This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

**Airfoils and Finite Wings
**

AVIONICS DEPARTMENT

PAF KIET

UDPATES

• Mid-term grades

• Team project

– Lab session to work on project this week (Thursday and Friday)

– Literature review and motor selection report due on March 25 (will likely push

this back a week)

• Mid-Term Exam

– Monday, March 21 in class

– Covers Chapter 4 and Chapter 5.1 – 5.15

– Open book / open notes… but no time to study during the exam

– Sample Mid-Term with Solution on line

– Review Session: Tuesday, March 15, Crawford auditorium 112, 8 – 10 pm

PRO|ENGINEER DESIGN CONTEST

• Winner

– Either increase your grade by an entire letter (C → B), or

– Buy your most expensive textbook next semester

• Create most elaborate, complex, stunning Aerospace Related project in

ProEngineer

• Criteria: Assembly and/or exploded view

PRO|ENGINEER CONTEST

PRO|ENGINEER CONTEST

If you do the PRO|E challenge…

Do not let it consume you!

SKETCHING CONTEST

• Choose any aerospace device you like (airplane, rocket, spacecraft, satellite,

helicopter, etc.) but only 1 entry per person

• Drawing must be in isometric view on 8.5 x 11 inch paper

• Free hand sketching, no rulers, compass, etc.

• Submit by April 22, 2011 by 5:00pm

• Winner: 10 points on mid-term, 2

nd

place: 7 points, 3

rd

place: 5 points

• Decided by TA’s and other Aerospace Faculty

DO NOT SUBMIT

READING AND HOMEWORK ASSIGNMENTS

• Reading: Introduction to Flight, by John D. Anderson, Jr.

– For April 4

th

lecture: Chapter 5, Sections 5.13-5.19

– Read these sections carefully, most interesting portions of Ch. 5

• Lecture-Based Homework Assignment:

– Problems: 5.7, 5.11, 5.13, 5.15, 5.17, 5.19

• DUE: Friday, March 25, 2011 by 5pm

• Turn in hard copy of homework

– Also be sure to review and be familiar with textbook examples in

Chapter 5

ANSWERS TO LECTURE HOMEWORK

• 5.7: Cp = -3.91

• 5.11: Cp = -0.183

– Be careful here, if you check the Mach number it is around 0.71, so the flow is

compressible and the formula for Cp based on Bernoulli’s equation is not valid. To

calculate the pressure coefficient, first calculate µ

∞

from the equation of state and find

the temperature from the energy equation. Finally make use of the isentropic relations

and the definition of Cp given in Equation 5.27

• 5.13: c

l

= 0.97

– Make use of Prandtl-Glauert rule

• 5.15: M

cr

= 0.62

– Use graphical technique of Section 5.9

– Verify using Excel or Matlab

• 5.17: µ = 30°

• 5.19: D = 366 lb

– Remember that in steady, level flight the airplane’s lift must balance its weight

– You may also assume that all lift is derived from the wings (this is not really true

because the fuselage and horizontal tail also contribute to the airplane lift). Also assume

that the wings can be approximated by a thin flat plate

– Remember that Equation 5.50 gives o in radians

LIFT, DRAG, AND MOMENT COEFFICIENTS (5.3)

• Behavior of L, D, and M depend on o, but also on velocity and altitude

– V

∞

, µ

∞

, Wing Area (S), Wing Shape, µ

∞

, compressibility

• Characterize behavior of L, D, M with coefficients (c

l

, c

d

, c

m

)

( ) Re , ,

2

1

2

1

2

2

·

·

·

·

=

= ÷

=

M f c

S q

L

S V

L

c

Sc V L

l

l

l

o

µ

µ

Matching Mach and Reynolds

(called similarity parameters)

M

∞

, Re

M

∞

, Re

c

l

, c

d

, c

m

identical

SAMPLE DATA

• Lift coefficient (or lift) linear

variation with angle of attack, a

– Cambered airfoils have

positive lift when o = 0

– Symmetric airfoils have

zero lift when o = 0

• At high enough angle of attack,

the performance of the airfoil

rapidly degrades → stall

c

l

Cambered airfoil has

lift at o=0

At negative o airfoil

will have zero lift

SAMPLE DATA: NACA 23012 AIRFOIL

Lift

Coefficient

c

l

Moment

Coefficient

c

m, c/4

o

Flow separation

Stall

AIRFOIL DATA (5.4 AND APPENDIX D)

NACA 23012 WING SECTION

c

l

c

m

,

c

/

4

Re dependence at high o

Separation and Stall

o

c

l

c

d

c

m

,

a

.

c

.

c

l

vs. o

Independent of Re

c

d

vs. o

Dependent on Re

c

m,a.c.

vs. c

l

very flat

R=Re

EXAMPLE: SLATS AND FLAPS

EXAMPLE: BOEING 727 FLAPS/SLATS

Flap extended

Flap retracted

AIRFOIL DATA (5.4 AND APPENDIX D)

NACA 1408 WING SECTION

• Flaps shift lift curve

• Effective increase in camber of airfoil

PRESSURE DISTRIBUTION AND LIFT

• Lift comes from pressure distribution

over top (suction surface) and bottom

(pressure surface)

• Lift coefficient also result of pressure

distribution

PRESSURE COEFFICIENT, C

P

(5.6)

• Use non-dimensional description, instead of plotting actual values of pressure

• Pressure distribution in aerodynamic literature often given as C

p

• So why do we care?

– Distribution of C

p

leads to value of c

l

– Easy to get pressure data in wind tunnels

– Shows effect of M

∞

on c

l

2

2

1

· ·

·

·

·

÷

=

÷

÷

V

p p

q

p p

C

p

µ

EXAMPLE: C

P

CALCULATION

For M

∞

< 0.3, µ ~ const

C

p

= C

p,0

= 0.5 = const

COMPRESSIBILITY CORRECTION:

EFFECT OF M

∞

ON C

P

2

0 ,

2

1

· ·

·

÷

÷

V

p p

C

p

µ

M

∞

2 2

0 ,

1

5 . 0

1

· ·

÷

=

÷

=

M M

C

C

p

p

For M

∞

< 0.3, µ ~ const

C

p

= C

p,0

= 0.5 = const

Effect of compressibility

(M

∞

> 0.3) is to increase

absolute magnitude of C

p

as

M

∞

increases

Called: Prandtl-Glauert Rule

Prandtl-Glauert rule applies for 0.3 < M

∞

< 0.7

COMPRESSIBILITY CORRECTION:

EFFECT OF M

∞

ON C

P

M

∞

OBTAINING LIFT COEFFICIENT FROM C

P

(5.7)

( )

2

0 ,

0

, ,

1

1

·

÷

=

÷ ~

}

M

c

c

dx C C

c

c

l

l

c

upper p lower p l

COMPRESSIBILITY CORRECTION SUMMARY

• If M

0

> 0.3, use a compressibility correction for C

p

, and c

l

• Compressibility corrections gets poor above M

0

~ 0.7

– This is because shock waves may start to form over parts of airfoil

• Many proposed correction methods, but a very good on is: Prandtl-Glauert Rule

• C

p,0

and c

l,0

are the low-speed (uncorrected) pressure and lift coefficients

– This is lift coefficient from Appendix D in Anderson

• C

p

and c

l

are the actual pressure and lift coefficients at M

∞

2

0 ,

1

·

÷

=

M

C

C

p

p

2

0 ,

1

·

÷

=

M

c

c

l

l

CRITICAL MACH NUMBER, M

CR

(5.9)

• As air expands around top surface near leading edge, velocity and M will increase

• Local M > M

∞

Flow over airfoil may have

sonic regions even though

freestream M

∞

< 1

INCREASED DRAG!

CRITICAL FLOW AND SHOCK WAVES

M

CR

CRITICAL FLOW AND SHOCK WAVES

‘bubble’ of supersonic flow

AIRFOIL THICKNESS SUMMARY

• Which creates most lift?

– Thicker airfoil

• Which has higher critical Mach number?

– Thinner airfoil

• Which is better?

– Application dependent!

Note: thickness is relative

to chord in all cases

Ex. NACA 0012 → 12 %

AIRFOIL THICKNESS: WWI AIRPLANES

English Sopwith Camel

German Fokker Dr-1

Higher maximum C

L

Internal wing structure

Higher rates of climb

Improved maneuverability

Thin wing, lower maximum C

L

Bracing wires required – high drag

THICKNESS-TO-CHORD RATIO TRENDS

A-10

Root: NACA 6716

TIP: NACA 6713

F-15

Root: NACA 64A(.055)5.9

TIP: NACA 64A203

MODERN AIRFOIL SHAPES

http://www.nasg.com/afdb/list-airfoil-e.phtml

Root Mid-Span Tip

Boeing 737

SUMMARY OF AIRFOIL DRAG (5.12)

w d p d f d d

wave pressure friction

c c c c

D D D D

, , ,

+ + =

+ + =

Only at transonic and

supersonic speeds

D

wave

=0 for subsonic speeds

below M

drag-divergence

Profile Drag

Profile Drag coefficient

relatively constant with

M

∞

at subsonic speeds

FINITE WINGS

INFINITE VERSUS FINITE WINGS

S

b

AR

2

÷

Aspect Ratio

b: wingspan

S: wing area

High AR

Low AR

AIRFOILS VERSUS WINGS

• Upper surface (upper side of wing): low pressure

– Recall discussion on exactly why this is physically

– Recall discussion on how to show this mathematically

AIRFOILS VERSUS WINGS

• Upper surface (upper side of wing): low pressure

• Lower surface (underside of wing): high pressure

• Flow always desires to go from high pressure to low pressure

• Flow ‘wraps’ around wing tips

FINITE WINGS

Front View

Wing Tip

Vortices

EXAMPLE: 737 WINGLETS

EXAMPLES: AIRCRAFT WAKE TURBULENCE

FINITE WING DOWNWASH (5.13)

• Wing tip vortices induce a small downward component of air velocity near

wing by dragging surrounding air with them

• Downward component of velocity is called downwash, w

Local relative wind

• Two Consequences:

1. Increase in drag, called induced drag (drag due to lift)

2. Angle of attack is effectively reduced, o

eff

as compared with V

∞

Chord line

ANGLE OF ATTACK DEFINITIONS

o

geometric

: what you see, what you would see in a wind tunnel

Simply look at angle between incoming relative wind and chord line

o

effective

: what the airfoil ‘sees’ locally

Angle between local flow direction and chord line

Small than o

geometric

because of downwash

o

induced

: difference between these two angles

Downwash has ‘induced’ this change in angle of attack

induced effective geometric

o o o + =

INFINITE WING DESCRIPTION

• LIFT is always perpendicular to the RELATIVE WIND

LIFT

Relative Wind, V

∞

FINITE WING DESCRIPTION

• Relative wind gets tilted downward under the airfoil

• LIFT is still always perpendicular to the RELATIVE WIND

• Lift vector is tilted back so a component of L acts in direction normal to

incoming relative wind → results in a new type of drag

induced effective geometric

o o o + =

Induced Drag, D

i

3 PHYSICAL INTERPRETATIONS

1. Local relative wind is canted downward, lift vector is tilted back so a

component of L acts in direction normal to incoming relative wind

2. Wing tip vortices alter surface pressure distributions in direction of

increased drag

3. Vortices contain rotational energy put into flow by propulsion system to

overcome induced drag

INDUCED DRAG: IMPLICATIONS FOR WINGS

d D

l L

c C

c C

>

<

Finite Wing

Infinite Wing

(Appendix D)

V

∞

o o <

eff

HOW TO ESTIMATE INDUCED DRAG

i i

i i

L D

L D

o

o

=

= sin

• Local flow velocity in vicinity of wing is inclined downward

• Lift vector remains perpendicular to local relative wind and is tiled back

through an angle o

i

• Drag is still parallel to freestream

• Tilted lift vector contributes a drag component

HOW TO ESTIMATE INDUCED DRAG

• Calculation of angle o

i

is not trivial (MAE 3241)

• Value of o

i

depends on distribution of downwash along span of wing

• Downwash is governed by distribution of lift over span of wing

WHY A LIFT DISTRIBUTION?

CHORD MAY VARY IN LENGTH

Thinner wing near tip

delay onset of high-speed

compressibility effects

Retain aileron control

WHY A LIFT DISTRIBUTION?

SHAPE OF AIRFOIL MAY VARY ALONG WING

NACA 64A210

NACA 64A209

F-111

WHY A LIFT DISTRIBUTION?

WING (AIRFOIL) MAY BE TWISTED

P&W / G.E. GP7000 FAMILY

HOW TO ESTIMATE INDUCED DRAG

• Special Case: Elliptical Lift Distribution (produced by elliptical wing)

• Lift/unit span varies elliptically along span

• This special case produces a uniform downwash

AR

C

C

AR

C

S q

D

AR

C

S q

AR

C

L L D

AR

C

L

i D

L i

L L

i i

L

i

t

t

t t

o

t

o

2

,

2

2

=

=

= = =

=

·

·

Key Results:

Elliptical Lift Distribution

ELLIPTICAL LIFT DISTRIBUTION

• For a wing with same airfoil shape across span and no twist, an elliptical lift

distribution is characteristic of an elliptical wing plan form

• Example: Supermarine Spitfire

AR

C

C

AR

C

L

i D

L

i

t

t

o

2

,

=

=

Key Results:

Elliptical Lift Distribution

HOW TO ESTIMATE INDUCED DRAG

• For all wings in general

• Define a span efficiency factor, e (also called span efficiency factor)

• Elliptical planforms, e = 1

– The word planform means shape as view by looking down on the wing

• For all other planforms, e < 1

• 0.85 < e < 0.99

eAR

C

C

L

i D

t

2

,

=

Span Efficiency Factor

Goes with square of C

L

Inversely related to AR

Drag due to lift

DRAG POLAR

eAR

C

c C

L

d D

t

2

+ =

Total Drag = Profile Drag + Induced Drag

{

c

d

EXAMPLE: U2 VS. F-15

• Cruise at 70,000 ft

– Air density highly reduced

• Flies at slow speeds, low q

∞

→

high angle of attack, high C

L

• U2 AR ~ 14.3 (WHY?)

eAR

C

c C

L

d D

t

2

+ =

L

SC V W L

2

2

1

· ·

= = µ

• Flies at high speed (and lower

altitudes), so high q

∞

→ low

angle of attack, low C

L

• Low AR (WHY?)

U2 F-15

EXAMPLE: U2 SPYPLANE

• Cruise at 70,000 ft

– Out of USSR missile range

– Air density, µ

∞

, highly

reduced

• In steady-level flight, L = W

• As µ

∞

reduced, C

L

must

increase (angle of attack must

increase)

• AR ↑ C

D

↓

• U2 AR ~ 14.3

eAR

C

c C

L

d D

t

2

+ =

L

SC V W L

2

2

1

· ·

= = µ

EXAMPLE: F-15 EAGLE

• Flies at high speed at low angle

of attack → low C

L

• Induced drag < Profile Drag

• Low AR, Low S

eAR

C

c C

L

d D

t

2

+ =

L

SC V W L

2

2

1

· ·

= = µ

WHY HIGH AR ON PREDATOR?

CHANGES IN LIFT SLOPE: SYMMETRIC WINGS

o

geom

c

l

Infinite wing:

AR=∞

Infinite wing:

AR=10

Infinite wing:

AR=5

c

l

=1.0

Slope, a

0

= 2t/rad ~ 0.11/deg

CHANGES IN LIFT SLOPE: CAMBERED WINGS

o

geom

c

l

Infinite wing:

AR=∞

Infinite wing:

AR=10

Infinite wing:

AR=5

c

l

=1.0

Zero-lift angle of attack independent of AR

Slope, a

0

= 2t/rad ~ 0.11/deg

FINITE WING CHANGE IN LIFT SLOPE

• In a wind tunnel, the easiest thing to

measure is the geometric angle of attack

• For infinite wings, there is no induced

angle of attack

– The angle you see = the angle the

infinite wing ‘sees’

• With finite wings, there is an induced

angle of attack

– The angle you see ≠ the angle the

finite wing ‘sees’

i eff geom

o o o + =

Infinite Wing

Finite Wing

o

geom

= o

eff

+ o

i

= o

eff

o

geom

= o

eff

+ o

i

FINITE WING CHANGE IN LIFT SLOPE

• Lift curve for a finite wing has a smaller

slope than corresponding curve for an

infinite wing with same airfoil cross-section

– Figure (a) shows infinite wing, o

i

= 0, so

plot is C

L

vs. o

geom

or o

eff

and slope is a

0

– Figure (b) shows finite wing, o

i

≠ 0

• Plot C

L

vs. what we see, o

geom

, (or

what would be easy to measure in a

wind tunnel), not what wing sees, o

eff

1. Effect of finite wing is to reduce lift curve slope

– Finite wing lift slope = o = dC

L

/do

2. At C

L

= 0, o

i

= 0, so o

L=0

same for infinite or

finite wings

i eff geom

o o o + =

Infinite Wing

Finite Wing

SUMMARY: INFINITE VS. FINITE WINGS

Properties of a finite wing differ in two major respects from infinite wings:

1. Addition of induced drag

2. Lift curve for a finite wing has smaller slope than corresponding lift curve for

infinite wing with same airfoil cross section (depends on AR)

EXTRA CREDIT

• What is the aspect ratio of this airplane?

• What is the aspect ratio of a 747?

• What aerodynamics decisions went into selected the A380 aspect ratio?

• What non-aerodynamics decisions went into limiting the A380 aspect ratio?

A380 burns about four liters (one gallon) of fuel per passenger every

80 miles and can fly some 8,000 nautical miles and seat as many as

550 passengers.

DDD

DDD

- External Flow-Drag Lift- SU Lift Force
- ConceptionAeroAerodynamisme.pdf
- 1202 Final Exam 2008
- Affect of Slats and Flaps
- Table
- Airfoil Selection
- Basic aerodynamics
- Solution Exercise Sheet 1 Mec 3707
- Aerodynamics
- Tutorial_ Aerofoils and Wings_25.8.13
- ACD506_Day 3 Aircraft Wing Design
- Ch4Wing&Airplane
- Airfoils and Camber[1]
- 1202 Lecture 9 (1)
- Influence of Endplate on Aerodynamic Characteristics of Low-Aspect-ratio Wing in Ground Effect
- 4.2 Airfoil Selection
- IJER_2014_305(1)
- Plane
- Plane
- Ground Effect
- Experimental Investigation of Effect of Multiple wings
- 2266_TR-4_Boost_Gliders.pdf
- Technical Report Boost Gliders
- Exam Answers 20100122
- 10.1.1.115.7863.pdf
- Development of Aerodynamic Prediction Methods for Irregular Planform Wings
- Aerodynamics Notes
- Introduction to Aerodynamics
- Bony Paper
- MOD 8
- flight introduction

Are you sure?

This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

We've moved you to where you read on your other device.

Get the full title to continue

Get the full title to continue reading from where you left off, or restart the preview.

scribd