Investigation of New Slat Configurations On Clark Y-14 Wing For Enhancing Aerodynamic Performance

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/331718321
Investigation of New Slat Conﬁgurations on Clark Y-14 Wing for Enhancing

Aerodynamic Performance
Thesis · January 2017
CITATIONS READS
0 926
1 author:
Mohammed Kheir Aldeen Abbas Askar

Al-Nahrain University
9 PUBLICATIONS 2 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Smoke Generator (used in Wind Tunnel) View project
Engineering Analysis with ANSYS Software View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Mohammed Kheir Aldeen Abbas Askar on 13 March 2019.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Ministry of Higher Education &
Scientific Research
University of Al-Nahrain
College of Engineering
INVESTIGATION OF NEW SLAT CONFIGURATIONS ON

CLARK Y-14 WING FOR ENHANCING AERODYNAMIC
PERFORMANCE
A Thesis
Submitted to the College of Engineering of
Al-Nahrain University in Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science
in
Mechanical Engineering
by
Hasan Khudhur Abbas
(B.Sc. 1993)
Raby` al-THaany 1438

January 2017
Abstract
Clark Y-14 is an airfoil which is widely studied in aerodynamics and
is generally used in aircraft design. The airfoil was designed in 1922 by
Virginus E. Clark. The airfoil has a chord of 90mm, a 250mm span, and
maximum thickness 14% from chord (12.6mm). This airfoil has been
chosen due to its easy construction and the flatness of the lower surface
from 30% of chord. Consequently, it helps in checking the angle of attack
with an inclinometer.
To improve the lift and performance of a Clark Y-14, auxiliary airfoils

such as slats and their resultant slots are used. New configurations have
been tested to identify the one that gives the best lift. Slats under
examination have been placed in front of, and above the leading edge.
These slats have been deflecting at different angles. Open and closed
slotted airfoils have been taken into consideration as well. These
configurations were tested numerically using JavaFoil and ANSYS first,
then tested in the Educational Wind Tunnel (EWT). The wind speed is 35
m/sec for all tests. Reynolds number was 200,069 at 27C°. Slats and slotted
Clark Y-14 models have been manufactured from Iron and drawn by
AutoDesk. These drawn models have been cut using an electrical discharge
wire cutting machine. Guides have been used to hold slats, and slots in
place when testing the airfoil at different angles.
Many tests have been done in both directions: numerically (JavaFoil

and ANSYS) and experimentally (EWT). Two best results have been
found. The first best result was achieved by using Clark Y-14 with two
slats (first slat placed 20%C with -10° forward from the main airfoil,
second slat 12mm with -10° above leading edge of main airfoil). In
JavaFoil lift coefficient CL is about 2.147, which has increment in lift
coefficient about 65%. While in EWT CL = 1.9009, which has increment
CL about 58.8%.
The second best result was achieved by using slotted Clark Y-14 with
dropped slat at 12mm at -10° form main airfoil. In javaFoil CL = 1.994
which has CL increment about 45%. While in EWT CL = 1.4518 which has
increment CL about 60%.
As for drag, the least value was found to be when using an airfoil with
two salts, in JavaFoil with (CD = 0.26951), while in EWT ((CD =
0.212124)). Next comes the slotted Clarck Y-14 with single slat above
main airfoil with 12mm at -10°, in Javafoil (CD = 0.19263), while in EWT
(CD = 0.399427)
When using simulation to evaluate the performance of the airfoils, it

was found that JavaFoil gives higher results compared to ANSYS. In
addition when calculating the lift for ANSYS, the solution does not
converge always and try to reach near the solution but not the exact value
at high angle of attack. For this reason, the lift value is averaged for the last
few iterations.
Table of Contents
Title Page
Abstract I
List of content III
Nomenclature VII
List of Figures and Tables X
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
1.1 High Lift Control Devices 1

1.2 Types of High lift devices 1
1.2.1 Slat 2
1.2.2 Flap 4
1.2.3 Spoiler 4
1.3 Types of Slat 5
1.4 Leading Edge Extension 6
1.4.1 Leading-Edge Root Extension 7
1.4.2 Leading-Edge Cuff 7
1.4.3 Dogtooth Extension 8
1.5 Aerodynamic Parameters 8
1.5.1 Lift 8
1.5.2 Drag 9
1.5.3 Angle of Attack 9
1.5.4 Boundary Layer Control 10
1.5.5 Stalling 11
1.6 Aim of Work 12
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Introduction 13
III
2.2 Experimental Studies for Airfoil 13
2.3 Numerical Studies for Airfoil 18
2.4 Numerical and Experimental Studies for Airfoil 19
CHAPTER THREE: Mathematical Model

3.1 Introduction 21
3.2 The Behavior of Fluid 21
Equations Describing the Behavior of Fluid
3.3 21
(Governing Equations)
3.3.1 Continuity Equation 22
3.3.2 Conservation of Linear Momentum 23
3.3.3 Navier-Stocks Equation 23
3.3.4 Kinematics Viscosity 24
3.4 Finite Element Method 25
3.5 Turbulence Model (k – ω) 25
3.6 Shear Stress Transport k-ω Governing Equations 26
3.7 Drawing and Simulation Software 28
3.7.1 Airfoil Configuration Using AutoCAD 2013 29
3.7.2 ANSYS 16.0 30
3.7.2.1 ANSYS Meshing 30
3.7.2.2 ANSYS Fluent 30
3.7.2.3 Boundary Conditions 31
3.8 Solution Method 32
3.9 Convergence Criteria 33
3.10 JavaFoil 34
Title Page
CHAPTER FOUR: EXPERIMENTAL WORK
IV
4.1 Introduction 36
4.2 Wind Tunnel 36
4.3 Wind Tunnel Calibration 39
4.3 Standard Clark Y-14 Airfoil 37
4.3.1 Wind speed 39
4.3.2 Airfoil Leveling 39
4.3.3 Tare Balance 39
4.3.4 Reading Outliers and Noise 39
4.4 Manufactured Items and Procedure Testing 40
4.5 Standard Clark Y-14 Airfoil 42
4.6 Clark Y-14 with Housing End Plates 43
4.7 Slat Design and Manufacturing 44
4.8 Slotted Wing Design and Manufacturing 46
4.9 Experimental Test Procedure 47
4.9.1 Standard Clark Y-14 Test without End plates 47
4.9.2 Standard Clark Y-14 Test with End Plates 48
4.9.3 Single Slat Clark Y-14 Tests 49
Single Slat above the Leading Edge of Clark Y-14
4.9.4 50
Tests
4.9.5 Two Slats Clark Y-14 Tests 51
4.9.6 Slotted Clark Y-14 Tests 52
4.9.7 Slotted Clark Y-14 with a Slat Tests 53
CHAPTER FIVE: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
5.1 Introduction 54
5.2 Airfoil Configurations Used in the Tests 54
5.2.1 Standard Clark Y-14 Test 55
V
5.2.2 Clark Y-14 with Slat in front of Leading Edge 55
5.2.3 Clark Y-14 with Slat above Leading Edge 62
5.2.4 Clark Y-14 with Two Slats 67
5.2.5 Slotted Clark Y-14 69
5.3 Comparing the Performance of Different 73

Configurations
5.4 Conclusion 75
Title Page
CHAPTER SIX: Conclusions and Recommendation for Future Work
6.1 Introduction 79
6.2 Conclusions 79
6.3 Recommendation for Future Work 80
References 81
Appendix A-1
Appendix B-1
Appendix C-1
Appendix D-1
VI
Nomenclature
Latin Characters
Symbol Description Units
m
b Wing span m
C Chord line m
N
D Drag force
k Turbulent kinetic energy m2/s2
L Lift force N
S Wing area m2
U Mean velocity components m/s

Non- Dimensional Parameters
Symbol Description
AR Wing aspect ratio = b2w / S ---
CD Drag coefficient ---
CL Lift coefficient ---
CM Pitching moment coefficient ---
CK , Cω , Cω1 , Cω2 , Constants in (k − ω) Model ---
σK , σω , ɑ 1
fk , fω Empirical function ---
Re Reynolds number ---
VII
turbulent Reynolds number ---
Ti Turbulent intensity ---
x, y, z Cartesian coordinate ---
Greek Symbols
Symbol Description Units
α Angle of attack degree
ε Dissipation rate of kinetic energy m2/s3
Δ Difference in values ---
ω Dissipation rate of turbulent kinetic energy m2/s2
μ Laminar viscosity N.s/m2
μt Turbulent viscosity N.s/m2
ρ Density of Air kg/m3
τij Mass averaged Viscous Stress Tensor N/m2

Superscripts
‘ Fluctuating part of parameter ---
- Average quantity ---
ij Tenser ---
VIII
Superscripts
∞ Free stream ---
1,2 Reference number ---
Abbreviations
aft Towards the rear part of / rearwards or backwards ---
AIAA American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics ---
CFD Computational Fluid Dynamics ---
PIV Particle Image Velocimetry ---
G.F. Gurney Flap ---
NACA National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics ---
NASA National Air and Space Administration ---
SIMPLE Semi-Implicit Method for Pressure Linked Equation ---
SST Shear-Stress Transport ---
EWT Educational Wind Tunnel ---
IX
Fig. No. Title of Figures Page
1-1 Control Devices System 2

1-2 Clark Y14 and Slat attached with End Plates 3
1-3 Slats and Slots 3
1-4 Effect of flap and slat on lift coefficient 4
1-5 Spoiler 5
1-6 Types of Slats 6
1-7 Leading Edge Extensions (LERX) 7
1-8 Force balance acting on the wing 8
1-9 Flow Separation 10
1-10 Airflow separating from an airfoil at a high angle of 12

attack
2-1 Clark Y-14 with Highly Cumbered Auxiliary Airfoil 13
2-2 Slotted Clark Y-14 14
2-3 Variable Geometry Factors-Slotted Clark Y-14 15
2-4 Change in Shape of Nose of Main Wing. Slotted 15

through Clark Y-14 Wing
2-5 Section of Clark Y-14 Wing with Multiple Fixed Slots 17
and Tralling –edge Flap
2-6 Plot of Possible test cases for computer simulations 17
3-1 Reynolds number calculation 25
3-2 Slotted Clark Y-14 End Plate 29
3-3 Slotted Wing with Guide Designed by AutoCAD 29
3-4 Meshing for airflow over Clack Y-14 wing 30
3-5 Clark Y-14 in Test Section 32
3-6 Boundary Conditions 32
3-7 The Residual Monitor Dialog Box 34
3-8 Convergence history for continuity, momentum, 34

turbulence equation
X
Fig.No. Title of Figures page
4-1 AEROLAB wind tunnel 37
4-2 EWT Test section 38
4-3 AeroLab software 38
4-4 Standard Clark Y-14 airfoil 42
4-5 Housing End Plates for an Airfoil with a Slat 43
4-6 CNC Laser Cutting Machine 44
4-7 Slat Shape 45
4-8 Elictrical discharge Machine 45
4-9 Slotted Clark Y-14 with Slot Airfoil 46
4-10 Slotted Clark Y-14 Hollow Airfoil 47
4-11 Design and manufacturing Parts are Assembled 47

togother
Standard Clark Y-14 without a Guide at EWT Test
4-12 48
Section
4-13 Standard Clark Y-14 with End Plates 48
4-14 Clark Y-14 with Single Slat. 49
4-15 Slat Location and deflection Degrees 50
4-16 Illustration of Slat Distances and Deflection Degrees 50

for Different Experiments
4-17 Slat above Nose of Clark Y-14 51
4-18 Slat Location and Deflection Degrees 51
4-19 Slot location 52
4-20 Slot Position for Main Wing 53
4-21 Slat with Deflection Auxiliary Wing 53
5-1 Lift for Standard Clark Y-14 55
5-2 Clark Y-14 with a Slat 56
5-3 Effect of a Slat at 0%C,5%C,10%C,15%C, and 20%C 56

with Clark Y-14 on Lift using JavaFoil
XI
Fig.No. Title of Figures Page
5-4 Effect of a Slat at 0%C, 5%C, 10%C, 15%C, and 57

20%C with Clark Y-14 on Lift using ANSYS
5-5 Lift coefficient VS number of iteration at 10 degree 58
5-9 Effect of a Slat at 0%C, 5%C, 10%C, 15%C, and 60

20%C with Clark Y-14 on Lift using EWT
5-10 Clark Y-14 with a Rotated Slat at 20%C 60
5-11 Effect of a Deflecting Slat at 0°, -5°, -10° with Clark 61

Y-14 on Lift using JavaFoil
Y-14 on Lift using Ansys
Y-14 on Lift using EWT
5-14 Clark Y-14 with a Slat above Leading Edge 63
5-15 Effect of Increasing Slat Height with Clark Y-14 on 63

Lift using JavaFoil
Lift using ANSYS
Lift using EWT
5-18 Clark Y-14 with a Deflected Slat at 12mm above 65
Leading Edge
5-19 Effect of Rotating Slat with Height of 12mm with 65
Clark Y-14 on Lift using JavaFoil
5-20 Effect of Deflecting Slat with Height of 12mm with 66
Clark Y-14 on Lift using ANSYS
5-21 Effect of deflecting Slat with Height of 12mm with 66
Clark Y-14 on Lift using EWT
5-22 Clark Y-14 with a Two Slats 67
5-23 Clark Y-14 with 2 Slats and the Effect of Deflecting 67

Slat above Leading Edge on Lift for JavaFoil
5-24 Clark Y-14 with 2 Slats and the Effect of Deflecting 68
Slat above Leading Edge on Lift for ANSYS
XII
Fig.No. Title of Figures Page
5-25 Clark Y-14 with 2 Slats and the Effect of Rotating Slat 68
above Leading Edge on Lift for EWT
5-26 Slotted Clark Y-14 69
5-27 Effect of Open and Closed Slot for Slotted Clark Y-14 69
using JavaFoil
using ANSYS
using EWT
5-30 Clark Y-14 with Deflected Slat and an Open Slot 71
5-31 Effect of Deflecting Slat for an Open Slot Clark Y-14 71

using JavaFoil
5-32 Effect of Deflecting Slat for an Open Slot Clark Y-14 72
using ANSYS
5-33 Effect of Deflecting Slat for an Open Slot Clark Y- 72
14 using EWT
5-34 Performance of Different Clark Y-14 Configuration in 73
JavaFoil
ANSYS
EWT
XIII
Table
No.
Title of Tables Page
4.1 Testing procedure 40
4.2 Slat Specification 44

4.3 Slotted Wing Slat Specification 46
5.1 Result Table 75
XIV
Chapter One
Introduction
1.1 High Lift Control Devices
In airplane design, a high lift control device is a section or an instrument on

an airplane wing that raises the total lift created by the wing as in shown in
figure (1-1). It may be a stationary, or a movable component [1]. Movable high-
lift devices are of two types: wing flaps, and slats. Stationary devices contain
leading edge root extensions and boundary layer control systems [2].
The design of the wing (which determines the lifting capacity of a fixed
wing) is chosen by compromising different factors. A larger wing provides
additional lift, reduces distance, and lessens the velocity required for takeoff and
landing on the one hand. On the other hand, the design might raise drag, which
reduces performance during the cruising portion of the flight [3].
Wing designs are optimized for speed and efficiency during the cruise
phase of the flight because during this phase, the aircraft covers most of its flight
time. High-lift devices compensate for this design trade off by adding lift at
takeoff and landing which helps reducing distance, and the speed required to
safely land the aircraft. It also allows the use of a more efficient wing in flight
[4].
1.2 Types of High Lift Devices
High lift devices come in different types. These types include: Flaps,
Slats, Leading Edge Extension, Boundary Layer Control, and Leading-Edge
Cuff.
1
Figure (1-1) Control Devices System [5]
1.2.1 Slat
A slat is a surface located on the leading edge of airplane wings as shown
in Figure (1-2). Its main purpose is to allow wings to have a higher angle of
attack value, which means a higher lift. A slat could be deployed based on pilot
command which means that the pilot could reduce/increase the critical angle of
attack. This is useful during takeoff, or landing. In normal flight, slats are
retracted to reduce drag [6].
Slats allow airplanes to takeoff and land in shorter runways than they
normally need [7]. Deployed slats cause a gap between the main wing and the
slat itself. This gap is called Slot [8] as shown in Figure (1-3). Research found
that wing slots have many advantages [9], such as:
2
 Delay stalling of the airplane.
 Reduction in speed stalls.
 Shorter take-off runway.
 High stability at lower speeds.
 Steep landing.
Figure (1-2) Clark Y14 and Slat attached with End Plates
Figure (1-3) Slats and Slots [8]

3
1.2.2 Flap
A flap is a part of the wing that can be changed by rotating around a
number of hinges, or be curved into airflow to produce extra lift. There are
several types of flaps [10, 11]. The effect of flap can be seen in lift curve shown
in green in Figure (1-4). It shows that lift is higher in the case of flaps – which
give a camber shape to the wing – than that of using a normal airfoil – which is
shown in blue – [12].
Figure (1-4) Effect of flap and slat on lift coefficient [13]
1.2.3 Spoiler
A Spoiler is one type of devices used to reduce the lift on the aircraft wing
[14]. It has a flap structure of rectangular cross-section whose leading edge is
hinged on upper wings (at any angle) disturbing the streamlined flow of air there
by changing the amount of lift. The net force on aircraft in the vertical direction
4
is equal to weight minus lift. Thus, when the spoilers are employed, lift gets
reduced as a result of the net downward force acting on the wing increases [15].
Mohammed K.A. & Ammer Q.H. [16] used spoiler as a high lift device
when investigation of a strap on upper surface Clark Y-14 wing. Gap (3.33%C)
improves maximum lift to drag ratio (28.3%) compared with clean wing.
Figure (1-5) Spoiler [16]

1.3 Types of Slats
Slats come in different shapes and forms. Some are ventilated, others are
sealed, etc. In this research, the slats under study are similar to ventilated slat.
Figure (1-6) shows a number of slat types.
5
Figure (1-6) Types of Slats [17]
1.4 Leading Edge Extension

It is a small extension attached to the wing surface at the front of the
leading edge as shown in figure (1-7). The main goal of adding a leading edge is
to improve the airflow at high angles of attack and low airspeeds. Besides, it
improves lift, and delays stall [18]. The following sections present a description
of the two types of Leading Edge Extensions.
6
Figure (1-7) Leading Edge Extensions (LERX) [18]
1.4.1 Leading-Edge Root Extension

A leading-edge root extension (LERX) is a small aerodynamic strip, mostly a
triangular shape, running forward from leading edge of the wing root to a point
along the fuselage. LERX controlled airflow over the wing at high angles of
attack, so delaying the stall and resulting loss of lift [18].
1.4.2 Leading-Edge Cuff

A Leading-cuff (or wing cuff) is a device located on fixed wing aircrafts
that results in sharp discontinuity in the shape of the wing’s leading edge [18].
The main goal is to produce a more gradual and gentler stall, without any spin.
7
1.4.3 Dogtooth Extension
It is a small break on the leading edge of the wing that comes in the shape
of zigzag. It is mainly used to generate a vortex flow field at high angle of
attacks to prevent the progress of separated flow [18].
1.5 Aerodynamic Parameters

There are many parameters that affect the performance of wings. These
include lift, stalls, angle of attack, and drag. The following sections explain
these parameters. Figure (1-8) shows these parameters.
Figure (1-8) Force balance acting on the wing.

1.5.1 Lift
Lift is the force that is generated as a result of air flowing on the wings. It
is perpendicular to the direction of airflow, so it works against the weight of the
airplane. To take-off, the lift should be higher than the weight of airplane. For
8
crusing, it should be equal to the weight of the palne, while in decending, it
should be less than the weight of the plane [19].
1.5.2 Drag
Drag is a force that pulls the airplane backwords against the thrust. It is a
result of moving the airplane though air. The shape of airplane affects drag.
Aerodynamic shapes have less drag since they displace air easily which reduce
air resistance. Airplane can change the value of drag by changing the shape of
wing. This change of drag is useful during take-off, landing, or crusing [20].
To overcome the drag of an airplane by using thrust. Thrust is the force which
moves an aircraft through the air. Thrust is generated by the engines of the
aircraft.
1.5.3 Angle of Attack

Angle of attack is the angle between the wind moving parallel to the flight
path, and the line between the leading and trailing edge of the wing. In general,
the lift gets increased when the angle of attack gets increased to a limit. When
the angle of attack reaches very high values (usually for clarck Y-14 the stall
angle is approximately 15°) a stall is introduced. This high value angle of attack
is called (Critical angle of attack) [21].
9
1.5.4 Boundary Layer Control
Boundary layer refers to the fluid (which is air in this case) that is in
contact with the surface of wing. Boundary layer separation refers to the
boundary layer that travels far enough against an adverse pressure gradient
where the speed of airflow relative to wing speed reaches almost zero. This
results in increased drag, and later on stalling [22].
Figure (1-9) Flow Separation [23].
𝑃𝐴 < 𝑃𝐵 < 𝑃𝐶 < 𝑃𝐷 … (1)

Where P is pressure at location A, B, C, or D.
𝜕𝑈
( 𝜕𝑦 ) =0 … (2)
𝑦=0
Point C is called separation point as referred to Figure (1-9).

Separation occurs when there is superposition of velocity gradient ∂ U/ ∂ y and
adverse pressure gradient ∂ p/ ∂ x
10
1.5.5 Stalling
Stalling happens when airplane wings lose lift suddenly at high angles of
attack when separation of boundary layer happens. Stalling happens when the
wing does not have enough lift that could keep the airplane in its flight level,
which is not safe when flying at low altitudes.
To illustrate how stall happens, assume that an aircraft is flying at a low air
speed. In this case, the lift isn’t enough to keep the airplane in its level, so the
pilot might increase the angle of attack of the wings, which usually increases
lift. If, however, the angle of attack is too high (larger than the critical angle of
attack), the lift stops increasing and collapses, causing a stall regardless of
airplane speed [24].
Figure (1-10) Airflow separating from an airfoil at a high angle of attack

[24]
11
1.6 Aim of the Work
The objective of this work is to investigate the effect of combining a
(Clark Y 14 wing with a narrow auxiliary airfoil) and a (Slotted Clark Y 14 with
auxiliary airfoil) in different configurations numerically and experimentally. An
experimental study of a Clark Y-14 rectangular wing is conducted to evaluate
the aerodynamics characteristics of clean airfoil and slats airfoil for different
heights and positions at different AOA ranged from (-5 degree to 25 degree).
The numerical analysis of this work is done using JavaFoil and computational
fluid dynamics (CFD) with ANSYS FLUENT, by adopting SIMPLE algorithm
to solve the continuity and momentum equations of airflow over a 3D airfoil. A
scaled down model for the wing and slats is used in the experimental work. Its
results are compared to CFD results for validation.
12
Chapter Two
Literature Review
2.1 Introduction
Since this study focuses on Clark Y-14 airfoil, this chapter gives a review
of similar studies. Some of these studies are experimental where actual models
of airfoil is being tested in wind tunnel, while others are numerical which use
software – such as ANSYS – to calculate the effects of wind on the airfoil and
different forces. Another group use both techniques. The following sections
give details of these studies.
2.2 Experimental Studies for Airfoil

Fred and Millard [25] tested a Clark Y-14 wing with a highly cambered
auxiliary airfoil that was 14.5% of the main wing. The wing was made from
mahogany while the auxiliary airfoil was made from aluminum alloy because
of its small size. The auxiliary airfoil was connected to the Clark Y-14 using
a thin plate from both sides. A vertical wind tunnel whose diameter is 5 feet
(1.524 meters) has been used. The wind speed was 35 m/sec. In his
experiment, the location of the auxiliary airfoil was tested at 141 different
locations above and in front of the main wing. The location of the auxiliary
airfoil was changed to 24 different locations.
Figure (2-1) Clark Y-14 with Highly Cumbered Auxiliary Airfoil

13
Its angle changed form -5° to 30°. The auxiliary wing gave 1.81
maximum lift coefficients which is 40% greater than that of Clark Y-14 with
𝐶𝐿𝑀𝑎𝑥
no auxiliary airfoil. The ⁄𝐶 ratio value was found to be 104.5
𝐷𝑀𝑖𝑛
which is an improvement of 21% with auxiliary airfoil compared to the

original Clark Y-14.
Carl and Shortal [26] used a vertical wind tunnel with a diameter of 5
feet (1.524 meters). A slotted Clark Y-14 wing has been tested. The cord of
the wing was 25.4 cm. Wind speed was 35 m/sec. The wing was made from
laminated mahogany, while the slat was made from aluminum alloy because
the slat was small in size as shown in figure (2-2).
Figure (2-2) Slotted Clark Y-14

The experiment took into consideration 100 positions where the slot gap,
slot width, and slot depth has been changed. The range of slot gap starts from
1.5 to 3.5% of the chord, 3.35 to 15% of the chord for slot width, and finally
the slot depth was tested from 3.5 above to 4% chord below the main wing.
The angle of attack has been changed from -6 to 46 with a Reynolds number
of 609,000. It was found that the best slot width was 14.7% of the chord, and
slot depth of 4% of the chord as shown in figure (2-3). They found that the lift
has been increased by 41.5%, and an angle of attack increase of 13 degrees.
The critical angle of attack was found to be 30 degrees. They concluded that
14
the shape and size of slat was not as important as the distance and the angle
of the slat from the main wing.
Figure (2-3) Variable Geometry Factors – Slotted Clark Y-14
Fred and Carl [27] tested the characteristics of Clark Y-14 with low
drag fixed slots. A number of test is being conducted first to find the best
probable slot arrangement. Next the best possible auxiliary airfoil shape and
position is determined as shown in figure (2-4).
Figure (2-4) Changes in Shape of Nose of Main Wing. Slot through

Clark Y-14 Wing
15
Then the effect of rounding the nose of main wing is evaluated, and
finally the effect of moving the slot further back form leading edge is checked.
The experiment has been conducted using a vertical wind tunnel with a 5 feet
diameter (1.524 meters) with a Clark Y-14 wing having a chord of 25.4 cm.
The angle of attack has been changed from -6 to 40 degrees. Air flow was 35
m/sec. Fred and Carl figured out the best position for slot from his previous
study [26]. Next they found that the drag is less when the nose of the auxiliary
airfoil is rounded. It was also found the change of the nose of the main wing
to be rounded gave best results when the radius of rounding was 2% of the
chord. Finally moving the slot back from the leading edge gave a slight
increase in lift. The best lift coefficient was 1.751 which is an improvement
of 34.6% has been achieved. The angle of attack increased from 15 to 24 –
which is 9 degrees improvement – using a slotted wing. The least drag for the
wing with fixed slot improved by 52.6%.
Fred and Joseph [28] studied the effect of multiple fixed slots for Clark
Y-14 wing with a trialing edge flap on lift and drag. In this study the wing has
four fixed slots as shown in figure (2-5). Tests are done in a vertical wind
tunnel with 5 feet in diameter (1.524 meters). The chord of the wing was 25.4
cm, and the angle of attack was ranging from -6 to 40 degrees, while the
airspeed was 35 m/sec. Results from this study showed that lift has been
improved by 37%. They found that increasing the number of slots beyond one
does not improved lift coefficient, for this reason Fred and Joseph concluded
that only one slot is enough to improve the lift from 1.291 to 1.772, and
improve the angle of attack from 15° to 24°.
16
Figure (2-5) Section of Clark Y Wing with Multiple Fixed Slots and
Tralling-edge Flap
Weiner [29] studied a cambered auxiliary airfoil in effort to increase lift.

In this study, a Clark Y-14 main wing has been used with an auxiliary
cambered shape airfoil that was placed in front or above the main wing.
Weiner performed a simulation using MATLAB where different locations and
rotation angles for the auxiliary airfoils has taken into consideration resulting
in 540 different models/configurations as shown in figure (2-6).
Figure (2-6) Plot of possible test cases for computer simulations
17
William [30] studied Clark Y-14 wing with a slat of type Maxwell. This
wing has been tested in a rectangular wind tunnel those dimensions are 7×10
feet. Air speed was 35 m/sec, and Reynolds number was 609000. The
Maxwell slat has a chord of 30% of the main wing. The main wing has a chord
of 25.4 cm, and a span of 152.4 cm. For a plane Clark Y-14 the lift coefficient
is 1.25, and best angle of attack is 14. However when using the Maxell slat
that is 0.175 of chord wing, the lift coefficient is 1.81 with a best angle of
attack of 23 degrees.
2.3 Numerical Studies for Airfoil
This section discusses theoretical studies related to Clark Y-14 with
auxiliary airfoil. These studies use ANSYS to evaluate the performance of
airfoil.
Sasaki et al [31] tested a fixed slat wing of type NACA 4415, angle of
attack from 0° to 45°. The researcher came up with three wing shapes by
changing slat length for the NACA 4415. In the first case the span of the slat
is 66% of the wing which the researcher called FS-66%. For the second case,
the slat has a span of 75% (FS-75%), and for the last case the span was 100%
(FS-100). Results of this study showed that the angle of attack increased to be
40 degrees in the case of FS-66 and FS75. The researcher concluded that this
fixed slat gives an increase for lift and angle of attack, and gives safety for
small airplane for small speeds. While for lift coefficient for NACA 4415
gives 0.92, FS-66% gives 1.22, FS-75% gives 1.35, and FS-100 gives 1.65.
Makawana el al [32] studied a fixed slot on NACA 0012 wing. The
chord of the wing was 1 meter. Airspeed was 5 m/sec. The angle of attack has
been changed until the critical angle (stall angle) of attack has been reached.
18
After that a slot that is 15% of the chord has been tested with different angles.
Two turbulence models has been studied.
2.4 Numerical and Experimental Studies for Airfoil
This section lists a number of studies that used numerical analysis then,
based on that result, an experimental part has been implemented.
Ali K. Al-Abadi [33] used a numerical study to give estimate about the
effect of flaps, and slats on the performance of wings. In this study a low speed
wind tunnel. A NACA 0015 wing with a slat and a flap has been used. The
study measured lift and drag for the wing. The angle of attack has been
changed to be 0, 10, 20 and 30 degrees with and without a slat. Air speeds of
8, 12, 16, and 20 m/sec has been used. Using slat improved the lift coefficient
and angle of attack. Resulting shows with and without slat test done with air
speed 12m/s gives lift coefficient without slat for airfoil type C16t equal 1.5
and with slat 1.85.
Plantin et al [34] made an experiment on VR-12 airfoil Boeing to study

the behavior of dynamic stall oscillations which happens when the angle of
attack is at its peak. A slat has been placed in front of leading edge of airfoil.
Numerical analysis has been performed for this configuration using (Vorticity
Transport Equation of fluid dynamics describes evolution of the vorticity 𝜔
of particle of a fluid as it moves with its flow) which is used for
incompressible fluids. These results has been matched against water tunnel
facility which provide steady and unsteady flow. The wing has been tested
with different angles of attack from 0° to 30°. Reynolds number = 200,000.
Results showed that the system is not affected by the dynamic stall.
19
Parthasarathy et al [35] analyzed the airflow using ANSYS for
multiple element airfoil that has slats, and flaps which are used a lot in
transport airplanes. 3D and 2D analysis has been performed for the wing
which is SC20610N airfoil for pressure. A standard turbulent model has been
used to solve the equations for slats and flaps. Results showed that moving
slats forward and placing flaps at with angles increase lift and stall angle.
Prabhakar and Ohri [36], studied the size of slot resulting from slat
movement in terms of percentage of chord. The effect of this slot size on lift
is being calculated. The wing type being tested is Micro Air Vehicle (MAV)
NACA2412 using CFD analysis with Reynolds number = 200,000. This type
of wing has been compared to pure NACA2412 wing. Results show that MAV
NACA2412 gave better results compared to that of pure NACA2412. Best
slot value was about 1.7% of chord size.
20
Chapter Three
Mathematical Model
3.1 Introduction
Simulation methods are available to calculate the behavior of fluid
surrounding airfoil. Some methods depend on ordinary boundary layer analysis
for low angle of attack. Naiver-Stocks, and Continuity equations are used for
high angles of attack. Methods such as Finite Difference Method (FDM) and
Finite Element Method (FEM) are used to solve these equations. FEM is
preferred since it could easily handle complex airfoil shapes and boundary layer
conditions [37]. This chapter explains these equations and how the equations
are being solved.
3.2 The Behavior of Fluid
For an airfoil that has a small angle of attack, the viscous effects
introduce small changes to the inviscid flow [37]. This means that ordinary
boundary layer analysis is enough to describe the behavior of viscous flow. If
the angle of attack increases, then separation occurs. This means that the
inviscid flow gets altered significantly. A better way to describe the behavior
in this case is to use the equations governing the flow. Solving these equations
requires huge numerical calculations. One way to solve such equations is to use
Finite State Method [37].
3.3 Equations Describing the Behavior of Fluid (Governing

Equations)
In the present work, the working fluid is air at 27C° and the flow
characteristics are assumed to be as follows:
21
• Steady state flow: refers to the condition where the fluid properties at any
single point in the system do not change over time.
• Two dimensional.
• Newtonian fluid: A Newtonian fluid's viscosity remains constant, no matter

the amount of shear applied for a constant temperature. These fluids have a
linear relationship between viscosity and shear stress.
• Incompressible: refers to a flow in which the material density is constant

within a fluid parcel an infinitesimal volume that moves with the flow velocity.
• Turbulent flow: a fluid flow in which the velocity at a given point varies in
magnitude and direction compare with laminar flow.
So that, the conservation equation for continuity, momentum, and turbulence

model equation can be written in tensor form [38], as follows:
3.3.1 Continuity Equation
The continuity or conservation of mass equation states that for a steady

incompressible fluid, 𝜌 = 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑡
𝜕𝑢 𝜕𝑉
+ =0 … (1)
𝜕𝑥 𝜕𝑦
or
⃗ =0
∇. 𝑉 … (2)
Where 𝑢 represents to velocity in x direction, 𝑉 represents to velocity in y

direction [39].
22
3.3.2 Conservation of Linear Momentum
Conservation of Linear Momentum is also known as Newton’s Second

Law of Motion. It states that “the net force acting on a fluid particle is equal to
the time rate of change of the linear momentum of the particle” [40].
u-momentum (x-direction)
∂ ∂ ∂p ∂ ∂u ∂ ∂u
(ρuu) + (ρuv) = − + (μeff )+ (μeff ) + Su … (3)
∂x ∂y ∂x ∂x ∂x ∂y ∂y
v-momentum (y-direction)
∂ ∂ ∂p ∂ ∂v ∂ ∂v
(ρvu) + (ρvv) = − + (μeff )+ (μeff ) + Sv … (4)
∂x ∂y ∂y ∂x ∂x ∂y ∂y
The momentum equations contain the viscosity effective (μeff) which is

defined for the fluid properties at the inlet.
This effective viscosity coefficient 𝛍𝐞𝐟𝐟 is:
𝜇𝑒𝑓𝑓 = μl + 𝜇𝑡 …
(5)
Where 𝝁𝒍 : the laminar viscosity. And 𝜇𝑡 : the turbulent eddy viscosity.
𝑆𝑈 :Source term of 𝑢 in X- direction, while 𝑆𝑉 : a source term of 𝑣 in Y-
direction.
3.3.3 Navier-Stocks Equation
For a viscous, incompressible, and steady state fluid, the Navier-Stocks

equation that describes the motion of the x, y directions with constant stream
velocity is [41]:
𝜕𝑢 𝜕𝑢 𝜕𝑝 𝜕2 𝑢 𝜕2 𝑢
𝑢 +𝑉 =− +𝑣( 2
+ ) … (6)
𝜕𝑥 𝜕𝑦 𝜕𝑥 𝜕𝑥 𝜕𝑦 2
𝜕𝑉 𝜕𝑉 𝜕𝑝 𝜕2 𝑉 𝜕2 𝑉
𝑢 +𝑉 =− +𝑣( 2
+ ) … (7)
𝜕𝑥 𝜕𝑦 𝜕𝑦 𝜕𝑥 𝜕𝑦 2
23
Where u velocity in x direction, V is velocity in y direction, 𝑣 is kinematics
𝜕𝑝 𝜕𝑝 𝜕2 𝑉 𝜕2 𝑉 𝜕2 𝑢 𝜕2 𝑢
viscosity, and is pressure gradient, 𝑣 ( 2
+ ) and 𝑣 (𝜕𝑥 2 + 𝜕𝑦2) is
𝜕𝑥 𝜕𝑦 𝜕𝑥 𝜕𝑦 2
viscosity controls velocity diffusion which is essentially, this term describes

how fluid motion is damped.
In the boundary layer, the changes in the stream-wise (x) direction are small
compared to changes in the wall normal (y) direction. Consequently (from
continuity) V << u, pressure gradient
𝜕𝑝
=0 … (8)
𝜕𝑦
Under this steady state and constant free stream velocity (zero pressure
gradient) the governing equations are simplified to
𝜕𝑢 𝜕𝑉
Continuity equation: + =0, 𝑢[𝑥, 𝑦 = 0] = 0 … (9)
𝜕𝑥 𝜕𝑦
𝜕𝑢 𝜕𝑢 𝜕2 𝑢
Momentum equation: +𝑉 =𝑣 , … (10)
𝜕𝑥 𝜕𝑦 𝜕𝑦 2
𝑉[𝑥, 𝑦 = 0] = 0, 𝑢[𝑥, 𝑦 = ∞] = 𝑼𝒆
Where 𝑼𝒆 is free stream velocity.
3.3.4 Kinematics Viscosity
For a Newtonian fluid, the Kinematics viscosity which is considered

constant, is calculated as follows [41]:
µ
𝑣= … (11)
𝜌
Where 𝑣 represent to viscosity,
24
3.4 Finite Element Method
Finite element method is used to solve the previous equations. In this

method, the area to be solved is divided into a number of small elements. These
elements can be triangular, quadrilateral, tetrahedral, hexahedral, etc. ANSYS
is being used to perform Finite Element Method calculations [42]. The domain
– which represents air – is being split into a number of sub regions. The number
of sub regions is increased near the airfoil to increase the accuracy of
calculations. As for parts that are not affected by airfoil, or do not have
important results, the number of regions is reduced [43].
3.5 Turbulence Model (k – ω)

This section presents the subsonic flow in two dimensions for the Clark
Y-14 wing. The angle of attack for the wing is changed. Reynolds number is
200,067 calculated at 27C° as shown in figure (3-1).
Figure (3-1) Reynolds number calculation

𝜌𝑉𝑙 𝑉𝑙
𝑅𝑒 = = … (12)
𝜇 𝑣
V = Velocity of the fluid

l = the characteristics length, the chord width of an airfoil
𝜌 = the density of the fluid
𝜇 = The dynamic viscosity of the fluid
𝑣 = The kinematic viscosity of the fluid
25
One of the three turbulence models [ 𝑘 − 𝜀 , 𝑘 − 𝜔 , or shear stress
transport (SST)] is combined with momentum conservation. Continuity is
being solved to obtain the flow. The aim is to validate the models by comparing
the experimental measurements with the predictions for the Clark Y-14 airfoil.
The problem domain is composed of cells that are finer near the airfoil. The air
speed is assumed to be constant – which is 35 m/sec. The angle of attack is
changed for the different turbulence models under test (from -5 to 25 degrees).
Transition point prediction and turbulence modeling are being highlighted. The
transition point from laminar to turbulent is taken into consideration to get
accurate results for the drag coefficient.
Many aerodynamic applications use the SST 𝑘 − 𝜔 turbulence model [44]

which is a two-equation eddy-viscosity model. It is a model that combines the
Wilcox 𝑘 − 𝜔 and the 𝑘 − 𝜀 models. A blending function 𝐹1 activates the
Wilcox model near the wall and the 𝑘 − 𝜀 model in the free stream. This
ensures that the appropriate model is utilized throughout the flow field:
 The 𝑘 − 𝜔 model is well suited for simulating flow in the viscous sub-layer.
 The 𝑘 − 𝜀 model is ideal for predicting flow behavior in regions away from
the wall.
3.6 Shear Stress Transport 𝒌 − 𝝎 Governing Equations
Turbulence Kinetic Energy had given as [45]:
𝜕𝑘 𝜕 𝜕𝑘
𝑈𝑗 𝜕𝑥 = 𝑃𝑘 − 𝛽 ∗ 𝑘𝜔 + 𝜕𝑥 [(𝑣 + 𝜎𝑘 𝑣𝑇 ) 𝜕𝑥 ] … (13)
𝑗 𝑗 𝑗
Where 𝑈𝑗 velocity components in Cartesian coordinates, 𝑃𝑘 is production

limiter, 𝑘 turbulent kinetic energy, 𝜔 specific dissipation rate of 𝑘, 𝑣 kinematic
26
molecular viscosity, 𝑣𝑇 kinematic turbulent viscosity, 𝜎𝑘 model constant, 𝛽 ∗
model constant.
Specific Dissipation Rate:
𝜕𝜔 𝜕 𝜕𝜔 1 𝜕𝑘 𝜕𝜔
𝑈𝑗 = 𝛼𝑆 2 − 𝛽𝜔2 + [(𝑣 + 𝜎𝜔 𝑣𝑇 ) 𝜕𝑥 ] + 2(1 − 𝐹1 )𝜎𝜔2 𝜔 𝜕𝑥 … (14)
𝜕𝑥𝑗 𝜕𝑥𝑗 𝑗 𝑖 𝜕𝑥𝑖
Where 𝛼 is model constant, 𝑆 is strain rate magnitude, 𝛽 is model constant, 𝜎𝜔

is model constant.
𝐹1 (Blending Function):
4𝜎𝜔2 𝑘 4
√𝑘 500𝑣
𝐹1 = tanh {{min [max ( , ) , ]} } … (15)
𝛽 ∗ 𝜔𝒴 𝒴 2 𝜔 𝐶𝐷𝑘𝜔 𝒴 2
Where 𝒴 is distance to the next surface, 𝐷𝑘𝜔 is the positive portion of the cross
diffusion term.
Note: F1 = 1 inside the boundary layer and 0 in the free stream.
1 𝜕𝑘 𝜕𝜔
𝐶𝐷𝑘𝜔 = max (2𝜌𝜎𝜔2 , 10−10 ) … (16)
𝜔 𝜕𝑥𝑖 𝜕𝑥𝑖
Kinematic eddy viscosity:
𝑎1 𝑘
𝑣𝑇 = … (17)
max(𝑎1 𝜔,𝑆𝐹2 )
𝐹2 (Second blending function)
2
2√𝑘 500𝑣
𝐹2 = tanh [[max ( , )] ] … (18)
𝛽 ∗ 𝜔𝒴 𝒴 2 𝜔
𝑃𝑘 (Production limiter)
27
𝜕𝑈𝑖
𝑃𝑘 = min (𝜏𝑖𝑗 , 10𝛽 ∗ 𝑘𝜔) … (19)
𝜕𝑥𝑗
𝜙 = 𝜙1 𝐹1 + 𝜙2 (1 − 𝐹1 ) … (20)
Where 𝜙1 and 𝜙2 is constant
Constants values for SST 𝑘 − 𝜔 two equation:
5 3 9
𝛼1 = , 𝛼2 = 0.4 , 𝛽1 = , 𝛽2 = 0.0828 , 𝐵∗ =
9 40 100
𝜎𝑘1 = 0.85 , 𝜎𝑘2 = 1 , 𝜎𝜔1 = 0.5 , 𝜎𝜔2 = 0.856
Additional notes about SST 𝑘 − 𝜔
1. The SST models exhibit less sensitivity to free stream conditions (flow
outside the boundary layer) than many other turbulence models.
2. The shear stress limiter helps the 𝑘 − 𝜔 model avoid a build-up of excessive
turbulent kinetic energy near stagnation points.
3. The SST models provide a platform for additional extensions such as sale
adaptive simulation and laminar-turbulence transition.
3.7 Drawing and Simulation Software
The following sections describe the software used to draw the airfoil and
solving the turbulence model. AutoCAD is used to draw the airfoil, while
ANSYS and Javafoil are used to calculate lift, and drag.
3.7.1 Airfoil Configuration Using AutoCAD 2013
28
AutoCAD is a commercial software that is used for 2D and 3D designs.
This application has been used to draw the airfoil, specify locations of main
wing, auxiliary airfoil, and their different angles. These draws are then
transfer later to CNC CO2 laser cutting machine as shown in figures (3.2 and
3.3). All measurements used are in mm. The figures show a dropped slat. The
oval shape illustrates the shape of the end plate that is used at wing ends.
Figure (3-2) Slotted Clack Y-14 End Plate
Figure (3-3) Slotted Wing with End Plate Designed by AutoCAD
3.7.2 ANSYS 16.0
29
ANSYS is software that consists of a number of packages that work
together to solve different engineering problems. The following section
explains the packages related to this work.
3.7.2.1 ANSYS Meshing
ANSYS Meshing is used to generate a mesh for the domain (which

represents the airflow around the wing). Regions are created which are small in
size near the airfoil, and get larger the more distance from the airfoil, could be
triangular or quadratic shapes. These regions are then used by ANSYS fluent
as shown in figure (3-4).
Figure (3-4): Meshing for airflow over Clack Y-14 wing.
3.7.2.2 ANSYS Fluent
ANSYS fluent is a computational fluid dynamics (CFD) software tool

that allows the user to build and compute turbulence models, perform Finite
Element Method calculations to find air pressure distribution over the wing,
velocity distribution, lift and drag coefficients.
3.7.2.3 Boundary Conditions
30
In Fig. (3-5), the airfoil in the test section is being shown. The height of
the test section is 300 mm, while the width is 610 mm. Figure (3-6), shows the
boundary conditions, where (A) is the speed of air that is entering the test
section which is 35 m/sec. (B) represents the outlet pressure of the test section
where the air exits, atmospheric pressure. (C) is the wall, where the air speed is
zero. (D) is the airfoil, which the test is being applied to. The speed of the airfoil
is zero relative to the airflow because it is fixed. Details for boundary conditions
are explained next.
A: Inlet test section:
1- Momentum: Velocity specification method is magnitude; normal to

boundary is 35 m/s Pressure is atmospheric
2- Turbulence:
Specification method is intensity and hydraulic diameter
Turbulence intensity is calculated as follows [46]
T. i = 0.16𝑅𝑒 −1/8 … (14)
Hydraulic diameter is calculated as follow:
4 𝑐𝑟𝑜𝑠𝑠 𝑠𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛
𝐷ℎ = … (15)
𝑝𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑚𝑒𝑡𝑒𝑟
B- Outlet Test Section.
The same previous equations (14), (15) are used at the outlet test section.
C- Wall Boundary Condition
31
No slip boundary condition is specified for the wing with and without winglet
surfaces and is set as a wall. These conditions are used to bound fluid and solid
regions.
610mm
300mm
Figure (3-5): Clark Y-14 in Test Section
Figure (3-6): Boundary Conditions
3.8 Solution Method
This section discusses how using ANSYS to solve the equations then calculate
the lift and drag. The solution steps are as follows:
32
1- First the initial values of air are being set (air velocity 35 m/s at
atmospheric pressure), these values are passed to the momentum
equations.
2- Momentum equations are solved to get the velocity.
3- Next, the continuity equation are used based on results from previous
steps, the pressure correction is calculated.
4- The correction for each sub region is calculated.
5- If convergence is not reached, then the current results are passed to
momentum equations, and step 2, 3, 4, and 5 are repeated.
3.9 Convergence Criteria
In the previous section, the process of calculating the solution are repeated
until a convergence is reached. The criteria for convergence mainly depend on
monitoring the normalized residuals of different variables – continuity, x, y, z
momentums, k and ω – after each iteration. First the unscaled residuals are
calculated. These contain some numerical errors. As the system goes from one
iteration to another, the errors become smaller and smaller. The values of these
residuals are then divided by the largest residual from the first iteration to give
a normalized value. figure 3-7 shows the configuration of convergence criteria,
while figure. 3-8 shows how the value converges over time.
33
Figure (3-7): The Residual Monitor Dialog Box
Figure (3-8) Convergence History for Continuity, Momentum,

Turbulence Equation
3.10 JavaFoil
JavaFoil is a program that is used to analyze airflow. The main purpose of
JAVAFOIL is to determine the lift, drag and moment characteristics of airfoils.
The program will first calculate the distribution of the velocity on the surface
34
of the airfoil. For this purpose it uses a potential flow analysis module which is
based on a higher order panel method (linear varying vorticity distribution).
This local velocity and the local pressure are related by the Bernoulli equation.
In order to find the lift and the pitching moment coefficient the distribution of
the pressure can be integrated along the surface. Next JAVAFOIL will calculate
the behavior of the flow layer close to the airfoil surface (the boundary layer).
The boundary layer analysis module (a so called integral method) steps along
the upper and the lower surfaces of the airfoil, starting at the stagnation point.
It solves a set of differential equations to find the various boundary layer
parameters. The boundary layer data is then be used to calculate the drag of the
airfoil from its properties at the trailing edge. Further details about JavaFoil
could be found in [47].
35
Chapter Four
Experimental Work
4.1 Introduction
To test the performance of the Slat with Clark Y-14 airfoil, tests were
conducted using a wind tunnel and a small airfoil model. Results from these tests
are compared to simulation results from ANSYS and JavaFoil. The following
sections illustrate this.
4.2 Wind Tunnel
In order to test the wing, an AEROLAB Educational Wind Tunnel [49, 50]
has been used. The tunnel is an Open Circuit test section. It is capable of producing
wind speed up to 64.8 m/s. However, the tests used wind speed of 35 m/sec. The
wind tunnel is shown in figure (4-1). The AEROLAB Wind Tunnel consists of the
following:
1- The contraction
2- The test section
3- The diffuser
4- The fan housing
The system works by passing the air through the Honeycomb. The Honeycomb is
a matrix of parallel passages, and its job is to eliminate most flow angularity. After
that, the air passes through two turbulence-reducing screens. These screens job is
reducing axial velocity variation. The fan consists of 9 blades constructed from
fiberglass-reinforced plastic. The motor speed can be changed via variable
frequency drive (VFD). In order for the system to take measurements, it uses two
36
solid state differential transducers, and three-component sting Force/Moment
balance together with the provided data acquisition system (DAC). In addition to
that, the system also has 24-tube multi-manometer that works by differing air
pressures.
3 4
2
1
AIRFLOW
4
3 2 1
Figure (4-1): AEROLAB wind tunnel
37
Test section
Sting balance
Pressure traducer
Scroll for
changing angle of
attack
Figure (4-2): EWT Test section
Figure (4-3): AeroLab software
The AeroLab software - shown in figure (4-3) - is used to show different

measurements that the wind tunnel sensors have detected.
38
4.3 Wind Tunnel Calbiration
When conducting the tests, a number of steps were followed in order to

checking and make sure accurate readings are obtained.
4.3.1 Wind Speed
To verify that the wind tunnel gives an accurate wind speed, an external
airspeed measurement device is used for comparison, used a digital anemometer
device. This device is placed inside test section of wind tunnel before conducting
the experiment to make sure that air speed is accurate.
4.3.2 Airfoil Leveling
When connecting the airfoil to the sting in the test section of the EWT, both
tips of the wing should be at the same distance from the ground level of the test
section, i.e. the wing should be placed horizontally. For this reason water balance
tool is used.
4.3.3 Tare Balance
Before conducting any experiment, the EWT sensors gives non-zero

readings even before the experiment starts. Sensor readings need to be set to zero
(for normal force and axial force) in order to get an accurate readings.
4.3.4 Reading Outliers and Noise
During the experiments, sometimes multiple readings for the same angle of
attack value results in two or more different values (noise), or might result in
values out of normal range (outliers). In order to address these issues and make
39
sure that the readings are more precise, multiple readings are performed for the
same angle of attack, and then averaged to get a more accurate value.
4.4 Manufactured Items and Procedure Testing
It has been manfacted the following items:
 A Slotted Clark Y-14 that is hollow from inside.

 A slot (which is part of the original wing)
 Two slats
 Many housing end plates that are used to hold airfoil parts in place at
different angles and distances during the tests. Notice that each test might
use different end plates based on expermnet parameters.
The following table shows the seven testing procedure.
Table 4.1: Testing procedure

No. Name Preview
1 Standard
Clark Y-14
Represents the standard Clark Y-14 configuration

without slat, flaps, or any other auxiliary wing.
2 Standard
Clark Y-14
with
housing
end plates Represents a standard Clark Y-14
wing, but with two housing end
plates attached to the tips of the wing. These end
plates are used for later experiments to hold the
slats, and slots in place during the test.
40
3 Clark Y-14
with single
slat in front
of the wing
Represents a Clark Y-14 with a slat placed in fornt.
During the test that uses a wind tunnel, a housing
end plates is used to hold the slat in place.
4 Clark Y-14
with a slat
above the
leading
edge Represents a Clark Y-14 with a slat that is placed
above the leading edge of the wing at different
heights and angles.
5 Clark Y-14
with two
slats
Represents a Clark Y-14 with two slats. One located

above the leading edge of the wing, while the other
placed in front of the wing.
6 Slotted
Clark Y-14
The Clark Y-14 is slotted, and the slot location is

changed.
7 Slotted
Clark Y-14
with a slat
above
leading
edge
An open slot Clark Y-14 wing that has a slat above
the leading edge rotated at different angels.
41
4.5 Standard Clark Y-14 Airfoil
Standard Clark Y-14 airfoil is being used first, and then its results are
compared against Clark Y-14 with Slat airfoil. The wing model shown in figure
(4-4) is made from steel and has a chord of 9cm, and a span of 25cm. The weight
of wing without slat is 0.537kg.
Figure (4-4): Standard Clark Y-14 airfoil
42
4.6 Clark Y-14 with Hosing End Plates
One of the issues that need to be addressed when working with an airfoil
containing a Slat is the position of the Slot itself. The Slat needs to be at a fixed
unchanging distance from the wing during the test in the wind tunnel. For this
reason, two housing end plates are made. These end plates contain holes for
placing the wing and the Slat at the desired angle and distance. Figure (4-5) shows
one of the end plates for the Clark Y-14 with a Slat.
Figure (4-5): Housing End plates for an Airfoil with a Slat
Multiple housing end plates have been designed for different angles and
distances of slat relative to the main wing using AutoCAD 2013. These designs
are then exported to CNC cutting machine that works using 𝐶𝑂2 cutting. The
housing end plates were made from Acrylic. The cutting process is shown in
Figure (4-6). The end plates are ellipse shaped, with a major axis of 150mm, and
a minor axis of 47.5mm [48]
43
Figure (4-6): CNC Laser Cutting Machine
4.7 Slat Design and Manufacturing
The slat design has been made using AutoCAD 2013. The slat was shaped
like a Clark Y-14 with a 28% of the main wing chord in size [26]. The slat
dimensions are stated in the table below.
Table 4.2 Slat Specification

Shape of Slat Manufacture Span Chord Thickness
28% from main Clark Y14 Airfoil 250mm 25.2mm 3.52mm
Two slats have been manufactured from Iron according to the specifications
mentioned above, where Figure (4-7) shows both of them. Electrical Discharge
Wire Cutting machine has been used to cut the metal according to the design of
the slat which is shown in Figure (4-8).
44
Figure (4-7): Slat Shape
Figure (4-8): Electrical discharge Machine (EDM)
45
4.8 Slotted Wing Design and Manufacturing
A slotted Clark Y-14 wing has been manufactured according to the specifications
in Table (4.3) [27]. The wing is shown in figure (4-9).
Table 4.3 Slotted Wing Slat Specifications

Shape of Slat Manufacture Span Chord
14.7% from main Clark Y-14 Chord 250mm 13.23mm
Figure (4-9): Slotted Clark Y-14 with Slot Airfoil
Similar to the manufacturing of the two slats mentioned earlier, the new wing has
been made from Iron using EDWC machine. It was noticed that the new wing was
about 3 times heavier than the standard Clark Y-14 used for tests. To solve this
issue a hollow wing has been created so that its weight is as close to the standard
Clark Y-14 as possible. Figure (4-10) illustrates that.
46
Figure (4-10): Slotted Clark Y-14 Hollow Airfoil
Figure (4-11) Design and Manufacturing Parts are Assmbled Togother
4.9 Experimental Test Procedure
The test work is employed in order to study the effect of Slat and Slot with
different angles on the drag coefficient (𝐶𝐷 ) and lift coefficient (𝐶𝐿 ) by using
AEROLAB Educational Wind Tunnel for angle of attack (-5° to +25°), and free
stream velocity of (35 m/s). The tests are describes in the following sections.
4.9.1 Standard Clark Y-14 Test without End plates
In this experiment, the standard Clark Y-14 is being tested. The wing does
not get attached to end plates.
47
Figure (4-12) Standard Clark Y-14 without End plates at EWT Test Section
The test records the lift (Cl), drag (Cd), and the angle of attack (AOA). These
readings are reptead for the same angle of attack are averaged to reduce noise and
outliers.
4.9.2 Standard Clark Y-14 Test with End Plates
The wing is attached to end plates. Its effect is to reduce the airfoil’s drag
by partial recovery vortex energy (this is done to prevent wind vortex at the tips
of wings), and it makes the test more similar to two denominational flows.
Figure (4-13): Standard Clark Y-14 with End Plates
48
4.9.3 Single Slat Clark Y-14 Tests
In this test, the Clark Y-14 wing is being tested with a slat those size is 28%
of the wing itself. To do that, end plates is being used as with the previous
experiment, except that the slat is being attached to the end plates as well.
Figure (4-14): Clark Y-14 with Single Slat.
In this test as shown in figure (4-15) and figure (4-16), the slat is being tested at a
fixed height relative to the main wing, while the angle and distance of the slat is
being changed as follows:
 The slat was placed at a 12%C in the y-direction.

 The slat was placed at different distances in the x-direction in front of the
wing at 0%C, 5%C, 10%C, 15%C, and 20%C.
49
 For each of the x-axis distances, the angle of the slat itself has been changed
to be 0°, -5°, and -10°.
Auxiliary
12%C
0⁰, -5⁰, or -100
0%C, 5%C, 10%C…, 20%C Chord = C
Figure (4-15): Slat Location and Deflection Degrees
0⁰, -5⁰, or -100

12%C
20%C 15%C 10%C 5%C 0%C
Chord = C
Figure (4-16): Illustration of Slat Distances and Deflection Degrees for

Different Experiments
4.9.4 Single Slat above the Leading Edge of Clark Y-14 Tests
In this test as shown in figure (4-17), the slat is placed above the main wing's
leading edge. The slat height is increased for each test from 4mm up to 12mm with
50
a 2mm increment. At 12mm the test is repeated with different salt angle 0°, -5°,
and -10°.
0°, -5°, -10°
12mm
10mm
8mm
6mm
4mm
Chord = C
Figure (4-17): Slat above Leading Edge of Clark Y-14
4.9.5 Two Slats Clark Y-14 Tests
In this test, two slats have been added to the standard Clark Y-14 airfoil.
The first slat is placed forward 20%C from main wing with -10°. The second slat
place above lead edge of main wing at height of 12mm with change angles from
0°, -5°, and -10° as shown in figure (4.18).
Auxiliary No. 2
12mm 0°, -5°, -10°
Auxiliary No.1
12%C
-10°
20%C
Chord = C
Figure (4-18): Slat Location and Deflection Degrees
51
4.9.6 Slotted Clark Y-14 Tests
In this experiment, a slot was cut from a hollow Clark Y-14 wing. First, an
experiment is done using an un-deployed slot in order to compare its result to the
standard Clark Y-14. This is done by placing the airfoil and its slot in the housing
end plates as shown in figure 4.19.
Un-deployed Slot
CLRK-Y-14%
Chord = C
Dropped Slat
CLRK-Y-14%
Figure (4-19): Slot location

Another experiment is done where the slot is deployed. The slot is placed at
4%C below the main wing, and 14.7%C in the x axis C as shown in figure (4-
20).
52
Depth
4%C
Width = 14.7%C
Figure (4-20): Slot Position for Main Wing [27]
4.9.7 Slotted Clark Y-14 with a Slat Tests
This test is similar to the one in the previous section, however a Slat with
the size of 28%C is added at 12mm above the wing, and it is rotated by -0, -10°,
and -20°.
0°, -10°, -20°
12mm
Dropped Slat
CLARK-Y-14%
Chord = C
Figure (4-21): Slat with Deflection Auxiliary Wing
53
Chapter Five
Results and Discussions
5.1 Introduction
This chapter introduces theoretical and test results which include
simulations using JavaFoil, ANSYS software, and EWT. These tests cover a
number of Clark Y-14 configurations such as standard Clark Y-14 airfoil, a
standard Clark Y-14 with housing end plates, a Clark Y-14 with a single slat,
two slat, etc. The chapter also compares the result for each test against each
other for the same wing configuration. Next a comparison for all these airfoil
configuration is presented. Finally the conclusion of the work is presented.
5.2 Airfoil Configurations Used in the Tests
This study uses a different sets of Clark Y-14 configurations. The set of
these configurations are presented in the table below:
Each configuration was tested using JavaFoil, ANSYS, and a wind

tunnel test. This chapter presents a comparison between different tests in
terms of lift. Since the drag is not as important as lift in this study (because
the main goal of the study is to improve takeoff and landing), its results are
presented in Appendix A. Similarly, the pressure and velocity calculated in
ANSYS are shown in Appendix C, and Appendix D.
54
5.2.1 Standard Clark Y-14 Test
This configuration used the standard Clark Y-14 airfoil without any
added slat, or auxiliary airfoil. The angle of attack in this test has been
changed from -5° to 25°. The wing speed is 35 m/s.
1.6
1.4
1.2
Lift Coefficient (CL)
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
-10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
-0.2
-0.4
Angle of Attack (AOA)
Airfoil in JavaFoil Airfoil in ANSYS Airfoil + Guide in EWT Airfoil in EWT
Figure (5-1): Lift for Standard Clark Y-14

Figure (5-1) shows lift coefficient behavior for the standard Clark-Y14
airfoil as the angle of attack changes. Simulation in JavaFoil gives high lift
compared to ANSYS and EWT test. As for EWT tests, the airfoil with guide
gives better lift than a clean airfoil, because end plates prevent wind vortex at
the tips of wings), and it makes the test more similar to two denominational
flows as shown in Figure (5-1).
5.2.2 Clark Y-14 with Slat in front of Leading Edge

In this configuration the Clark Y-14 airfoil has been used with a slat at
different distances as shown in Figure (5-2). In the case of JavaFoil, the
simulation has been performed such that the distance of the slat is at 0%C,
55
5%C, 10%C, 15%C, and 20%C. The effects on lift is shown in Figure. (5-3).
The figure shows clearly that an increase in the distance of the slat in front of
leading edge results in better lift value.
0%C 5%C 10%C
15%C 20%C
Figure (5-2): Clark Y-14 with a Slat
2
1.8
1.6
1.4
1.2
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
-5 -0.2 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
CLARK Y14 +AUX 0%C CLARK Y14+AUX 5%C CLARK Y14+AUX 10%C
CLARK Y14+AUX 15%C CLARK Y14 +AUX 20%C
Figure (5-3): Effect of a Slat at 0%C,5%C,10%C, 15%C, and 20%C

with Clark Y-14 on Lift using JavaFoil
Analysis in ANSYS gives unstable results compared to JavaFoil as
shown in Figure (5-4).
56
1.8
1.6
Lift Coefficient (CL) 1.4
1.2
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
-10 -5 -0.2 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
-0.4
Figure (5-4): Effect of a Slat at 0%C, 5%C, 10%C, 15%C, and 20%C
with Clark Y-14 on Lift using ANSYS
Figure (5-4) shows some fluctuation in result. Low angle of attack, from
-5 degrees to 10 degrees, has no fluctuated, ANSYS reaches the solution easily
(needs less number of iteration) to get exact left coefficient for each angle of
attack as is shown in figure (5-5), and figures (5-6). But at a higher angle of
attack from 15 degrees to 25 degrees, the solution does not converge and keep
on fluctuating which gets near the solution but not the exact value of left
coefficient as is shown in figure (5-7), and figure (5-8). The same behavior
appears for most ANSYS figures in this chapter.
57
Figure (5-5) lift coefficient VS number of iteration at 10 Degree
Figure (5-6) Lift Coefficient VS Number of Iteration at 15 Degree
58
59
For EWT tests, the 20%C also gave the best lift value as shown in figure.
(5-9). It can be seen that test results gives similar behavior to that of JavaFoil.
Also the best distance in the test is compatible with the best distance in both
JavaFoil and ANSYS which is 20%C.
1.5
0.5
0
-10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
-0.5
60
Figure (5-9): Effect of a Slat at 0%C, 5%C, 10%C, 15%C, and 20%C
with Clark Y-14 on Lift using EWT
Since the distance of 20%C gave the best result in all cases, then a slat is
being tested at different deflection angles (0°,-5°, and -10°).
Deflection by 0 Degrees Deflection by -5 Degrees Deflection by -10 Degrees

Figure (5-10): Clark Y-14 with a Deflected Slat at 20%C
Results from test in JavaFoil show that deflecting by a higher angle

results in better lift after when the angle of attack is beyond 10 degrees. This
is shown in figure (5-11). The same behavior is obtained when performing an
test in ANSYS, and EWT as shown in Fig. (5-12, 5-13).
2.5
2
1.5
0.5
0
-5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
-0.5
20%C WITH 0 DEGREE 20%C WITH -5 DEGREE 20%C WITH -10 DEGREE
Figure (5-11): Effect of a Deflecting Slat at 0°, -5°, -10° with Clark Y-14
on Lift using Javafoil
61
1.8
1.6
1.4
1.2
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
-10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
-0.2
-0.4
on Lift using ANSYS
1.5
0.5
0
-10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
-0.5
on Lift using EWT
5.2.3 Clark Y-14 with Slat above Leading Edge
62
In this configuration a slat located above the leading edge is being tested
at different heights as shown in figure (5-14). In figure (5-15), it can be seen
that increasing the height of slat from 4mm gradually to 12mm resulted in an
increase in lift. In the case of ANSYS, the 12mm height resulted in best lift
for high angle of attack which Fig. (5-14) shows. Figure (5-17) shows that the
same behavior has been obtained from the tests done in the EWT wind tunnel.
This suggests that a slat located at higher distance above leading edge results
in less negative effect on lift. The next tests test deflecting the slat above
leading edge at different angles (0°, -5°, -10°).
4mm 6mm
8mm 10mm
12mm
Figure (5.14): Clark Y-14 with a Slat above Leading Edge
63
1.6
1.4

1.2
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
-5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
4mm 6mm 8mm 10mm 12mm
Figure (5-15): Effect of Increasing Slat Height with Clark Y-14 on Lift
using JavaFoil
1.6
1.4
1.2
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
-10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
-0.2
using ANSYS
64
1.6
1.4
1.2
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
-10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25
using EWT
Simulation results in JavaFoil and ANSYS show that increasing the slat angle
gives improves lift as shown in Fig. (5-19, 5-20). Test results are consistent
with this were they show the same behavior in Figure. (5-17).

Figure (5-18): Clark Y-14 with a Deflected Slat at 12mm above Leading
Edge
65
2
1.8
1.6
1.4
1.2
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
-5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
-0.2
12mm WITH 0 DEGREE 12mm WITH -5 DEGREEE 12mm WITH -10 DEGREE
Figure (5-19): Effect of Deflecting Slat with Height of 12mm with Clark
Y-14 on Lift using JavaFoil
1.6
1.4
1.2
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
-10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
-0.2
-0.4
Y-14 on Lift using ANSYS
66
1.6
1.4
1.2
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
-10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25
Y-14 on Lift using EWT
5.2.4 Clark Y-14 with Two Slats

In this configuration, a Clark Y-14 has been used where a slat is placed in
front of the leading edge at 20%C and deflected by -10 degrees, and another
slat is placed above the leading edge at 12mm and deflected at different
angles. This configuration is shown in figure. (5-22).
0 Degree -5 Degree -10 Degree

Figure (5-22): Clark Y-14 with a Two Slats
Figures (5-23, 5-24, and 5-25) shows the effect of deflecting the slat by 0°,-
5°, and -10° degrees on lift for JavaFoil, ANSYS, and EWT tests. All three
figures show that deflection by -10 degrees gave the best lift value.
67
2.5
2
1.5
0.5
0
-5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
-0.5
2nd AUX AT 0 DEGREE 2nd AUX AT -5 DEGREE 2nd AUX AT-10 DEGREE
Figure (5-23): Clark Y-14 with 2 Slats and the Effect of Deflecting Slat
above Leading Edge on Lift for JavaFoil
1.4
1.2
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
-10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
-0.2
-0.4
above Leading Edge on Lift for ANSYS
68
2.5
2
1.5
0.5
0
-10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
-0.5
above Leading Edge on Lift for EWT
5.2.5 Slotted Clark Y-14

For this test, a slotted Clark Y-14 wing with a closed slat, and another
with open slat is being tested. The configuration is shown in figure. (5-26).
Closed Slot Open Slot

Figure (5-26): Slotted Clark Y-14
Comparing open and closed slot in JavaFoil, ANSYS, simulations show that
an open slot has better lift value than a closed slot. EWT gives similar results
to simulation. Figures (5-27, 5-28, 5-29) illustrate lift value for the three tests.
Since an open slot gives better performance than that of a closed one, an open
69
slot configuration is combined with a slat above the leading edge of the wing.
The new configuration is shown in Figure. (5-30).
2.5
2
Lift Coefficent (CL)
1.5
0.5
0
-5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
-0.5
CLOSE SLOT OPEN SLOT
Figure (5-27): Effect of Open and Closed Slot for Slotted Clark Y-14
using JavaFoil
1.5
0.5
0
-10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
-0.5
using ANSYS
70
1.6
1.4
1.2
Lift Coefficent (CL)
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
-10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
-0.2
using EWT

Figure 5.30: Clark Y-14 with a Deflected Slat and an Open Slot
In this configuration, the slat is deflected by 0°, -10°, and -20°. The slat
is placed at 12mm above the main airfoil. Results of deflection are shown in
figures (5-31, 5-32, 5-33). Results from these figures shows that a deflection
angle of -10 results in lift that is better compared to other deflection angles.
71
2.5
Lift Coefficient (CL) 2
1.5
0.5
0
-5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
-0.5
AUX AT 0 DEGREE AUX AT -10 DEGREE AUX AT -20 DEGREE
Figure (5-31): Effect of Deflecting Slat for an Open Slot Clark Y-14
using JavaFoil
2
1.8
1.6
1.4
1.2
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
-10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
-0.2
using ANSYS
72
2
1.5
0.5
0
-10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
-0.5
using EWT
5.3 Comparing the Performance of Different Configurations

This section compares the performance of different airfoil configurations
for JavaFoil, ANSYS, and EWT. Figure (5-34) compares the performances
under JavaFoil. The figure shows that having two slats deflected by -10
degrees gives better lift value than any other configuration in general.
However, the value for open slot, and open slot with slat gives better
performance when the angle of attack is high. Notice that an open slot with a
slat gives slightly better performance than that of a pure open slot. Figure (5-
35) compares the results for ANSYS. ANSYS results show that an open slot
with auxiliary airfoil deflected by -10° gives better performance which is
compatible with JavaFoil. As for tests in the EWT, results show that an open
slot with a deflected slat by -10° gives best lift for high angles of attacks.
73
2.5
1.5
0.5
0
-5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
-0.5
STANDARD CKARK Y14 WITH GUID AUX1 20%C Rotate -10 + AUX2 12mm Rotate -10
AUX AT 20%C AUX 20%C + Rotate -10 DEGREE
AUX AT 12mm AUXT AT 12m + Rotate -10
OPEN SLOT OPEN SLOT + AUX 12mm Rotate -10
Figure (5-34): Performance of Different Clark Y-14 Configuration in

JavaFoil

ANSYS
74
2.5
1.5
0.5
0
-10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
-0.5

EWT
5.4 Conclusion
This chapter presented different configurations of a Clark Y-14 airfoil,
compared result theatrically (JavaFoil and ANSYS) and experimentally
(Educational Wind Tunnel EWT). Results shows that an airfoil with housing
end plates give better performance than one without. In the case of a slat in
front of leading edge, the best distance of slat at 20%C gives higher lift
coefficient than other distance. In the case of a slat above leading edge, the
lift coefficient increases as the height of salt increases. Deflecting the slat
improves the lift further. As for the slotted airfoil, an open slot gives better
performance compared to a closed one. Finally an open slot with a slat above
airfoil gives the best performance out of all configurations when the angle of
attack is high. Summery result for lift coefficient is shows in table (5.1) which
presented at angle of attack equal 20 degrees for all tests configuration.
75
Table (5.1) Result Table
Theoretical Experimental
Tests at AOA ANSYS JavaFoil EWT
No.
equal 20° Increment Increment Increment
CL CL CL
CL % CL % CL %
Standard
1 Clark Y-14 --- --- --- --- 1.197 …
(Clean)
Clark Y-14
2 with housing 1.2684 --- 1.297 --- 1.292 7.9%
end plates
Clark Y-14
with single
3 1.204 --- 1.909 47% 1.67590 40%
slat forward
position
Clark Y-14
with single
4 slat over 1.2017 --- 1.688 30% 1.23209 3%
leading edge
position
Clark Y-14
5 with two 1.2053 --- 2.147 65% 1.9009 58.8%
slats
Slotted Clark
Y-14
6 1.3526 --- 1.376 --- 0.9068 …
(closed
slotted)
slotted Clark
Y-14
7 dropped 1.5148 12% 2.002 45% 1.4153 56%
(open
slotted)
Slotted Clark
Y-14
dropped
8 with single 1.6596 22.7% 1.994 45% 1.4518 60%
slat over
leading edge
position
76
No. Preview Figure JavaFoil ANSYS EWT
AOA CL CD CL CD CL CD
20° - - - - 1.197 0.393
1
Standard Clark Y-14: Represents the standard
Clark Y-14 configuration without slat, flaps, or 25° - - - - 0.884 0.686
any other auxiliary wing.
Javafoil ANSYS EWT
20° 1.297 0.216 1.2684 0.314 1.292 0.398

2
Standard Clark Y-14 with housing guide: 25° 1.105 0.329 1.1183 0.387 1.032 0.760
Represents a standard Clark Y-14 wing, but
with two housing guides attached to the tips of
the wing. These guides are used for later
experiments to hold the slats, and slots in place
during the experiment.
Clarck Y-14 with single salt at 20%C with -10° (Optimum
postion)
Javafoil ANSYS EWT
0⁰, -5⁰, or -100
12%C
3 Clark Y-14 with single slat in front of the wing:
Represents a Clark Y-14 with a slat placed in 20%C 15%C 10%C 5%C 0%C 20° 1.909 0.23749 1.204 0.2343 1.67590 0.5259
fornt, and above the wing at different distances
and angles. During the experiment that uses a Chord = C
25° 1.794 0.45158 1.605 0.62975 1.36695 0.920
wind tunnel, a housing guide is used to hold the
slat in place.
Clarck Y-14 with a slat above the leading eage at 12mm with -10°
(Optimum postion)
0°, -5°, -10°
Javafoil ANSYS EWT
12m
m
10m
m 20° 1.688 0.25011 1.2017 0.2239 1.23209 0.6796
8m
4 m
6m
m
4m 25° 1.573 0.36492 1.5034 0.37953 - -
Clark Y-14 with a slat above the leading edge: m
Represents a Clark Y-14 with a slat that is
placed above the leading edge of the wing at
different heights and angles.
Chord = C
77
Clark Y-14 with first slat at 20%C at -10°, Second slat above
leading eage 12mm at -10° (Optimmum position)
Auxiliary No. 2
Javafoil ANSYS EWT
12mm 0°, -5°, -10°
Auxiliary No.1
5
20° 2.147 0.26951 1.2053 0.41448 1.9009 0.2121
Clark Y-14 with two slats: Represents a Clark 12%
-10° C
Y-14 with two slats. One located above the
25° 2.111 0.48732 1.3056 0.19319 1.83267 0.49704
leading edge of the wing, while the other 20%
placed in front of the wing. C
Chord = C
Slotted Clarck Y-14

Un-deployed
Slot Closed Javafoil ANSYS EWT
CLRK-Y-14%
20° 1.376 0.10587 1.3526 0.28609 0.9068 0.3738
25° 1.136 0.14137 1.5248 0.72813 0.7376 0.7090

Chord = C
6
Open Javafoil ANSYS EWT
Slotted Clark Y-14: The Clark Y-14 is slotted, Dropped Slat AOA CL CD CL CD CL CD
and the slot location is changed.
20° 2.002 0.16919 1.5148 0.16607 1.4153 0.3256
CLRK-Y-14% 1.4020
25° 2.136 0.22983 1.6592 0.34801 0.5488
3
Open Slot Clarck Y-14 with a slat above leading eage at 12mm with -
10°
Javafoil ANSYS EWT
7 AOA CL CD CL CD CL CD
20° 1.994 0.23019 1.6596 0.16394 1.4518 0.4392

Slotted Clark Y-14 with a slat above leading
edge: An open slot Clark Y-14 wing that has a 25° 2.018 0.25144 1.7387 0.28348 1.6145 0.5373
slat above the leading edge rotated at different
angels. 0°, -10°, -20°
12mm
Dropped Slat
CLARK-Y-14%
Chord = C
78
Chapter Six
Conclusions and Recommendations for Future Work
6.1 Introduction
Investigation to find a new confirmation which give higher lift
coefficient for Clark Y-14. By enhancement adding Slats to main airfoil or
using Slotted airfoil.
6.2 Conclusions
The following conclusions based on the best result of theoretical (JavaFoil)
and experimental (EWT) of table (6.1) at angle of angle 20°.
1- Adding housing end plate to Clark Y-14, change flow from 3 dimensional
to 2 dimensional flow. Also affected lift coefficient by 7.9%.
2- When using a slat that is placed in front of the leading edge of a Clark
Y-14 it is better to place the slat further away to improve airfoil lift coefficient
20%C. Improving the lift further can be achieved by deflecting the slat by -10
degrees. The mount of lift is 1.909 and lift increment is about 47%.
3- If the slat is placed on top of leading edge, then it is better to place the
slat at higher distance from the wing 12mm. Similar to the case of using a slat
in front of leading edge, improving the lift further can be achieved by rotating
the slat by -10. The lift coefficient is 1.688 and lift increment is about 30%.
4- If two slats are being used with the a Clark Y-14 airfoil, then one
should be placed in front of leading edge, rotated by -10 degrees, and another
placed on top of leading edge, and rotated by -10 degree. This resulting
configuration should perform better than single slat configuration. The mount
of lift is 2.147 and lift increment is about 65%.
79
5- When using slotted airfoil, an open slot gives better performance than
a closed one. The mount of lift is 2.002 and lift increment is about 45%.
6- If a slat is placed above leading edge for a slotted Clark Y-14, and
rotated by -10 degrees, then the performance of lift coefficient is better at
higher angle of attack values compared to other configurations. The mount of
lift is 1.994 and lift increment is about 45%.
7- Result from ANSYS shows increase in lift coefficient in all results
compare with standard Clark Y-14 (Clean). In table (5.1)
8- When using simulation to evaluate the performance of the airfoils,
it was found that JavaFoil gives higher results compared to ANSYS. In
addition when calculating the lift for ANSYS, the solution does not converge
always and try to reach near the solution but not the exact value at high angle
of attack. For this reason, the lift value is averaged for the last few iterations.
6.3 Recommendation for Future Work

To check the effect of adding other elements on the airfoil, future work
could take into consideration:
1- Studying the effect of using a single slat with flaps
2- Studying the effect of using two slats with flap
3- Studying the effect of using slotted Clark Y-14 with a flap.
4- Studying the effect of using slotted Clark Y-14 with a slat and a flap.
80
References
[1] T. Havar, M. Meyer & H. Fietzek, “High-Lift System”, U.S. Patent No.
20,160,144,947. Washington, DC: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, 2016.
[2] L. K. Loftin, Quest for performance: The evolution of modern aircraft

(No 468), Scientific and Technical Information Branch, National
Aeronautics and Space Administration, 1985.
[3] Anderson JD Jr., Aircraft Performance and Design (Vol. 1), WCB
McGraw Hill, Boston, 1999.
[4] M. P. Patel, Z. H. Sowle, T. C. Corke and C. He, “Autonomous sensing

and control of wing stall using a smart plasma slat”, Journal of aircraft,
44(2), 516-527, 2007.
[5] J. Chesire. (2016, August) What is a spoiler in aviation?. Quora.

[Online]. Available: https://www.quora.com/What-is-a-spoiler-in-aviation.
[6] J.A. Axelson and G.L. Stevens, “Investigation of a Slat in Several

Different Positions on an NACA 64A010 Airfoil for a Wide Range of
Subsonic Mach Numbers”, National Advisory Committee for Aeronaut,
Technical Note 3129, Mar.1954
[7] R.G. Munroe, “Automatic leading edge slat for aircraft,” U.S. Patent No.
4,422,606. Washington, DC: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. 1983.
[8] C.Carnegie, (May, 2008). Wing Design - Level 3 OTHER WING
ADDITIONS,NASA.[Online].Available:http://www.allstar.fiu.edu/aero/win
g33.htm
81
[9] B. Varghese (Jan 14, 2016) Fixed Wing Aircrafts, Aircraft Design.
Slidshar.net.[Online].Available: http://www.slideshare.net/bevarghese/fixed-
wing-aircrafts
[10] A. Dal Monte, M.R. Castelli and E. Benini,” A Retrospective of High-

Lift Device Technology”. In Proceedings of World Academy of Science,
Engineering and Technology (No. 71, p. 1979). World Academy of Science,
Engineering and Technology (WASET), Nov. 2012.
[11] Ahmed Hamid “Experimental and Numerical Study of Modified

Gurney Flap on CLARK Y-14 Airfoil for straight wing,” M.S. thesis,
college of engineering of Alnahrain university, 2014.
[12] V. Prisacariu, and A. Luchian, “The aerodynamic analysis of high lift

devices,” AFASES Proceedings, 1, 2247-3173, 2014.
[13] B. P. Srikavya, A. S. Rao,” Aerodynamic CFD Analysis on High-Lift

Multi-Element Wing of Airbus A380” 2014.
[14] T. A. Talay, Introduction to the Aerodynamics of Flight (Vol 367),
Scientific and Technical Information Office, national aeronautics and space
administration, 1975.
[15] Shruti Nair, Shreya Nair.” Aircraft Braking System” Dept. of
Mechanical and Automation Engineering, Indira Gandhi Delhi Technical.
Nov 2013 - April 2014
[16]Mohammed Kheir-aldeen Abbas, Amer Qader Hameed, " Aerodynmic
Study of a New Configuration Spoiler on a Model Wing in Low Subsonic
Wing Tunnel", International Journal of Art & Humanity Science (IJAHS) e-
ISSN: 2349-5235, Volume 2 Issue 5, PP. 26-3, Sept-Oct 2015
82
[17] I. Kroo, Stanford University, (Jan. 1999), High Lift Systems –
Introduction,[Online].Available:http://adg.stanford.edu/aa241/highlift/highli
ftintro.html
[18] Wikipedia, (March 2016), Leading-edge extension, [Online]. Available:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leading-edge_extension
[19]NASA(May,2015)."What is left ?" [Online]. Available: https://www.grc.

nasa.gov / WWW/K-12/airplane/lift1.html
[20]NASA(5,May,2015).What is drag? [Online] .Available: https://www.grc

.nasa. gov/WWW/k-12/airplane/drag1.html
[21] L. R. LeVie, R. Lisa, “Review of Research On Angle-of-Attack
Indicator Effectiveness”, Langley Research Center, Hampton, Virginia
NASA, 2014.
[22] A. Kaushari, “Boundary layer control using sfcmart materials”,
Research project is funded by ADA under DISMAS scheme, 2005.
[23] Fred Stern (fall 2010 lecture), Boundary Layer, An advanced Fluid
Mechanics Separation of the Boundary Layer, [Online]. Available:"
www.imc.pcz.czest.pl/instytut/pl/3/3.8/materialy/.../afm_bl6a.pdf"
[24] Wikipedia, (April 2016), Stall (fluid mechanics), [Online]. Available:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stall (fluid_mechanics)
[25] W., Fred E and B., Millard J, “Wind-tunnel tests of a Clark Y wing with
a narrow auxiliary airfoil in different positions,” NACA-TR-428, Date
Acquired: Sep 01, 1996, 1933.
83
[26] W., Carl J; A. Shortal, J. “The Aerodynamic Characteristics of a Slotted
Clark Y Wing as Affected by the Auxiliary Airfoil Position”, NACA-TR-
400, Date Acquired: Sep 01, 1996, 1932.
[27] W., Fred E; W., Carl J, “The characteristics of a Clark y wing model
equipped with several forms of low-drag fixed slots,” NACA-TR-407, Date
Acquired: Sep 01, 1996, 1933.
[28] W., Fred E; S., Joseph A, “The effect of multiple fixed slots and a
trailing-edge flap on the lift and drag of a Clark Y airfoil,” NACA-TR-427,
Date Acquired: Sep 01, 1996,
[29] D. Weiner, “Using a Cambered Auxiliary Airfoil to Increase the Lift

and Efficiency of a Clark Airfoil,” Department of Mechanical and
Aeronautical Engineering, Clarkson University, Thesis Proposal, 3/9/2011.
[30] G., William E, “Wind-tunnel tests of a Clark Y wing with 'Maxwell'

leading-edge slots,” NACA-TN-598, Date Acquired: Sep 01, 1996, 1937.
[31] D. Sasaki; A. Ito; T. Ishida; and K. Nakahashi; “Design Optimization of

a Mild-Stall Airfoil/Wing for UAV and PAV Applications,” Conference:
27th AIAA Applied Aerodynamics Conference, June 2009.
[32] P. Makwana B. and J. makadiya J., “Numerical Simulation of Laminar

Flow over Slotted Airfoil,” IOSR Journal of Mechanical and Civil
Engineering (IOSR-JMCE), e-ISSN: 2278-1684,p-ISSN: 2320-334X,
Volume 11, Issue 4 Ver. II, PP 64-71, Jul- Aug. 2014.
[33] Ali K. Al-Abadi, “STUDYING OF FLAPS AND SLATS EFFECTS

ON IMPROVING THE AERODYNAMIC FORCES OF THE WINGS,”
84
The Iraqi Journal For Mechanical And Material Engineering, Vol.11, No.1,
2011
[34] P. PlantinDe Hugues, K. W: McAlister, and C. Tung, "Effect of an

Extendable Slat on the Stall Behavior of a VR-12 Airfoil," NASA Technical
Paper 3407, ATCOM Technical Report 93-A-002, September 1993.
[35] G.Parthasarathy, B. Shishira Nayana, B. Dinesh Kumar,

"Computational Fluid Analysis for High Lift on Multi-Element Airfoil Used
in Civilian Aircraft," International Journal of Science and Research (IJSR),
2013.
[36] A. Prabhakar and A. Ohri, "CFD Analysis on MAV NACA 2412 Wing
in High Lift Take-Off Configuration for Enhanced Lift Generation,"
Aeronaut Aerospace Eng, Volume 2 • Issue 5, 2013.
[37] Anwar J. M. J. and Ali Y. A., “Determination of the Pressure and

Velocity of the flow around an airfoil using Finite Element Method”, 1st
international conference for engineering, 2008.
[38] Jones D.A., and Clark D.B., ''Simulation of a Wing-Body Junction
Experiment using the Fluent Code'', Commonwealth of Australia AR-013-
426, June 2005
[39] F. Fairag, “Numerical computations of viscous, incompressible flow
problems using a two-level finite element method”, SIAM Journal on
Scientific Computing, 24(6), 1919-1929, 2003.
[40] J. J. Bertin and S. Michaell, “ Aerodynamics For Engineers”, United
States Air Force Academy, Prentice-Hall International, Inc., Third Edition,
1998.
85
[41] Taylor C., Hughes T. G., “Finite Element programming of the Navier-
Stokes Equations ”, Pineridge Press Limited, Swansea, 1981.
[42] Chung T. J., “Finite Element Analysis in Fluid Dynamics”, the
University of Alabama in Huntsville, McGraw-HILL, New York, (1978).
[43] James A. L., “Fluid Mechanics”, Cornell University, U. S. A., (1994)
[44] M., Florian R, “Improved two-equation k-omega turbulence models for

aerodynamic flows,” NASA Technical Memorandum 103975, October
1992.
[45] Jones D.A., and Clark D.B., ''Simulation of a Wing-Body Junction
Experiment using the Fluent Code'', Commonwealth of Australia AR-013-
426, June 2005
[46] CFD Online, (9/November/2016), " Introduction to turbulence/Nature
of_turbulence"[Online].Variable:"https://www.cfdonline.com/Wiki/Introduc
tion_to_turbulence/Nature_of_turbulence "
[47] Martin Hepperle, (27.01.2007). JavaFoil — Analysis of Airfoils

[Online]. Available: http://www.mh-aerotools.de/airfoils/javafoil.htm
[48] William Russell Haney, Jr., "DESIGN CRITERIA FOR BULB TYPE
VSING TIPS," M.Sc. thesis, Georgia Institute of Technology, March, 1949.
[49] manual Aerolab Educational Wind Tunnel. U.S.A 2012.
[50]Educational Wind Tunnel (EWT). Operations Manual http://www.

Aerolabcom. 2012.
86
Appendix A
Clark Y14 Drag Coefficient vs AOA

0.8
0.7
0.6
Drag Coefficient (CD)
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
-10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
-0.1
Angle of Attak (AOA)
Airfoil in JavaFoil Airfoil in ANSYS Airfoil + Guide in EWT Airfoil in EWT
Figure 1: Drag Coefficient for Standard Clark Y-14 vs AOA
Javafoil, Clark Y14 + Auxiliary in Front of Leading Edge

1.4
1.2
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
-5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Figure 2: Drag Coefficient for Standard Clark Y-14 + Auxiliary in front of Leading Edge vs AOA in
Javafoil
A-1
ANSYS, Clark Y14 + Auxiliary in Front of Leading Edge
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
-10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Angle of Attack(AOA)
Figure 3: Drag Coefficient for Standard Clark Y-14 + Auxiliary in front of Leading Edge vs AOA in ANSYS
EWT, Clark Y14 + Auxiliary in Front of Leading Edge

1.2
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
-10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Figure 4: Drag Coefficient for Standard Clark Y-14 + Auxiliary in front of Leading Edge vs AOA in EWT
A-2
Javafoil, Clark Y14 with AUX at 20%C
0.9
0.8
Drag Coefficient(CD)
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
-5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Figure 5: Drag Coefficient for Clark Y-14 with auxiliary airfoil located at 20%C in front of Leading Edge
for Javafoil
ANSYS, Clark Y14 with AUX at 20%C

0.8
0.7
Drag Coefficient(CD)
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
-10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Figure 6: Drag Coefficient for Clark Y-14 with Auxiliary airfoil located at 20%C in front of Leading Edge
in ANSYS
A-3
EWT, Clark Y14 with AUX at 20%C
1.2
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
-10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Figure 7: Drag Coefficient for a Clark Y-14 with Auxiliary Airfoil located at 20%C in front of Leading
Edge in EWT
Javafoil, Clark Y14 with AUX above Leading Edge

0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
-5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Figure 8: Drag Coefficient for Clark Y-14 with Auxiliary Airfoil located above Leading Edge in Javafoil
A-4
ANSYS, Clark Y14 with AUX over Leading Edge
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
-10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Figure 9: Drag Coefficient for Clark Y-14 with Auxiliary Airfoil located above Leading Edge in ANSYS
EWT, Clark Y14 with AUX over Leading Edge

1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
-10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25
Figure 10: Drag Coefficient for Clark Y-14 with Auxiliary Airfoil located above Leading Edge in EWT
A-5
Javafoil, Clark Y14 with AUX over Leading Edge Rotated at
Different Angles
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
-5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Figure 11: Drag Coefficient for Clark Y-14 with Auxiliary Airfoil located above Leading Edge by 12mm
and Rotated in Javafoil
ANSYS, Clark Y14 with AUX over Leading Edge and Rotated
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
-10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
and Rotated in ANSYS
A-6
EWT, Clark Y14 with AUX above Leading Edge and Rotated
1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
-10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25
and Rotated in EWT
Javafoil, Clark Y14 with 2 Auxiliaries, First AUX at 20%C at -10

Degrees, Second AUX at 12mm at Different Rotation Angles
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
-5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Figure 14: Drag Coefficient for Clark Y-14 with Two Slats, 1st Slat located at 20%C and Rotated by -10
Degrees. 2nd Slat at 12mm above leading edge in Javafoil
A-7
ANSYS, Clark Y14 with 2 Auxiliaries, First AUX at 20%C at -10
Degrees, Second AUX at 12mm at Different Angles
0.5
0.45
0.4
0.35
0.3
0.25
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
-10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Degrees. 2nd Slat at 12mm above leading edge in ANSYS
EWT, Clark Y14 with 2 Auxiliaries, First AUX at 20%C at -10

Degrees, Second AUX at 12mm at Different Angles
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
-10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Degrees. 2nd Slat at 12mm above leading edge in EWT
A-8
Javafoil, Open & Closed Slot
0.25
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
-5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Figure 17: Drag Coefficient for Open and Closed Slot in Javafoil
ANSYS, Open & Closed Slot

0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
-10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Figure 18: Drag Coefficient for Open and Closed Slot in ANSYS
A-9
EWT, Open & Closed Slot
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
-10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Figure 19: Drag Coefficient for Open and Closed Slot in EWT
Javafoil, Slotted Wing with Auxliary at 12mm

0.35
0.3
0.25
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
-5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Figure 20: Drag Coefficient for Slotted Wing with Auxiliary Airfoil above Leading Edge in Javafoil
A-10
ANSYS, Slotted Wing with Auxliary at 12mm
0.45
0.4
0.35
0.3
0.25
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
-10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Figure 21: Drag Coefficient for Slotted Wing with Auxiliary Airfoil above Leading Edge in ANSYS
EWT, Slotted Wing with Auxliary at 12mm

1.2
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
-10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Figure 22: Drag Coefficient for Slotted Wing with Auxiliary Airfoil above Leading Edge in EWT
A-11
Javafoil, Optimum Position for Different Configurations
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
-5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Figure 23: Drag Coefficient for Optimum Positions and Configurations in Javafoil
ANSYS, Optimum Position for Different Configurations

0.8
Drag Coeefficient (CD)
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
-10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Figure 24: Drag Coefficient for Optimum Positions and Configurations in ANSYS
A-12
EWT, Optimum Position for Different Configurations
1.2
Drag Coeefficient (CD)
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
-10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Figure 25: Drag Coefficient for Optimum Positions and Configurations in EWT
A-13
Appendix B
Table 1: Javafoil, ANSYS, EWT, Lift Coefficient (CL) and Drag Coefficient (CD)
for Clark Y-14
Standard Clark Y Standard Clark Y 14 Standard Clark Y 14 WITH Standard Clark Y 14
14 in Javafoil in ANSYS OUT GUIDE in EWT WITH GUIDE in EWT
α CL Cd α CL CD α CL CD α CL CD
[°] [-] [-] [°] [-] [-] [°] [-] [-] [°] [-] [-]
-3.5 0.001 0.013 -5 -0.2140 0.025 -5.1 0.009 -0.017 -5.1 0.004 0.043
-2.5 0.11 0.018 0 0.3893 0.021 -4.9 0.015 -0.016 0 0.465 0.094
-1.5 0.22 0.018 5 0.8423 0.030 0 0.350 0.032 0.1 0.477 0.096
-0.5 0.329 0.019 10 1.2683 0.054 5 0.721 0.106 5 0.910 0.169
0.5 0.437 0.019 15 1.4234 0.140 10 1.087 0.201 9.9 1.156 0.231
1.5 0.545 0.020 20 1.2684 0.314 15 1.183 0.255 10 1.149 0.229
2.5 0.653 0.022 25 1.1183 0.387 15.7 1.193 0.266 15 1.275 0.290
3.5 0.759 0.023 16.1 1.189 0.266 19.9 1.292 0.398
4.5 0.864 0.024 16.2 1.190 0.274 22.1 1.173 0.670
5.5 0.966 0.026 16.8 1.200 0.290 25.4 1.032 0.760
6.5 1.064 0.029 17.1 1.193 0.295
7.5 1.156 0.032 19.1 1.206 0.342
8.5 1.241 0.036 20.8 1.197 0.393
9.5 1.317 0.040 25.4 0.884 0.686
10.5 1.379 0.045
11.5 1.427 0.051
12.5 1.461 0.060
13.5 1.483 0.069
14.5 1.491 0.081
15.5 1.486 0.095
16.5 1.468 0.114
17.5 1.443 0.133
18.5 1.392 0.163
19.5 1.337 0.194
20.5 1.297 0.216
21.5 1.25 0.246
22.5 1.206 0.266
23.5 1.156 0.294
24.5 1.105 0.329
Table 2: Javafoil, Lift Coefficient (CL) for Clark Y-14 with Auxiliary at Different
Position Forward
Angle 0%C at 0 ° 5%C at 0 ° 10%C at 0 ° 15%C at 0 ° 20%C at 0 °
α CL CL CL CL CL
[°] [-] [-] [-] [-] [-]
-3.5 0.034 0.014 0.003 -0.002 -0.005
-2.5 0.166 0.15 0.14 0.135 0.133
-1.5 0.298 0.286 0.277 0.273 0.271
-0.5 0.432 0.421 0.414 0.411 0.41
0.5 0.56 0.552 0.548 0.546 0.546
1.5 0.686 0.683 0.681 0.681 0.682
B-1
2.5 0.806 0.81 0.811 0.813 0.815
3.5 0.913 0.927 0.936 0.94 0.944
4.5 1.003 1.03 1.048 1.058 1.067
5.5 1.072 1.11 1.145 1.162 1.177
6.5 1.134 1.184 1.223 1.246 1.271
7.5 1.18 1.243 1.293 1.325 1.352
8.5 1.213 1.287 1.349 1.389 1.425
9.5 1.238 1.32 1.392 1.441 1.485
10.5 1.256 1.345 1.426 1.482 1.534
11.5 1.271 1.366 1.453 1.516 1.574
12.5 1.285 1.384 1.477 1.544 1.607
13.5 1.299 1.401 1.499 1.57 1.634
14.5 1.309 1.417 1.52 1.594 1.657
15.5 1.32 1.43 1.54 1.616 1.676
16.5 1.333 1.444 1.556 1.632 1.693
17.5 1.347 1.46 1.574 1.646 1.701
18.5 1.362 1.477 1.592 1.654 1.708
19.5 1.377 1.495 1.609 1.665 1.713
20.5 1.393 1.513 1.624 1.675 1.716
21.5 1.408 1.53 1.63 1.682 1.715
22.5 1.417 1.547 1.64 1.687 1.711
23.5 1.43 1.564 1.648 1.689 1.705
24.5 1.441 1.569 1.655 1.689 1.694
Table 3 :Javafoil, Drag Coefficient (Cd) for Clark Y14 with Auxiliary at Different
Position Forward
Angle 0%Cat 0 ° 5%C at 0 ° 10%C at 0 ° 15%C at 0 ° 20%C at 0 °
α Cd Cd Cd Cd Cd
[°] [-] [-] [-] [-] [-]
-3.5 0.02235 0.01962 0.02 0.02024 0.02043
-2.5 0.0226 0.02303 0.02356 0.02395 0.02425
-1.5 0.02336 0.02322 0.02358 0.02373 0.02395
-0.5 0.02447 0.02443 0.0246 0.02477 0.02483
0.5 0.02612 0.02613 0.02607 0.02609 0.02603
1.5 0.02851 0.02813 0.02792 0.02784 0.0279
2.5 0.03205 0.03099 0.03034 0.0302 0.02987
3.5 0.03611 0.03484 0.0338 0.03322 0.03275
4.5 0.04115 0.03925 0.03801 0.03714 0.03703
5.5 0.04314 0.04138 0.0433 0.04176 0.04098
6.5 0.05182 0.04854 0.04496 0.04449 0.04636
7.5 0.06099 0.05749 0.05372 0.05125 0.04874
8.5 0.07649 0.06994 0.06482 0.06133 0.058
9.5 0.09144 0.0845 0.07835 0.07102 0.06842
10.5 0.11626 0.10582 0.09617 0.08791 0.08128
11.5 0.14079 0.13211 0.11401 0.10721 0.09868
12.5 0.1771 0.15954 0.13471 0.13058 0.12059
13.5 0.21047 0.19279 0.16478 0.15867 0.14436
14.5 0.27037 0.24235 0.21729 0.18938 0.17687
15.5 0.31441 0.27352 0.24829 0.21999 0.20887
16.5 0.38647 0.34037 0.27604 0.27733 0.23766
B-2
17.5 0.46627 0.4147 0.37083 0.30413 0.29271
18.5 0.55504 0.45251 0.38822 0.36754 0.35685
19.5 0.60239 0.5289 0.46222 0.43438 0.37066
20.5 0.70598 0.63725 0.55593 0.52612 0.43183
21.5 0.82514 0.73363 0.61626 0.57701 0.49712
22.5 1.01325 0.91549 0.75539 0.67385 0.63547
23.5 1.10311 1.06261 0.78942 0.76114 0.71123
24.5 1.23571 1.13973 0.90461 0.84255 0.78661
Table 4: Javafoil, Lift Coefficient (CL) for Clark Y14 with

Auxiliary at Different Position Forward at 0°, -5°, and -10 °
Angle 20%C at 0 ° 20%C at -5 ° 20%C at -10 °
α CL CL CL
[°] [-] [-] [-]
-3.5 -0.005 -0.055 -0.083
-2.5 0.133 0.076 0.036
-1.5 0.271 0.21 0.161
-0.5 0.41 0.347 0.291
0.5 0.546 0.484 0.421
1.5 0.682 0.621 0.557
2.5 0.815 0.757 0.693
3.5 0.944 0.892 0.829
4.5 1.067 1.025 0.963
5.5 1.177 1.155 1.096
6.5 1.271 1.279 1.228
7.5 1.352 1.392 1.357
8.5 1.425 1.491 1.48
9.5 1.485 1.568 1.594
10.5 1.534 1.642 1.693
11.5 1.574 1.699 1.776
12.5 1.607 1.743 1.834
13.5 1.634 1.774 1.888
14.5 1.657 1.796 1.924
15.5 1.676 1.81 1.944
16.5 1.693 1.818 1.952
17.5 1.701 1.822 1.951
18.5 1.708 1.822 1.942
19.5 1.713 1.818 1.928
20.5 1.716 1.806 1.909
21.5 1.715 1.793 1.886
22.5 1.711 1.777 1.861
23.5 1.705 1.76 1.829
24.5 1.694 1.739 1.794
Table 5: Javafoil, Drag Coefficient (CD) for Clark Y14 with

Auxiliary at Different Position Forward at 0°, -5°, and -10 °
Angle 20%C at 0 ° 20%C at -5 ° 20%C -10 °
α Cd Cd Cd
[°] [-] [-] [-]
-3.5 0.02043 0.02733 0.03563
B-3
-2.5 0.02425 0.02597 0.03152
-1.5 0.02395 0.02539 0.02897
-0.5 0.02483 0.02524 0.02752
0.5 0.02603 0.02513 0.0256
1.5 0.0279 0.02611 0.026
2.5 0.02987 0.02757 0.02776
3.5 0.03275 0.03018 0.02873
4.5 0.03703 0.03188 0.03029
5.5 0.04098 0.03482 0.03229
6.5 0.04636 0.03863 0.03474
7.5 0.04874 0.04307 0.03787
8.5 0.058 0.04858 0.04173
9.5 0.06842 0.05188 0.04688
10.5 0.08128 0.05954 0.05277
11.5 0.09868 0.06989 0.05964
12.5 0.12059 0.08183 0.065
13.5 0.14436 0.09931 0.07484
14.5 0.17687 0.12046 0.08754
15.5 0.20887 0.1434 0.10379
16.5 0.23766 0.16335 0.12198
17.5 0.29271 0.19306 0.14729
18.5 0.35685 0.24249 0.17482
19.5 0.37066 0.27235 0.20215
20.5 0.43183 0.33174 0.23749
21.5 0.49712 0.39671 0.27192
22.5 0.63547 0.46733 0.32968
23.5 0.71123 0.54236 0.37329
24.5 0.78661 0.62067 0.45158
Table 6: Javafoil, Lift Coefficient (CL) for Clark Y-14

with Auxiliary above Leading Edge at 4, 6, 8, 10, 12mm
Angle 4mm 6mm 8mm 10mm 12mm
α CL CL CL CL CL
[°] [-] [-] [-] [-] [-]
-3.5 0.068 0.068 0.067 0.067 0.066
-2.5 0.181 0.182 0.183 0.183 0.183
-1.5 0.293 0.296 0.298 0.299 0.3
-0.5 0.405 0.409 0.413 0.415 0.417
0.5 0.511 0.52 0.525 0.529 0.532
1.5 0.613 0.627 0.636 0.641 0.646
2.5 0.71 0.729 0.742 0.751 0.758
3.5 0.797 0.824 0.842 0.856 0.866
4.5 0.871 0.913 0.937 0.955 0.968
5.5 0.948 0.991 1.023 1.047 1.065
6.5 1.018 1.062 1.102 1.131 1.154
7.5 0.98 1.131 1.17 1.207 1.234
8.5 1.024 1.193 1.237 1.272 1.307
9.5 1.061 1.246 1.295 1.335 1.368
10.5 1.092 1.154 1.345 1.388 1.424
11.5 1.119 1.183 1.236 1.433 1.472
B-4
12.5 1.139 1.206 1.262 1.469 1.51
13.5 1.155 1.224 1.28 1.328 1.373
14.5 1.167 1.236 1.292 1.341 1.382
15.5 1.174 1.243 1.299 1.346 1.387
16.5 1.176 1.244 1.3 1.346 1.387
17.5 1.175 1.241 1.295 1.341 1.38
18.5 1.17 1.234 1.285 1.33 1.367
19.5 1.16 1.221 1.271 1.312 1.349
20.5 1.146 1.205 1.252 1.291 1.325
21.5 1.128 1.184 1.228 1.265 1.297
22.5 1.099 1.159 1.201 1.235 1.265
23.5 1.065 1.123 1.17 1.202 1.23
24.5 1.027 1.082 1.126 1.162 1.192
Table 7: Javafoil, Drag Coefficient (CD) for Clark Y-14 with

Auxiliary above Leading Edge at 4, 6, 8, 10, 12mm
α CD CD CD CD CD
[°] [-] [-] [-] [-] [-]
-3.5 0.02302 0.02013 0.02002 0.02046 0.02062
-2.5 0.02418 0.02111 0.02097 0.02145 0.02144
-1.5 0.02255 0.02563 0.0255 0.02616 0.0262
-0.5 0.02802 0.02739 0.02719 0.02779 0.02769
0.5 0.03103 0.02989 0.02583 0.02969 0.02939
1.5 0.03406 0.03315 0.03217 0.0321 0.03157
2.5 0.03737 0.03642 0.03605 0.03558 0.03437
3.5 0.04091 0.03966 0.03919 0.03842 0.03768
4.5 0.04263 0.04371 0.04367 0.0427 0.04175
5.5 0.0473 0.0511 0.04812 0.04671 0.04561
6.5 0.05454 0.05179 0.05491 0.05325 0.05161
7.5 0.07919 0.05715 0.05578 0.05859 0.05709
8.5 0.09184 0.06499 0.06159 0.05974 0.06318
9.5 0.10681 0.07357 0.06857 0.06673 0.06448
10.5 0.12383 0.11322 0.07928 0.07455 0.07112
11.5 0.13808 0.13159 0.12306 0.08365 0.07874
12.5 0.16087 0.15098 0.14068 0.09379 0.08949
13.5 0.1835 0.17157 0.1628 0.15457 0.1451
14.5 0.20567 0.19113 0.18305 0.17512 0.16787
15.5 0.23803 0.21638 0.21033 0.20037 0.19317
16.5 0.27415 0.252 0.23967 0.22331 0.21543
17.5 0.31047 0.27656 0.26823 0.25162 0.24314
18.5 0.34885 0.31497 0.30194 0.28147 0.27468
19.5 0.38953 0.35305 0.33389 0.3172 0.30604
20.5 0.4286 0.39492 0.37549 0.35363 0.35148
21.5 0.46221 0.43597 0.41988 0.39163 0.37929
22.5 0.5018 0.48089 0.46706 0.4387 0.42111
23.5 0.57816 0.54927 0.51438 0.48744 0.47261
24.5 0.61775 0.59194 0.54973 0.5349 0.52237
B-5
Table 8: Javafoil, Lift Coefficient (CL) for Clark Y14 with
Auxiliary above Leading Edge at 12mm at 0°, -5°, and -10°
Angle 0° -5 ° -10 °
α CL CL CL
[°] [-] [-] [-]
-3.5 0.066 0.018 -0.016
-2.5 0.183 0.135 0.097
-1.5 0.3 0.253 0.21
-0.5 0.417 0.37 0.317
0.5 0.532 0.486 0.43
1.5 0.646 0.603 0.545
2.5 0.758 0.718 0.659
3.5 0.866 0.834 0.772
4.5 0.968 0.948 0.884
5.5 1.065 1.061 0.996
6.5 1.154 1.171 1.105
7.5 1.234 1.276 1.208
8.5 1.307 1.378 1.306
9.5 1.368 1.473 1.4
10.5 1.424 1.559 1.485
11.5 1.472 1.633 1.56
12.5 1.51 1.695 1.627
13.5 1.373 1.742 1.682
14.5 1.382 1.775 1.724
15.5 1.387 1.75 1.748
16.5 1.387 1.628 1.751
17.5 1.38 1.626 1.714
18.5 1.367 1.613 1.693
19.5 1.349 1.594 1.694
20.5 1.325 1.567 1.688
21.5 1.297 1.533 1.67
22.5 1.265 1.492 1.645
23.5 1.23 1.447 1.612
24.5 1.192 1.399 1.573
Table 9: Javafoil, Drag Coefficient (CD) for Clark Y-14

with Auxiliary above Leading Edge at 12mm at 0°, -5°,
and -10°
Angle 0° -5 ° -10 °
α CD CD CD
[°] [-] [-] [-]
-3.5 0.02062 0.01972 0.03178
-2.5 0.02144 0.02445 0.03118
-1.5 0.0262 0.02472 0.02999
-0.5 0.02769 0.02789 0.03316
0.5 0.02939 0.02922 0.03423
1.5 0.03157 0.03086 0.03545
2.5 0.03437 0.03269 0.03701
3.5 0.03768 0.03488 0.0377
4.5 0.04175 0.03712 0.03963
B-6
5.5 0.04561 0.03986 0.04188
6.5 0.05161 0.04326 0.04797
7.5 0.05709 0.04849 0.0491
8.5 0.06318 0.05384 0.05375
9.5 0.06448 0.05898 0.05842
10.5 0.07112 0.06428 0.06356
11.5 0.07874 0.07046 0.06939
12.5 0.08949 0.07726 0.07633
13.5 0.1451 0.08517 0.08483
14.5 0.16787 0.09428 0.09501
15.5 0.19317 0.11311 0.10909
16.5 0.21543 0.17977 0.12955
17.5 0.24314 0.2033 0.16893
18.5 0.27468 0.22146 0.20353
19.5 0.30604 0.24341 0.22689
20.5 0.35148 0.27104 0.25011
21.5 0.37929 0.29865 0.27446
22.5 0.42111 0.3312 0.30317
23.5 0.47261 0.35985 0.33515
24.5 0.52237 0.39885 0.36492
Table 10: Javafoil, Lift Coefficient (CL) for Clark Y14

with Two Auxiliary, AUX1 Forward 20%C at -10 ° &
AUX2 at above Leading Edge at 12mm at 0°, -5°, and -10°
Angle 0° -5 ° -10 °
α CL CL CL
[°] [-] [-] [-]
-3.5 -0.006 -0.098 -0.056
-2.5 0.121 0.021 0.069
-1.5 0.255 0.142 0.2
-0.5 0.393 0.274 0.336
0.5 0.531 0.407 0.473
1.5 0.673 0.547 0.616
2.5 0.814 0.688 0.758
3.5 0.954 0.828 0.9
4.5 1.092 0.968 1.041
5.5 1.228 1.106 1.181
6.5 1.36 1.243 1.32
7.5 1.486 1.377 1.454
8.5 1.603 1.506 1.583
9.5 1.705 1.626 1.7
10.5 1.79 1.733 1.803
11.5 1.852 1.821 1.882
12.5 1.907 1.887 1.954
13.5 1.946 1.945 2.012
14.5 1.97 1.99 2.057
15.5 1.983 2.02 2.088
16.5 1.988 2.04 2.11
17.5 1.986 2.053 2.126
18.5 1.98 2.06 2.136
B-7
19.5 1.971 2.064 2.143
20.5 1.958 2.064 2.147
21.5 1.939 2.063 2.147
22.5 1.919 2.058 2.138
23.5 1.716 2.049 2.127
24.5 1.692 2.037 2.111
Table 11: Javafoil, Drag Coefficient (CD) for Clark Y14

Angle 0° -5 ° -10 °
α CD CD CD
[°] [-] [-] [-]
-3.5 0.03694 0.04111 0.04874
-2.5 0.0337 0.03947 0.04404
-1.5 0.03583 0.03742 0.0436
-0.5 0.03556 0.03649 0.04235
0.5 0.03471 0.03511 0.0406
1.5 0.03708 0.03717 0.04138
2.5 0.03834 0.03797 0.04349
3.5 0.04091 0.04053 0.0447
4.5 0.04358 0.04236 0.04654
5.5 0.04818 0.04517 0.04912
6.5 0.05221 0.04814 0.05097
7.5 0.05713 0.05205 0.05792
8.5 0.06319 0.05705 0.06228
9.5 0.06998 0.06271 0.06776
10.5 0.07784 0.0693 0.07403
11.5 0.08506 0.07421 0.0782
12.5 0.09646 0.08429 0.08324
13.5 0.11091 0.09707 0.09649
14.5 0.127 0.11023 0.10898
15.5 0.14684 0.12948 0.12515
16.5 0.17056 0.15469 0.14675
17.5 0.20297 0.1732 0.17034
18.5 0.24116 0.21011 0.19811
19.5 0.27682 0.24536 0.23497
20.5 0.31071 0.27911 0.26951
21.5 0.35501 0.3204 0.3041
22.5 0.42121 0.39348 0.3764
23.5 0.61394 0.41824 0.41641
24.5 0.70486 0.48556 0.48732
Table 12: Javafoil, Lift Coefficient (CL) Open

& Close Slot
Angle Closed Slot Open Slot
α CL CL
[°] [-] [-]
-3.5 -0.203 -0.086
-2.5 -0.148 -0.01
B-8
-1.5 -0.082 0.046
-0.5 -0.005 0.113
0.5 0.081 0.183
1.5 0.173 0.257
2.5 0.27 0.407
3.5 0.37 0.503
4.5 0.471 0.605
5.5 0.57 0.603
6.5 0.664 0.705
7.5 0.757 0.812
8.5 0.847 0.922
9.5 0.934 1.034
10.5 1.02 1.145
11.5 1.266 1.255
12.5 1.174 1.355
13.5 1.237 1.453
14.5 1.29 1.548
15.5 1.33 1.638
16.5 1.362 1.725
17.5 1.382 1.807
18.5 1.39 1.882
19.5 1.388 1.946
20.5 1.376 2.002
21.5 1.347 2.044
22.5 1.303 2.078
23.5 1.252 2.112
24.5 1.196 2.12
25.5 1.136 2.136
26.5 1.081 2.144
Table 13: Javafoil, Drag Coefficient (CD) Open & Close Slot
α CD CD
[°] [-] [-]
-3.5 0.04897 0.20479
-2.5 0.0404 0.16268
-1.5 0.03429 0.15009
-0.5 0.02985 0.13155
0.5 0.02621 0.11385
1.5 0.02389 0.1009
2.5 0.0229 0.06661
3.5 0.02246 0.05801
4.5 0.02288 0.05219
5.5 0.02406 0.05129
6.5 0.02585 0.04754
7.5 0.02825 0.04759
8.5 0.03125 0.04842
9.5 0.03504 0.05198
10.5 0.03972 0.05577
11.5 0.03093 0.0611
B-9
12.5 0.04772 0.06651
13.5 0.05262 0.07396
14.5 0.0581 0.08237
15.5 0.06517 0.09133
16.5 0.07192 0.10229
17.5 0.07926 0.12213
18.5 0.08736 0.13644
19.5 0.09621 0.15419
20.5 0.10587 0.16919
21.5 0.1165 0.19013
22.5 0.12835 0.21045
23.5 0.14137 0.22983
Table 14: Javafoil, Lift Coefficient (CL) Open & Closed Slot with
Auxiliary above Leading Edge 12mm with 0°, -10°, and -20 °
Angle 0° -10 ° -20 °
α CL CL CL
[°] [-] [-] [-]
-3.5 -0.045 -0.082 0.089
-2.5 0.033 -0.044 0.069
-1.5 0.113 0.026 0.128
-0.5 0.195 0.097 0.189
0.5 0.256 0.171 0.252
1.5 0.333 0.249 0.319
2.5 0.443 0.417 0.37
3.5 0.537 0.411 0.447
4.5 0.636 0.504 0.529
5.5 0.74 0.604 0.618
6.5 0.848 0.709 0.713
7.5 0.883 0.819 0.814
8.5 0.988 0.931 0.917
9.5 1.093 1.045 1.022
10.5 1.198 1.158 1.125
11.5 1.301 1.269 1.225
12.5 1.396 1.371 1.328
13.5 1.488 1.469 1.429
14.5 1.578 1.565 1.528
15.5 1.666 1.656 1.622
16.5 1.747 1.744 1.711
17.5 1.813 1.826 1.795
18.5 1.86 1.902 1.873
19.5 1.899 1.967 1.939
20.5 1.928 2.022 1.994
21.5 1.952 2.068 2.041
22.5 1.967 2.108 2.079
23.5 1.968 2.144 2.107
24.5 1.968 2.163 2.027
25.5 1.964 2.176 2.018
26.5 1.953 2.189 2.025
B-10
Table 15: Javafoil, Drag Coefficient (CD) Open & Closed Slot
with Auxiliary above Leading Edge 12mm with 0, -10, and -20 °
Angle 0° -10 ° -20 °
α CD CD CD
[°] [-] [-] [-]
-3.5 0.17927 0.21823 0.30283
-2.5 0.16759 0.1998 0.28493
-1.5 0.14233 0.17952 0.22816
-0.5 0.10658 0.14843 0.22165
0.5 0.11002 0.12845 0.16631
1.5 0.09402 0.11861 0.14834
2.5 0.06945 0.08047 0.13908
3.5 0.058 0.07566 0.12089
4.5 0.0531 0.08034 0.11872
5.5 0.04958 0.07433 0.11131
6.5 0.04789 0.07251 0.10615
7.5 0.07034 0.07342 0.10816
8.5 0.07418 0.07591 0.11009
9.5 0.07904 0.08234 0.11219
10.5 0.08639 0.08701 0.11648
11.5 0.09564 0.08995 0.12128
12.5 0.10527 0.0943 0.12916
13.5 0.11857 0.10325 0.13986
14.5 0.13233 0.11765 0.14395
15.5 0.14606 0.12812 0.15596
16.5 0.1614 0.13993 0.17691
17.5 0.17968 0.15994 0.18112
18.5 0.19907 0.17622 0.19759
19.5 0.22074 0.19263 0.21085
20.5 0.24538 0.21179 0.23019
21.5 0.26578 0.23483 0.24679
22.5 0.2938 0.25537 0.25144
Table 16: ANSYS, Lift Coefficient (CL) for Clark Y14 with Auxiliary at
Different Position Forward
Angle 0%C at 0° 5%C at 0° 10%C at 0° 15%C at 0° 20%Cat 0°
α CL CL CL CL CL
[°] [-] [-] [-] [-] [-]
-5 -0.15544 -0.17652 -0.18902 -0.20859 -0.21232
0 0.33073 0.28181 0.2914 0.31181 0.31631
5 0.7838 0.768258 0.72953 0.7301 0.72247
10 1.087235 1.186488 1.134170 1.089156 1.090087
15 1.165584 1.431703 1.373445 1.293056 1.1627176
20 1.254108 1.223826 1.183302 1.182688 1.358069
25 1.393271 1.540615 1.477035 1.470201 1.57
Table 17: ANSYS, Drag Coefficient (CD) for Clark Y14 with Auxiliary at
Different Position Forward
Angle 0%C 0 ° 5%C 0 ° 10%C 0 ° 15%C 0° 20%C 0 °
α CD CD CD CD CD
B-11
[°] [-] [-] [-] [-] [-]
-5 0.025187 0.026861 0.026411 0.025773 0.024814
0 0.021785 0.022507 0.021913 0.022687 0.022734
5 0.047773 0.043110745 0.041892 0.03975 0.037761
10 0.163132941 0.126658235 0.108567451 0.0969966 0.085273824
15 0.275824488 0.259346078 0.238626667 0.2097994 0.19189549
20 0.457821609 0.419598627 0.418405294 0.3896649 0.395786816
25 0.789047326 0.652242745 0.670712353 0.6739084 0.685273762
Table 18: ANSYS, Lift Coefficient (CL) for Clark Y14 with
Auxiliary at Different Position Forward at 0, -5, and -10 °
Angle 20%C at 0 ° 20%C at -5 ° 20%C at -10 °
α CL CL CL
[°] [-] [-] [-]
-5 -0.21232 -0.09916351 -0.178415882
0 0.31631 0.244925917 0.19698
5 0.72247 0.66945 0.64435
10 1.090087059 1.0643 0.95052
15 1.162717647 1.15234902 1.1112
20 1.358069154 1.064116471 1.204869524
25 1.57 1.410211111 1.6055
Table 19: ANSYS, Drag Coefficient (CD) for Clark Y14 with
Auxiliary at Different Position Forward at 0, -5, and -10 °
Angle 20%C at 0 ° 20%C at -5 ° 20%C -10 °
α CD CD CD
[°] [-] [-] [-]
-5 0.024814 0.040614902 0.055065529
0 0.022734 0.021554273 0.02623
5 0.037761 0.028055 0.026254
10 0.085273824 0.065285 4.85E-02
15 0.19189549 0.162107451 0.13075
20 0.395786816 0.314870392 0.234300952
25 0.685273762 0.610045079 0.62975
Table 20: ANSYS, Lift Coefficient (CL) for Clark Y14 with Auxiliary above
Leading Edge at 4, 6, 8, 10, 12mm
α CL CL CL CL CL
[°] [-] [-] [-] [-] [-]
-5 -0.0946 -0.10027 -0.10035 -0.10035 -0.10203
0 0.34932 0.35361 0.35835 0.35042 0.32187
5 0.67864 0.72881 0.72232 0.72738 0.73745
10 0.55426 1.014 0.97917 1.007 1.0358
15 0.81118 1.1844 0.87091 1.0454 0.97483
20 1.0302 1.1979 1.1305 1.343 1.1001
25 1.2779 1.3105 1.399 1.2284 1.47012
B-12
Table 21: ANSYS, Drag Coefficient (CD) for Clark Y14 with Auxiliary
above Leading Edge at 4, 6, 8, 10, 12mm
α CD CD CD CD CD
[°] [-] [-] [-] [-] [-]
-5 0.023807 0.022559 0.023024 0.023251 0.023297
0 0.02662 0.025666 0.025824 0.023635 0.022616
5 0.072294 0.052407 0.047131 0.043857 0.041841
10 0.18003 0.20003 0.1716 0.13843 0.12123
15 0.29609 0.36666 0.25528 0.25335 0.22374
20 0.50366 0.41783 0.52244 0.42787 0.32951
25 0.71119 0.65813 0.79798 0.61541 0.48446
Angle 0° -5 ° -10 °
α CL CL CL
[°] [-] [-] [-]
-5 -0.10203 -0.15201 -0.20378
0 0.32187 0.28535 0.22848
5 0.73745 0.76835 0.69056
10 1.0358 1.0404 0.9791
15 0.97483 1.0956 1.0141
20 1.1001 1.1117 1.2017
25 1.47012 1.3322 1.5034
Table 23: ANSYS, Drag Coefficient (CD) for Clark Y14 with
Angle 0° -5 ° -10 °
α CD CD CD
[°] [-] [-] [-]
-5 0.023297 0.023258 0.030254
0 0.022616 0.022389 0.024905
5 0.041841 0.033668 0.035183
10 0.12123 0.058579 0.04977
15 0.22374 0.14643 0.1049
20 0.32951 0.26456 0.2239
25 0.48446 0.39646 0.37953
Two Auxiliary, AUX1 Forward 20%C at -10 ° & AUX2 at
above Leading Edge at 12mm at 0°, -5°, and -10°
Angle 0° -5 ° -10 °
α CL CL CL
[°] [-] [-] [-]
-5 -0.09247 -0.1687 -0.14297
0 0.25893 0.20909 0.14916
5 0.66334 0.63809 0.57779
10 0.9928 0.95258 0.88372
B-13
15 1.2245 1.2856 1.1028
20 1.1794 1.061 1.2053
25 1.2586 1.2462 1.3056
Table 25: ANSYS, Drag Coefficient (CD) for Clark Y14

Angle 0° -5 ° -10 °
α CD CD CD
[°] [-] [-] [-]
-5 0.046679 0.056089 0.066145
0 0.026353 0.026635 0.030503
5 0.036506 0.030419 0.032356
10 0.067717 0.049923 0.046829
15 0.21424 0.099689 0.11153
20 0.31675 0.23783 0.19319
25 0.47141 0.32339 0.41448
Table 26: ANSYS, Lift Coefficient (CL) Open & Close Slot
α CL CL
[°] [-] [-]
-5 -0.28088 -0.0248
0 0.28882 0.19001
5 0.80845 0.52951
10 1.2812 0.89498
15 1.4594 1.2878
20 1.3526 1.5148
25 1.5248 1.6592
Table 27: ANSYS, Drag Coefficient (CD) Open & Close Slot
α CD CD
[°] [-] [-]
-5 0.031862 0.082967
0 0.024213 0.036008
5 0.036685 0.04145
10 0.053813 0.055904
15 0.1328 0.08919
20 0.28609 0.16607
25 0.72813 0.34801
Table 28: ANSYS, Lift Coefficient (CL) Open & Close Slot with
Angle 0° -10 ° -20 °
α CL CL CL
[°] [-] [-] [-]
-5 0.061611 -0.05674 -0.06145
B-14
0 0.2908 0.27761 0.090374
5 0.71941 0.80868 0.28715
10 1.0723 1.2431 0.6761
15 1.2663 1.4785 0.88766
20 1.3418 1.6596 1.2562
25 1.6078 1.7387 1.5608
Table 29: ANSYS, Drag Coefficient (CD) Open & Close Slot with
Angle 0° -10 ° -20 °
α CD CD CD
[°] [-] [-] [-]
-5 0.073865 0.072542 0.13309
0 0.044134 0.038052 0.091547
5 0.044481 0.04891 0.081535
10 0.10446 0.066279 0.099571
15 0.19326 0.089225 0.14109
20 0.2887 0.16394 0.16271
25 0.41641 0.28348 0.22384
Table 30: EWT, Lift Coefficient (CL) for Clark Y-14 with Auxiliary at Different Position Forward
Angle 0%C 0 ° Angle 5%C 0 ° Angle 10%C 0 ° Angle 15%C 0 ° Angle 20%C 0 °
α CL α CL α CL α CL α CL
[°] [-] [°] [-] [°] [-] [°] [-] [°] [-]
-5.1 -0.08725 -4.9 -0.081096 -4.9 -0.072110 -5.2 -0.0977518 -4.9 -0.089270
0 0.419512 0 0.407343 0 0.4135544 -5.1 -0.1259602 0 0.41557
5 0.890636 0.1 0.42423 5 0.9041804 -0.1 0.4004208 0.1 0.434194
5.4 0.91301 5 0.895764 7.7 1.157614 0 0.4091143 5 0.887089
6.4 1.004310 10 1.289904 10 1.3160464 5 0.8833826 10 1.266632
7.2 1.042573 12.6 1.273088 13 1.3376999 7.4 1.0267393 15 1.467380
9.9 1.050887 15 1.335649 15 1.410257 7.5 1.0248174 19.1 1.649771
14.9 1.270694 17.1 1.307767 17.5 1.533048 10 1.1865694 21 1.71977
17 1.314679 17.2 1.313774 18.6 1.549401 12.5 1.3021393 21.1 1.543477
17.1 1.316063 19.2 1.191774 18.7 1.572880 12.6 1.2984388 25.4 1.371855
20 1.350260 20.2 1.150721 19.9 1.424361 15 1.4240862
22.2 1.329819 22.4 1.192619 17.5 1.5548429
24.3 1.312946 22.5 1.188094 18.9 1.6212241
24.4 1.309384 19 1.6268492
19.5 1.68879833
22.7 1.3312084
Table 31: EWT, Drag Coefficient (CD) for Clark Y-14 with Auxiliary at Different Position Forward
Angle 0%C 0 ° Angle 5%C 0 ° Angle 10%C 0 ° Angle 15%C 0 ° Angle 20%C 0 °
α CD α CD α CD α CD α CD
[°] [-] [°] [-] [°] [-] [°] [-] [°] [-]
-5.1 0.0491 -4.9 0.049789 -5 0.051923 -5.2 0.054543 -4.9 0.048242751
0 0.1141 0 0.107751 -4.9 0.050415 -5.1 0.044829 0 0.110012054
5 0.2257 0.1 0.112248 0 0.1068715 -0.1 0.104890 0.1 0.11632055
B-15
5.4 0.22673 5 0.221541 5 0.218817 0 0.1100954 5 0.214827235
6.4 0.25901 10 0.370811 7.7 0.301930 5 0.2166058 10 0.347128781
7.2 0.26389 12.6 0.461024 10 0.350651 7.4 0.267291 15 0.48803202
9.9 0.34395 15 0.521558 13 0.460431 7.5 0.271153 19.1 0.600364196
14.9 0.55512 17.1 0.714799 15 0.512278 10 0.3309038 21 0.655948992
17 0.69081 17.2 0.663521 17.5 0.590094 12.5 0.422568 21.1 0.843832262
17.1 0.69767 19.2 0.761467 18.6 0.757213 12.6 0.422202 25.4 1.070577295
20 0.86667 20.2 0.767750 18.7 0.698557 15 0.490044
22.2 0.96016 22.4 0.885073 19.9 0.799317 17.5 0.5616093
24.3 1.04922 22.5 0.882020 18.9 0.608407
24.4 1.04888 19 0.608544
19.5 0.804245
22.7 0.8822511
Table 32: EWT, Lift Coefficient (CL) for Clark Y14 with Auxiliary at Different
Position Forward at 0, -5, and -10 °
Angle 20%C at 0 ° Angle 20%C at -5 ° Angle 20%C at -10 °
α CL α CL α CL
[°] [-] [°] [-] [°] [-]
-4.9 -0.089270249 -4.9 -0.032191472 -4.9 -0.02630964
0 0.415574421 0 0.39250389 0 0.332049031
0.1 0.434194348 0.1 0.403958008 5 0.861609838
5 0.887089533 5 0.944524268 10 1.163179753
10 1.266632602 10 1.194120913 15 1.487441762
15 1.467380098 10.1 1.193693063 19.1 1.665933769
19.1 1.649771912 15 1.524577315 20 1.675904898
21 1.71977959 18.1 1.635218418 21 1.697795619
21.1 1.543477395 19.1 1.657586389 22.1 1.731661702
25.4 1.371855381 20 1.684128166 22.5 1.742670002
21 1.71075768 23 1.661872229
21.6 1.730356907 23.1 1.433179139
21.7 1.729375342 24.3 1.405626495
22.5 1.755129344 24.4 1.366957891
23 1.681924723
23.1 1.431907887
23.8 1.372586829
25.4 1.46
Table 33: EWT, Drag Coefficient (CD) for Clark Y14 with Auxiliary at Different
Position Forward at 0, -5, and -10 °
Angle 20%C at 0 ° Angle 20%C at -5 ° Angle 20%C -10 °
α CD α CD α CD
[°] [-] [°] [-] [°] [-]
-4.9 0.048242751 -4.9 0.05912 -4.9 0.073477748
0 0.110012054 0 0.099010849 0 0.113763009
0.1 0.11632055 0.1 0.104688495 5 0.181575284
5 0.214827235 5 0.193344512 10 0.272643996
10 0.347128781 10 0.312415903 15 0.3803068
15 0.48803202 10.1 0.312554 19.1 0.510283929
B-16
19.1 0.600364196 15 0.439228818 20 0.52596341
21 0.655948992 18.1 0.53023 21 0.55884341
21.1 0.843832262 19.1 0.540327776 22.1 0.596372776
25.4 1.070577295 20 0.5594 22.5 0.613159162
21 0.57865 23 0.697172905
21.6 0.65 23.1 0.864235698
21.7 0.6510211 24.3 0.980110865
22.5 0.71223 24.4 0.920985408
23 0.7894
23.1 0.8432
23.8 0.9121
25.4 0.967
Table 34: EWT, Lift Coefficient (CL) for Clark Y14 with Auxiliary above Leading Edge at 4, 6,
8, 10, 12mm
Angle 4mm Angle 6mm Angle 8mm Angle 10mm Angle 12mm
α CL α CL α CL α CL α CL
[°] [-] [°] [-] [°] [-] [°] [-] [°] [-]
-4.9 0.0701 -5.1 0.0693 -4.9 0.0808 -4.9 0.08645 -5.1 0.09510
0 0.4821 0 0.4914 0 0.4992 0 0.53414 0 0.58756
5 0.9332 5 0.9175 5 0.96416 5 1.03165 5 1.13481
9.1 1.1123 10 1.1564 10 1.30421 11 1.39550 11 1.474
9.3 0.9086 11 1.0650 11.5 1.15390 11.5 1.23467 12 1.35814
15 0.9243 15 1.07424 15 1.15506 15 1.23591 15 1.2773
20 0.9851 20 1.0883 20 1.10651 20 1.064 20 1.18768
Table 35: EWT, Drag Coefficient (CD) for Clark Y14 with Auxiliary above Leading Edge at 4, 6, 8,
10, 12mm
Angle 4mm Angle 6mm Angle 8mm Angle 10mm Angle 12mm
α CD α CD α CD α CD α CD
[°] [-] [°] [-] [°] [-] [°] [-] [°] [-]
-4.9 0.046674 -5.1 0.0433 -4.9 0.04543 -4.9 0.046339 -5.1 0.0472
0 0.109861 0 0.10851 0 0.111379 0 0.113606 0 0.11587
5 0.204199 5 0.1966 5 0.20377 5 0.207845 5 0.2120
9.1 0.297478 10 0.2976 10 0.320029 11 0.32643 11 0.33295
9.3 0.433949 11 0.4926 11.5 0.510919 11.5 0.521137 12 0.53156
15 0.637387 15 0.63967 15 0.653128 15 0.666191 15 0.6795
20 0.804294 20 0.79948 20 0.838592 20 0.855364 20 0.87247
Table 36: EWT, Lift Coefficient (CL) for Clark Y14 with Auxiliary above
Leading Edge at 12mm at 0°, -5°, and -10°
Angle 0° Angle -5 ° Angle -10 °
α CL α CL α CL
[°] [-] [°] [-] [°] [-]
-5.1 0.095105 -5.1 0.065501 -5.1 0.05213
0 0.587562 0 0.571 0 0.5
5 1.134819 5 1.113 5 1.034
11 1.474 11 1.48 11 1.5
B-17
12 1.358142 12 1.37 12 1.4
15 1.2773 15 1.3 15 1.36432
20 1.18768 20 1.15 20 1.23209
Table 37: EWT, Drag Coefficient (CD) for Clark Y14 with Auxiliary above
Leading Edge at 12mm at 0°, -5°, and -10°
α CD α CD α CD
[°] [-] [°] [-] [°] [-]
-5.1 0.047266 -5.1 0.044902 -5.1 0.03682
0 0.115878 0 0.110084 0 0.090269
5 0.212002 5 0.201402 5 0.16515
11 0.332958 11 0.31631 11 0.259375
12 0.53156 12 0.483719 12 0.39665
15 0.679515 15 0.645539 15 0.529342
20 0.872471 20 0.828848 20 0.679655
Table 38: EWT, Lift Coefficient (CL) for Clark Y14 with Two Auxiliary, AUX1
Forward 20%C at -10 ° & AUX2 at above Leading Edge at 12mm at 0, -5, and -10
α CL α CL α CL
[°] [-] [°] [-] [°] [-]
-4.9 -0.02763 -4.9 -0.02912 -4.9 -0.03057
0 0.33869 0 0.356979 0 0.374828
5 0.878842 5 0.9263 5 0.972615
10 1.186444 10 1.250512 10 1.313037
15 1.453 15 1.531462 15 1.608035
19.1 1.699253 19.1 1.791012 19.1 1.880563
20 1.71765 20 1.810403 20 1.900923
21 1.731752 21 1.825267 21 1.91653
22.1 1.766295 22.1 1.861675 22.1 1.954759
22.5 1.777523 22.5 1.87351 22.5 1.967185
23 1.778203 23 1.874226 23 1.967937
23.1 1.719815 23.1 1.812685 23.1 1.96
24.3 1.61332 24.3 1.7564 24.3 1.901
24.4 1.60995 24.4 1.7454 24.4 1.83267
Table 39: EWT, Drag Coefficient (CD) for Clark Y14 with Two Auxiliary, AUX1
Forward 20%C at -10 ° & AUX2 at above Leading Edge at 12mm at 0°, -5°, and -10°
α CD α CD α CD
[°] [-] [°] [-] [°] [-]
-4.9 0.044875 -4.9 0.044865 -4.9 0.044855
0 0.04062 0 0.04066 0 0.0406
5 0.04912 5 0.04912 5 0.04912
10 0.07403 10 0.07403 10 0.07403
15 0.12515 15 0.118893 15 0.095114
19.1 0.17515 19.1 0.166393 19.1 0.133114
20 0.27911 20 0.265155 20 0.212124
B-18
21 0.315 21 0.29925 21 0.2394
22.1 0.3734 22.1 0.35473 22.1 0.283784
22.5 0.39348 22.5 0.373806 22.5 0.299045
23 0.60139 23 0.571321 23 0.457056
23.1 0.61394 23.1 0.583243 23.1 0.466594
24.3 0.63394 24.3 0.602243 24.3 0.481794
24.4 0.654 24.4 0.6213 24.4 0.49704
Table 40: EWT, Lift Coefficient (CL) Open & Close Slot
Angle Close Slot Angle Open Slot
α CL α CL
[°] [-] [°] [-]
-4.9 -0.00281 -4.9 -0.09707
0 0.159451 0 0.203003
5 0.496044 5 0.470969
10 0.758218 9.9 0.805676
10.1 0.756333 15 1.071253
15 0.783505 17.2 1.268476
17 0.890892 18 1.314336
17.1 0.899701 20 1.40203
18.1 0.916144 22.1 1.408917
20.3 0.906869 23.7 1.416089
23 0.902719 24.9 1.415311
25.3 0.737642
Table 41: EWT, Drag Coefficient (CD) Open & Close Slot
Angle Close Slot Angle Open Slot

α CD α CD
[°] [-] [°] [-]
-4.9 0.035854 -4.9 0.121841
0 0.083235 0 0.106715
5 0.13716 5 0.175873
10 0.18946 9.9 0.222955
10.1 0.188429 15 0.274821
15 0.266277 17.2 0.306787
17 0.297645 18 0.30416
17.1 0.303972 20 0.325626
18.1 0.319779 22.1 0.39716
20.3 0.373885 23.7 0.477921
23 0.42497 24.9 0.548884
25.3 0.709084
Table 42: EWT, Lift Coefficient (CL) Open & Close Slot with Auxiliary above
Leading Edge 12mm with 0°, -10°, and -20 °
α CL α CL α CL
[°] [-] [°] [-] [°] [-]
B-19
-4.9 -0.04932 -4.9 -0.23195 0 0.095597
0 0.376986 0 0.018269 0.1 0.103671
5 0.62792 5 0.399296 5 0.334515
10 1.04211 10 0.850627 9.9 0.733372
15 1.208337 15 1.229599 15 1.041644
17 1.319544 17.2 1.432816 18 1.29592
17.1 1.318238 19.9 1.595355 20 1.451879
18.1 1.403639 22.1 1.690507 22.1 1.544389
18.2 1.421963 25 1.65 24.6 1.58828
18.3 1.42772 25.1 1.64 25.4 1.614582
20 1.508664 25.4 1.64
20.1 1.528572
24.9 1.564739
Table 43: EWT, Drag Coefficient (CD) Open & Close Slot with Auxiliary above
Leading Edge 12mm with 0, -10, and -20 °
α CD α CD α CD
[°] [-] [°] [-] [°] [-]
-4.9 0.147807 -4.9 0.142044 -4.9 0.209147
0 0.145743 0 0.12392 0 0.193461
5 0.225993 5 0.189287 0.1 0.1942
10 0.367099 10 0.241472 5 0.254086
15 0.556524 15 0.321141 9.9 0.303791
17 0.669807 17.2 0.363513 15 0.399374
17.1 0.668565 19.9 0.399427 18 0.420747
18.1 0.7197 22.1 0.43775 20 0.439297
18.2 0.744633 25 0.702763 22.1 0.481655
18.3 0.75454 25.1 0.710482 24.6 0.521316
20 0.823408 25.4 0.720327 25.4 0.537338
20.1 0.907139
24.9 0.995372
B-20
Appendix C
Figure 1: Pressure for Standard Clark Y-14
Figure 2: Pressure for Standard Clark Y-14
C-1
Figure 3: Pressure for Standard Clark Y-14 with (Slat at 20%C)
Figure 4: Pressure for Standard Clark Y-14 with (Slat at 20%C)
C-2
Figure 5: Pressure for Standard Clark Y-14 with (Slat at 20%C & Rotate with -10°)
Figure 6: Pressure for Standard Clark Y-14 with (Slat at 20%C & Rotate with -10°)
C-3
Figure 7: Pressure for Standard Clark Y-14 with (Slat at 12mm)
Figure 8: Pressure for Standard Clark Y-14 with (Slat at 12mm)
C-4
Figure 9: Pressure for Standard Clark Y-14 with (Slat at 12mm with -10°)
Figure 10: Pressure for Standard Clark Y-14 with (Slat at 12mm with -10°)
C-5
Figure 11: Pressure for Standard Clark Y-14 with two Slat
Figure 12: Pressure for Standard Clark Y-14 with two Slat
C-6
Figure 13: Pressure for Slotted Clark Y-14
Figure 14: Pressure for Slotted Clark Y-14
C-7
Figure 15: Pressure for Slotted Clark Y-14 with (Slat at 12mm & Rotated with -10°)
Figure 16: Pressure for Slotted Clark Y-14 with (Slat at 12mm & Rotated with -10°)
C-8
Appendix D
Figure 1: Velocity for Standard Clark Y-14
Figure 2: Velocity for Standard Clark Y-14
D-1
Figure 3: Velocity for Standard Clark Y-14 with (Slat at 20%C)
Figure 4: Velocity for Standard Clark Y-14 with (Slat at 20%C)
D-2
Figure 5: Velocity for Standard Clark Y-14 with (Slat at 20%C & Rotate with -10°)
Figure 6: Velocity for Standard Clark Y-14 with (Slat at 20%C & Rotate with -10°)
D-3
Figure 7: Velocity for Standard Clark Y-14 with (Slat at 12mm)
Figure 8: Velocity for Standard Clark Y-14 with (Slat at 12mm)
D-4
Figure 9: Velocity for Standard Clark Y-14 with (Slat at 12mm with -10°)
Figure 10: Velocity for Standard Clark Y-14 with (Slat at 12mm with -10°)
D-5
Figure 11: Velocity for Standard Clark Y-14 with two Slat
Figure 12: Velocity for Standard Clark Y-14 with two Slat
D-6
Figure 13: Velocity for Slotted Clark Y-14
Figure 14: Velocity for Slotted Clark Y-14
D-7
Figure 15: Velocity for Slotted Clark Y-14 with (Slat at 12mm & Rotated with -10°)
Figure 16: Velocity for Slotted Clark Y-14 with (Slat at 12mm & Rotated with -10°)
D-8
‫الخالصة‬
‫يعد الجناح كالرك واي‪ 14-‬االكثر دراسة في مجال الديناميكية الهوائية و االكثر استخداما ً‬
‫في مجال تصميم الطائرات‪ .‬و قد قام فرجيناس ي‪ .‬كالرك تتصميم ذاا الجناح في العام ‪.1922‬‬
‫و لهاا الجناح مقطع ‪ 90‬ملم و امتداد ‪ 250‬ملم و السماكة القصوى تصل الى ‪ %14‬من مقطع‬
‫الجناح(‪ 12.6‬ملم)‪ .‬تم اختيار ذاا الجناح لسهولة تصنيعه و استواء سطحه السفلي الاي يكون‬
‫‪ %30‬من مقطع الجناح لاا‪ ،‬فهو يساعد في التحقق من زاوية الجناح في حال استخدام اداة قياس‬
‫الميل (‪.)Inclinometer‬‬
‫و لغرض تحسين رفع و اداء الجناح كالرك واي‪ 14-‬تم استخدام اجنحة مساعدة كالشرائح‬
‫و الفجوات الناتجة عنها ‪ .‬و تم وضع الشرائح قيد الدراسة امام و فوق الحافة االمامية للجناح و‬
‫وضع ذاه الشرائح تزوايا مختلفة‪.‬‬
‫و قد تم اخا االجنحة ذات الفجوات المفتوحة و المغلقة تنظر االعتبار ايضاً‪ .‬و تم استخدام‬
‫اتتداءا ً الختبار ذاه االشكال رقميا ً كل من تطبيقات الحاسوب (‪ Javafoil‬و ‪.)ANSYS‬‬
‫و تم اختبارذا مرة اخرى تاستخدام نفق الهواء التعليمي ‪.‬و كانت سرعة الريح ‪ 35‬متر‬
‫تالثانية في جميع االختبارات‪ .‬و كان رقم رينولدز ‪ 200,069‬عند ‪ .27C°‬صنعت نماذج اجنحة‬
‫كالرك واي‪ 14-‬ذات الشرائح و الفجوات من الحديد و رسمت تاستخدام ‪ .AutoDesk‬وقطعت‬
‫النماذج المرسومة تاستخدام ماكنة قطع ‪(Electrical Discharge Wire Cutting‬‬
‫)‪ .Machine‬و تم استخدام قواعد لتثبيت الشرائح و الفجوات في اماكنها اثناء اختبار الجناح عند‬
‫زوايا مختلفة‪.‬‬
‫و تعد القيام تالعديد من االختبارات من كال االتجاذين ‪ ,‬رقميا ً (تاستخدام ‪ Javafoil‬و‬

‫‪ )ANSYS‬و مختبريا ً (تاستخدام نفق الهواء التعليمي)‪ ،‬تم الحصول على افضل نتيجتين‪ .‬اوالذما‬
‫تحققت تاستخدام كالرك واي‪ 14-‬ذو الشريحتين (توضع الشريحة االولى ب ‪ 20%C‬مع ‪-10°‬‬
‫امام الجناح الرئيسي و وضع الشريحة الثانية ذات ‪ 12‬ملم مع ‪ -10°‬فوق الحافة العليا للجناح‬
‫الرئيسي‪ .‬عند استخدام تطبيق ‪ Javafoil‬فان معامل الرفع (‪ )CL‬يكون ‪ 2.147‬الاي يمثل زيادة‬
‫في معامل الرفع تنسبة مقدارذا ‪ .%65‬تينما النتيجة في نفق الهواء التعليمي فان معامل الرفع ‪CL‬‬
‫يكون ‪ 1.9009‬و الاي يمثل زيادة تنسبة ‪.%58.8‬‬
‫اما ثاني افضل نتيجة فقد تحققت تاستخدام كالرك واي‪ 14-‬ذو فجوات مع شريحة منحدرة‬
‫عند ‪ 12‬ملم عند ‪ -10°‬عن الجناح االصلي‪ .‬عند استخدام تطبيق ‪ Javafoil‬فان معامل الرفع ‪CL‬‬
‫يكون ‪ 1.994‬الاي يمثل نسبة زيادة مقدارذا ‪ .%45‬تينما في نفق الهواء التعليمي فان معامل‬
‫الرفع يكون ‪ 1.4518‬الاي يمثل نسبة زيادة مقدارذا ‪.%60‬‬
‫و فيما يخص حالة الكبح (‪ )Drag‬فقد وجد ان اقل قيمة كانت عند استخدام جناح ذو‬
‫شريحتين‪ .‬عند استخدام تطبيق ‪ Javafoil‬فان معامل السحب ‪ CD‬يكون ‪ 0.26951‬تينما في نفق‬
‫الهواء التعليمي فان معامل الكبح يكون ‪ .0.212124‬و يأتي تعدذا كالرك واي‪ 14-‬ذو الفجوة‬
‫الاي يصاحبه شريحة منفردة فوق الجناح االساسي تمسافة ‪ 12‬ملم عند ‪ -10 °‬تحيث ان النتيجة‬
‫في ‪ Javafoil‬كانت تساوي ‪ 0.19263‬تينما في نفق الرياح التعليمي كانت تساوي ‪0.399427‬‬
‫عند استخدام المحاكاة ( التحليل العددي ) للتحقق من اداء الجنيح وجد ان التحليل تاستخدام‬
‫( ‪ ) JavaFoil‬يعطي نتائج اعلى واكثر استقرارا مقارنه تالتحليل تاستخدام (‪. ) ANSYS‬‬
‫تاالضافه الى كون ( ‪ ) ANSYS‬عند استخدامة في حساب الرفع فانه يتم الحصول على نتائج‬
‫مقارتة للحل وليس الحل نفسه وذاا يكون في حال حساب زوايا الهجوم ذات القيمه العاليه ويتم‬
‫اخا معدل القراءات االخيرة لحساب النتائج ‪.‬‬
‫شكر وتقدير‬
‫وينطالقا‬ ‫نحمد هللا عز وجل وأشككه ل يسيرككي ل يع يي رككي ودر ك ي دي ل يع اع جمي ي‬

‫يي اان بايجميل‪ ،‬اإنه ييرك نع أن أي دب بايرككه ويا سإان أيت أيككساشر‪ ،‬و رك اع ي يككساش ييمرككاعد ييدكس‬
‫د يد ييمركككككاعدو يع واع جمي ييمجاام‪ ،‬ودمدي‬ ‫ييمهإدس محمد خيرالدين عباس ييذر ا ي ينت ي ا ع‬
‫هلل بأن ير ل اع د بع وير به أ ر‬
‫جا سع ييحبيب جامعة النهرين ‪ ،‬وكلي ييهإدي ك ‪ ،‬وقرككمع‬ ‫وأي دب كذيك بجزيل ييرككه أيت كل‬
‫علي حسين محمد‬ ‫مثال ب ئيره ي يساش ييمراعد ييدكس‬ ‫يي زيز قرم ييهإدي ييميهانيهي‬
‫عإان اع‬ ‫كما أي دب بجزيل ييركككه أيت أيكككايذيع أعنكككان يجإ ييإ ان ييم ق ي علت ا يهبدول‬
‫ق ينو يايسع وأغإائها بم س دايهم يي يم‬
‫كل‬ ‫ويم وي أنرككككككت أن أي دب بلائر ييرككككككه ويادس يب وييس دي أيت يفلع وهللاوجسع دل هم‬
‫عإع كل ييخي‬ ‫ري يع يي لمي ويغاي يآلن وجزيفم‬ ‫ي ن‪ ,‬و ييلذي ياندونع ووقل ي بجانبع إذ بديي‬
‫د يع يد يي ن إلكمال‬ ‫واع ييإهاي يرــــ نع أن أي دب بجزيل ييرهــــــ و ي سإـــان أيت كل‬

‫ييإه ي‬ ‫يايسع وخاص اع جانبها يي ملع اع خسب يم قرم ييهإدي ييميهانيهي بجا‬
‫حسن خضر عباس‬

‫وزارة التعليم العالي والبحث العلمي‬
‫جامعة النهرين ‪ /‬كلية الهندسة‬
‫دراسة اعدادات جديدة لشريحة على جناح كالرك واي‪ 14-‬لتحسين ديناميكية‬
‫الهواء‬
‫رسالة مقدمة‬
‫إلى قسم الهندسة في جامعة النهرين‬
‫وهي جزء من متطلبات نيل درجة ماجستير علوم‬
‫في‬
‫الهندسة الميكانيكية‬
‫من قبل‬
‫حسن خضر عباس‬

‫(بكالوريوس ‪)1993‬‬
‫‪ 1438‬ه‬ ‫ربيع الثاني‬

‫‪ 2017‬م‬ ‫يناير‬
‫‪View publication stats‬‬

Investigation of New Slat Configurations On Clark Y-14 Wing For Enhancing Aerodynamic Performance

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Investigation of New Slat Configurations On Clark Y-14 Wing For Enhancing Aerodynamic Performance

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

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

Investigation of New Slat Conﬁgurations on Clark Y-14 Wing for Enhancing

Thesis · January 2017

Mohammed Kheir Aldeen Abbas Askar

Smoke Generator (used in Wind Tunnel) View project

Engineering Analysis with ANSYS Software View project

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

INVESTIGATION OF NEW SLAT CONFIGURATIONS ON

Raby` al-THaany 1438

To improve the lift and performance of a Clark Y-14, auxiliary airfoils

Many tests have been done in both directions: numerically (JavaFoil

When using simulation to evaluate the performance of the airfoils, it

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION

1.1 High Lift Control Devices 1

CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW

CHAPTER THREE: Mathematical Model

CHAPTER FIVE: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

5.3 Comparing the Performance of Different 73

k Turbulent kinetic energy m2/s2

U Mean velocity components m/s

Symbol Description Units

α Angle of attack degree

ε Dissipation rate of kinetic energy m2/s3

Δ Difference in values ---

ω Dissipation rate of turbulent kinetic energy m2/s2

μ Laminar viscosity N.s/m2

μt Turbulent viscosity N.s/m2

ρ Density of Air kg/m3

τij Mass averaged Viscous Stress Tensor N/m2

‘ Fluctuating part of parameter ---

- Average quantity ---

∞ Free stream ---

1,2 Reference number ---

aft Towards the rear part of / rearwards or backwards ---

AIAA American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics ---

CFD Computational Fluid Dynamics ---

PIV Particle Image Velocimetry ---

G.F. Gurney Flap ---

NACA National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics ---

NASA National Air and Space Administration ---

SIMPLE Semi-Implicit Method for Pressure Linked Equation ---

SST Shear-Stress Transport ---

EWT Educational Wind Tunnel ---

1-1 Control Devices System 2

1-10 Airflow separating from an airfoil at a high angle of 12

2-4 Change in Shape of Nose of Main Wing. Slotted 15

3-8 Convergence history for continuity, momentum, 34

4-11 Design and manufacturing Parts are Assembled 47

4-16 Illustration of Slat Distances and Deflection Degrees 50

5-3 Effect of a Slat at 0%C,5%C,10%C,15%C, and 20%C 56

5-4 Effect of a Slat at 0%C, 5%C, 10%C, 15%C, and 57

5-9 Effect of a Slat at 0%C, 5%C, 10%C, 15%C, and 60

5-11 Effect of a Deflecting Slat at 0°, -5°, -10° with Clark 61

5-15 Effect of Increasing Slat Height with Clark Y-14 on 63

5-23 Clark Y-14 with 2 Slats and the Effect of Deflecting 67

5-31 Effect of Deflecting Slat for an Open Slot Clark Y-14 71

4.1 Testing procedure 40

4.2 Slat Specification 44

1.1 High Lift Control Devices

In airplane design, a high lift control device is a section or an instrument on

Figure (1-3) Slats and Slots [8]

Figure (1-4) Effect of flap and slat on lift coefficient [13]