High school inventor noob here. I was using NACA airfoils before, but then I found some problems that I don't know if are actually problems. The fact that the camber line is made from two parabolas that are pieced together at the point of maximum camber means that the two curves on the upper surface are only first degree smooth with each other. Same with the two curves on the lower surface. Also, the two curves that intersect at the leading edge are only second degree smooth with each other. I tried to make my own airfoil where the surfaces are made from one, continuously-changing spline, and the camber line is made from one spline with one vertex, to make it smoother.
My design was based on NACA airfoils, so the shape is described by the same variables, with the addition of the position of the maximum thickness on the chord, and the trailing edge thickness. This one has a max thickness of 10% of the chord, located at 30% of the chord's length from the leading edge, a max camber of 3% of the chord at 42.5% of the chord's length from the leading edge, and a trailing edge thickness of 2.5% of the maximum thickness.
What do you think? Any suggestions? Is there another airfoil I should consider researching maybe?
We get it. You know lots of big words.
Ask your teacher, nerd.
/sci/ might be more interested in this, all /3/ ever thinks about is zbrushing their waifus.
Honestly I have no idea what you are saying or describing. >>503437 is right.
You might want to consider looking for that NACA airfoils and stuff on academia.edu or sites like that. Maybe even scribd or the internet archive can have documents with the research you need.
Just because you're asking grown-ups doesn't mean you have to be all Jargon like that.
I for one have no idea what you just said.
To be fair, its basic airfoil terminology. But then again, it's a bit too engineer-y for /3.
Is basically asking about the optimal aerodynamics for his wings, not sure what lead him to 3DCG. The only /3 thing about your post is curvature continuity degrees, m8.