I'll start saying that the picture you've posted is wrong.

You'll see why (if yo

u have the patiente to read my post), but let me assure you that the CP and the
AC are two very different things.
Ok, let me first simplify the things a bit by using lift only.
In this condition the Center of Pressure (CP) becomes the Center of Lift (CoL).
Because the lift is made up of pressure only, the center of lift is in the same
position than the center of pressure (or better, the center of lift is the horiz
ontal coordinate of the center of pressure). Drag, on the other hand, is made bo
th of pressure and share.
The CoL is the point on "something" (that must be treated as a rigid body) where
the lift force can be concentrated producing the same effect that the distribut
ed lift around that same "something".
This means that the dynamic response of that something will be the same if you u
se all the elemental infinitesimal lifts applied around the thing that if you us
e the sigle net lift applied at the CoL.
That's sort of a definition, however when you starplaying with it you get to a p
ropperty that's exclusive of the CoL and that hence can be used in lieu of its d
efinition. You'll see:
If you inegrate the elemental little lifts around the body, you get a net lift L
. That's the lift that you'll apply at the CoL. That's the easy part.
Now, if you integrate all the little pitching moment contributions about any giv
en point "O" made by all the elemental little lifts around the body, you'll also
get a net pitching moment. Let's call it Mo (the little "O" showing that we are
taking moments about "O")
Now, for the CoL to trully represent "the point where the lift force can be conc
entrated producing the same effect that the distributed lift", as we defined abo
ve, we have no choice but to require that the pitching moment moment about "O" m
ade by the net lift L applied at the CoL, be exactly the same Mo as calculated a
bove for the individual-elemental-distributed little lifts. If we we call "(CoLO)" the vector that goes from the poit "O" where we are taking monents about to
the point CoL of the application of the net lift L, then the pitching moment abo
ut "O" made by the net lift L applied on the CoL can be written as:
Mo = (CoL-O) X L
Of course, "O" can be any arbitrary point. And that's how things start to get in
terestring. If for example we take O in the CG we get:
Mcg = (CoL-CG) X L
And if we take O in the center of lift, we get:
Mcol = (CoL - CoL) X L
Oops.... something
Yes, the CoL has a
t made by the lift
CoL, we can use it

looks like zero there, doesn't it?

very important propperty, and that is that the pitching momen
about the CoL is zero. And because this is true ONLY for the
as a definition of CoL:

The CoL is the point where the pitching moment made by the lift is zero. How's t
hat?
Now, bear in mind that I've used words like "something" or "body". That somethin

g could be for example a wing, and we would be talking about the center of lift
of the wing. Ot it could be the tail, and we would be talking about the center o
f lift of the tail, or it could be the whole airplane, and we would be talikng a
bout the center of lift of the whole airplane.
And here is where things start to become interesting again.
Let's take a simplified case that is however a very good approximation to the re
al case (well, most of the times at least). We have an airplane that is flying b
ut not turning and not pitching up or down. Let's asume that the drag and the th
rust don't make a pitching moment about the CG (that's the simplification). Of c
ourse the airplane's weight can't make a pitching moment about the CG either, be
cause it's applied on the CG. The only force left that could make a pitching mom
ent about the CG is the lift (and I mean the lift of the whole plane, not the wi
ng only). Where can the CoL of the whole plane be in relation to the CG?
Because the plane is steadily not pitching up or down,
ibrium in pitch, and thus pitching moment about the CG
the lift is the only force with the ability to make a
hing moment of the lift about the CG must be zero. But
of the lift is zero only about the CoL!

we need it to be in equil
MUST be zero. And because
pitching moment, the pitc
wait! The pitching moment

Congratulations, you have just discovered that, whenever the plane is in equilib
rium, the CG and the CoL ARE on the same plane.
Not the use of ARE. I didn't say, can be or should be. It just IS that way.
Ok, but what if the CG and the CoL are NOT in the same place? Then there is a ne
t pitching moment and the plane is not in equilibrium in pitch. The plane will e
ither pitch up or down (and at an accelerated rate, that is). That simple.
The first time I nearly understood this a lot of questions raised in my head:
How does the pilot ENSURES that the CG and the CoL is in the same place? What ha
ppens as fuel burns and the location of the CG changes? Or if a passegenr walks
down the aisle to the lavatory? If the above is true and the CG is actually on t
he CoL and that measn that the plane doesn't pitch up or down, how does the pilo
t do to initiate a pitch up or pitch down maneuver?
The answer to all these questions is the same: The pilot MOVES the CoL to either
match the CG AT ALL TIMES while he wants to keep the plane in equilibrium, or m
oves the CoL aft or ahead of the CG to pitch down or up respectivelly.
Say again???
The pilot moves the CoL??? Yes.
How? Later.
Wasn't that a fixed point, a sort of geometric propperty of a body??? No.
Take the simple case of an airfoil. Both the lift and the pitching moment are fu
nction of the AoA (well, there is one point about which the pitching moment is n
ot a function of the AoA, more on that later). So if you cahnge the AoA of an ai
rfoil, then the pitching moment about what was previously the CoL is no longer z
er, and hence that point is not longer the CoL, and hence the CoL is smoewhere e
lse: it moved.
In the more complex casde of a whole airplane, the movement of the CoL is even e
asier to understand: Say that you have an airplane steadily flying straight and
level. In that condition, we now know that the whole airplane's CoL matches the
CG. Now the pilot pulls up. What happens? The plaen pitches up. That measn a non
-zero pitching moment and that means that the CoL is somewhere else but on the C
G. It moved. How? Let's see it frame by frame. Now it's time to use (and abuse)
your picture.

If you look at the pitcure you've posted, it reads Neutral point: "position of t
he CG where tail moment and wing moment are equal".
I can't end counting how many errors are in that sentence alone.
To begin with, we'll have to assume that it means that "where the tail moment an
d wing moment are of equal dimmension and opposite direction", which would bette
r said "where the tail and wing pitching moments cancel each other", or sum zero
. In a simplified "wing and tail" model (i.e. where only the wing and tail make
forces and moments), that would be further clearer if we just said "where the pi
tching moment due to lift is zero".
But wait! Wasn't that the definition (or exclusive propperty) of CoL?
It was, it is and it will for ever be. Tell whoever made that picture that that
is NOT THE NEUTRAL POINT, that's the whole airplane's CENTER OF LIFT (the horizo
ntal coordinate of the CP, remember?).
Finally, by now, what does it mean "the position of the CG where..."?
Grab a marker and mark the CoL in that picture (that is matching the CG). Now mo
ve the CG somewhere else. Does that changes the pitching moment about the CG? Ye
s. Does that changes the pitching moment about the dot marked with the marker? L
et's see. The AoA has not changed. The wing and tail are still in the same posit
ion relative to that dot too. Hence the wing and tail lifts and pitching moments
about that dot did not change. It was zero and still is, so this point is still
the Center of Lift even when the CG is somewhere else. The Center of Lift doesn
't care about where the CG is (although the pilot, even without knowing so, does
care where one is relative to the other).
Returning on how a pilot controls the location of the CoL.
In wour picture, the plane is happily flying straigh and level. The CoL (incorre
ctly depicted as the neutral point) matches the CG. The nose-up pitching moment
made by the wing is ballanced by the nose-down pitching moment made by tha tail
(always about the CG, that by now it's matching the CoL). Next, the pilot pulls
up on the stick, what makes the tail tilt in the trailing-edge-up direction. In
the picture you posted, that translates in a reduced AoA on the tail, and hence
a reduced lift on the tail, and hence a reduced nose-down pitching moment about
the CG. But the nose-up pitching moment made by the wing has not changed. This b
rakes the ballance and now we have a net nose-up pitching moment, and hence the
plane will start tp pitch up (which, not just by chance, is what the pilot proba
bly had in mind when he pulled up).
Evidently, since the pitching moment about the CG is not longer zero, the CoL an
d the CG don't match any longer, and not because the CG moved because it didn't.
So where did the CoL go?
We have to look for a point about which the total pitching moment is zero. Since
the wing's nose-up pitching moment about the CG got stronger than the tail's no
se-down pitching moment about the CG, we have to look for a point that has a sho
rter arm for the wing and a longer arm for the tail. Yes, the CoL has moved ahea
d of the CG.
You see how the pilot controls the location of the CoL to control the airplane i
n pitch? WITH THE ELVATOR!!!
When applied to the whole airplane, the CoL is all about equilibrium and control
, but has nothing to do with strability (the ability to return by itself to the
equilibrium when disturbed from it).
To finish the CoL chapter, remember that the CoL can be applied to anything, for

example to the wing, or for the tail, or for the whole airplane (as we did). Le
t's give just a short look at the CoL applied to the wing (or an airfoil).
The propperty still applies: The CoL of a wing is the point about which the pitc
hing moment of the wing is zero. Tyically, for reasons that we are going to ment
ion in the next chapter, we represent the action of the wing with a straigh arro
w indicating the lift at one point and a turning arrow around the same point ind
icating the pitching moment.
In that case, evidently said point or NOT the CoL, or there would be no reason f
or the turning arrow.
As if there were not enough errors, in the picture you posted the lift is applie
d on the Aerodynamic Center (AC), but there is no turning arrow. Since the AC do
esn't match the CoL, and the lift is shown as applied on the AC, and there is no
turning arrow indicating the pitching moment made by the wing or tail about its
own ACs, something IS wrong: Either the lift is applied in the wing and tail ow
n CoLs (not the AC), or the pitching moment of the wing and tail about their own
ACs is missing.
Gabriel is offline
Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2011, 03:03 AM
#3
Gabriel
Senior Member
Gabriel's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Buenos Aires - Argentina
Posts: 4,071
Default
AC and Neutral Point time.
Say that you have an airfoil making lift in the upwards direccion.
Take a point of reference "A" way ahead of the airfoil.
If you want to represent the effect of the lift on that point, you'll have to pu
t the lift there plus a nose-down pitching moment.
In other words, you'll have to put a vertical arrow starting on A and pointing u
p and marked with L, plus a counterclockwise arrow around A marked with M.
Now take a point of reference "B" way aft of the same airfoil.
It's evident that while the same lift still goes up, now the pitching moment abo
ut B is nose-up.
Now you still have the same vertical arrow starting on B and pointing up to repr
esent the lift, but a clockwise arrow around B represnting the pitching moment.
Evidently, somewhere between A and B there will be one point about which, while
you'll still need the vertical arrow to represent the lift, the pitching moment
will be zero. If it takes you more than two second to say what that point is, I'
ll regret having wasted my time with the previous post. I hope by now you have a
lready correctly said "It's the CoL".
Ok, now let's be a bit tricky. Let's increase the AoA of that airfoil.
Now the lift increases, and hence the vertical arrows both on A and B become lon
ger. The new lift is the previous lift plus an increment.
The same happens with the pitching moments. The pitching moment about A is the p
revious nose-down pitching moment about A plus a nose-down increment, and the pi
tching moment about B is the previous nose-up pitching moment plus a nose-up inc
rement (remember that we are talking about the same system, it's not two pitchin

g moments acting at once, it's how the pitching moment changes whether you take
it about A or about B).
Now it's time for the abstraction, let the brain sweat.
Forget about the full lift and the full pitching moment. Think in the increments
only.
Both A and B receive the same increment in lift. It's evident that whatever poin
t between A and B would receive the same increment.
But A recives a nose-down increment in the pitching moment, while B receives a n
ose-up increment in the pitching moment. It's evident that the increment in pitc
hing moment will be zero about some point between A and B. What is this point?
Does it sound too similar to the CoL?
Yes, it does. Unfortunately so, because that's why (together with bad teachers a
nd bad texts an pictures) so may people confuse the terms.
This is NOT the CoL. This is, ahem... the Aerodynamic Center (AC).
Let's make a pause here to clarify things a bit. What is the difference between
the CoL and the AC?
The Center of Lift (CoL) is the point about which the net pitching moment due to
lift is zero. Is the pitching moment zero about this point now? Then this is th
e CoL now. Now if the AoA changes, the CoL can (and mostly does) move.
On the other hand, the Aerodynamic Center doesn't care about what the pitching m
oment is, but about how it changes with the AoA. Never mind if in this instant t
he pitching moment about a given point is zero or not, if the AoA cahnges and th
e pitching moment doesn't, then this is the Aerodynamic Center.
So now we are ready for a definition: The Aerodynamic Center is the point about
which the pitching moment due to lift does NOT change when the AoA does.
Note that in the example above, we just used an unamed airfoil changing from an
unamed AoA to another unamed AoA (other that the second one was greater), and tw
o generic A and B points, one "way ahead" and the other "way behind" the airfoil
. And if you want me to get complicated, I could even think of two airfoils (one
representing the wing and one the tail) as one single airfoil "with a fancy sha
pe".
All that just to say, the example above was a very generic one. The resulting de
finition applies just to "something", which can be an airfoil, a wing, a wing-ta
il combination, or a whole airplane.
The AC is very interesting for a number of reasons.
When analyzing your picture, we had seen that if you put the airfoil's lift on t
he airfoil's CoL, you don't need to put an additional pitching moment about that
point. You can take the airfoil's pitching moment as zero. While this looks goo
d, it's not, because of the "mooving" nature of the CoL. You change the AoA and
the CoL is not where it was, so now you have to either move the lift (that's com
plicated) or leave the lift where it is and put a pitching moment around that "n
ow-not-the-CoL" point, and the magnitude of the pitching moment varies with the
AoA (including being zero when the AoA happens to be such that the CoL is there
again).
If we take any other point, the same happens. Not only the lift but also the pit
ching moment changes whenever the AoA changes.

Except when you take moments about the AC. In that case, while the pitching mome
nt is generally not zero, at least it doesn't change with AoA. In that case, you
can represent the effect of the lift whith a straight arrow that changes in siz
e with the AoA, and a turning arrow around the AC that doesn't change with the A
oA. That's why the airfoil's pitching moment about the AC is usually taken as th
e airfoil's pitching moment.
I really think that whoever made the pitcure you posted, he did mean AC in the a
irfoils where he put the lift arrows, but he wrongly ommited the pitching moment
turning arrows around those AC points. That's the usual way to do it.
It is in the whole airplane, however, where the AC becomes most interesting. And
this will lead us to understand why, for the whole airplane, the AC is also cal
led the Neutral Point.
Let's go back to our plane in equilibrium flying sraight and level, as depicted
in your picture. Say for a moment that the author actaully meant to put the CG i
n the the Neutral Point (that is, again, in the aerodynamic center of the whole
airplane). I don't really think for a second that he mant this, but let's preten
d it.
Then we would be in a case that I have mentioned is very rare: The AC and the Co
L are in the same place, and the CG too. And the pitching moment about this comm
on point is zero.
What happens if the plane is disturbed from that equilibrium and the AoA changes
?
This is the question of stability. If, when disturbed from the equilibrium, the
plane tends to return to the previous state of equilibrium, the plane is said to
be statistically stable (or to have positive static stability). If it tends to
diverge further away from the previous state of equilibrium, it is said to be st
atically unstable (or to have negative static stability). If it tends to do noth
ing, that is, to stay in the new disturbed position, it is said to be staticlly
indifferent (or to have neutral static stability).
So, we were saying, the plane changes it's AoA. Since we are taking moments abou
t the AC, the pitching moment doesn't change when the AoA changes. The pitching
moment was zero before, and will keep being zero. The CoL doesn't move (as it al
most always does). We still have the Col, the AC and the CG in the same spot. Th
e lift will have changed, but since we are taking the lift acting on this point
too, it makes no pitching moment about the CG either.
In short, the AoA was disturbed from its previous position of equilibrium and th
ere is no pitching moment that will either tend to bring it back to that previou
s state or take it farther away. The AoA will happily reamin in the new value, o
r in wahtever value we set it. It's the case of a statically indifferent plane,
one with neutral static stability. And we never want a plane like this, that's w
hy I'm sure this is not what the author of the picture intended.
Now, let's go back to our original equilibrium. The CG matches the CoL (it's a r
equirement for having zero pitching moment about the CG, and hence for the equil
ibrium, remember?). But the whole airplane's AC is ahead of the CG by a distance
D.
We can think of the plane as having its lift concentrated in the CoL=CG and no p
itching moment about that point, or we can make the equivalent reasoning of plac
ing the lift at the AC with a pitching moment about that point. Let's see.

For the plane to be in equilibrium, we need that the pitching moment about the C
G is zero. About the CG, the weight makes no moment, so we are only left with th
e aerodynamic moments (we'll take those due to the lift only).
The lift, placed on the AC a distance D ahead of the CG, makes a nose-up pitchin
g moment about the CG of L*D. Since the pitching moment about the CG is zero (co
ndition for equilibrium), we conclude that, other than the lift, there has to be
a ballancing nose-down pitching moment of the same magnitude: L*D. In a more gr
aphical way, on AC we draw a straight vertical arrow representing the lift and a
counterclockwise rotating arrow representing the pitching moment. The two toget
her make for a zero pitching moment about the CG.
Now, what happens is the AoA changes? Say that it increases. The pitching moment
about the AC won't change by definition of AC. It reamins the same nose-down va
lue as before. On the other hand, the pitching moment that the lift placed on th
e AC makes about the CG is still a nose-up L*D, only that L has increased ebcaus
e of the increased AoA. The result is a net nose-up pitching moment about the CG
. Let's see: the AoA increases and the plane responds with a nose-up pitching mo
ment, that will only tend to icnrease the AoA even further. If that sounds like
something unstable, it is.
Finally, what if the CG is now ahead of the AC?
Now we can draw on the AC the vertical arrow representing the lift. That lift wi
ll make a nose-down pitching moment about the CG. So there must be again a pitch
ing moment of value L*D, but this time nose-up (a clockwise turning arrow around
the AC). When the angle of attack increases, the lift increases and the nose-do
wn pitching moment it makes about the CG increases too (again, it's L*D but with
a greater L). Onthe other hand, again, the pitching moment about the AC remains
constant by defintion of AC. That's a net nose-down pitching moment. Let's see:
The AoA increases and the plane responds with a nose-down pitching moment that
will tend to restore it back to its original value. If that sounds like somethin
g stable, it is.
So to close this chapter:
If the CG is ahead of the AC of thewhole airplane, the plane is statically stabl
e (or has positive static stability).
If the CG is behind the AC of the whole airplane, the plane is statically unstab
le (or has negative static stability).
If the CG is on the AC of the whole airplane, the plane is statically indiferent
(or has NEUTRAL static stability). Hence the name of netral point. The AC of th
e whole airplane is the poitn where, if you put the CG on it,the plane has neutr
al stbility. Move the CG forward and it becomes stable. Move it back and it beco
mes unstable.
The AC of the whole airplane, or Neutral Point, cannot be controlled by the pilo
t (as he can do with the CoL of the whole airplane by moving the emevator). What
the pilot can and must do, is ensure that the CG is ahead enoguh of said neutra
l point for the plane to have sufficient static margin (i.e. that it has suffici
ent positive static stability), a thing that is achieved during the famous "weig
ht and ballance", making sure that the CG is within the airplane's approved enve
lope.
In the previous chapted we had said that the CoL of the whole airplane is all ab
out equilibrium and control, and nothing about stability.
Well, in the same way the we can say that the AC of the whole airplane (Neutral
Point) is all about stability, and nothing about equilibrium and control.
Except that equilibrium, control and stability are somehow related, but that's a

whole different chapter that goes light years beyond the original question (as
if these two posts hadn't gone far enough)