Article Sidebar

Submitted
Sep 11, 2026
Published
Aug 31, 2026
Download
.pdf
Statistic
Read Counter : 0 Download : 0

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Main Article Content

Abstract

This study is a continuation of previous research, with a special discussion on optimizing the aerodynamics of the NACA 2412 aerofoil by applying the morphing concept. The morphing aerofoil concept was selected because it can change shape as required, offering the potential for significant improvements in aerodynamic performance. This study focuses on optimizing the morphing aerofoil shape to achieve the maximum lift to drag ratio ( CL/CD) in each change of angle of attack. A Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) approach was used to simulate variations in speed and angle of attack to identify the most aerodynamically efficient morphing aerofoil configuration. The results of this study are expected to contribute to the development of morphing aerofoil designs that not only improve aerodynamic efficiency but also refine the concept design stage, so that the aerofoil is expected to be ideal and superior in its class. Overall, the simulation results show an aerodynamic performance that is in accordance with the theoretical expectations for the aerofoil configuration with a morphing NACA 2412 aerofoil. The morphing concept applied to the 2D airfoil section showed that its aerodynamic effectiveness strongly depends on the flight conditions, particularly the angle of attack. At 0° AoA, morphing the aft 30% of the chord provided a substantial aerodynamic benefit, boosting lift from Cl = 0.1990 to Cl = 1.3178 and improving Cl/Cd from 21.43 to 47.75, yielding a 122.76% increase. This is clearly reflected in the static pressure contours, where the morph-induced curvature strengthened the suction on the upper surface without causing large drag penalties. However, at higher AoAs (4°, 8°, and 12°), the morphing effect became progressively less efficient. Although the lift continues to increase after morphing, the drag increases at a much faster rate owing to stronger adverse pressure gradients and an earlier onset of pressure recovery distortion. As shown in the pressure contours, the altered aft section created additional pressure buildup near the trailing edge, causing a higher profile drag. Consequently, Cl/Cd decreased by 11.12%, 28.61%, and 13.26% at 4°, 8°, and 12°, respectively.

Keywords

Morphing Aerofoil NACA 2412 CFD Aerodynamic Optimization

Article Details

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

How to Cite
Daffa, F. ., Susilo, T., Suprianto, A., Chaeroni, A. ., & Bradikta, D. (2026). Aerodynamic Performance Optimization of NACA 2412 Aerofoil by Morphing Concept using CFD. Jurnal Teknologi Kedirgantaraan, 11(2), 177-186. https://doi.org/10.35894/jtk.v11i2.411
Download Citation
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
BibTeX

References

  1. F. Moens, “Augmented Aircraft Performance with the Use of Morphing Technology for a Turboprop Regional Aircraft Wing,” Biomimetics, vol. 4, no. 3, p. 64, Sept. 2019, doi: 10.3390/biomimetics4030064.
  2. J. Zhu, J. Yang, W. Zhang, X. Gu, and H. Zhou, “Design and applications of morphing aircraft and their structures,” Front. Mech. Eng., vol. 18, no. 3, Aug. 2023, doi: 10.1007/s11465-023-0750-6.
  3. T. Susilo, F. Daffa Arrahman, A. Suprianto, and W. Cesar, “Concept and Preliminary Design of a Light-Weight Electric-Powered Aircraft with Two Seats Capacity,” European Alliance for Innovation, Jan. 2024. doi: 10.4108/eai.8-11-2023.2345841.
  4. J. H. Yedidja Malega, A. Suprianto, and M. H. Widanto, “Simulation of Stress Distribution on Slotted Flap Mechanism Using Finite Element Method,” European Alliance for Innovation, Jan. 2024. doi: 10.4108/eai.8-11-2023.2345838.
  5. R. Hentschke, B. Schurmann, J. Rabe, J. Chem. DTU Research Library (2020)
  6. T. F. Wunderlich, S. Dähne, L. Reimer, A. Schuster. AIAA (2021)
  7. K. Tsiakas, X. Trompoukis, V. Asouti, K. Giannakoglou, G. Rogé, S. Julisson. Fluids (2024)
  8. Z.A. Rana , F. Mauret, J.M. Sanchez-Gil, K. Zeng, Z. Hou, I. Dayyani and L. Könözsy. Computational analysis and design of an aerofoil with a morphing tail for improved aerodynamic performance in the transonic regime, Centre for Computational Engineering Sciences, School of Aerospace, Transport and Manufacturing, Cranfield University, Cranfield, UK. (2021)
  9. Haris Moazam Sheikh, Sangjoon Lee, Jinge Wang, and Philip S. Marcus. Airfoil optimization using Design-
  10. by-Morphing. Journal of Computational Design and Engineering, 2023, 10, 1443–1459, (2023), DOI: 10.1093/jcde/qwad059
  11. J. Sun, Q. Guan, Y. Liu, and J. Leng, “Morphing aircraft based on smart materials and structures: A state-of-the-art review,” Journal of Intelligent Material Systems and Structures, vol. 27, no. 17, pp. 2289–2312, July 2016, doi: 10.1177/1045389x16629569.
  12. J. Fu, W. Shyy, H. Qiu, and X. Liu, “Effects of flexibility and aspect ratio on the aerodynamic performance of flapping wings,” Bioinspir. Biomim., vol. 13, no. 3, p. 036001, Mar. 2018, doi: 10.1088/1748-3190/aaaac1.
  13. A. Dharmdas et al., “An Experimental and Simulation Study of the Active Camber Morphing Concept on Airfoils Using Bio-Inspired Structures.,” Biomimetics, vol. 8, no. 2, p. 251, June 2023, doi: 10.3390/biomimetics8020251.
  14. I. Dimino, G. Diodati, D. Flauto, R. Pecora, and A. Concilio, “Actuation System Design for a Morphing Wing Trailing Edge,” MENG, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 138–148, July 2014, doi: 10.2174/2212797607666140429005538.
  15. Z. Lyu and J. R. R. A. Martins, “Aerodynamic Shape Optimization of an Adaptive Morphing Trailing-Edge Wing,” Journal of Aircraft, vol. 52, no. 6, pp. 1951–1970, July 2015, doi: 10.2514/1.c033116.
  16. Z. Lyu, G. K. Kenway, and J. R. R. A. Martins, “RANS-based Aerodynamic Shape Optimization Investigations of the Common Research Model Wing,” American Institute Of Aeronautics Astronautics, Jan. 2014. doi: 10.2514/6.2014-0567.
  17. S. S. Chauhan and J. R. R. A. Martins, “RANS-Based Aerodynamic Shape Optimization of a Wing Considering Propeller–Wing Interaction,” Journal of Aircraft, vol. 58, no. 3, pp. 497–513, Mar. 2021, doi: 10.2514/1.c035991.
  18. A. S. Kurhade et al., “Optimizing Aerofoil Design: A Comprehensive Analysis of Aerodynamic Efficiency through CFD Simulations and Wind Tunnel Experiments,” jmmf, pp. 713–724, Sept. 2024, doi: 10.18311/jmmf/2024/45361.
  19. A. V. Popov, M. Mamou, Y. Mebarki, R. Botez, and L. T. Grigorie, “Real Time Morphing Wing Optimization Validation Using Wind-Tunnel Tests,” Journal of Aircraft, vol. 47, no. 4, pp. 1346–1355, July 2010, doi: 10.2514/1.47431.
  20. M. Selig, R. Deters, and G. Wiliamson, “Wind Tunnel Testing Airfoils at Low Reynolds Numbers,” American Institute Of Aeronautics Astronautics, Jan. 2011. doi: 10.2514/6.2011-875.
  21. A. S. Kurhade et al., “Optimizing Aerofoil Design: A Comprehensive Analysis of Aerodynamic Efficiency through CFD Simulations and Wind Tunnel Experiments,” jmmf, pp. 713–724, Sept. 2024, doi: 10.18311/jmmf/2024/45361.
  22. E. Ting, D. Chaparro, N. Nguyen, and G. E. C. Fujiwara, “Optimization of Variable-Camber Continuous Trailing-Edge Flap Configuration for Drag Reduction,” Journal of Aircraft, vol. 55, no. 6, pp. 2217–2239, Oct. 2018, doi: 10.2514/1.c034810.
  23. M. Rivers and A. Dittberner, “Experimental Investigations of the NASA Common Research Model in the NASA Langley National Transonic Facility and NASA Ames 11-Ft Transonic Wind Tunnel (Invited),” American Institute Of Aeronautics Astronautics, Jan. 2011. doi: 10.2514/6.2011-1126.
  24. Q. Ai, M. Azarpeyvand, and P. M. Weaver, “Design and mechanical testing of a variable stiffness morphing trailing edge flap,” Journal of Intelligent Material Systems and Structures, vol. 29, no. 4, pp. 669–683, July 2017, doi: 10.1177/1045389x17721028.
  25. J. Urnes and N. Nguyen, “A Mission Adaptive Variable Camber Flap Control System to Optimize High Lift and Cruise Lift to Drag Ratios of Future N+3 Transport Aircraft,” American Institute Of Aeronautics Astronautics, Jan. 2013. doi: 10.2514/6.2013-214.
  26. M. Bashir, M. H. Negahban, R. M. Botez, and T. Wong, “Numerical Simulation of the Transient Flow around the Combined Morphing Leading-Edge and Trailing-Edge Airfoil,” Biomimetics, vol. 9, no. 2, p. 109, Feb. 2024, doi: 10.3390/biomimetics9020109.
  27. D. I. Papadimitriou and K. C. Giannakoglou, “Aerodynamic Shape Optimization Using First and Second Order Adjoint and Direct Approaches,” Arch Computat Methods Eng, vol. 15, no. 4, pp. 447–488, Aug. 2008, doi: 10.1007/s11831-008-9025-y.
  28. D. Dopico, Y. Zhu, A. Sandu, and C. Sandu, “Direct and Adjoint Sensitivity Analysis of Ordinary Differential Equation Multibody Formulations,” Journal of Computational and Nonlinear Dynamics, vol. 10, no. 1, Sept. 2014, doi: 10.1115/1.4026492.
  29. K. C. Giannakoglou and D. I. Papadimitriou, “Adjoint Methods for Shape Optimization,” Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2008, pp. 79–108. doi: 10.1007/978-3-540-72153-6_4.