Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Materials Chemistry and Environmental Engineering

DOI: 10.54254/2755-2721/127/2025.20218

CFD Analysis of NACA2412 and NACA0012 at Low

Reynolds (2.2×10*6) Numbers Based on ANSYS Fluent
Zhuo Gong1,a,*
1
School of Mechanical Engineering, SWITU University, Chengdu, China
a. [email protected]
*corresponding author

Abstract: The paper is about analysing two-dimensional aerodynamic characteristics of

NACA 2412 and NACA0012 aerofoils at Reynolds number of 2.2×10*6 using the CFD
method. Numerical analysis was performed through ANSYS Fluent, a fluid simulation
software based on the finite volume method. The geometry model and mesh of the aerofoil
are established by ANSYS Meshing, and the simulation calculation is carried out based on
the pressure solver. During simulation processing, the Spalart Almaras model is used based
on the incompressible continuity equation and Navier-Stokes Equation. The aerodynamic
characteristics such as pressure, velocity distribution, CL and Cd, are systematically analysed
and compared for these two airfoils. The results of the report show that if the aircraft needs
to fly smoothly between 6°-12°, the NACA 0012 is a better choice and if you need to generate
higher lift at low speeds, the NACA 2412 May be more suitable. The result of this paper can
be applied to aircraft design, and new aerofoil development, and guide two-dimensional CFD
analysis to these aerofoils.

Keywords: NACA2412, NACA0012, CFD analysis, Aerodynamic characteristics,

Turbulence models

1. Instruction
Aerofoil is a key concept in aeronautical engineering. An airfoil is a shaped surface which aims to
generate a specific response from the air it traverses. [1]. As the wing's contour and angle of attack
are altered, the forces of lift and drag acting on the wing are correspondingly changed. The
configuration of a wing's cross-sectional profile dictates how the aerodynamic forces interact with
the wing's angle of attack, ultimately shaping the wing's performance. [2]. An appropriately designed
airfoil can enhance the aircraft's efficiency by significantly reducing resistance and increasing lift
force during flight. Therefore, the selection of aerofoils is of great significance in aeronautical
engineering. The NACA airfoil series is introduced by the National Advisory Committee for
Aeronautics (NACA) in the mid-1900s. It is a collection of time-honoured airfoil shapes famous for
their straightforward design principles and parameterisation. Some of these airfoils have had all the
makings of a classic in both academic studies and practical engineering applications. [3]. Among
many NACA aerofoils, NACA2412 and NACA0012 have been widely studied and applied for their
good aerodynamic performance. Specifically, the NACA2412 aerofoil exhibits good lift at a small
Angle of attack and is commonly used in light aircraft and drones; The symmetrical aerofoil of the

© 2025 The Authors. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0
(https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

59
 Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Materials Chemistry and Environmental Engineering
DOI: 10.54254/2755-2721/127/2025.20218

NACA0012 is suitable for smooth flight, performing well at low speeds, and is used with some small
gliders and drones.
Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) simulation is becoming a crucial component within the
realms of aerodynamics and fluid mechanics. [4]. Therefore, the CFD study of the above two aerofoils
can deeply reveal the changes in their aerodynamic characteristics under various flight conditions and
provide references for the subsequent aircraft design and improvement.
The study of aerodynamic characteristics of different aerofoils, especially combined with
numerical simulation and experimental methods, can provide a scientific basis and data support for
aerofoil optimization. With the rapid development of modern Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD),
the aerodynamic characteristics of the aerofoil can be deeply studied using numerical analysis, so that
the performance of the aerofoil can be evaluated comprehensively at the design stage. However, there
are few studies on systematic comparison of these two types of aerofoil. Thus the aerodynamic
characteristics and the specific performance of these two types of aerofoil under different attack
angles are analysed and compared in this paper based on ANSYS Fluent fluid simulation software.
This result will guide different types of existing aircraft in the design stage and provide theoretical
references for the development and testing of new aerofoils.
2. Model simulation
2.1. Geometric models and computational domains
By obtaining Aerofoil coordinates from the Aerofoil Tools database and importing them into Fluent,
the geometry for CFD simulation is created. The geometry of NACA2412 and NACA0012 is shown
in Figure 1 and Figure 2. Figure 3 shows the calculation domain applied to the simulation. The speed
and pressure are specified in the inlet and outlet sections.

Figure 1: NACA2412 model

Figure 2: NACA0012 model

The figure below illustrates the geometric shape of the calculation domain. The diameter of the
semicircular section and the length of the rectangular section is 15 meters. An airfoil, featuring a
chord length of 1 meter, is positioned within this area such that the trailing edge aligns with the
midpoint of the semicircular region's diameter while its string line aligns with symmetrical lines of
the whole region. The velocity of inlet flow is 33 m/s boundary condition and it is applied to incoming
flow. Similarly, exit boundary conditions apply to outflows. Wall conditions apply to the rest of the
boundaries. For this research, it is presupposed that the turbulence intensity at the inlet is considerably
lower compared to the outlet, hence the turbulence at the velocity inlet boundary is set to 0.1%.

60
 Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Materials Chemistry and Environmental Engineering
DOI: 10.54254/2755-2721/127/2025.20218

Figure 3: Computational domains

2.2. Grid Division

The quality of meshing will directly affect the reliability of numerical data. Therefore, the 2D
structured mesh is selected to generate the grid for the aerofoil and computation domain. To better
simulate the flow field motion, the "C" type computation domain is used in the computation domain,
and the computation domain is divided into 6 subdomains. To optimize computing efficiency and
reduce computing cost, the outer domain adopts coarser cell side lengths for grid processing. A fine
mesh is used around the aerofoil to better reflect the airflow movement. The overall grid division at
the calculation domain is shown in Figure 4. The details around the aerofoil are shown in Figure 5.

Figure 4: Overall mesh

Figure 5: Details of aerofoil mesh

61
 Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Materials Chemistry and Environmental Engineering
DOI: 10.54254/2755-2721/127/2025.20218

2.3. Boundary conditions and governing equations

Boundary conditions refer to the characteristic physical properties or conditions on the surface of a
region that represent a specific flow variable of a physical model [5]. To obtain accurate numerical
results, this paper sets 1000 iterations and 10*6 iteration errors during CFD simulation to ensure the
convergence of results. Detailed parameters are shown in table 1 below.

Table 1: Boundary condition

Solver Pressure-Based
General
Time Steady
Turbulence model Viscous Model Spalart Almaras
Material: Air Density 1.225kg/m³
Boundary conditions Velocity-Inlet 33m/s
Scheme Coupled
Pressure Second Order
Solution methods
Momentum Second Order Upwind
Turbulent Kinetic Energy Second Order Upwind
Solution
Hybrid initialization
Initialization
Run Calculation Number of Iterations 1000

The turbulence model provides a mathematical framework for predicting how turbulence
influences aerofoils. The Spalart-Allmaras model (1992) is a straightforward, single-equation
approach that addresses the transport equation for kinematic eddy (turbulent) viscosity. Tailored for
aerospace applications, particularly those with wall-bounded flows, it has demonstrated reliable
performance in scenarios involving boundary layers under adverse pressure gradients [6].
The basic governing equations used in this paper are given below:
The continuity equation is expressed as follows:
∂𝜌
⃗)=0
+ ∇ ⋅ (𝜌𝑉 (1)
∂𝑡

Navier-Strokes is expressed as follows:

∂
⃗ ) + ∇ ⋅ (𝜌𝑉
(𝜌𝑉 ⃗𝑉⃗ ) = −∇𝑝 + ∇ ⋅ (𝑟̅̅ ) + 𝜌𝑔 + 𝐹 (2)
∂𝑡

The SST k−ω turbulence model is a commonly used two-equation eddy-viscosity model [7]. It
employs two parameters: k representing the kinetic energy, and ω representing the specific dissipation
rate. This model is integrated with the SST model, which is also also widely used. Specific conditions
are given on FLUENT for input parameters along and in the following table 2.

Table 2: Fluid condition

Solver Pressure based steady
Viscous Model K-ΩSST model
Density 1.225kg/m³
Viscosity 1.7894e-5kg/m-s
Turbulence intensity ratio 0.1
Turbulence length scale 0.3

62
 Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Materials Chemistry and Environmental Engineering
DOI: 10.54254/2755-2721/127/2025.20218

Table 2: (continued).

Inlet Velocity 33m/s

Reynolds Number 2.2×106
Chord length 1m
Momentum Second Order Upwind
Pressure velocity coupling Coupled

3. Result and discussion

In this paper, NACA 2412 and NACA0012 aerofoils are analysed and compared in detail based on
ANSYS Fluent software, and the pressure and velocity distribution on the aerofoil's surface and the
comparison of aerodynamic characteristics under different attack angles are studied.
3.1. Pressure distribution cloud image
Figure 6 shows static pressure cloud images of NACA2412 and NACA0012 between 0-18°angles of
attack. (left----NACA2412 right----NACA0012) With the increase of the angle of attack, the pressure
centre of the low-pressure area on the upper surface gradually moves to the leading edge. The above
phenomenon is reflected in NACA2412 and NACA0012. It is worth noting that the stagnation point
is located at the leading edge, where the static pressure is highest. According to the lift theory, when
there is a certain pressure difference between the upper surface and the lower surface of the aerofoil,
the airflow can effectively push the wing upward and generate lift. For NACA2412, as the angle of
attack increases, there is a more pronounced effect between the lower pressure region and higher-
pressure region that creates more lift force until the angle reaches a certain point. After the angle
reaches that point, there will be no more lift force created. For NACA0012, as it is a symmetrical
aerofoil when the angle of attack is 0, it creates very little lift force because there is no pressure
difference between its upper and lower surfaces. When the angle of attack increases, it creates lift
force just like other types of aerofoils, and with the increase of the angle of attack, the lift-drag ratio
also increases gradually. As the angle reaches a certain point, the lift-drag ratio will meet its max
value and then fall, eventually it becomes very unstable.

0°angle of attack

63
 Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Materials Chemistry and Environmental Engineering
DOI: 10.54254/2755-2721/127/2025.20218

6°angle of attack

12°angle of attack

18°angle of attack
Figure 6: Pressure distribution cloud image at different angles of attack

3.2. Velocity distribution cloud image

Figure 7 shows the velocity distribution of NACA2412 and NACA0012 between 0°to 18°Angle of
attack. (left----NACA2412 right----NACA0012) At the first three angles, these two aerofoils are
similar in velocity distribution cloud image. According to the Bernoulli principle, if the velocity of a
fluid rises, its static pressure must correspondingly decrease to maintain equilibrium. [8]. So, before
the angle of attack increases, the speed of air on the upper and lower surfaces is close so there is no
obvious difference in pressure. With the increment of the angle of attack, the area of higher speed
becomes smaller while the low-speed zone is the opposite.

64
 Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Materials Chemistry and Environmental Engineering
DOI: 10.54254/2755-2721/127/2025.20218

0°angle of attack

6°angle of attack

12°angle of attack

18°angle of attack
Figure 7: Distribution velocity cloud map at different angles of attack

3.3. Aerodynamic characteristics at different angles of attack

From Figure 8 and Table 3, we can see NACA2412 has better performance between 0-18 angle of
attack which provides more lift force at low speed. However, NACA0012 has a lower drag coefficient
which can fly smoother compared with NACA2412. (blue----NACA2412 orange----NACA0012)

65
 Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Materials Chemistry and Environmental Engineering
DOI: 10.54254/2755-2721/127/2025.20218

Figure 8: The lift-drag ratio for NACA2412 and NCAA0012 at different angles of attack

Table 3: Lift and drag coefficient for NACA2412 and NCAA0012 at different angles of attack
Angle of attack Lift coefficient Drag coefficient
0 0.21 0.005 0.009 0.009
6 0.84 0.64 0.012 0.011
12 1.39 1.21 0.022 0.020
18 1.55 0.28 0.061 0.22

4. Conclusion
For this paper, the aerodynamic properties of the NACA2412 and NACA0012 airfoils are studied
comprehensively based on ANSYS Fluent. The SA turbulence model and finite volume method are
applied to simulate the two-dimensional flow characteristics, and the pressure distribution, velocity
distribution, and aerodynamic properties of the aerofoil at various angles of attack are analysed. The
research conclusions of this paper are as follows:
(1)NACA2412 has a higher lift-drag ratio, which provides more lift force for aircraft.
(2)NACA0012 has a lower drag coefficient while flying thus it has a positive effect on the
manoeuvring of the aircraft
(3) At a low Reynolds number (2.2×10*6), the drag coefficient increases with the angle of attack
for both.
(4) At a low Reynolds number (2.2×10*6), the lift coefficient increases with the angle of attack
for both until a certain angle, then tapers off.
(5) Neither of these aerofoils should be used at high angles of attack.
To sum up, in the selection of an aerofoil, the designer should choose the appropriate aerofoil
according to the specific requirements of the aircraft. If the aircraft needs to fly smoothly between
6°-12°, the NACA 0012 is a better choice. If you need to generate higher lift at low speeds, the NACA
2412 May be more suitable. In addition, the performance of both aerofoils gradually declines beyond
a certain angle so users should avoid using these two aerofoils at high angles of attack.
At the beginning of the process of building mesh, poor mesh quality affects the quality of the result
seriously. The is a huge deviation from the NACA result between my result until I improve my mesh.
After that, the gap between the new result and the NACA result is within acceptable limits.
Hope in the future to analyse with the more professional the methods and equipment and explore
different parameters that influence the characteristics and performance of the aerofoil.

66
 Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Materials Chemistry and Environmental Engineering
DOI: 10.54254/2755-2721/127/2025.20218

References
[1] Sayel M. Fayyad, Aiman AL Alawin, Suleiman Abu-ein et al. (2024) Aerodynamics Analysis Comparison between
NACA 4412 and NREL S823 Airfoils[J] E-ISSN: 2224-347X
[2] Mangano M, Martins J R R A. (2021) Multipoint aerodynamic shape optimization for subsonic and supersonic
regimes[J]. Journal of Aircraft, 58(3): 650-662.
[3] Conlan-Smith C, Ramos-Garcí a N, Sigmund O, et al.(2020) Aerodynamic shape optimization of aircraft wings using
panel methods[J]. AIAA Journal, 58(9): 3765-3776.
[4] Karim Oukassoua, 0F, Sanaa El Mouhsineb, Abdellah El Hajjajia, Bousselham Kharbouch.(2019) Comparison of
the power, lift and drag coefficients of wind turbine blades from aerodynamics characteristics of Naca0012 and
Naca2412[J]. Procedia Manufacturing 32 983–990
[5] Christian Busse, Andrew Kach, Stephan M.(2015) Wagner Boundary Conditions: What They Are, How to Explore
Them, Why We Need Them, and When to Consider Them SSRN Electronic Journal DOI:10.2139/ssrn.2713980
[6] P. R. Spalart, S. R. Allmaras. (1992), A One-Equation Turbulence Model for Aerodynamic Flows, AIAA-92-0439.
[7] F. R. Menter, Zonal.(1993) Two Equation k-ω Turbulence Models for Aerodynamic Flows, AIAA Paper
DOI:10.1063/1.4934721.
[8] Lee Johnson (2022) Bernoulli's ---Principle: Definition, Equation, Examples[online]. https://sciencing.com/
bernoullis-principle-definition-equation-examples-13723388.html

67