EFFECT OF VARIABLE SWEEP ON THE

AERODYNAMICS OF GEOMETRICALLY MODIFIED

AEROFOIL FOR MAV AND UAV APPLICATIONS
A project report submitted by
TRAVIS JUDE (URK18AE012)
in partial fulfillment for the award of the degree

of
BACHELOR OF TECHNOLOGY
in
AEROSPACE ENGINEERING
under the supervision of
Dr. A. SAMSON RATNA KUMAR

DEPARTMENT OF AEROSPACE ENGINEERING

KARUNYA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY AND SCIENCES
(Deemed-to-be-University)

Karunya Nagar, Coimbatore - 641 114. INDIA.

APRIL 2022
 BONAFIDE CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that the project report entitled “EFFECT OF VARIABLE

SWEEP ON THE AERODYNAMICS OF GEOMETRICALLY MODIFIED
AEROFOIL FOR MAV AND UAV APPLICATIONS” is the bonafide work
of “TRAVIS JUDE” who carried out the project work under my supervision.

SIGNATURE SIGNATURE

Dr. JIMS JOHN WESLEY Dr.A.SAMSON RATNA KUMAR

HEAD OF THE DEPARTMENT
Associate Professor
Department of Aerospace Engineering
School of Engineering and Technology
SUPERVISOR
Assistant Professor
Department of Aerospace Engineering
School of Engineering and Technology

Submitted for the (Full Semester) Viva Voce held on ............................

Internal Examiner External Examiner

ii
 ABSTRACT

An approach is presented where a Micro Aerial Vehicle or an Unmanned Aerial Vehicle can

perform post-stall maneuvers. Birds performs ‘perching maneuvers or post-stall maneuvers with

high precision in order to decelerate to perch on a branch or land. This behavior can be attributed

to the morphology of their wings and body. Here, we try to imitate that of a bird and exploit this

behavior to implement in a MAV. A 3D model of the aircraft tested in the base paper have been

produced in a CAD software. The model has been modified in the leading edge with forward

Sweep Configuration with the goal of enhancing the performance and maneuverability during

Low Reynolds Number. Validated with the Base paper by the comparing the results from the

Base paper to that of the Simulation results. Simulation has been performed for a range angle of

attacks from 0, 2, 5, 7 and 10 and various low Reynolds Numbers. Various aerodynamic

characteristics form the simulation have been plotted, compared and studied.

iii
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I give all the glory and honour to our LORD GOD almighty for being with me
and guiding me to complete this project successfully.

I thank our founder Chancellor Emeritus, Late Dr. D.G.S Dhinakaran

C.A.I.I.B, Ph.D., and our respected Chancellor Dr. Paul Dhinakaran M.B.A,
Ph.D., for their constant prayers and support. We also thank our Vice Chancellor Dr.
P. Mannar Jawahar, Ph.D., and Registrar Dr. R. Elijah Blessing, Ph.D., for
supporting me and providing all the academics facilities required.

I express my deep sense of gratitude to our H.O.D, Dr. JIMS JOHN

WESLEY for providing valuable guidance, timely suggestion and encouragement in
every stage of this project.

I am highly thankful and indebted to my guide Dr. A. Samson Ratna Kumar,

Assistant Professor, Department of Aerospace Engineering, School of Engineering and
Technology for his valuable guidance and great interest in every stage of the project
work.

Finally, I thank my Parents heartily for their constant support, prayer and
encouragement. I also thank all my Friends for their support and encouragement.

iv
 Contents
Page no
.
BONAFIDE CERTIFICATE...............................................................................................ii

ABSTRACT.......................................................................................................................... iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT...................................................................................................iv

List of Tables...................................................................................................................... viii

List of Figures....................................................................................................................... ix

List of Symbols and Abbreviations.....................................................................................xi

1. INTRODUCTION.............................................................................................................1
1.1 Aim............................................................................................................................. 2
1.2 Objectives................................................................................................................... 2
1.3 Methodology............................................................................................................... 2

2. LITERATURE SURVEY.................................................................................................3
2.1 Base Paper.................................................................................................................. 3
2.2 Research Gap.............................................................................................................5

3. VALIDATION...................................................................................................................6
3.1 Creating a Model of E-FLITE AS3XTRA...............................................................6
3.2 Importing to Ansys Workbench and Geometry......................................................7
3.3 Meshing...................................................................................................................... 8
3.3 Setup........................................................................................................................... 9
3.4 Validating.................................................................................................................10

4. Simulation for Straight Wing at Low Reynolds Numbers...........................................12

4.1 Re = 20,000...............................................................................................................12

v
 4.1.1 Setup....................................................................................................................... 12
4.2 Re = 50,000...............................................................................................................13

4.2.1 Setup....................................................................................................................... 13
4.3 Re = 1,00,000............................................................................................................14

4.3.1 Setup....................................................................................................................... 14
4.4 Comparison of Cl values.........................................................................................16
4.5 Observation..............................................................................................................17

5. Simulation for Forward Swept wing..............................................................................18

5.1 Modifying the Straight wing to forward sweep wing............................................18
5.2 Importing to Ansys Workbench and Geometry....................................................18
5.3 Meshing.................................................................................................................... 20
5.4 Setup.........................................................................................................................21

5.4.1 Re = 20,000............................................................................................................22

5.4.2 Re = 50,000............................................................................................................23

5.4.3 Re = 1,00,000.........................................................................................................24
5.5 Results Compared....................................................................................................25

6. Simulation for Leading Edge Modification...................................................................26

6.1 Modifying the Leading Edge of the Forward Sweep Wing..................................26
6.2 Importing to Ansys Workbench and Geometry....................................................27
6.3 Meshing.................................................................................................................... 28
6.4 Setup.........................................................................................................................29

6.4.1 Re = 20,000............................................................................................................30

vi
 6.4.2 Re = 50,000............................................................................................................31

6.4.3 Re = 1,00,000.........................................................................................................32

7. Observations....................................................................................................................33
7.1 Comparison between Straight Wing, 25 degree forward swept wing and Leading
edge modified wing........................................................................................................33

8. Skin Friction Coefficient Comparison...........................................................................35

8.1 Skin Friction comparison at Re=20,000 and AoA=5.............................................35
8.2 Skin Friction comparison at Re=20,000 and AoA=7.............................................37
8.3 Skin Friction comparison at Re=20,000 and AoA=10...........................................38
8.4 Skin Friction comparison at Re=50,000 and AoA=5.............................................40
8.5 Skin Friction comparison at Re=50,000 and AoA=7.............................................41
8.5 Skin Friction comparison at Re=50,000 and AoA=10...........................................43
8.6 Skin Friction comparison at Re=1,00,000 and AoA=5..........................................44
8.7 Skin Friction comparison at Re=1,00,000 and AoA=7..........................................46
8.8 Skin Friction comparison at Re=1,00,000 and AoA=10........................................47

9. Conclusions and Suggestions for future research.........................................................49

9.1 Conclusion................................................................................................................ 49
9.2 Suggestions for future research..............................................................................49

References............................................................................................................................ 50

vii
 List of Tables

Table 1: Velocity Components......................................................................................................10

Table 2: Velocity Components......................................................................................................13
Table 3: Velocity Components......................................................................................................14
Table 4: Velocity Components......................................................................................................15
Table 5: Cl values compared.........................................................................................................16
Table 6: Velocity Components......................................................................................................22
Table 7: Cl and Cd values from the Simulation............................................................................22
Table 8: Velocity Components......................................................................................................23
Table 9: Cl and Cd values from the Simulation............................................................................23
Table 10: Velocity Components....................................................................................................24
Table 11: Cl and Cd values from the Simulation..........................................................................24
Table 12: Velocity Components....................................................................................................30
Table 13: Cl and Cd values...........................................................................................................30
Table 14: Velocity Components....................................................................................................31
Table 15: Cl and Cd values...........................................................................................................31
Table 16: Velocity Components....................................................................................................32
Table 17: Cl and Cd values...........................................................................................................32

viii
 List of Figures

Figure 1: A brown eagle sweeps its wings forward during a “perching/snatching” maneuver........4
Figure 2: Modified aircraft showing wing in forward-swept configuration....................................4
Figure 3: Mechanism demonstrated in straight (top) and swept (bottom) configurations done in
SOLIDWORKS.............................................................................................................................. 5
Figure 4: Sketch of E-FLITE AS3XTRA in SOLIDWORKS.........................................................6
Figure 5: CAD model of E-FLITE AS3XTRA of thickness 2mm..................................................7
Figure 6: Geometry......................................................................................................................... 8
Figure 7: Mesh................................................................................................................................ 9
Figure 8: CL v AoA Comparison...................................................................................................11
Figure 9: CL v AoA Comparison for Various Re...........................................................................17
Figure 10: Modified Model with 25degree forward sweep...........................................................18
Figure 11: Geometry..................................................................................................................... 19
Figure 12: Mesh............................................................................................................................ 20
Figure 13: Cl values Compared.....................................................................................................25
Figure 14: Leading Edge Modification.........................................................................................26
Figure 15: Geometry..................................................................................................................... 27
Figure 16: Mesh............................................................................................................................ 28
Figure 17: Cl Comparison for Re=20,000.....................................................................................33
Figure 18: Cl comparison for Re = 50,000....................................................................................34
Figure 19: Cl comparison for Re = 1,00,000.................................................................................34
Figure 20: CF for Straight Wing....................................................................................................35
Figure 21: CF for Forward Swept Wing........................................................................................36
Figure 22: CF for Modified Leading Edge.....................................................................................36
Figure 23: CF for Straight Wing....................................................................................................37

ix
Figure 24: CF for Forward Swept Wing........................................................................................37
Figure 25: CF for Modified Leading Edge.....................................................................................38
Figure 26: CF for Straight Wing....................................................................................................38
Figure 27: CF for forward swept Wing..........................................................................................39
Figure 28: CF for Modified Leading Edge.....................................................................................39
Figure 29: CF for Straight Wing....................................................................................................40
Figure 30: CF for Forward Swept Wing........................................................................................40
Figure 31: CF for Modified Leading Edge.....................................................................................41
Figure 32: CF for Straight Wing....................................................................................................41
Figure 33: CF for Forward Swept Wing........................................................................................42
Figure 34: CF for Modified Leading Edge.....................................................................................42
Figure 35: CF for Straight Wing....................................................................................................43
Figure 36: CF for Forward Swept Wing........................................................................................43
Figure 37: CF for Modified Leading Edge.....................................................................................44
Figure 38: CF for Straight Wing....................................................................................................44
Figure 39: CF for Forward Swept wing.........................................................................................45
Figure 40: CF for Modified Leading Edge.....................................................................................45
Figure 41: CF for Stright Wing......................................................................................................46
Figure 42: CF for Forward Sept Wing...........................................................................................46
Figure 43: CF for Modified Leading Edge.....................................................................................47
Figure 44: CF for Straight Wing....................................................................................................47
Figure 45: CF for Forward Swept Wing........................................................................................48
Figure 46: CF for Modified Leading Edge.....................................................................................48

x
 List of Symbols and Abbreviations

AoA : Angle of Attack

Re : Reynolds Number
CL : Coefficient of Lift
CD : Coefficient of Drag
CF : Skin Friction Coefficient
τw : Skin Friction Coefficient
ρ : Density
m : Meter
cm : Centimeter
mm : Millimeter
s : seconds
V : Velocity
Vx : Velocity along x direction
Vy : Velocity along x direction
UAV : Unmanned Aerial Vehicle
MAV : Micro Aerial Vehicle
Kg : Kilogram

xi
 1. INTRODUCTION

Unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) OR Micro Aerial Vehicles (MAVs) that are able to
imitate perching ability of a bird would be able to take off and land in extremely small
locations, traverse large distances, and hover for extended periods of time.
Search and rescue, disaster response, agricultural inspection, and retrieval and delivery of
terrestrial goods are just a few of the practical uses for aircraft with this combination of
skills. Birds can be seen bringing their wings forward to perform such feats. The aircraft
with variable sweep angle has better aerodynamic efficiency at different flight speeds, which
is being one the biggest advantage from a fixed-wing aircraft.
Forward-swept wings are not a novel idea, but were invented by the Germans during World
War 2. At the time, the bureau to investigate the merits of forward-swept wings was led by a
German engineer called Hans Wocke. He was confident that this particular airfoil
arrangement offered specific performance and structural benefits. The Junker-287 was the
first prototype created by this outfit. The technology necessary for the correct design and
construction of an aircraft of this type would not be available for several years.
In 1977, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) sponsored a
competition to build an experimental forward-swept-wing airplane. In 1981, the Grumman
model X-29 was introduced. The X-29 proved an aircraft with forward-swept wings could
be flown safely and reliably and were able to discover the planes advantages at high angles
of attack. The aircraft proved to maneuver at high angles of attack better than what was
predicted. The X-29 provided a path for new technologies as well as reassurance that the
old technologies still worked. As in other cases in Aviation, birds provide much inspiration
for this work. In particular, many species have been observed to sweep their wings forward
during high angle of attack perching and “snatching” maneuvers.

1
1.1 Aim
To Study the Effects of Variable Sweep on the Aerodynamics of Geometrically Modified
Aerofoil for MAV And UAV Applications.

1.2 Objectives
1. To perform low Reynolds number (Re) simulation (10,000 – 1,00,000) on a
symmetric aerofoil for varying AoA.
2. To illustrate the effect of variable sweep on aerodynamic characteristics for varying
Re and sweep.
3. To illustrate the aerodynamic characteristics of geometric modification for forward
sweep wing.

1.3 Methodology
1. Fluent simulation of symmetric model with straight wing at low Reynolds number
(20,000 -1,00,000) for varying Angle of Attack.
2. Fluent simulation of symmetric model with forward swept wing at low Reynolds
number (20,000 -1,00,000) for varying Angle of Attack.
3. Leading Edge modification of Variable sweep wing for UAV.
4. Fluent simulation of symmetric model with leading edge modified for forward swept
wing at low Reynolds number (20,000 -1,00,000) for varying Angle of Attack.
5. Result Analysis.

2
 2. LITERATURE SURVEY

2.1 Base Paper

A VARIABLE FORWARD-SWEEPWING DESIGN FOR IMPROVED PERCHING IN
MICRO AERIAL VEHICLES
 Zachary R. Manchester, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 02138
 Jeffrey I. Lipton, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts,
02139
 Robert J. Wood‡ and Scott Kuindersma, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts,
02138
The variable-forward-sweep wing concept presented in this paper shows potential for enhancing
the agility and performance of micro aerial vehicles. They have taken a E-FLITE AS3XTRA RC
plane, an aircraft was the low-cost flat-foam hobby aircraft subjected it to some Wind Tunnel
Experiment. The Aircraft then was given a 25 degree forward sweep and again subjected to Wind
Tunnel Experiment. Data is collected for range -25 to +75 AoA for the both the cases and
compared to gain insight into flight dynamics and controllability. Simulated the perching
trajectories that indicate that forward sweep wing configuration can demonstrate lower cost and
effective perching manoeuvres than a straight wing configuration.
The Wind tunnel testing indicates that sweeping the wings forward increases post-stall lift and
can be used to impart a pitching moment or alter the pitch stability characteristics of an aircraft.
Design modifications and further testing are needed to better understand these effects.

3
Figure 1: A brown eagle sweeps its wings forward during a “perching/snatching” maneuver.

Figure 2: Modified aircraft showing wing in forward-swept configuration.

4
2.2 Research Gap

(Zachary and Jeffery 2017) concludes on the potential for enhancing the agility and performance
of MAVs. As witnessed in avian behavior, the preliminary modeling and control work indicates
that a forward-swept wing may provide better performance than a straight wing in perching
maneuvers. For instance, in agricultural inspections, Quadcopters are widely used. The major
disadvantage of Quadcopters or multi-rotors are that they create massive downwash that disturb
the ecosystem or hinder the inspection all together. The blades itself can create damage to the
corps.
The idea is that using Variable Sweep wing, we can create perching maneuvers that can be ideal
in Inspections and Surveillances. This would ideally reduce noise and can be easily managed in
places with obstructions.

Figure 3: Mechanism demonstrated in straight (top) and swept (bottom) configurations done in
SOLIDWORKS.

The mechanism demonstrates the variable sweep of the wing. The wing can morph from straight
to Forward sweep.

5
 3. VALIDATION

3.1 Creating a Model of E-FLITE AS3XTRA

Created a Symmetrical half of the Aircraft E-FLITE AS3XTRA in SOLIDWORKS

Figure 4: Sketch of E-FLITE AS3XTRA in SOLIDWORKS

6
 Figure 5: CAD model of E-FLITE AS3XTRA of thickness 2mm.

3.2 Importing to Ansys Workbench and Geometry

1. Saved the model IGS file format and is Imported to Geometry in ANSYS Workbench.
2. Created two domains around the model.
a. Inner Domain is of the dimension 0cm towards the -Z direction and 50cm towards
all directions.
b. Outer Domain is of the dimension 0cm towards the -Z direction and 100cm towards
all directions.
3. Inserting Boolean subtract operation to subtract the model from the domains.
4. Names-selecting the inlet, outlet, symmetry and the wall of the Outer domain.

7
 Figure 6: Geometry

3.3 Meshing
The types of Mesh used: -
1. Body Sizing of Outer Domain of size 5cm.
2. Body sizing of the Inner Domain of size 3cm.
3. Face Sizing of the Model of 1cm.
4. Face Meshing of the Inlet, Outlet and 3 walls of the Outer domain.
5. Adding Inflation layers

8
The number of Nodes in the Mesh = 262784
The number of Elements in the Mesh = 1464042

Figure 7: Mesh

3.3 Setup
1. Solver Type
a. Type - Pressure Based
b. Velocity Formulation – Absolute
c. Time – Transient
2. Viscous Model – k-epsilon Realizable
3. Inlet – Velocity Inlet
4. Outlet – Pressure Outlet

9
 5. Pressure Velocity Coupling Scheme – Coupled
6. Flux Type - Rhie-Chow: distance based
7. Time step size – 0.1s
8. Number of Time steps – 40
9. No. of Iterations/time steps -30
10. Density = 1.22 Kg/m^3
11. Flow velocity = 10m/s
12. Length = 0.426m
13. Viscosity = 1.789 *10^-5
(Zachary and Jeffery 2017) deals with experiments at 10m/s.
Density∗Velocity∗Length
Therefore, ℜ=
DynamicViscosity

Re = 290508.6641

3.4 Validating
The simulation is done for AoA = 0, 2,5,7 and 10 degrees.
Velocity-X component, V x =V∗cos( AoA)
Velocity-Y component, V y =V∗sin( AoA)

Table 1: Velocity Components

AoA Vx Vy

0 10 0

2 9.99390827 0.348994967

5 9.96194698 0.8715574275
1
7 9.92546151 1.218693434
6
10 9.84807753 1.736481777

10
The Cl v AoA values from the Base paper are compared and the results are identical. Therefore,
the validation is completed.

Figure 8: CL v AoA Comparison

11
 4. Simulation for Straight Wing at Low Reynolds Numbers

MAVs/ UAVs operate in low Reynolds Number regime. Therefore, Simulation for low Reynolds
number was performed for the straight wing. The Aerodynamic Characteristics of the Wing such
as CL, CD and CF were recorded.
Here, we are taking the same Model and the Mesh from the Validation part to run the Simulation
for various AoA at different low Reynolds numbers.

4.1 Re = 20,000
4.1.1 Setup
1. The number of Nodes in the Mesh = 262784
2. The number of Elements in the Mesh = 1464042
3. Solver Type
a. Type - Pressure Based
b. Velocity Formulation – Absolute
c. Time – Transient
4. Viscous Model – k-epsilon Realizable
5. Inlet – Velocity Inlet
6. Outlet – Pressure Outlet
7. Pressure Velocity Coupling Scheme – Coupled
8. Flux Type - Rhie-Chow: distance based
9. Time step size – 0.1s
10. Number of Time steps – 60
11. No. of Iterations/time steps -40
12. Density = 1.22 Kg/m^3
13. Length = 0.426m
14. Viscosity = 1.789 *10^-5

12
 Density∗Velocity∗Length
To find velocity, ℜ=
DynamicViscosity
Velocity = 0.6884476256m/s

The formula for the Velocity components,

Velocity-X component, V x =V∗cos( AoA)
Velocity-Y component, V y =V∗sin( AoA)

Table 2: Velocity Components

AoA Vx Vy

0 0.6884476256 0

2 0.6880282419 0.02402647564

5 0.6858278745 0.06000216415

7 0.6833160414 0.0839006601

10 0.0.6779885592 0.1195476756

4.2 Re = 50,000
4.2.1 Setup
1. Time step size – 0.1s
2. Number of Time steps – 60
3. No. of Iterations/time steps -40
4. Density = 1.22 Kg/m^3
5. Re = 50,000
6. Length = 0.426m
7. Viscosity = 1.789 *10^-5

13
 Density∗Velocity∗Length
To find velocity, ℜ=
DynamicViscosity

Velocity = 1.721116064m/s

The formula for the Velocity components,

Velocity-X component, V x =V∗cos( AoA)
Velocity-Y component, V y =V∗sin( AoA)

Table 3: Velocity Components

AoA Vx Vy

0 1.721119064 0

2 1.720070605 0.0600661891

5 1.714569686 0.1500054104

7 1.708290103 0.2097516503

10 1.694971398 0.298869189

4.3 Re = 1,00,000
4.3.1 Setup
1. Time step size – 0.1s
2. Number of Time steps – 60
3. No. of Iterations/time steps -40
4. Density = 1.22 Kg/m^3

14
5. Length = 0.426m
6. Viscosity = 1.789 *10^-5

Density∗Velocity∗Length
To find the velocity, ℜ=
DynamicViscosity

Velocity = 1.721116064m/s

The formula for the Velocity components,

Velocity-X component, V x =V∗cos( AoA)
Velocity-Y component, V y =V∗sin( AoA)

Table 4: Velocity Components

AoA Vx Vy

0 3.442238128 0

2 3.44014121 0.1201323782

5 3.429139373 0.3000108208

7 3.416580207 0.4195033005

10 3.383342796 3.389942796

15
4.4 Comparison of Cl values.

Table 5: CL values compared

Re=20, 000 Re = 50,000 Re = 1,00,000

AoA CL CL CL

0 0.005129 0.004537 0.00585

2 0.120107 0.12575 0.127399

5 0.289575 0.30865 0.312226

7 0.39817 0.43349 0.438522

10 0.549842 0.619861 0.642622

16
 Figure 9: CL v AoA Comparison for Various Re

4.5 Observation
The CL is visibly increasing w.r.t to AoA namely from 5degree of AoA. Therefore, the further
simulations are done only for 5, 7 and 10 degrees of AoA.

17
 5. Simulation for Forward Swept wing

In the Base Paper, the geometric modification was also experimented. They had converted the
straight wing to Forward Sweep configuration of 25degrees.
Here, the straight wing was modified into a 25degree forward sweep in SOLIDWORKS and
simulated in ANSYS. Simulations are done only for 5, 7 and 10 degrees of AoA.

5.1 Modifying the Straight wing to forward sweep wing

Modified the Straight to Forward sweep for the forward sweep angle of 25degrees.

Figure 10: Modified Model with 25degree forward sweep

5.2 Importing to Ansys Workbench and Geometry

1. Saved the model IGS file format and is Imported to Geometry in ANSYS Workbench.
2. Created two domains around the model.

18
 a. Inner Domain is of the dimension 0cm towards the -Z direction and 50cm towards
all directions.
b. Outer Domain is of the dimension 0cm towards the -Z direction and 100cm towards
all directions.
3. Inserting Boolean subtract operation to subtract the model from the domains.
4. Names-selecting the inlet, outlet, symmetry and the wall of the Outer domain.

Figure 11: Geometry

19
5.3 Meshing

The types of Mesh used: -

1. Body Sizing of Outer Domain of size 5cm.
2. Body sizing of the Inner Domain of size 3cm.
3. Face Sizing of the Model of 1cm.
4. Face Meshing of the Inlet, Outlet and 3 walls of the Outer domain.
5. Adding Inflation layers

The number of Nodes in the Mesh = 271356

The number of Elements in the Mesh = 1493916

Figure 12: Mesh

20
5.4 Setup

1. Solver Type
a. Type - Pressure Based
b. Velocity Formulation – Absolute
c. Time – Transient
2. Viscous Model – k-epsilon Realizable
3. Inlet – Velocity Inlet
4. Outlet – Pressure Outlet
5. Pressure Velocity Coupling Scheme – Coupled
6. Flux Type - Rhie-Chow: distance based
7. Time step size – 0.1s
8. Number of Time steps – 60
9. No. of Iterations/time steps -40
10. Density = 1.22 Kg/m^3
11. Length = 0.426m
12. Viscosity = 1.789 *10^-5

Density∗Velocity∗Length
To find the Velocity, ℜ=
DynamicViscosity

The formula for the Velocity components,

Velocity-X component, Vx=V∗cos( AoA)
Velocity-Y component, Vy =V∗sin (AoA)

21
5.4.1 Re = 20,000

Velocity = 0.6884476256m/s

Table 6: Velocity Components

AoA Vx Vy

5 0.6858278745 0.06000216415

7 0.6833160414 0.0839006601

10 0.0.6779885592 0.1195476756

5.4.1.1 Results

Table 7: Cl and Cd values from the Simulation

Re = 20,000

AoA CL CD

5 0.41796007 0.34426245

7 0.58187167 0.33990526

10 0.30130556 0.34630792

22
5.4.2 Re = 50,000

Velocity = 1.721119064m/s

Table 8: Velocity Components

AoA Vx Vy

5 1.714569686 0.1500054104

7 1.708290103 0.2097516503

10 1.694971398 0.298869189

5.4.2.1 Results
Table 9: Cl and Cd values from the Simulation
Re = 50,000

AoA CL CD

5 0.32529643 0.26896529

7 0.45930649 0.26742713

10 0.67115379 0.26423638

23
5.4.3 Re = 1,00,000

Velocity = 3.442238128m/s

Table 10: Velocity Components

AoA Vx Vy

5 3.429139373 0.3000108208

7 3.416580207 0.4195033005

10 3.383342796 3.389942796

5.4.3.1 Result

Table 11: Cl and Cd values from the Simulation

Re = 1,00,000

AoA CL CD

5 0.33510041 0.22387352

7 0.47243737 0.22260758

10 0.69595749 0.22018307

24
5.5 Results Compared

Figure 13: Cl values Compared

25
 6. Simulation for Leading Edge Modification

The Forward Sweep Modified wing was again modified along the leading edge. The leading edge
was modified similar to a sinusoidal wave. Simulations are done only for 5, 7 and 10 degrees of
AoA.

6.1 Modifying the Leading Edge of the Forward Sweep Wing.

Modified the leading edge of the Forward sweep wing of 25degrees with Certain Wavelength and
Amplitude.

Figure 14: Leading Edge Modification

Wavelength = 36.172mm
Amplitude = 18mm

26
6.2 Importing to Ansys Workbench and Geometry

1. Saved the model IGS file format and is Imported to Geometry in ANSYS Workbench.
2. Created two domains around the model.
a. Inner Domain is of the dimension 0cm towards the -Z direction and 50cm towards
all directions.
b. Outer Domain is of the dimension 0cm towards the -Z direction and 100cm towards
all directions.
3. Inserting Boolean subtract operation to subtract the model from the domains.
4. Names-selecting the inlet, outlet, symmetry and the wall of the Outer domain.

Figure 15: Geometry

27
6.3 Meshing

The types of Mesh used: -

1. Body Sizing of Outer Domain of size 5cm.
2. Body sizing of the Inner Domain of size 3cm.
3. Face Sizing of the Model of 1cm.
4. Face Meshing of the Inlet, Outlet and 3 walls of the Outer domain.
5. Adding Inflation layers
The number of Nodes in the Mesh = 267451
The number of Elements in the Mesh = 1489448

Figure 16: Mesh

28
6.4 Setup

1. Solver Type
a. Type - Pressure Based
b. Velocity Formulation – Absolute
c. Time – Transient
2. Viscous Model – k-epsilon Realizable
3. Inlet – Velocity Inlet
4. Outlet – Pressure Outlet
5. Pressure Velocity Coupling Scheme – Coupled
6. Flux Type - Rhie-Chow: distance based
7. Time step size – 0.1s
8. Number of Time steps – 60
9. No. of Iterations/time steps -40
10. Density = 1.22 Kg/m^3
11. Length = 0.426m
12. Viscosity = 1.789 *10^-5
Density∗Velocity∗Length
To find the Velocity, ℜ=
DynamicViscosity

The formula for the Velocity components,

Velocity-X component, V x =V∗cos( AoA)
Velocity-Y component, V y =V∗sin( AoA)

29
6.4.1 Re = 20,000

Velocity = 0.684476256m/s

Table 12: Velocity Components

AoA Vx Vy

5 0.6858278745 0.06000216415

7 0.6833160414 0.0839006601

10 0.0.6779885592 0.1195476756

6.4.1.1 Results

Table 13: Cl and Cd values

AoA CL CD

5 0.30192437 0.34425695

7 0.41877647 0.34192431

10 0.58312449 0.33734579

30
6.4.2 Re = 50,000

Velocity = 1.721119064m/s

Table 14: Velocity Components

AoA Vx Vy

5 1.714569686 0.1500054104

7 1.708290103 0.2097516503

10 1.694971398 0.298869189

6.4.2.1 Results

Table 15: Cl and Cd values

AoA CL CD

5 0.32535634 0.24618774

7 0.45943642 0.24460398

10 0.66979339 0.24196476

31
6.4.3 Re = 1,00,000

Velocity = 3.442238128m/s

Table 16: Velocity Components

AoA Vx Vy

5 3.429139373 0.3000108208

7 3.416580207 0.4195033005

10 3.383342796 3.389942796

6.4.3.1 Results

Table 17: Cl and Cd values

AoA CL CD

5 0.33297859 0.18962837

7 0.46853883 0.18824755

10 0.68835091 0.18628917

32
 7. Observations

7.1 Comparison between Straight Wing, 25 degree forward swept wing and Leading edge
modified wing.

Figure 17: Cl Comparison for Re=20,000

33
 Figure 18: Cl comparison for Re = 50,000

Figure 19: Cl comparison for Re = 1,00,000

34
 8. Skin Friction Coefficient Comparison

The skin friction coefficient is an important dimensionless parameter in boundary-layer flows. It

specifies the fraction of the local dynamic pressure, that is felt as shear stress on the surface. It
provides the correct order of magnitude and parametric dependence on Reynolds number.
τw
CF=
1 2
ρV
2
The CF is compared along the symmetry of all the wing configuration. The two series of points
plotted from position 0cm to 42.6cm are the CF along the surface of the model. The upper series
of points indicate the CF along the upper surface of the model and the lower series of points
indicate the CF lower surface of the model.

8.1 Skin Friction comparison at Re=20,000 and AoA=5

Figure 20: CF for Straight Wing

35
 Figure 21: CF for Forward Swept Wing

Figure 22: CF for Modified Leading Edge

36
8.2 Skin Friction comparison at Re=20,000 and AoA=7

Figure 23: CF for Straight Wing

Figure 24: CF for Forward Swept Wing

37
 Figure 25: CF for Modified Leading Edge
8.3 Skin Friction comparison at Re=20,000 and AoA=10

Figure 26: CF for Straight Wing

38
 Figure 27: CF for forward swept Wing

Figure 28: CF for Modified Leading Edge

39
8.4 Skin Friction comparison at Re=50,000 and AoA=5

Figure 29: CF for Straight Wing

Figure 30: CF for Forward Swept Wing

40
 Figure 31: CF for Modified Leading Edge
8.5 Skin Friction comparison at Re=50,000 and AoA=7

Figure 32: CF for Straight Wing

41
 Figure 33: CF for Forward Swept Wing

Figure 34: CF for Modified Leading Edge

42
8.5 Skin Friction comparison at Re=50,000 and AoA=10

Figure 35: CF for Straight Wing

Figure 36: CF for Forward Swept Wing

43
 Figure 37: CF for Modified Leading Edge
8.6 Skin Friction comparison at Re=1,00,000 and AoA=5

Figure 38: CF for Straight Wing

44
 Figure 39: CF for Forward Swept Wing

Figure 40: CF for Modified Leading Edge

45
8.7 Skin Friction comparison at Re=1,00,000 and AoA=7

Figure 41: CF for Stright Wing

Figure 42: CF for Forward Swept Wing

46
 Figure 43: CF for Modified Leading Edge
8.8 Skin Friction comparison at Re=1,00,000 and AoA=10

Figure 44: CF for Straight Wing

47
 Figure 45: CF for Forward Swept Wing

Figure 46: CF for Modified Leading Edge

48
 9. Conclusions and Suggestions for future research

9.1 Conclusion

Simulations and studies of CL, CD, and CF behaviors were performed on different configurations
and modifications of the model's wings to help identify the benefits and improvements of the
different Re and AoA aerodynamics. No improvements in the characteristics of the modified
leading edge of the wing was observed. The simulation for modified leading edge needs to be
rerun in ANSYS Fluent by improving the mesh and increasing the number of iterations and time
step size. Modeling and simulation work suggests that forward swept wings may be superior to
straight wings in seating motion. To better understand the function of the leading edge in various
aerodynamic characteristics, wing sweeps and leading edge changes need to be further calculated
and optimized.

9.2 Suggestions for future research

This project has yielded many results on the characteristics due to the change in forward sweep
and leading edge modifications. To able to study more accurately and compare the results, it is
observed that there needs to be significant increase in the Meshing. The nodes and elements of
the mesh needs to improved significantly. The simulation needs to run for higher number of
iterations and timestep size to accurately plot the results. Various other factors are also necessary
to be recorded to able study and compare. The simulations should be performed for various
forward sweep angles and varying leading edge modifications.

49
 References

Jeffrey I Lipton., Robert J. Wood., Scott Kuindersma., A Variable Forward-Sweep Wing Design
for Enhanced Perching in Micro Aerial Vehicles, 10.2514/6.2017-0011

Moore, J., Cory, R., and Tedrake, R., “Robust Post-Stall Perching with a Simple Fixed-Wing
Glider Using LQR-Trees,” Bioinspiration & Biomimetics, Vol. 9, No. 2, June 2014, pp. 025013.

Desbiens, A. L., Asbeck, A. T., and Cutkosky, M. R., “Landing, Perching and Taking off from
Vertical Surfaces,” The International Journal of Robotics Research, Vol. 30, No. 3, Jan. 2011, pp.
355–370.

Wickenheiser, A. M. and Garcia, E., “Optimization of Perching Maneuvers Through Vehicle

Morphing,” Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, Vol. 31, No. 4, 2008, pp. 815–823.

Gomez, J. C. and Garcia, E., “Morphing Unmanned Aerial Vehicles,” Smart Materials and
Structures, Vol. 20, No. 10, 2011, pp. 103001.

Wright, K., Investigating the Use of Wing Sweep for Pitch Control of a Small Unmanned Air
Vehicle, Ph.D. thesis, University of California, San Diego, 2011.

Sachin Mishra, Sahil Garg., Flapping Wing Micro Air Vehicle Having Tendency of Gliding and
Hovering, Symposium on Applied Aerodynamics and Design of Aerospace Vehicle (SAROD
2013) November 21-23rd, 2013.

50
 Department of Aerospace Engineering

DECLARATION

Academic Year: Title of the Project: Name of the Guide:

2021-2022 EFFECT OF VARIABLE SWEEP Dr. A. SAMSON RATNA

ON THE AERODYNAMICS OF KUMAR
GEOMETRICALLY MODIFIED
AIRFOIL FOR MAV AND UAV
APPLICATIONS

I understand that Karunya Institute of Technology and Sciences (Deemed to be

University) shall hold the copyrights of all thesis/dissertations submitted to the
Institution.

I will republish the entire thesis / extracts of the thesis only with the
permission of Karunya Institute of Technology and Sciences (Deemed to be
University) and I am liable to pay 40% of royalty to the Institution.

If I engage in documenting any research findings with an intention of

publishing it for commercial purpose, I shall obtain a NOC from the Office
of the Registrar prior to engaging in such activities.

Name of the candidate: TRAVIS JUDE

Reg. No. URK18AE012

Signature of the candidate:

51
 RESUME

Name Travis Jude

Reg. No URK18AE012
Jude Francis.,
Father' s Name &
Phone number
+971558759457

19D/8B/4, Sharon St 5th extn, Nesamony

Address for communication Nagar, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District,
Tamil Nadu – 629001.

Contact details
travisjude.official@gmail.com, 6385804657
(Email & Mobile No.)

Educational Qualifications: B. Tech Aerospace Engineering

SSLC HSC/ Diploma
82 65
(% of marks and Institution) (As above)
B. Tech M. Tech
73.5 -
(up to 7th Semester) (up to 3rd Semester)
Future plan Higher Studies Area of Interest Design.
In-plant training - IAESTE -
Placement status
Nil Mentor name Dr. Aldin Justin
(Company Name)
Project title (UG)
Effect of variable sweep on the aerodynamics of geometrically
modified aerofoil for MAV and UAV applications.
Dr. A. Samson Ratna Kumar, Assistant Professor, Aerospace
Project Guide
Engg., KITS
Conference attended
GRE / IELTS 304 / 7.5
Academic and sports
-
awards received
Software skills developed ANSYS, SOLIDWORKS, Auto-CAD, CATIA

Date: Signature

52