
reading because now they are not still stagnation
points. Bottom portion of the air foil shows higher
pressure thus normal forces increases at the bottom.
But like discussion when angle of attack is 0 degree,
the normal force from point 1 to point 6 decreases
and from point 13 to point 8 it increases.
The nature of curve for angle of attack 3 degree and
6 degree are same. The difference is that, the normal
force at the top of air foil is more at angle of attack 3
degree as compare to the angle of attack 6 degree.
Similarly the normal force at the bottom of air foil is
8
 less at angle of attack 3 degree as compare to the
angle of attack 6 degree.
The lift force Vs the angle of attack graph shows the
effect of lift force with increasing of angle of attack.
Each line shows the variation of lift force with angle of
attack at different ground clearance.
When angle of attack is zero, the lift force is also zero
for different ground clearance. Because as we are doing
the experiment with a symmetrical air foil body. The
pressure force both the sides of the air foil are same.
When we increase the angle of attack to 3 degree the lift
force increases. Because already we discussed that the
pressure force at the top of the air foil body decreases
due to the increase in the velocity. And the reverse is
happening at the bottom of the airfoil body. The same
thing is happening when we increase the angle of
attack to 6 degree. Now the lift force increases more
because of better stream lining at the top of the air foil
body.
But further increasing of angle of attack, the lift
force decreases at every ground clearance. This is
due to the boundary layer separation happening
somewhere at the top of the air foil body as shown in
fig.
6. CONCLUSION
We hereby conclude from our experiment that a
certain critical angle of attack results in maximum
lift force. The critical angle of attack was found to be
in between 30 to 90, which was found experimentally
through our setup. If the value decreases or increases
from that limit, the lift w i l l decrease substantially.
The next observation made was concerned with the
ground clearance effect on the lift. We observed that
nearer the object is to the ground, the lift force will
be more as compared to the same object at a higher
elevation from the ground. There is a very useful
application which can be deduced from the above
observation. We suggest that the runway strips used
for takeo ff purposes be constructed with a slight
slope in its contour. This will result in the aircraft
being closer to the ground for a longer time, thus
increasing the lift as observed from our experiment.
This will not only help in saving the costly jet fuel
which is used during the takeoff procedure but it
will also make runways shorter in length as the
aircrafts will have higher lift force.
7.References
[1] A.E. Raymond, Ground influence on airfoils, NACA
Technical Note 67, 1921.
[2] E.G. Reid, A full scale investigation of ground effect,
NACA Technical Report 265, 1927.
[3] K.V. Rozhdestvensky, Aerodynamics of a Lifting
System in Extreme Ground Effect, 1st ed., Springer-Verlag,
2000, p. 30.
[4] J.D. Anderson Jr., Fundamentals of Aerodynamics, third
ed., McGraw- Hill, 2001, p. 283, 284, 334, 335.
[5] R.G. Ollila, Historical review of WIG vehic les, J.
Hydronaut. 14 (3) (1980) 65–76.
[6] S. Ando, Critical review of design philosophies for recent
transport WIG effect vehic les, Trans. Jpn Soc. Aeronaut. Space
Sci. 33 (99) (1990) 28–40.
[7] A.W. Ailor, W.R. Eberle, Configuration effects on the lift
of a body in close ground proximity, J. Aircraft 13 (8) (1976)
584–589.
[8] M.D. Chawla, L.C. Edwards, M.E. Frande, Wind -tunnel
investigation of wing-in-ground effects, J. Aircraft 27 (4) (1990)
289–293.
[9] H. Tomaru, Y. Kohama, Experiments on wing in
ground effect with fixed ground plate, in: Proceedings of the
second JSMEKSME Fluids Engineering Conference, 1990, pp.
370–373.
[10] C.M. Hs iun, C.K. Chen, Aerodynamic characteristics of a
twodimensional airfoil with ground effect, J. Aircraft 33 (2) (1996)
386–392.
[11] H.H. Chun, I.R. Park, K.H. Chung, Computational and
experimental studies on wings in ground effect and a wig
effect craft, in: Proceedings of the Workshop on Ekranoplans
and Very Fast Craft, University of New South Wales, 1996, pp.
38–59.
[12] R. Ranzenbach, J.B. Barlow, Two-dimensional airfoil in
ground effect, an experimental and computational study,
Society of Automotive Paper No. 94-2509, 1994.
[13] R. Ranzenbach, J.B. Barlow, Cambered aerofoil in ground
effect: wind tunnel and road conditions, AIAA Paper 95-1909,
1995.
9
 [14] R. Ranzenbach, J.B. Barlow, Cambered aerofoil in
ground effect, an experimental and computational study,
Society of Automotive Paper No. 96- 0909, 1996.
[15] M.R. Ahmed, Y. Kohama, Experimental investigation on
the aerodynamic characteristics of a tandem wing configuration
in close ground proximity, JSME Int. J. 42 (4) (1999) 612–618.
[16] X. Zhang, J. Zerihan, A. Ruhrmann, M. Deviese, Tip
vortices generated by a wing in ground effect, in:
th
Proceedings of the 11 International Symposium on
Applications of Laser Techniques to Fluid Mechanics,
Portugal, 2002.
[17] J. Zerihan, X. Zhang, Aerodynamics of a single element
wing in ground effect, J. Aircraft 37 (6) (2000) 1058–1064.
[18] X. Zhang, J. Zerihan, Turbulent wake behind a single
element wing in ground effect, in: Proceedings of the 11th
International Symposium on Applications of Laser Techniques
to Fluid Mechanics, Portugal, 2002.
[19] N.A. Ahmed, J. Goonaratne, Lift augmentation of a
low-aspectratio thick wing in ground effect, J. Aircraft 39 (2)
(2002) 381–384.
[20] J.B. Barlow, W.H. Rae, A. Pope, Low-Speed Wind
Tunnel Testing, third ed., John Wiley, New York, 1999, p. 360and
374

10

View publication stats