Slender Wing Theory

© All Rights Reserved

35 views

Slender Wing Theory

© All Rights Reserved

- D2-8_DPW4Summary_2009-07-20
- Leading Edge Vortices in Insect Flight
- Lift and Drag
- Plane Descriptions
- Cyclone Separater
- Fluidum Continuum Part 1s
- An Investigation of Ship Airwakes Using Detached-Eddy Simulation
- Horizontal Axis Wind Turbine Research- A Review of Commercial CFD, FE Codes and Experimental Practices
- A New Linear Model of Fossil Fired Steam Unit for Power System Dynamic Analysis
- 1995 - P.C. Kriesels, J.C. Bruggeman - High Amplitude Vortex Induced Pulsations
- How an Airplane Flies
- High Reynolds Number Oscillations of a Circular Cylinder
- Lanzafame (2007) - Fluid dynamics wind turbine design - Critical analysis, optimization and application of BEM theory.pdf
- Overview Aerodynamics 2017
- 21460_092914095031
- CFD Jet into Cross Flow Boundary Layer Controlan.pdf
- Types of Flow in Open Channel
- Chapter 6 Flow Control in S Duct
- Drag and Lift students.pdf
- 1-s2.0-S1000936113001581-main.pdf

You are on page 1of 18

doi:10.1098/rspa.2004.1295

Published online 16 November 2004

By E d m u n d C h a d w i c k

School of Computing, Science and Engineering,

University of Salford, Salford M5 4WT, UK (e.a.chadwick@salford.ac.uk)

Consider uniform, steady potential ow past a slender wing. By considering a horseshoe vortex in the limit as /U s , where is the circulation, U is the uniform

stream velocity and s is the span, a model representing a vortex sheet is obtained

from which the lift on the slender wing can be determined. (This is in contrast to

the textbook approach of Batchelor and Katz & Plotkin, who discretize the vortex

sheet with horseshoe vortices in the limit as /U s , but then relate the vortex strength to lift by using the two-dimensional limit /U s 0. We shall argue

that using these dierent limits in the same analysis is inconsistent and leads to an

incorrect result.)

The resulting potential term is shown to be the same as the potential term of

the lift Oseenlet in Oseen ow. In the limit of high-Reynolds-number ow, only half

the contribution to the lift integral comes from the potential-velocity part of the

lift Oseenlet. The other half comes from the vortexwake-velocity part of the lift

Oseenlet. We therefore assume potential ow everywhere except at the vortex sheet,

along which we allow a singular vortexwake-velocity term of the lift Oseenlet.

From this, a slender-wing theory is presented together with integral expressions

for the lift and change in lift over the wing surface. Applications to slender bodies

and large-aspect-ratio wings, in particular, the LanchesterPrandtl lifting line, are

then considered.

Keywords: potential ow; Oseen ow; slender-body theory;

slender-wing theory; manoeuvring

1. Introduction

We investigate the manoeuvring of slender bodies with appendages such as ns and

slender wings, within an incompressible uid. Ship and submarine manoeuvring,

and marine-animal propulsion, fall into this category, as well as bird ight, aircraft

manoeuvring and missile guidance at velocities such that the compressibility of air

is not an important factor. For these problems, the uid slips past the bodies and a

vortex wake emanates behind. The requirement is to provide an accurate mathematical model that enables us to determine manoeuvring characteristics. This means an

accurate representation of the wake. Since the uid slips past the bodies, the viscous

resistance to motion is small. This naturally leads to the potential-ow representation. However, in the present paper, we argue that the standard potential-ow

models do not model the wake properly, in particular, the vortex sheet emanating

from the trailing edge of a wing. We therefore propose an alternative potential-ow

model derived from the Oseen formulation.

Received 8 July 2002

Revised 1 December 2003

Accepted 10 February 2004

415

416

E. Chadwick

As a rst step, consider uniform, steady ow past xed, closed slender bodies

and slender wings. The slenderness assumption enables us to approximate the ow

near the body and, in this way, nd relations between the hydrodynamic forces on

the body and the body shape (Clarke 1972; Lighthill 1960; Newman 1972; Thwaites

1960; Tuck 1992). These models also assume potential ow. Hence the vortex wake

is not modelled. This gives rise to concern as it was shown by Chadwick (1998) that,

in general, the far-eld velocity cannot be decomposed into a potential-velocity part

and a wake-velocity part. (In the far eld, the Oseen equations approximately hold.)

It is concerning because using (incorrectly) this decomposition leads to an incorrect

evaluation of the lift (Chadwick 1998). We cannot then be sure that potential-ow

models evaluate the lift correctly. However, the potential velocity and wake velocity

can be separated for two-dimensional ow, axisymmetric ow and low Reynolds

number ow (Chadwick 1998). For these special cases, this diculty does not arise.

The question now arises as to whether, for high-Reynolds-number ow without

transition to turbulence, a potential-ow model is sucient for determining the

lift force on the body. For high-Reynolds-number ow past slender bodies, Chadwick (2002) argues that the Oseen equations are approximately valid everywhere

and the slip boundary condition can be applied on the surface of the slender body.

This yields a slender-body theory in Oseen ow, and is generated by a distribution of Oseenlets. However, exactly half the contribution to the lift comes from

the potential velocity of the lift Oseenlet, and the other half comes from the vortex wake velocity, regardless of the Reynolds number (see Appendix A). So, in the

limit of high-Reynolds-number ow, a potential-ow model is obtained from which

only half the contribution to the lift comes from the potential velocity. The extra

half contribution, which comes from the vortexwake-velocity term, must also be

included in the model. This has far-reaching consequences for general textbook

potential-ow models of slender wings and slender bodies, since it suggests that,

in the existing models, half of the lift contribution, from the vortex-wake velocity,

has been inadvertently omitted. This gives rise to a dilemma, since the models have

been veried extensively over the years by experiment. This is the starting point of

the research within the present paper, and we begin by looking at textbook wing

theory.

Consider slender-wing theory in which the slender wing is replaced by a vortex

sheet which, in turn, is represented by a distribution of horseshoe vortices. In these

models (Batchelor 1967; Lighthill 1989; Thwaites 1960), the lift of the horseshoe

vortex is taken as /U s 0. Since the vortex sheet is represented by the limit

of innitesimal horseshoe vortices, the limit should be /U s , which we shall

show results in a reduction in the lift by exactly a half. In this limit, the potential

velocity due to the horseshoe vortex is the same as the potential velocity part of the

lift Oseenlet. We argue that an additional half contribution to the lift comes from

the vortexwake-velocity term of the lift Oseenlet. So, by good fortune, the existing

models have been inadvertently evaluating the correct value for the lift although

using the wrong limit.

From this analysis, a slender-wing theory is presented, together with applications to slender bodies and large-aspect-ratio wings, in particular, the Lanchester

Prandtl lifting line. We shall also discuss the implications of this theory for the Kutta

condition.

Proc. R. Soc. A (2005)

417

SB

S

2. Potential ow

(a) Equations of motion

We start with the incompressible NavierStokes equations (Lamb 1932, p. 577), with

the viscosity set to zero, and also the continuity equation for incompressible ow

uj

ui

p

=

,

xj

xi

uj

= 0.

xj

(2.1)

Here, ui and p are the velocity and pressure, respectively, in sux notation for the

Cartesian coordinate system (x1 , x2 , x3 ) and is the uid density and is assumed to

be constant.

Assuming the slip-body boundary condition, then

u j nj = 0

(2.2)

on the body surface SB , where ni is the outward pointing normal. Consider a slender

wing with a trailing edge and assume that a wake emanates from the trailing edge

on which the velocity and pressure may be singular and discontinuous.

We suppose that a surface S exists on which the trailing edge lies, and enclosed

by a contour C . The contour C is dened as the intersection with SB of a tube T

with circular cross-section, radius centred on the trailing edge (see gure 1).

The tube T also has a hemispherical cap at each end, centred at the endpoints of

the trailing edge with radius . Hence the points on the contour C and the points

on the surface S all lie a distance at most away from the nearest point to them on

the trailing edge.

Then the condition

te

min{xC

(2.3)

i (t1 ) xi (t2 )2 }

t1

i represents a point on the

contour C parametrized by the variable t1 such that ta t1 tb for some constants

ta and tb , xte

i represents a point on the trailing edge parametrized by the variable t2

such that tc t2 td for some constants tc and td , mint1 is the minimum value at

t1 over the range of values for t2 and (2.3) must hold for all t1 .

Then the force is represented by a surface integral of the normal pressure over the

body surface (Lamb 1932) such that

fi = lim

pni ds ,

(2.4)

0

SB S

418

E. Chadwick

where fi is the force on the body due to the uid, ds is an element of surface and

SB S is part of the body surface not lying on S . Since uj nj = 0 on the body

surface, then

fi = lim

(pni + ui uj nj ) ds

0

SB S

0

SS

= lim

(pni + ui uj nj ) ds ,

(2.5)

where S is a general surface enclosing the body except for the constraint that S must

lie on S. We have used the result that the integrand of the volume integral enclosing

the two surfaces S S and SB S is identically zero from Greens integral theorem.

Finally, we assume that, away from the vortex-wake region, the velocity can be

represented by a potential velocity such that ui = /xi . Then

p = 12

2

= 0,

xj xj

,

xi xi

(2.6)

which are the Bernoulli equation and Laplace equation, respectively. We assume that

p 0 and /xi 0i as r , where 0i is the vector (01 , 02 , 03 ) = (0, 0, 0).

(b) Vortex line

In the following sections, we shall use the velocity representation of a vortex line

and its near-eld approximation, which shall be given here. A vortex line is dened

such that the circulation around a closed contour enclosing the line is a constant

giving its strength, in the limit as the contour approaches the line (Batchelor 1967).

A vortex line is itself the limiting value of a vortex tube as the length dimension of

the tube cross-section tends to zero (Batchelor 1967).

(i) Velocity representation of a vortex line

We shall show that the vortex line along the x3 -axis from x3 = a to x3 = b is given

by

b

1

ui (x1 , x2 , x3 ) =

k3 d,

ijk

(2.7)

4 a

xj R

where R = {x21 + x22 + (x3 )2 }1/2 . We shall show that is the circulation. We

note that this is a hypothetical vortex line, since a real vortex line cannot begin or

end in the uid (Batchelor 1967). The circulation C is then given by

C = lim

ui ti dc ,

(2.8)

r0

Cr

where ti is the vector tangent to the contour Cr such that ti = ijk nj lk , lk is the

unit vector direction of the vortex line and Cr is a circular contour enclosing the

vortex line in a plane perpendicular to it of radius r and centred

on it such that the

polar coordinates (r, ) give x1 = r cos , x2 = r sin , r = x21 + x22 .

Dene

ui ti dc.

(2.9)

I(r, x3 ) =

Cr

Then

I=

Cr

ijk

a

xj

419

1

k3 d (ilm nl m3 ) dc.

R

(2.10)

and from c to , we get

bx3 2

1

r d d

(ijk ilm k3 m3 nl )

I=

4 ax3 0

xj

2 + r2

bx3 2

1

=

r d d

4 ax3 0 r

2 + r2

bx3

r2

= 12

d.

(2.11)

2

2 3/2

ax3 ( + r )

By noting that

r2

= 2

,

2 + r2

( + r2 )3/2

we get

I(r, x3 ) =

1

2

b x3

a x3

.

(b x3 )2 + r2

(a x3 )2 + r2

(2.12)

C=

(2.13)

(ii) Two-dimensional velocity approximation near a vortex line

We now consider the two-dimensional approximation near a vortex line. The neareld approximation is

unf

(2.14)

i ,

i =

2r

where (1 , 2 ) = ( sin , cos ) and the superscript nf denotes the near eld. Then,

over the circular contour Cr radius r, the circulation C is

2

(2.15)

C=

j j r d = ,

2r

0

since ti = ijk nj lk = i . A slender wing is represented by a vortex model and is

discussed next.

(c) Slender-wing representation

The classical approach is developed by thinking of a discretization of the vortex

sheet by a number of horseshoe vortices. Lighthill (1989, gure 86, p. 216), Batchelor

(1967, gure 7.8.4, p. 585) and Katz & Plotkin (2001, gure 8.2, p. 169) distribute

a spanwise number of horseshoe vortices of varying strength and in the limit let

the span of each tend to zero, Newman (1977, gure 5.18, p. 195) and Katz &

Proc. R. Soc. A (2005)

420

E. Chadwick

area A

x1

x2

x3

x1

x3

horseshoe vortex

Figure 2. Distribution of horseshoe vortices which make up the vortex sheet.

Plotkin (2001, gure 8.17, p. 186) distribute a spanwise and chordwise distribution

of horseshoe vortices of varying strength and in the limit again let the span of each

tend to zero. We therefore represent the ow around a slender wing by a distribution

of bound and free vortices over an area A within the slender wing. This distribution

is approximated by a nite number of horseshoe vortices distributed over the area A.

Let us suppose that A lies in the plane x2 = 0, and that the horseshoe vortices are

regularly spaced with span x3 in the x3 -direction and separated by distance x1

in the x1 -direction, as shown in gure 2.

The vortex strength on the vortex sheet (x1 , x3 ) is approximated at a nite

number of points with coordinates (ix1 , 0, (j + 12 )x3 ) for some integer values of i

and j, and related to the strength of the horseshoe vortex at that point. In the limit

as both x1 and x3 0, then the vortex-strength function is determined. Hence,

in this limit, the span of each horseshoe vortex tends to zero. This means we take

/U s .

The total lift is approximated by summing the lift contributions from all the

horseshoe vortices in the model. Hence the lift is found exactly by applying the

limiting process such that /U s .

However, we assert that the standard classical approach wrongly assumes the lift

contribution from each of the innitesimal horseshoe vortices in the limit /U s 0.

This means that, in order to relate vortex strength to lift, the two-dimensional result

is used. Batchelor (1967, p. 586) explicitly states that this is an assumption: According to the second of our two main assumptions. . . the ow about any section of the

wing. . . may be regarded as two dimensional. Similarly, Katz & Plotkin (2001, p. 172)

relate vortex strength to lift by using the local two-dimensional lift result. The reasoning given for assuming this in these particular cases is that the spanwise variation is very gradual. But, however gradual, there is still a variation, otherwise there

would not be the requirement for the horseshoe vortex discretization in the classical

approach; a vortex sheet is assumed to emanate from the trailing edge rather than

vortices trailing from the two span tips only. To recap, in order to relate the vortex

strength to lift, the limit /U s 0 is generally assumed, but this is inconsistent

with the representation of the wake by a vortex sheet for which the limit /U s

holds.

For wings such that the spanwise variation is not gradual, the lift force is generally

determined by calculating the pressure dierence over the top and bottom surfaces of

the wing. This is equivalent to Newmans approach (Newman 1977, p. 193) and also

Proc. R. Soc. A (2005)

421

x2

O

x1

x3

bound

vortex

line

wing trailing

edge lies

on S

r

s

trailing vortices

r + O(s)

points of intersection

of Katz & Plotkin (2001, pp. 191, 193). However, in these calculations, the pressure

integral across the trailing edge has been omitted and is not the complete lift force.

Including this reduces the lift force by a half, and will be shown in a forthcoming

paper. In contrast, the lift induced by a horseshoe vortex by considering the complete

surface pressure integral is given next.

3. Horseshoe vortex

Consider now the force contribution on the slender wing from one of the horseshoe

vortices lying over the area A. For ease of analysis, position the horseshoe vortex such

that the three vortex lines range from (, 0, 0) to (0, 0, 0), from (0, 0, 0) to (0, 0, s)

and from (0, 0, s) to (, 0, s), as shown in gure 3.

From (2.7), the velocity of the horseshoe vortex is then given by

1/2

1

ijk

k1 d

ui =

4 0

xj (x1 )2 + x22 + (x3 s)2

1/2

+

ijk

k1 d

4 0

xj (x1 )2 + x22 + x23

1/2

s

ijk

k3 d.

(3.1)

4 0

xj x21 + x22 + (x3 )2

Consider the closed surface S of the force integral equation (2.4), remembering

that the trailing edge of the wing lies on it. In the case of this horseshoe vortex, we

therefore consider a particular closed surface S, which is constrained such that the

Proc. R. Soc. A (2005)

422

E. Chadwick

x2

x3

surface S

x1

trailing edge

two points of intersection between the surface S and the two trailing vortices of the

horseshoe vortex lie on the trailing edge (see gure 4). In the limit as the span of

the horseshoe vortex tends to zero (and so /U s ), the distance r along each

trailing vortex line of the horseshoe vortex from the bound vortex line to the point

where the line pierces the surface S is the same to rst order.

We can therefore choose the surface S consisting of a cylindrical surface radius

r = {x21 + x22 }1/2 along the length 0 x3 s, a hemisphere radius r centred at

(0, 0, 0) in the region x3 0 and another hemisphere radius r centred at (0, 0, s) in

the region x3 0 (see gure 5). The choice of hemispherical caps, rather than, say,

discs at the ends, is for ease of analysis.

We also want to demonstrate that the limit /U s 0 has been wrongly assumed

in the standard classical approach. Therefore, we consider the force integral in two

limits: rst, as /U s 0, and second, as /U s .

(a) The limit /U s 0

Equivalently, this means t = s/r , and in this limit we shall nd that the

contribution to the lift force comes from the velocity induced by the bound vorticity

only. The force integral over the surface (2.5) is

(pni + ui uj nj ) ds .

(3.2)

fi = lim

0

SS

The integral is divided into contributions from the bound vortex (denoted by superscript B), the trailing vortices (superscript T; T1 for the vortex line from (0, 0, 0)

to (, 0, 0) and T2 for the vortex line from (, 0, s) to (0, 0, s)), the circular cylindrical surface (superscript cyl) and the hemispherical surfaces (superscript hem).

Hence

fi = fiB + fiT = fiB,cyl + fiB,hem + fiT,cyl + fiT,hem .

(i) Contribution from the bound vortex line

The trailing edge, along which the vortex sheet emanates, lies along the line = 0.

From (2.3), we can bound the surface S by a contour C which is a distance either

side of the trailing edge, at = /r and = 2 /r. Hence the contribution to the

Proc. R. Soc. A (2005)

lift f2 from the bound vortex line is

s 2/r

B,cyl

B

= lim

U u2 n1 r d dx3 +

f2

0

/r

423

2/r

U uB

1 n2 r d dx3

(3.3)

/r

from symmetry arguments, where the polar coordinate (r, ) are such that x1 =

r cos and x2 = r sin . Assuming that the ow is two dimensional in the plane of

constant x3 , then the velocity is given by the approximation (2.14), and so

f2B,cyl = 12 U s + 12 U s,

(3.4)

which is O(s) where O means of the order of. We note that the contributions from

the hemispherical ends of the surface are O(r), and so are negligible in the limit

t = s/r . So

(3.5)

f2B = U s,

which is the standard result for the lift of a horseshoe vortex (Lighthill 1989; Newman

1977). We now show that the contributions from the trailing vortices tend to zero in

the limit.

(ii) Contribution from trailing vortex lines

First consider the trailing vortex line that induces the velocity

1/2

1

T1

ijk

k1 d

ui =

4 0

xj (x1 )2 + x22 + x23

ln(R x1 )k1 ,

= ijk

4

xj

(3.6)

where R = {x21 + x22 + x23 }1/2 and we use the identity given in Appendix B. Similarly,

from symmetry arguments and using the same integral limits as (3.3), we have

s 2/r

s 2/r

T1

f2T1,cyl = lim

U uT1

n

r

d

dx

+

U

u

n

r

d

dx

1

3

2

3 .

2

1

0

/r

/r

(3.7)

Splitting the rst of these integrals in two, to get

1 2/r

s 2/r

T1

U uT1

n

r

d

dx

U

u

n

r

d

dx

lim

1

3

1

3 ,

2

2

0

/r

1

(3.8)

/r

where 1 = Ar, with A a large constant, we see that the rst term in (3.8) is O(r)

and the second term is O(r ln r). Similarly, the second part of (3.7) is O(r).

Furthermore, over the hemispherical surfaces, the integral contributions are of

O(r). Applying the same analysis to the trailing vortex line T2 means that f2T =

O(r ln r), and these contributions are of negligible order in the limit t = s/r .

So, dening the quantity L such that

L = U s,

(3.9)

f2 = f2B = L = U s.

(3.10)

then

424

E. Chadwick

This result is of no surprise, since in the limit the ow is two dimensional, and this

is the two-dimensional result for lift on an aerofoil. However, for three-dimensional

ow past a wing, a trailing vortex sheet occurs, and so the two-dimensional result

cannot be generalized for three dimensions, and the following limit for the horseshoe

vortex must be considered instead.

(b) The limit /U s

Equivalently, this means t = s/r 0, and in this limit we shall nd that the

contribution to the lift force comes from the velocity induced by both the bound

vortex line and also the free vortex lines.

(i) Contribution from the bound vortex line

As t = s/r 0,

uB

i

ijk

4

xj

1

s x1

k3 =

.

R

4 R3

(3.11)

From symmetry, the contribution to the force integral comes from the term

B

B

f2 = lim

U u2 n1 ds = 13 L,

(3.12)

0

SS

(ii) Contribution from the free vortex lines

Consider the free vortex lines F1 for the vortex line from (, 0, 0) to (0, 0, 0)

and F2 for the vortex line from (0, 0, s) to (, 0, s). Let us consider rst the free

vortex line F1. From symmetry arguments, the integral contribution to the force

from the free vortex line F1 is

U uF1

n

ds

.

(3.13)

f2F1 = lim

1

2

0

SS

Now consider the contribution to this integral over the cylindrical surface. From

(2.14), near the vortex line F1 the velocity is

uF1

2

x3

,

2 (x22 + x23 )

U r s x3

U r

s2

F1,cyl

f2

=

dx3 dx2 =

ln 1 + 2 dx2 .

2 r 0 x22 + x23

4 r

x2

(3.14)

(3.15)

t

t

s

2s

U

f2F1,cyl =

dq

,

(3.16)

ln(1 + q 2 )

2

4

q

t 1 + q

t

Proc. R. Soc. A (2005)

425

f2F1,cyl =

U r

{ln(1 + t2 ) 2t(tan1 t 12 )}.

2

(3.17)

So, as t 0,

U r

(t) = 12 L.

2

The same contribution is obtained from the free vortex line F2, and so

f2F1,cyl

(3.18)

(3.19)

Finally, we consider the contribution over the hemispherical surfaces. Since the origins of the hemispheres are separated by a distance s, the velocity

= uF1,hem

+ uF2,hem

uF,hem

2

2

2

=

ln(R x3 )

ln(Rs x3 )

4 x3

x3

s 2

ln(R x3 )

4 x23

(3.20)

in the limit as t 0, where Rs = {x21 + x22 + (x3 s)2 }1/2 . Furthermore, in the limit,

the two hemispherical surfaces tend to the surface of a sphere Sr of radius r. From

symmetry arguments, the force contribution from the free vortex lines over the two

hemispherical surfaces is then given by

u2 n1 ds

f2F,hem = lim U

0

Sr S

U s

= lim

0

4

=

Sr S

2

ln(R x3 )n1 ds

x23

16 L.

(3.21)

Bringing all these results together, the total force on the surface enclosing horseshoe

vortex in the limit /U s is

F2 = F2B + F2F

= F2B + F2F,cyl + F2F,hem

= 13 L + L 16 L

= 12 L.

(3.22)

Hence the lift force due to the potential-velocity term in this limit /U s is

seen to be exactly half of that in the limit /U s 0.

4. Lifting element

Let us dene the lifting element to be the limiting value of the horseshoe vortex as

/U s . In this section, we give the potential of the lifting element and from it

evaluate the lift force associated with it.

Proc. R. Soc. A (2005)

426

E. Chadwick

(a) Potential

1/2

1

d

2

2

2

0 x2 x1 + x2 + (x3 )

1

s

4 x2 R

L

=

ln(R x1 )

4U x1 x2

u1 =

(4.1)

as /U s . Similarly,

1

u2 =

d

4 0 x3 [(x1 )2 + x22 + (x3 s)2 ]1/2

1

d

+

4 0 x3 [(x1 )2 + x22 + x23 ]1/2

s

1

d

+

4 0 x1 [x21 + x22 + (x3 )2 ]1/2

s 2

1

s

1

d

+

2

2

2

2

1/2

4 0 x3 [(x1 ) + x2 + x3 ]

4 x1 R

s 2

s 2

ln(R

x

)

ln(R x1 )

1

4 x23

4 x21

L

=

ln(R x1 )

4U x2 x2

(4.2)

1

ln(R x1 ) =

d,

xj

x

j R

0

such that R = {(x1 )2 + x22 + x23 }1/2 .

Finally, the third velocity component is

d

u3 =

4 0 x2 [(x1 )2 + x22 + (x3 s)2 ]1/2

d

4 0 x2 [(x1 )2 + x22 + x23 ]1/2

s 2

1

d

4 0 x2 x3 [(x1 )2 + x22 + x23 ]1/2

L

ln(R x1 )

=

4U x3 x2

as /U s . Again, the integral identity given in Appendix B was used.

Proc. R. Soc. A (2005)

(4.3)

427

=

L

ln(R x1 ).

4U x2

(4.4)

This is the potential part of the lift Oseenlet (Lagerstrom 1964; Oseen 1927).

(b) Lift

From symmetry arguments, the force due to the lifting elements is

f2 =

U u1 n2 ds

U u2 n1 ds = 13 L + 16 L = 12 L

S

(4.5)

by substituting in for the potential (4.4). As expected, this is the same as the

result (3.22) obtained in 3 b. The lifting element potential is now used to give a

slender-wing theory.

5. Slender-wing theory

Consider an area A over which are distributed bound and free vortex lines within a

slender wing. This is given by the velocity potential

l(, )

ln(R, x1 ) d d,

(5.1)

=

A 4U x2

where R, = {(x1 )2 + x22 + (x3 )2 }1/2 .

We now use the fact that half the lift contribution comes from the potential

term (4.4) and the other half comes from the singular wake velocity term (see

Appendix A) of the lift Oseenlet. Then the total lift is given by

l(, ) d d.

(5.2)

L=

A

We shall use these equations in the following applications for slender bodies and

large-aspect-ratio wings.

(a) Application: slender-body theory

Let us take the width of the vortex sheet to approach zero. If the slender body lies

along the length xa x1 xb , then, from (5.1),

xb

l1 ()

=

ln(R x1 ) d,

(5.3)

xa 4U x2

where R = {(x1 )2 + x22 + x23 }1/2 . The lift is given by

xb

l1 () d.

L=

(5.4)

xa

x2

L(x1 )

2D

,

=

2U x22 + x23

Proc. R. Soc. A (2005)

(5.5)

428

E. Chadwick

where we dene L(x1 ) such that L (x1 ), the derivative of the function L(x1 ), is

L (x1 ) = l1 (x1 ).

The lift force per unit length due to this ow is

2

U u1 n2 r d

(5.6)

0

This gives a lift per unit length at x1 = of 12 l1 (). Hence the lift forces are

matched in the near and far elds. This agrees with the potential term for slenderbody theory in Oseen ow (Chadwick 1998).

(b) Application: large-aspect-ratio wing theory

By taking the length of the slender wing to approach zero, a theory for highaspect ratio wings is given next. The near-eld ow is then shown to agree with

LanchesterPrandtl theory.

Let the wing lie along the span xc x3 xd . For a large-aspect-ratio wing, the

potential (5.1) becomes

xd

l3 ()

ln(R x1 ) d,

(5.7)

=

xc 4U x2

where R = {x21 + x22 + (x3 )2 }1/2 . The lift is given by

xd

l3 () d.

L=

(5.8)

xc

horseshoe vortices each of span x3 = (xd xc )/N gives

L = lim

x3 0

N

+1

U j x3 ,

(5.9)

j=1

where j is the strength of the jth horseshoe vortex along the wing span. So j

approximates the vortex strength function (x3 ) at the point x3 = xc + (j + 12 )x3 .

Hence

(5.10)

l3 (x3 ) = U (x3 ).

This gives the potential for large aspect ratio wings as

xd

1

()

ln(R x1 ) d.

=

4 xc

x2

Near to the wing, x1 , x2 x3 . So

xd

x2

1

()

d

4 xc

(x3 )2

xd xd

x2

x2

1

()

()

d ,

x3 xc

x3

4

xc

Proc. R. Soc. A (2005)

(5.11)

(5.12)

429

assumed zero. So

xd

()

1

d,

(5.13)

x2

4 xc x3

which is the velocity given by the LanchesterPrandtl lifting line theory (Van Dyke

1975).

6. Discussion

A slender-wing theory has been presented by representing the slender wing by a

vortex sheet, and the vortex sheet by an integral distribution of lifting elements

together with a wake-velocity term present only on the vortex sheet. The lifting

element is dened as a horseshoe vortex in the limit as /U s . The wake-velocity

term is included because it contributes signicantly to the lift. This contribution is

evaluated by considering the lift Oseenlet in the limit of high Reynolds number but

laminar ow. (The contribution is exactly a half (see Appendix A).)

By taking the span of the slender wing to approach zero, the potential term contributing to lift for a slender body is given. Then, by matching the surface lift integral,

the approximate near-eld potential ow is obtained.

Also, by taking the length of the slender wing to approach zero, a theory for highaspect ratio wings is given. The near-eld ow is shown to agree with Lanchester

Prandtl theory.

However, the far-eld ow for these two problems given in Tuck (1992) and

Van Dyke (1975) disagrees with our analysis: more than one far-eld term matches

asymptotically to the same near-eld term in these cases. However, if we match the

terms generating lift in the near and far elds, then the far-eld terms given by Tuck

(1992) and Van Dyke (1975) can be discounted. (These discounted far-eld terms

consist of dipole distributions, which do not generate lift.) Furthermore, we note

that the discounted terms generate ows that traverse the wake (cross-ow terms).

This has implications for the Kutta condition, which states that there is smooth

tangential ow at the trailing edge, so there is no cross-ow at the trailing edge, or

1

u2 dl = 0.

lim ( 2 r)

r0

(C is a contour perpendicular to the direction of, and enclosing, the slender body axis

of radius r. u2 is the velocity lateral to the direction of the slender body axis.) Thus,

for the particular representation considered here, by a distribution of lifting elements,

the Kutta condition is automatically satised as a consequence of the matching of

the lift surface integral in the near and far elds.

Therefore, future work will investigate a general derivation of the Kutta condition

for slender bodies and wings by matching the forces and moments in the near and far

elds, a comparison of the theory with experiment and development of a slender-wing

theory for high Reynolds number but laminar Oseen ow.

I acknowledge the anonymous referee who provided improved calculations for the results (2.12),

(3.18) and (B 5). I also acknowledge Nina Fishwick for her contribution to the calculation of the

lift of the horseshoe vortex.

Proc. R. Soc. A (2005)

430

E. Chadwick

Appendix A.

We show that half the contribution to the force of the lift Oseenlet comes from the

potential-velocity term, and half from the vortexwake-velocity term.

The Oseen equations (Oseen 1927) are

U

ui

p

2 ui

=

+

,

x1

xi

xj xj

uj

= 0.

xj

(A 1)

The lift Oseenlet in the x2 -direction is given as (Chadwick 1998; Lagerstrom 1964;

Oseen 1927)

ui =

+ wi =

+

2k 2i ,

xi

xi xi

,

p = U

x1

ln(R x1 ),

=

4U x2

(A 2)

L k(Rx1 )

=

ln(R x1 ),

e

4U

x2

k(Rx1 )

L e

,

=

4U

R

k=

.

2

The force integral given in Chadwick (1998) is

ui

fi =

pni + nj

(A 3)

U ui n1 ds,

xj

S

and so the lift from the Oseenlet is given by

w2

n2

n1 ds +

n1 U w2 n1 ds.

f2 = U

x2

x1

S x1

S

We rst calculate the contribution from the potential terms. This gives

n2 ds = 13 L,

U

S x1

U

n1 ds = 16 L.

S x2

(A 4)

(A 5)

So the total lift from the potential terms is 12 L, and this is true for any surface S

enclosing the lift Oseenlet singularity. We next calculate the lift from the wake terms.

Taking the surface over the plane at x1 = X and X , the contribution

w2

1

0.

n1 ds = O

X

S x1

The other contribution to the lift from the wake velocity is

w2 n1 ds = U

n1 ds + 2kU

n1 ds.

U

S

S x2

S

Proc. R. Soc. A (2005)

(A 6)

431

L kr02 /2x1 1 2 cos2 0 2k

cos 0 ,

e

x2

4U

r02

x1

2

L

ekr0 /2x1 ,

4U x1

(A 7)

where the cylindrical polars (r0 , 0 ) are dened such that x2 = r0 cos 0 and x3 =

r0 sin 0 .

Taking the surface integral S over the integration limits 0 r0 < , 0 0 < 2,

we have

2

U

n1 ds = U

r0 d0 dr0 = 12 L

(A 8)

x

x

2

2

0

0

S

and

n1 ds = 2kU

2kU

0

r0 d0 dr0 = L.

(A 9)

The contribution to the lift from the wake velocity is then 12 L + L = 12 L and the

total lift from the velocity potential and wake velocity is 21 L + 12 L = L.

Appendix B.

We want to show that

ln(R x1 ) =

xj

xj

1

,

R

(B 1)

For j = 1, we have

LHS(B 1) =

1

R

and

RHS(B 1) =

0

(B 2)

x1

1

1

d =

= .

R2

R 0

R

(B 3)

For j = 1, we have

LHS(B 1) =

xj (R + x1 )

xj

=

,

R(R x1 )

r02 R

(B 4)

RHS(B 1) =

0

xj

xj x1

xj (R + x1 )

d = 2

=

.

3

R

r0

R 0

r02 R

(B 5)

432

E. Chadwick

References

Batchelor, G. K. 1967 An introduction to uid dynamics. Cambridge University Press.

Chadwick, E. 1998 The far eld Oseen velocity expansion. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A 454, 20592082.

Chadwick, E. 2002 A slender-body theory in Oseen ow. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A 458, 20072016.

Clarke, D. 1972 A two-dimensional strip method for surface ship hull derivatives. J. Mech. Engng

Sci. 14, 5361.

Katz, J. & Plotkin, A. 2001 Low-speed aerodynamics, 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press.

Lagerstrom, P. A. 1964 Laminar ow theory (ed. F. K. Moore), vol. 6, High speed aerodynamics

and jet propulsion. Princeton University Press.

Lamb, H. 1932 Hydrodynamics. Cambridge University Press.

Lighthill, M. J. 1960 Note on the swimming of slender sh. J. Fluid Mech. 9, 305317.

Lighthill, J. 1989 An informal introduction to theoretical uid mechanics. IMA Monograph

Series. Oxford University Press.

Newman, J. N. 1972 Some theories on ship manoeuvring. J. Mech. Engng Sci. 14, 3442.

Newman, J. N. 1977 Marine hydrodynamics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Oseen, C. W. 1927 Neure Methoden und Ergebnisse in der Hydrodynamik. Leipzig: Akademische

Verlagsgesellschaft.

Thwaites, B. (ed.) 1960 Incompressible aerodynamics. New York: Dover.

Tuck, E. O. 1992 Analytic aspects of slender body theory. In Wave asymptotics (ed. P. A. Martin

& G. R. Wickham), ch. 10, pp. 184201. Cambridge University Press.

Van Dyke, M. 1975 Perturbation methods in uid mechanics, 2nd edn. Stanford, CA: Parabolic

Press.

- D2-8_DPW4Summary_2009-07-20Uploaded byGaetan Kenway
- Leading Edge Vortices in Insect FlightUploaded byRohith Jayasimha Rao
- Lift and DragUploaded byJair Gonzalez
- Plane DescriptionsUploaded byapi-3812403
- Cyclone SeparaterUploaded bySanjay Yadav
- Fluidum Continuum Part 1sUploaded bycmdbali
- An Investigation of Ship Airwakes Using Detached-Eddy SimulationUploaded byUmut Cırık
- Horizontal Axis Wind Turbine Research- A Review of Commercial CFD, FE Codes and Experimental PracticesUploaded byMostafa Rashed
- A New Linear Model of Fossil Fired Steam Unit for Power System Dynamic AnalysisUploaded bySara VooDoo Haze
- 1995 - P.C. Kriesels, J.C. Bruggeman - High Amplitude Vortex Induced PulsationsUploaded bySRVfiv
- How an Airplane FliesUploaded byRaihan Hassan
- High Reynolds Number Oscillations of a Circular CylinderUploaded byValbort Hernandez
- Lanzafame (2007) - Fluid dynamics wind turbine design - Critical analysis, optimization and application of BEM theory.pdfUploaded bydfg
- Overview Aerodynamics 2017Uploaded bymarco
- 21460_092914095031Uploaded byRibhi Hamdan
- CFD Jet into Cross Flow Boundary Layer Controlan.pdfUploaded bymojicap
- Types of Flow in Open ChannelUploaded byFarhana Jani
- Chapter 6 Flow Control in S DuctUploaded byKadiyam Vijay
- Drag and Lift students.pdfUploaded byAfwan Irfan
- 1-s2.0-S1000936113001581-main.pdfUploaded byVgokulGokul
- UGP||Non-Circular Vortex RingsUploaded byChanchala Naagar
- [1]1-s2.0-S1877705814006328-mainUploaded byHenil Patel
- MuniKrishna_2007Uploaded byHariharan Ramanathan
- Notes EOAUploaded byYokesvaran K
- Efficient Optimization of an AirfoilUploaded byDaulet Moldabayev
- 73859952-VORTEC-Micro-Hydro-Power-Plant.pdfUploaded byAmal Pallathukudy
- IJREI_Analysis of vortex formation around a circular cylinder at low Reynolds numberUploaded byIjrei Journal
- Student Handout 25 2014Uploaded bykietni
- DeardorffLESUploaded bywatersakana
- Pressure Distribution of NACA Airfoil Aerodynamic CharactersiticsUploaded byAnkitha

- Mechanics of FluidsUploaded byShiva U
- FD AE Model PaperUploaded byShiva U
- Feasibility Study of Power Generation Using a Turbine Mounted in Aircraft WingUploaded byShiva U
- Experimental Aerodynamic Analysis of Delta WingUploaded byShiva U
- Canard DesignUploaded byShiva U
- 150001Uploaded byPurvak Mistry
- Truncated AirfoilUploaded byShiva U
- Lvmt 24 QuestionsUploaded byShiva U
- Chapter 2 MOFUploaded byShiva U
- AIAA paperUploaded byShiva U
- Ewade2007 ScholzUploaded byShiva U
- Differential FormsUploaded byWill Black
- hispd_notes01Uploaded byShiva U
- Gas TurbineUploaded byarsalantariq15
- Enae 411 Abet SyllabusUploaded byShiva U
- $MP-005-01Uploaded byShiva U
- Head.methodHSADUploaded byShiva U
- Cover PageUploaded byShiva U
- AVS-II Qtn BankUploaded byShiva U
- complete aircraft equationsUploaded byShiva U
- Paper Template ICCMEH 2015Uploaded byShiva U
- pdf 20Uploaded byShiva U
- Singh GGJJ2011Uploaded byShiva U
- CIT06-0246Uploaded byShiva U
- AE2025-AU-Nov12Uploaded byaeroacademic
- Aero 3 -8 Anna's SyllabusUploaded byShiva U
- III Aero AssignmentsUploaded byShiva U

- Mesinger Arakawa 1976Uploaded byAyan Banerjee
- [Deich] - Technical Gas DynamicsUploaded byRaphael Pugliesi
- fluid mechanicsUploaded byAdeola Odeleye
- Unit 2Uploaded byhumbleavi
- EkmanUploaded bySNADA
- MHDUploaded byХардип Зинта
- H.K. Moffatt, S.Kida and K. Ohkitani- Stretched vortices - the sinews of turbulence; large-Reynolds-number asymptoticsUploaded byVortices3443
- 9401798249Uploaded bymitra1006
- FlowLabEOC2e_CH10Uploaded byBernardo Benzecry
- Vorticity and CirculationUploaded byFabian Torres
- Wind Turbine Response to Variation of Analytic Inflow VorticesUploaded byGonzalo Rojas Lopez
- 4_Shallow_water.pdfUploaded byDayver Daza Salgado
- Inlet Flow Distortion in a Centrifugal CompressorUploaded byAmbrish Singh
- numerical simulation aeroacoustic resonance in solid rocket motorUploaded bybernardo.favini6840
- vol8no4-3_TangHSUploaded byDmitry Gradov
- CFD ReportUploaded byGeorge Opar
- Flow and Heat Transfer Dissertation Biegger Online Opt 450Uploaded bypuyang48
- Visualizing Spacetime Curvature via Frame-Drag Vortexes and Tidal Tendexes I. General Theory and Weak-Gravity Applications 1108.5486Uploaded byforizsl
- Stream DrawUploaded bybrian5412
- The Influence of Inlet Velocity Distribution Muy Bueno Este EsteUploaded byfrankkqqzz
- G. K. Batchelor-An Introduction to Fluid Dynamics-Cambridge University Press (2000).pdfUploaded byameuren2
- sphere rolling a inclind plane in a submerged liquidUploaded byDnl Ganesh
- Kevin A. O’Neil- Collapse and concentration of vortex sheets in two-dimensional flowUploaded byPonmij
- Fluid Dynamics FinalUploaded bygollakoti
- CFD Dominant flow features of twin jets and.pdfUploaded bymojicap
- Marine HydrodynamicsUploaded bySanjay Madaka
- PHY2009S Buffler Fluid DynamicsUploaded byVijay Kumarasamy
- KMM-1987Uploaded byssssbossss
- Conformal MappingUploaded byAlireza Zare'zade
- Free & Forced Vortex Lab ReportsUploaded byAmy Farhana