Abstract
This study presents a computational fluid dynamics (CFD) analysis of a NACA 2421 airfoil
using ANSYS Fluent. The airfoil geometry was modeled based on standard NACA four-digit
airfoil coordinates, and steady-state incompressible flow simulations were conducted at angles of
attack of 8° and 10°. Pressure and velocity contours were examined to understand the flow
behavior, and aerodynamic performance was quantified using lift and drag coefficients. The
results demonstrate increased pressure differential and lift with increasing angle of attack,
consistent with established aerodynamic theory.
1. Introduction
Aerodynamic characteristics of airfoils directly influence aircraft performance and structural
loading. Accurate prediction of lift and drag forces is essential for aircraft structural mechanics
and material design. The NACA 2421 airfoil, a cambered four-digit airfoil, is widely applied in
low-speed aerodynamic applications. This paper investigates the aerodynamic behavior of the
NACA 2421 airfoil at two angles of attack using CFD methods, with emphasis on pressure
distribution, velocity fields, and resulting aerodynamic coefficients.
2. Geometry Modeling
The NACA 2421 airfoil coordinates were obtained from a validated airfoil database. These
coordinates were imported into ANSYS Design Modeler to generate a smooth two-dimensional
airfoil profile. A sufficiently large C-shaped fluid domain was created around the airfoil to
minimize boundary interference. A Boolean subtraction was performed to remove the airfoil
body from the fluid domain, ensuring an appropriate computational flow region.
3. Mesh Generation
Meshing was performed using ANSYS Meshing with particular attention to near-wall flow
resolution. Inflation layers were applied along the airfoil surface to accurately capture boundary
layer effects and steep velocity gradients. Local mesh refinement was implemented around the
airfoil using a body-of-influence region. Mesh quality metrics were verified to ensure numerical
stability and solution accuracy.
4. Numerical Methodology
4.1 Solver and Flow Model
A steady-state, pressure-based solver was employed in ANSYS Fluent. The flow was assumed
incompressible, as the Mach number remained below 0.3. Air was modeled as the working fluid
with a density of 1.225 kg/m³ and a dynamic viscosity of 1.7894 × 10⁻⁵ Pa·s.
4.2 Boundary Conditions
The inlet boundary was defined as a velocity inlet, with velocity components adjusted to
represent angles of attack of 8° and 10°. The outlet was specified as a pressure outlet with zero
gauge pressure. The airfoil surface was treated as a no-slip wall.
4.3 Solution Controls
The SIMPLE algorithm was used for pressure–velocity coupling. Standard initialization was
applied, and convergence was monitored through residual reduction and stabilization of lift and
drag coefficients.
5. Results and Discussion
5.1 Pressure and Velocity Contours
At both angles of attack, lower pressure and higher velocity were observed on the upper surface
of the airfoil, generating lift. The stagnation point occurred near the leading edge, where velocity
approached zero and pressure reached its maximum value. Increasing the angle of attack from 8°
to 10° resulted in a larger pressure differential between the upper and lower surfaces, indicating
increased lift generation.