Contents

1. Question no.1 2

2. Question no.2 2

3. Question no.3: Mesh Independence Study (Re=40) 2

4. Question no.4: 3

5. Discussion 11

6. Conclusion 12

1
1. Question no.1

⇒ Everything was clear and I did not notice any mistakes.

2. Question no.2

(a) Suspension Bridge Cables

⇒ Given:
Diameter, D = 0.6 m
Density of air, ρ = 1.2 kg/m3
Viscosity of air, µ = 1.8 × 10−5 Pa·s
Wind speed for Re = 80:
Re · µ 80 × 1.8 × 10−5
V = = ≈ 0.002 m/s
ρ·D 1.2 × 0.6
Reynolds number for wind speed 45 m/s:
ρ·V ·D 1.2 × 45 × 0.6
Re = = ≈ 1.8 × 106
µ 1.8 × 10−5

(b) Submarine Communication Cables

⇒ Given:
Diameter, D = 0.025 m
Density of sea water, ρ = 1027 kg/m3
Viscosity of sea water, µ = 1.41 × 10−3 Pa·s
Water current speed for Re = 80:
80 × 1.41 × 10−3
V = ≈ 0.00439 m/s
1027 · 0.025

3. Question no.3: Mesh Independence Study (Re=40)

(a)Mesh Table and Results

Case Radial Div. Circumf. Div. Elements CD % Diffrence

1 21 7 714 1.6223 3.6481
2 30 10 1560 1.5923 1.7314
3 43 14 2752 1.5833 1.1564
4 60 20 5040 1.5754 0.6517
5 85 28 9520 1.5706 0.3450
6 120 40 19200 1.5673 0.1342
7 170 56 38080 1.5652 –
Table 1: Mesh cases and drag coefficient results

2
(b)Plot of CD vs Number of Elements

Figure 1: Drag coefficient vs Number of elements

(c)Mesh Independence Comment

⇒ From the graph, we can see that the drag coefficient (CD ) values start to level off as
the mesh becomes [Link] Case 5, differences are [Link], Cases 5 and above
are acceptable for accurate simulations.

4. Question no.4:

(a) Geometry and Dimensions

a) Dimensions of Body:
• Body 1:(as shown in Fig 1)

– Length = 2000mm
– Height = 1000mm

• Body 2: (as shown in Fig 2)

– Length = 1700mm
– Diameter of semi-circle (height) = 1000mm

• Body 3: (as shown in Fig 3)

– Diameter of semi-circle (height) = 1000mm

– Length = 4000mm

b) Dimensions of fluid domain:

• Domain 1:

– Length = 10000mm
– Height = 5000mm

3
• Domain 2:

– Length = 10000mm
– Diameter of semi-circle (height) = 5000mm

• Domain 3:

– Diameter of semi-circle (height) = 10000mm

– Length = 10000mm

Figure 2: Geometry of Body 1 with fluid domain

Figure 3: Geometry of Body 2 with fluid domain

4
 Figure 4: Geometry of Body 3 with fluid domain

c) Boundary conditions:
Density of fluid (ρ) = 1kg/m3
Viscosity of fluid (µ) = 0.025 Pa.s
Reynold’s number (Re) = 100
Height of body (D) = 1000mm = 1m

Velocity (v) is calculated as:

Re × µ 100 × 0.025
v= = = 2.5m/s
ρ×D 1×1

d) Mesh:
Number of elements for each body:

• No. of elements of meshing Body1: 93137 elements

• No. of elements of meshing Body 2: 51976 elements

• No. of elements of meshing Body 3: 45600 elements

5
 Fig.1: Mesh of Body 1

Fig.2: Zoomed figure of Body 1 meshing

Fig.3: Mesh of Body 2

6
Fig.4: Zoomed figure of Body 2 meshing

Fig:5 Mesh of Body 2

Fig.6: Zoomed figure of Body 3 meshing

7
(e) Post-Processing Visuals

Fig: Velocity contour of Body 1

⇒This figure shows the velocity distribution around a rectangular body subjected to fluid
flow. The velocity increases rapidly from the stagnation point at the front of the body,
forming a wake region with lower velocity behind the body. The blue region near the
surface indicates areas of low velocity due to the no-slip condition, while higher velocities
are observed farther from the body.

Fig: Pressure contour of Body 1

⇒ The highest pressure is observed in the front stagnation region of the body, while
the pressure decreases sharply around the sides and rear, reaching minimum values at
certain corners.

Fig: Pressure contour of Body 2.

8
 ⇒The pressure distribution around the bullet-shaped body shows a peak at the front
stagnation point, where the fluid first impacts the surface. As the fluid flows along the
curved nose, the pressure decreases, creating a favorable pressure gradient. The lowest
pressure regions are found along the sides and rear, indicating efficient flow acceleration
and reduced wake pressure. Compared to rectangular bodies, the bullet-shaped body
experiences a smaller low-pressure region behind it, highlighting its aerodynamic advan-
tage.

Fig: Velocity contour of Body 2

⇒A stagnation point is observed at the front of the bullet-shaped body. As the flow
moves past the stagnation region, a streamlined pattern develops, with the wake region
forming behind the body. The velocity increases rapidly along the curved surface, and a
narrower wake is visible compared to bluff bodies.

Fig: pressure contour of Body 3

9
⇒Pressure is highest at the bullet’s nose, then drops as the fluid moves around
and behind. The streamlined shape keeps the low-pressure wake small, show-
ing its aerodynamic advantage.

Fig: Velocity contour of Body 3.

⇒The velocity contour illustrates how the fluid accelerates as it flows along the
streamlined bullet-shaped body. A stagnation point forms at the front, where the ve-
locity is lowest, and the flow then speeds up around the curved surface, hugging the body
closely. The wake region behind the body is narrow and smooth, indicating reduced flow
separation and turbulence. This streamlined flow pattern demonstrates the aerodynamic
efficiency of the bullet shape, resulting in lower drag and more organized fluid motion.

(f ) Drag Coefficient Comparison

Body CD
Body 1 2.3976
Body 2 1.8845
Body 3 0.2469
Table 2: Comparison of CD values

(g) Drag Force Analysis

Fig: console tab of Body 1

10
 Fig: console tab of Body 2

Fig: console tab of Body 3

Body Pressure Drag (N) Viscous Drag (N) Total Drag (N)
Body 1 6.8714 0.6212 7.4927
Body 2 2.0208 0.6030 2.6238
Body 3 1.40593 0.70296 2.1088
Table 3: Drag force values from Fluent console

⇒From the above discussion, we can see how streamlining affects drag forces. Stream-
lined shapes are designed to allow fluid to flow smoothly over their surfaces, minimizing
disturbances and keeping the boundary layer attached for longer. This reduces the size
of the wake and, consequently, the pressure drag acting on the body.
Blunt or non-streamlined bodies, such as rectangles or cylinders, create large regions
of separated flow behind them. This separation leads to a broad wake and high pressure
drag. In contrast, streamlined bodies—rounded at the front and gradually tapering at
the rear—encourage laminar flow and reduce the formation of eddies in the wake

(h) CD Ratio vs. Total Drag Force

⇒The coefficient of drag ratio between the objects also applies to the total drag force,
which is directly linked to the drag coefficient. Total drag is calculated using the formula:
1
Total Drag Force = ρv 2 SCD (1)
2
For two bodies with identical area, velocity, and density, the total drag force is propor-
tional to the drag coefficient. Thus, the drag coefficient ratio remains consistent for the
total drag force between any two bodies.

5. Discussion

⇒The results clearly show that streamlining significantly reduces the total drag force
acting on a body. As the shape becomes more streamlined, the pressure drag drops
sharply, resulting in a much lower total drag compared to blunt or less streamlined bodies.
Although viscous drag may increase slightly due to a larger surface area, this increase
is minor compared to the substantial reduction in pressure drag. Therefore, adopting a

11
streamlined shape is an effective way to minimize total drag and improve efficiency in
fluid flow applications.

6. Conclusion

⇒Through this assignment, we learned that streamlining plays a big role in reducing
both pressure and total drag. Streamlined shapes help the airflow stay attached, shrink
the wake region, and lower overall drag. We also saw how important it is to use enough
mesh elements for accurate results, which we confirmed through a mesh independence
study. Overall, this helped us understand why streamlined designs are so effective in
improving efficiency when dealing with fluid flow.

12