See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/301202010

Characteristics & Aspects of Using Delta Wings for Subsonic & Supersonic
Aircraft

Research · April 2016

CITATIONS READS

0 1,680

1 author:

Jared Beaubien-Taylor
Seneca College
1 PUBLICATION   0 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Jared Beaubien-Taylor on 28 November 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Running Head: DELTA WINGS FOR SUBSONIC AND SUPERSONIC AIRCRAFT 1

Characteristics & Aspects of Using Delta Wings for Subsonic & Supersonic Aircraft

Jared Beaubien-Taylor

Prepared for: Dr. Labib

Seneca College
 DELTA WINGS FOR SUBSONIC AND SUPERSONIC AIRCRAFT 2

Content

Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 3

Earlier Wing Designs ...................................................................................................................... 4

Straight Wing .............................................................................................................................. 4

Rectangular Straight................................................................................................................ 5

Elliptical .................................................................................................................................. 6

Straight Tapered ...................................................................................................................... 7

Swept Wing................................................................................................................................. 8

Delta Wing .................................................................................................................................... 10

Double Delta ............................................................................................................................. 14

Ogival Delta .............................................................................................................................. 16

Conclusion .................................................................................................................................... 21

References ..................................................................................................................................... 23
 DELTA WINGS FOR SUBSONIC AND SUPERSONIC AIRCRAFT 3

Introduction

There are many trade-offs in aircraft design. Aircraft that operate relatively efficiently in

subsonic speed regimes generally cannot in transonic, or supersonic speed regimes. For example,

a straight wing is more ideal at slow speeds than a swept wing. The sweep of a swept wing

allows it to operate at a higher speed, but the more a wing is swept, the less lift it produces,

which is disadvantageous for slower speeds. The goal in aircraft design is to find a balance; in

this example a solution would be a sweep angle that reduces the aircraft’s critical Mach to

something appropriate for the aircraft mission while still providing enough lift while landing or

taking off.
 DELTA WINGS FOR SUBSONIC AND SUPERSONIC AIRCRAFT 4

Earlier Wing Designs

Delta-shaped stabilizers were used on rockets during the 16th century (CONRAD), but the

first delta aeroplane flew in 1931 (Ford). To discuss the characteristics of using delta wings, let’s

examine wing design that led to this configuration.

Straight Wing

The first successful flight of an aeroplane was achieved in 1903 by the Wright brothers

(NASA). This along with earliest production aircraft were of straight wing design. Straight wings

are generally the easiest and least expensive to manufacture – which was ideal for a time when

wing manufacturing techniques and technology were still very young. Compared to other designs

of similar surface area, material, and weight, straight wings can: 1. tolerate more loading without

extra reinforcement than swept back wings (because swept back wings experience a torque

caused by the arm between the center of lift of the wing and its connection to the fuselage

(Figure 9.)) but; 2. tolerate less wing loading than delta wings (because delta wings connect to

the fuselage over such a large area (Figure 10.)). Straight wings are also, for the most part,

designed perpendicular (especially the rectangular straight wing) to the free stream of air. This

causes the component of velocity of the free stream of air that is normal to the leading edge to be

about equal the velocity of the free stream of air.

Figure 3. Rectangular Straight Wing/Free

Stream Planform View
 DELTA WINGS FOR SUBSONIC AND SUPERSONIC AIRCRAFT 5

This is ideal for low speed regimes (such as takeoffs or landings) or whenever lift is critical

because the force of lift is positively affected by the square of the velocity component of free

stream air normal to the leading edge of the wing. However, because of this, straight wings have

the lowest critical Mach number compared to swept wings or delta wings with similar aerofoils

and thickness (discussed later in this report). There are three distinctive takes on the straight

wing design: Rectangular Straight, Elliptical (or Rounded Straight), and Straight Tapered.

Figure. 4. Rectangular Straight, Elliptical, and Straight

Tapered Wing Planforms Respectively

Rectangular Straight. The earliest straight wing designs were rectangular in shape

(Figure 4.). This is the easiest and least expensive straight wing to manufacture because its

planform consists only of straight lines. Since the leading edges of both the elliptical and straight

tapered designs are not perpendicular to the airflow like that of a rectangular straight wing, a

rectangular straight wing planform produces more lift than the elliptical and straight tapered

designed of the same area, and sometimes too much lift near the tips.
 DELTA WINGS FOR SUBSONIC AND SUPERSONIC AIRCRAFT 6

Elliptical. Wing taper affects the span-wise distribution of lift. The Prandtl lifting-line

theory is a mathematical model that proves that the minimum induced drag occurs when lift is

distributed in an elliptical fashion (spanwise) (Raymer). This occurs when the wing planform

itself is shaped like an ellipse, untwisted, and unswept (Figure 5.).

Figure 5. Elliptical Wing and Lift Distrubution (Raymer)

The figure below illustrates the coefficient of lift spanwise from root to tip of a rectangular wing,

an elliptical wing, and a circular disk (Figure 6.).

Figure 6. Spanwise Lift Distribution on an Elliptical Versus Rectangular Planform (ProAdvice)

 DELTA WINGS FOR SUBSONIC AND SUPERSONIC AIRCRAFT 7

An untapered rectangular wing has constant chord length along its span, so according to the

lifting line theory, it has excessive chord length progressing towards the tips when compared to

an ideal elliptical wing. This creates excess lift (or pressure) at the tips of the wings, increasing

wing-tip vortices and drag. Elliptical wings are, however, much more difficult and expensive to

build compared to a regular untapered wing.

Straight Tapered. Tapering a wing causes the tip chords to become shorter (Figure 7.).

Figure 7. Straight Tapered Planform

This helps alleviate the undesired effects of the constant-chord rectangular wing, similar to an

elliptical planform. In fact, a straight tapered wing with a taper ratio of 0.45 only has 1% more

induced drag than an elliptical wing, but is much cheaper and easier to build (Raymer). The

figure below illustrates the effects wing taper has on load distribution, root bending moment, and

span efficiency for three wings of equal aspect ratios (AR= 10) but varying taper ratios (λ = 1.0,

λ = 0.5, λ = 0.2) (Figure 8.).

 DELTA WINGS FOR SUBSONIC AND SUPERSONIC AIRCRAFT 8

Figure 8. Load Distributions, Root Bending Moment, and Span Efficiency for Three Different

Taper Ratios (Wing Taper)

Of the three wings, the one most tapered will have the smallest tip deflection. This is because its

larger root gives greater local stiffness, and it has a smaller root bending moment factor (Mo =

0.100 L b). A disadvantage of having so much taper is that the local spanwise cℓ will be

maximum near the tips, and increases the stall speed. If the tips stall first, the aircraft could roll.

Washout counters this by reducing the angle of incidence (and therefore angle of attack) from

root to tip. It is also important to mention that the drag on such tapered wings (including

elliptical wings) are less than that of a straight, untapered wing because the component of free

stream of air normal to the leading edge is less. This becomes a very important concept for swept

wings when travelling close to the speed of sound.

Swept Wing

The critical Mach number of an aircraft is the lowest Mach number at which the air flow over

some point of the aircraft reaches the speed of sound. The air travelling over the wings of an
 DELTA WINGS FOR SUBSONIC AND SUPERSONIC AIRCRAFT 9

aircraft can be travelling faster than the aircraft through the free stream of air. At critical Mach

number (or even airspeeds approaching critical Mach number) there exists much more

aerodynamic drag (due to the compressibility of air) which decreases performance significantly.

Sweeping a wing increases the critical Mach number of an aircraft. It causes the airflow to

encounter the wing at an angle which can be broken down into two components, one

perpendicular to the wing, and one parallel to the wing. The component of flow parallel to the

wing has no effect on it, and the component of flow perpendicular to the wing (VN) is less than

the free stream flow (VO) (Figure 9.).

Figure 9. Free Stream Normal Component of a Swept Wing

With this configuration an aircraft can travel close to the speed of sound much more efficiently

and before the onset of shockwaves. In slow speed regimes this is a disadvantage because the air

travelling perpendicular to the leading edge, which directly affects lift, is less than the airspeed

of the aircraft. Another disadvantage is that the lift produced by a swept wing causes it to twist as

well as bend, so the wing has to be stronger and therefore generally heavier. A swept wing is also

generally more difficult to manufacture than a straight wing.

DELTA WINGS FOR SUBSONIC AND SUPERSONIC AIRCRAFT 10

Delta Wing

Basic delta wings on the other hand are generally stronger and easier to manufacture than swept

wings of similar material and surface area. One reason for this is because its spars extend

perpendicularly from its fuselage. Also, a delta’s root chord is much greater than its tip chord

providing a stiffer/stronger connection to the fuselage, and less bending moment because of its

low aspect ratio (Figure 10.).

Figure 10. Delta Planform

Its shape also gives a large total wing area, meaning it can withstand more wing loading making

it the ideal planform for high manoeuvrability and payload. There is also much more room for

fuel, landing gear, and structure. This long wing root can also be a disadvantage. Sometimes

there is little room remaining for a horizontal tail, forcing the use of a cantilevered structure,

canard, or tailless design approach. The first aerodynamic advantage of the delta wing is that,

with a proper sweep angle, the shockwave formed at the nose of the aircraft during transonic and
DELTA WINGS FOR SUBSONIC AND SUPERSONIC AIRCRAFT 11

supersonic flight will not encounter the leading edge of the wing. As seen photographed in figure

11 below, the faster an object travels through a fluid above the speed of sound, the more narrow

the Mach cone it produces will be.

Figure 11. Mach Cone of a Bullet from M = 1.30 to M = 0.98

This must be considered when designing a delta wing for a supersonic aircraft. Wings can be

placed further aft on the fuselage (disadvantageous for stability at higher Mach numbers), or

wing aspect ratio can be decreased to accommodate a narrower Mach cone. The figure below

(Figure 12) graphs the CL of delta wings with varying aspect ratios with respect to angle of

attack. The faster an aircraft travels, the lower the wing aspect ratio must be (especially on a

simple delta wing design) to avoid contact with the Mach cone. The lower the aspect ratio, the

lower the CL. The lower the CL, the poorer the wing will perform in lower speed regimes.
DELTA WINGS FOR SUBSONIC AND SUPERSONIC AIRCRAFT 12

Figure 12 Simple Delta Aspect Ratio Versus CL.

The delta wing’s sweep is also advantageous like it is on a swept wing in high subsonic, or

transonic speed regimes. However, delta wings generally tend to have a higher drag coefficient

than swept wings because of their smaller aspect ratio. This can be seen with the drag

𝐶𝐿 2
equation: 𝐶𝑑 = 𝐶𝑑0 + . Since delta wings are generally have a greater angle of “sweep”
πeAR

than swept wings, their leading edge encounters even less of a normal component of the free

stream of air than most swept wings (some swept wing military fighters have similar sweep

angles but usually incorporate variable sweep to decrease sweep angles in low speed regimes).

The large sweep of a delta wing is disadvantageous when flying in low speed regimes.

Fortunately, a phenomenon exists that can increase the critical angle of attack of a delta wing.
DELTA WINGS FOR SUBSONIC AND SUPERSONIC AIRCRAFT 13

Especially at high angles of attack up to 25º (A, A), (because of the increase in pressure under

the delta wing) the flow of air from under the wing rolls up from the leading edges into two

coned-shaped vortex sheet (Figure 13.).

Figure 13. Cone-Shaped Vortex Sheets on a Simple Delta

These vortex sheets reattach onto the top of the delta wing. This re-energizes the flow overtop

the wing at angles of attack where the wing would have otherwise stalled. Delta wing vortices

also create lift (Polhamus). Similar to the leading-edge suction force required to balance the

centrifugal force created by the flow about the leading edge (Figure 14(a) and 14 (b)), the flow

(cross-section of the previously discussed leading edge spiral vortex cones) ahead of the

stagnation point flow forward separates from the wing as it leaves the lead edge of the delta wing

and rolls up and reattaches to create the vortex cones (Figure 14(c)) (Polhamus).
DELTA WINGS FOR SUBSONIC AND SUPERSONIC AIRCRAFT 14

Figure 14. Leading-edge Flow Conditions

Therefore, a normal force exists which is similar to the theoretical leading-edge suction force but

it acts upward, perpendicular to the free stream of air (Polhamus).

The proper location of a delta wing for stability in the subsonic regime is further aft than

required for stability in the supersonic regime (Raymer) because the center of pressure moves aft

and angle of attack decreases as airspeed increases. Adding a canard forward of the delta wing

that is more swept than the main delta wing can solve this problem. Having a higher sweep will

cause the canard to produce lift in the higher speed regimes when needed.

Double Delta

An alternative to having a canard stabilize a simple delta-winged aircraft is the use of the

double delta. This is an efficient planform for supersonic aircraft. It consists of a delta wing with

a kink then a more highly swept delta planform inboard the kink (Figure 15.).
DELTA WINGS FOR SUBSONIC AND SUPERSONIC AIRCRAFT 15

Figure 15. Double-Delta Planform

The two angles of the double-delta planform also affect the vortices’ characteristics. Less

pressure is required from under the wing to create the leading edge vortex cones if the leading

edge is at a higher “sweep” angle because the normal force the leading edge encounters is less.

This mean that the advantageous vortices that increase the critical angle of attack of a double-

delta will occur at a lower angle of attack ahead of the kink than a typical simple delta planform

of similar aspect ratio. A fairly recent experiment was published 2013 in the Aeronautics &

Aerospace Engineering on the structure of double-delta vortices by Abene Abderrahmane (A,

A.). The experiment shows that as the angle of attack of the double-delta increases through 15,

20, 25, and 30 degrees, the angle between the main vortex and the secondary vortex decreases

and concentrates towards the mid-span point (Figure 16.).

DELTA WINGS FOR SUBSONIC AND SUPERSONIC AIRCRAFT 16

Figure 16. Planform View of Double-Delta Vortices at 15, 20, 25, and 30 Degrees Angle of

Attack (i)

This is because the leading edge aft of the kink with lower angle of sweep requires more pressure

from underneath the wing (and thus more angle of attack) to have vortices flow about it than the

leading edge forward of the kink. So as the angle of attack increases, the secondary vortex is

“pushed” (or shifted) inboard towards the main vortex.

Ogival Delta

The ogival delta is a streamlined delta wing design. Its shape is such that is utilizes the

advantages of the double-delta, but with smooth curves instead of two straight leading edges and

a kink (Figure 17.). This reduces aerodynamic losses that occur due to the leading edge kink in a

double-delta configuration. It is also an ideal shape for Mach cone conformity as the taper ratio

increases toward the tips of the wings. This allows the ogival delta to have a higher aspect ratio

than a double-delta while conforming as well to the Mach cone at the same Mach number as an

aircraft with a double-delta configuration of similar surface area. Again, higher aspect ratio is

advantageous in low speed regimes.

DELTA WINGS FOR SUBSONIC AND SUPERSONIC AIRCRAFT 17

Figure 17. Ogival Delta Planform

As with an elliptical wing, the curve of the leading edge of an ogival delta can be designed

integrally together with washout, and anhedral (or dihedral) to obtain a desired spanwise pressure

and lift distribution. In figures 18, 19, 20 and 21 below, the (spanwise) change: leading edge

sweep, anhedral, washout, and angle of incidence of the ogival delta Concorde wing can be seen.

Increasing leading edge sweep at some point spanwise will decrease drag and lift. Decreasing

angle of incidence at some point spanwise will delay the onset of stall (especially important at

the tips). Angle of incidence, along with anhedral will also affect the downwash off the wing

which affects lift and induced drag. The anhedral also affect the pressure under the wing by

“trapping” the component air that flows spanwise outboard under the wing. This in turn will

ideally increase lift, decrease drag, and aid in the creation of leading edge vortices.
DELTA WINGS FOR SUBSONIC AND SUPERSONIC AIRCRAFT 18

Figure 18. Planform View of Concorde

Figure 19. Front View of Concorde

DELTA WINGS FOR SUBSONIC AND SUPERSONIC AIRCRAFT 19

Figure 20. Under Concorde Wing

Figure 21. Above Concorde Wing

As mentioned earlier in this report, the delta shape, spanwise pressure distribution under

the wing (mostly affected by angle of attack) and “sweep” angle of the leading edge are factors
DELTA WINGS FOR SUBSONIC AND SUPERSONIC AIRCRAFT 20

for the leading edge vortex cone formation on delta wings. These vortex cones can be seen

forming on top of the ogival delta wing of a model concord (Figures 22 and 23) below.

Figure 22. Concorde Model Leading Edge Vortices Planform View

DELTA WINGS FOR SUBSONIC AND SUPERSONIC AIRCRAFT 21

Figure 23. Concorde Model Leading Edge Vortices Side View

Conclusion

The ogival delta wing utilizes many advantageous design characteristics from its predecessors

while minimizing their disadvantages to operate in subsonic, transonic, and supersonic speed

regimes. It’s curved, leading edge (in conjunction with washout, anhedral, and angle of

incidence) distributes the lift spanwise like an elliptical wing making it more efficient. Its sweep,

like a swept wing, allows it to operate in transonic and supersonic speed regimes. Its fine-tuned

delta shape creates leading edge vortices that reenergize the flow on top of the wing, giving it a

higher critical angle of attack, and lower landing speed than would have been possible without a

delta configuration while still being able to efficiently cruise at such a high speed. Its double-
DELTA WINGS FOR SUBSONIC AND SUPERSONIC AIRCRAFT 22

delta-like layout aids its stability and control over an even wider speed envelope. Its streamline

design and smooth curves makes it aerodynamically more efficient and able to operate over a

larger speed envelope than achievable by any previous wing designs whose design characteristics

it shares.
 DELTA WINGS FOR SUBSONIC AND SUPERSONIC AIRCRAFT 23

References

A, A. (2013). Visualisation of Vortex Structures Developed on the Upper Surface of Double-

Delta Wings. Journal of Aeronautics & Aerospace Engineering J Aeronaut Aerospace Eng.

CONRAD HAAS. (1983). Retrieved June 12, 2015, from http://www.sibiweb.de/vip/haas/

Ford, R. (2000). Germany's secret weapons in World War II. Staplehurst: Spellmount.

NASA (n.d.). Retrieved June 02, 2015, from http://history.nasa.gov/SP-468/ch1.htm

Polhamus, E. (1966). A CONCEPT OF THE VORTEX LIFT OF SHARP-EDGE DELTA

WINGS BASED ON A LEADING-EDGE-SUCTION ANALOGY. Retrieved June 15,

2015, from http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19670003842.pdf

ProAdvice 2: THE WING PLANFORM. (2010). Retrieved June 6, 2015, from

http://www.flightlevelengineering.com/downloads/ProAdvice 2 - THE WING

PLANFORM.pdf

Raymer, D. (2012). Aircraft design: A conceptual approach (5.th ed.). Reston, VA: American

Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics.

Wing Design. (NASA). Retrieved June 15, 2015, from

http://www.aeronautics.nasa.gov/pdf/wing_design_k-12.pdf

Wing Taper Considerations. (n.d.). Retrieved June 15, 2015, from

http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/aeronautics-and-astronautics/16-01-unified-engineering-i-ii-iii-

iv-fall-2005-spring-2006/systems-labs-06/spl8a.pdf

View publication stats