1st International Conference on Advances in Science, Engineering and Robotics Technology 2019 (ICASERT 2019)

Numerical Assessment of the Backward Facing Step

for NACA 0015 Airfoil using Computational Fluid
Dynamics
Asif Kabir Md. Saadbin Chowdhury Md. Jahirul Islam
Dept. of Mechanical Engineering Dept. of Mechanical Engineering Dept. of Mechanical Engineering
Bangladesh University of Engineering Bangladesh University of Engineering Bangladesh University of Engineering
and Technology (BUET) and Technology (BUET) and Technology (BUET)
Dhaka, Bangladesh Dhaka, Bangladesh Dhaka, Bangladesh
asifkabir121@gmail.com saadshovon@gmail.com j.i.munna319@gmail.com

Mehran Islam
Dept. of Offshore Engineering
Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman
Maritime University (BSMRMU)
Dhaka, Bangladesh
mehran.islam.92@gmail.com

Abstract—The objective of this work was to investigate the force has two components. The vertical component is known
lift and drag characteristics of a NACA 0015 airfoil with a as lift and the horizontal component is known as drag. Fig 1.1
backward facing step. For a free stream velocity of 30m/s, the shows the forces acting on an airfoil.
point of separation was determined via CFD analysis for an
increasing angle of attack. A backward facing step was then
introduced just prior to the point of separation which extended
till the trailing edge. Computational studies were conducted
with the goal of enhancing the aerodynamic performance of the
airfoil by inserting several backward facing steps of gradually
increasing depth. The CFD analysis was conducted for 30 m/s
wind speed, with steps placed just prior to the point of
separation for 18° angle of attack. The results produced show
that as much as a 26% reduction in drag is possible by
introducing the step. But at the same time, about 12% reduction
in the lift was also observed. A wind tunnel test on a NACA 0015
was also conducted to verify the results from CFD analysis.
Predominantly the goal of this thesis was to numerically
determine whether or not the aerodynamic performance of an Fig. 1.1: Force vectors on an airfoil
airfoil can be enhanced by introducing a backward facing step
on the upper surface of the airfoil. The drag FD and lift FL are represented in terms of two
dimensionless coefficients: the drag coefficient and Lift
Keywords—backward facing step, computational fluid coefficient, defined as
dynamics, life force, drag force, separation delay ிವ
‫ܥ‬஽ ൌ భ మ (1)
I. INTRODUCTION ఘ ௎ ஺
మ ಮ ಮ

An Airfoil is a structure, piece, or body intended to acquire ‫ܥ‬௅ ൌ భ

ிಽ
(2)
a valuable response upon itself in its movement through the ఘ ௎ మ஺
మ ಮ ಮ
air. An airfoil might be close to a level plate, yet for the most
part, it has a cross-area painstakingly formed as per its planned
application or capacity. Airfoils are utilized on the airplane as
wings to deliver lift or as propeller sharp edges to create push.
Both these powers are created opposite to the wind current.
Drag is an outcome of the generation of lift/push and acts
parallel to the wind current. Airfoil shapes are intended to give
high lift esteems at low drag for given flight conditions. The
airfoil makes a circumstance where the speed over the airfoil
is higher than the speed beneath the airfoil. As per Bernoulli's
guideline, a fluid or gas, territories with high relative speed
make lower weight frameworks, and zones with low relative
speed make high-weight frameworks. So, the upper surface
pressure is lower than the lower surface pressure. This
pressure difference creates a resultant force. This resultant
Fig. 1.2: Lift and drag curves for typical airfoil.

978-1-7281-3445-1/19/$31.00 ©2019 IEEE

 The lift created by an airfoil relies upon such factors as
Speed of the wind stream, Density of the air, Total region of
the airfoil, Angle of assault. Fig 1.2 demonstrates a lift and
drag bend acquired in wind passage testing for the distinctive
assault of edge.
The bend speaks to an airfoil with a positive camber so
some lift is created at zero approaches. With an expanded
approach, lift increments in a generally straight connection. At
around 18 degrees this airfoil slows down, and lift tumbles off
rapidly past that. The drop in lift can be clarified by the
activity of the upper-surface limit layer, which isolates and
extraordinarily thickens over the upper surface at and past the
slow down point. The thickened limit layer's removal
thickness changes the airfoil's powerful shape, specifically, it
diminishes its viable camber, which alters the general stream
field in order to decrease the flow and the lift. The thicker limit
layer additionally causes a huge increment in weight drag,
with the goal that the general drag expands strongly close and
past the slow down point. In this way, stream partition
happens over the airfoil top surface when the approach (AOA)
surpasses a specific worth the "stalling" approach.
At the end of the day, stream partition happens when the
limit layer goes far enough against an unfavorable weight
inclination that the speed of the limit layer in respect to the
article falls nearly to zero. The liquid stream winds up
separated from the outside of the article and rather takes the
types of vortexes and vortices. In optimal design, stream
detachment can regularly bring about expanded drag,
especially weight drag which is brought about by the weight
differential between the front and back surfaces of the item as
it goes through the liquid.
II. LITERATURE REVIEW
Boundary layer separation is a phenomenon that designers
normally attempt to avoid, as it leads to a decrease in lift and
an increase in drag. This separation may occur anywhere an
adverse pressure gradient exists, such as on wings, airfoils,
turbomachinery, and engine inlets. This problem is especially
prevalent at low Reynolds numbers when the laminar flow is
prevalent.
One of the earliest investigations of the flow features near
surfaces structured with spherical dimples was made by
Bearman and Harvey [1]. This study demonstrated the
effectiveness of dimples as a technique of causing early
boundary layer transition without the drag penalties associated
with sand roughness. Unlike a smooth or roughed round ball,
the dimpled ball drag curve remains almost constant at the
post-critical Reynolds number. This confirms the dimples
have a more beneficial effect on the drag reduction and
laminar-turbulent transition than sand roughness.
Experiments carried out with the dimpled circular cylinder
[2] have the shallow dimples cause the critical drag reduction
event to occur at a lower Reynolds number than that for a
smooth cylinder. It was concluded that the dimples affect the
flow around a circular cylinder in a similar manner as the flow
around a golf ball. Experimental studies of a cross-flow
dimpled cylinder [3], [4] have revealed that the separation
point is moved in the downstream direction. This results in a
smaller wake region and a reduction in the pressure drag.
A two-dimensional groove is the limiting case of a closely
spaced spanwise array of dimples. The background relevant to
the rectangular-shaped groove can be found in many existing
publications. The data obtained by Zhak [5] have shown the
laminar-turbulent flow transition inside the rectangular cavity
can occur via the specific mechanism of the Taylor-Görtler
instability The available publications demonstrate that steps
engraved into a solid surface generate 3D or 2D vortex flow
structures that energize the boundary layer and reduce
pressure losses over a wide range of Reynolds numbers.
Besides Mahdi [6] and Asif [7] have all also used a wide range
of Reynolds numbers for NACA 0012. As air flows over an
indented surface treatment, such as a dimple or groove, a
complex flow pattern develops. The flow inside the step is
highly time-dependent. This unsteadiness causes instability
with a laminar boundary layer, causing the boundary layer to
begin the transition to turbulent flow. The turbulent flow
promotes the mixing of high momentum flow in the boundary
layer, which helps to combat the adverse pressure gradient.
Lake [8], Rouser [9], and Khalatov [10] have all recently
utilized these strategies in the plan of improved detached
stream partition control methods for instances of laminar
division. The spaces don't influence the partition of a fierce
limit layer, as the impacts of blending have just been
acknowledged through the tempestuous idea of the stream.
The effectiveness of the recessed technique depends on
several factors, including the location of the indentation
relative to the separation bubble, the geometry of the step, and
the pre-recess boundary layer thickness. Albeit a few
examinations have surveyed the adequacy of indented surface
medications for deferring limit layer detachment, conclusive
plan rules have never been distributed. This investigation
analyzed the past writing with an eye towards deciding the
ideal position, profundity, and length of the means. The best
area for the notches or dimples is only preceding the locale of
partition. So, our objective was to introduce a backward facing
step just prior to the point of separation on the upper surface
of a NACA 0015 airfoil and investigate its aerodynamic
performance using Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) and
verifying the CFD results by an experimental approach.
III. METHODOLOGY
A. Formulation of the Flow Problem
The streaming issue was set up as an airfoil fixed at a
specific approach with air streaming over it at a given free
stream speed. The objective was to study the aerodynamic
performance of the airfoil using a backward facing step that
extends till the trailing edge of the airfoil. The configuration
of a step is defined by its location on the airfoil chord and its
depth expressed in the terms of airfoil maximum thickness.
The employment of the step to control the flow field around
the airfoil comprises the passive flow control used in this
study.
B. Parameter Range
There are a few parameters which can influence the
stream field around an airfoil. Both the airfoil and step
profiles constitute the geometric parameters. The most
important ones are the shape of an airfoil (symmetric or
cambered); chord length, which was taken as 19 cm; angle of
attack; chord-wise location of the step; its length and depth
on the upper surface. Fig. 3.1 shows a sketch of a sample
airfoil configuration with a backward facing step defining the
main geometric parameters.
The stream parameters are the free stream speed,
thickness, and consistency assembled as the Reynolds

Fig. 3.1: Geometric parameters associated with airfoil
with backward facing step
number (Re). For this flow problem the free stream velocity
was taken as 30 m/s, density as 1.166 kg/m3 and the viscosity
as 1.8599 × 10-5 kg/s-m, which gave a corresponding
Reynolds number of 357,341 while α was 18 degrees.
C. Computational Details
All of the computational work was done using commercial
software packages. The airfoil profile was generated using
SOLIDWORKS 2016. The profile was then imported into
ANSYS 17.0 FLUENT. All the Pre-processing comprising
generating meshes for all the airfoil configurations, quality
control, setting up of the boundary conditions was done using
FLUENT. FLUENT is a finite volume method based CFD
tool which solves the governing equations of conservation of
mass and momentum. Post-handling including the age of plots
and figures was finished utilizing FLUENT.
The problem was set up as a two-dimensional flow
problem in a single phase. The Cartesian co-ordinate
tomahawks were fixed at the main edge of the airfoil for each
situation. The computational domain comprises of four blocks
for all base airfoil configurations, while the backward facing
step configurations had six mesh blocks. Fig. 3.2 and 3.3 show
Fig. 3.2: Grid distribution around a NACA 0015 airfoil
Fig. 3.2: Grid distribution around a NACA 0015 airfoil with
backward facing step (close).
the grid distribution around a NACA 0015 airfoil. The flow
was modeled as steady, incompressible in the flow domain
comprising several blocks. The fluid chosen was air at 30° C
and 1 atm pressure which was set as the reference values
along with the free-stream velocity set corresponding to the
flow Re for every recreation keep running for the starter
instances of study. The inlet was set as “Velocity Inlet” which
includes all the front, top and bottom edges of the flow
domain. The x and y-speeds are "u", which is characterized
by the Reynolds number utilized and "v". "Spalart-Allmaras"
one condition choppiness model was utilized in FLUENT for
all calculations. This computational model is appropriate for
displaying divider driven streams which come to pass most
normally over streamlined bodies. All the leave limits
consolidated were set as “Pressure Outlet”. With the no-slip
condition, all the airfoil edges together were set as “Wall”.
The stream solver utilized the "SIMPLE" algorithm
calculation for weight speed coupling. Least Squares Cell-
Based strategy was utilized for slope calculations. The
pressure was set as second order, Momentum, and Modified
Turbulent Viscosity were set as Second Order Upwind for
Spatial Discretization computations.
IV. WIND TUNNEL TESTING
A subsonic wind tunnel test on a NACA 0015 airfoil was
conducted to validate some of the results obtained with
numerical studies conducted as a part of this research effort.
The experimental studies were conducted in the Fluid
Mechanics and Machineries Laboratory located in the
Department of Mechanical Engineering at Bangladesh
University of Engineering and Technology. This section
presents the approach followed for the wind tunnel testing of
the NACA 0015 airfoil.
The airfoil was contained in a reasonable sided pipe in
'shut closures' course of action; therefore wind stream was
uniquely over the bent surfaces of the airfoil. Pressure taps
were placed along the top and bottom surfaces of the airfoil.
Each of the pressure taps was numbered according to their
placement. Pressure taps on the upper surface of the airfoil
were numbered 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15
and 16 while taps on the lower surface of the airfoil were
numbered 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30,
31 and 32.
First, the initial readings were taken from each tube of the
Fig. 4.1: Experimental results for 18° AOA, 30 m/s free
stream velocity.
manometer. Second readings were taken after the flow over
the airfoil reached steady condition which was the final value
in centimeter. The differences were converted into the meter.
Comparing the experimental data for a NACA 0015 airfoil at
18° AOA with the CFD result, we can see that our simulation
result matches very closely to the experimental results. The
slight deviation close to the leading edge may result from
friction during the experimental procedure.
V. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
This CFD analysis was conducted on a NACA 0015
airfoil with a chord length of 19 cm and a free stream velocity
of 30 m/s. The temperature taken was 30° C which gave us Fig. 5.3: Velocity contour of NACA 0015 at 16° AOA, 30
air density, ρ = 1.166 kg/m3 and kinematic viscosity, μ = m/s free stream velocity
1.8599 × 10-5 kg/s-m. This gave us Reynold’s number of
357,341 based on the chord length. Based on this Reynold’s
number, the turbulent Spalart-Allmaras model was chosen for
the CFD simulation.
At first, for a base NACA 0015 airfoil, the point of
separation was determined for an increasing angle of attack
from 8° up to 20° and found that for the above conditions, the
stall angle was at 18°. The determination of the separation
point was necessary because, from the literature review, it
was found that the best area for the sudden change in
Fig. 5.4: Velocity contour of NACA 0015 at 20° AOA, 30
geometry is only preceding the locale of partition. Along
m/s free stream velocity
these lines, a retrogressive confronting step was acquainted
Near the trailing edge, a small separated region can be
only earlier with the purpose of detachment on the upper
noticed at 14° AOA. The separation point can be located
surface of the NACA 0015 airfoil and the lift and drag
where the x-wall shear becomes negative. In this case, from
qualities were examined by CFD investigation.
the CFD analysis, it was found to be at x/c = 0.83 from the
From 8° to 10° AOA, no separation can be observed.
leading edge.
However, a separation can be observed near the trailing edge
at 12° AOA. From here on, the separated region grows and
slowly moves towards the leading edge as the angle of attack
increases.

Fig. 5.5: Pressure distribution over NACA 0015 with step

Fig. 5.1: Velocity contour of NACA 0015 at 8° AOA, 30
depth of 1 mm.
m/s free stream velocity

Fig. 5.2: Velocity contour of NACA 0015 at 12° AOA, 30 Fig. 5.6: Pressure distribution over NACA 0015 with step
m/s free stream velocity depth of 3 mm.
 Fig. 5.7: Pressure distribution over NACA 0015 with step
depth of 5 mm.
Stall conditions were reached at 18° AOA. After which the
Fig. 5.9: Reduction in lift coefficient with increasing step
flow over the upper surface of the airfoil becomes more
depth.
separated. A very large increase in the separated region can
be noticed when the angle of attack was increased from 18°
to 20° due to exceeding the stall angle.
In order to place the backward step, the angle of attack
was chosen to be 18° and the free stream velocity to be 30
m/s. For 18° AOA, the separation point was found at x/c =
0.47 from the leading edge. The step was placed at the point
prior to the separation point; at x/c = 0.42 from the leading
edge.
For a step depth of 3 mm, a sharper disturbance can be
observed in the pressure distribution curve. The pressure
starts to drop sharply from the location of the step at x/c =
0.42 until x/c = 0.44, and then the pressure sharply increases
until x/c = 0.52; after which the curve follows a similar trend
to the base airfoil.
For a backward facing step of 5 mm depth, a higher Fig. 5.10: Reduction in lift coefficient with increasing step
pressure drop can be observed that starts from x/c = 0.42 and depth.
stops at x/c = 0.48, followed by a noticeable pressure increase
until x/c = 0.68. From there the curve starts to follow a similar
trend to the base airfoil. The highest lift reduction at 12% and
the highest drag reduction at 26% can be observed. With
increasing step depth, the step length that extends till the
trailing edge also increases.

Fig. 5.11: Increase in lift to drag ratio with increasing step

Fig. 5.8: Comparison of Cp for increasing step depths.
depth.
With the increase of the step depth, both the lift and the
drag decreases. From fig. 5.9 and 5.10, it is evident that both
lift and drag reduction is linear until d/t = 0.07 and becomes
irregular as d/t increases. However, it is clear that the
reduction in the lift is much smaller than the reduction in
drag. As a result, even though the lift is decreasing, for a
larger decrease in drag, we get a higher lift to drag ratio with
increasing step depth. Similar to the trend that can be
observed in fig. 5.9 and 5.10, it can be seen that the increase
in the lift to drag ratio is also linear up until d/t = 0.07 and
becomes irregular as the d/t increases.
 VI. CONCLUSION
The objective of this study was to investigate the
aerodynamic performance of a NACA 0015 airfoil with a
backward facing step for a chosen velocity and angle of
attack. The airfoil with a backward facing step on the upper
surface was shown to have the potential to improve the
streamlined qualities by decreasing the drag coefficients and
expanding the lift-to-drag proportions impressively. The
findings of this study may be summarized as the following:
• It is possible to enhance the aerodynamic performance of
an airfoil by introducing a backward facing step
extending till the trailing edge placed on the upper
surface prior to the separation point.
• Drag coefficient can be reduced by the introduction of
the step.
• Drag coefficient decreases with the increase of step
depth.
• A drag reduction of up to 26% was observed in this
study.
• However, the lift coefficient also decreases with the
increase of step depth. A lift reduction of up to 12% was
observed.
Although the reduction in drag is much higher than the
reduction in lift. As a result, the lift to drag ratio actually
increases with the increase in step depth.
VII. RECOMMENDATION
In this work, we have studied the aerodynamic
performance of a NACA 0015 airfoil with a backward facing
step extending till the trailing edge. The chord length was
taken to be 19 cm, free stream velocity was chosen to be 30
m/s. The step was placed at x/c = 0.42 at 18° AOA. The depth
of the step was varied from d/t = 0 to d/t = 0.18.
• The aerodynamic performance of an airfoil with a
backward facing step can be investigated for different
AOA.
• The backward facing step studied in this work was
perpendicular to the chord. Steps of different angle can
be studied to enhance the aerodynamic performance of
the airfoil.
• The effect of different geometry for surface
modification, for example, a circular step extending till
the trailing edge, can be investigated.
• The aerodynamic characteristics of an asymmetrical
airfoil with a backward facing step should be
investigated.
Further increase in step depth should be investigated. A
backward facing step can be introduced at the lower surface
of the airfoil.
REFERENCES
[1] P. W. Bearman and J. K. Harvey, "The Golf Ball Aerodynamics,"
Aeronautical Quarterly, vol. 27, pp. 112-121, 1976.
[2] P. W. Bearman and J. K. Harvey, "Control of Circular Cylinder Flow
by the use of Dimples," AIAA Journal, vol. 31, pp. 1753-1756, 1993.
[3] A. P. Kozlov, A. V. Shchukin and R. S. Agachev, "The
Hydrodynamics Effects from Spehrical Depressions on the Cross
Flow Cylinder," Izevtia Vuzov, ser. Aviatsionnaya Technika, pp. 27-
34, 1992.
[4] A. S. Kovalenko and A. A. Khaloatov, "Fluid Flow and Heat Transfer
Features at a Cross-Flow of a Dimpled Tube in Confined Space," in
ASME, 2003.
[5] V. D. Zhak, "The Taylor- Görtler Vortices and Three-Dimensional
Flow Evolution in Cavity," Russian Journal of Engineering
Thermophysics, vol. 5, pp. 165-176, 1995.
[8] J. P. Lake, "Flow Separation Prevention on a Turbine Blade in
Cascade at Low Reynolds Number," Wright-Patterson AFB, June
1999.
[9] K. Rouser, "Use of Dimples to Suppress Boundary Layer Separation
on a Low Pressure Turbine Blade," Wright-Patterson AFB, December
2002.
[10] A. A. Khalotov, I. S. Varganov, G. V. Kovalenko and I. I. Borisov,
"Blade of Turbine, Compressor, or Fan with a Flow Separation
Control". Ukraine Patent 44532A, 15 February 2002.