Low-Speed Aerodynamics!

Robert Stengel, Aircraft Flight Dynamics, MAE

331, 2016

Learning Objectives
•! 2D lift and drag
•! Appreciate effects of Reynolds number
•! Relationships between airplane shape
and aerodynamic characteristics
•! Distinguish between 2D and 3D lift and
drag
•! How to compute static and dynamic
effects of aerodynamic control
surfaces
Reading:!
Flight Dynamics !
Aerodynamic Coefficients, 65-84!

Copyright 2016 by Robert Stengel. All rights reserved. For educational use only.
http://www.princeton.edu/~stengel/MAE331.html
http://www.princeton.edu/~stengel/FlightDynamics.html

Review Questions!
!! What are Newton’s three laws of motion?!
!! Why are non-dimensional aerodynamic
coefficients useful?!
!! What are longitudinal motion variables?!
!! What are lateral-directional motion variables?!
!! Why are 2-D and 3-D aerodynamics
different?!
!! Describe some different kinds of aircraft
engines.!
!! Why aren’t rockets used for cruising aircraft
propulsion?!

2
2-Dimensional Aerodynamic!
Lift and Drag!

Lift and Drag

•! Lift is perpendicular to the free-stream
airflow direction
•! Drag is parallel to the free-stream airflow
direction

4
 Longitudinal Aerodynamic
Forces
Non-dimensional force coefficients, CL and CD, are
dimensionalized by
dynamic pressure, q, N/m2 or lb/sq ft
reference area, S, m2 of ft2

"1 %
Lift = C L q S = C L $ !V 2 ' S
#2 &
"1 %
Drag = C D q S = C D $ !V 2 ' S
#2 &
5

Circulation of Incompressible Air Flow

About a 2-D Airfoil
Bernoullis equation (inviscid, incompressible flow)
(Motivational, but not the whole story of lift)

1
pstatic + !V 2 = constant along streamline = pstagnation
2
Vorticity at point x
Vupper (x) = V! + "V (x) 2 #V (x)
Vlower (x) = V! # "V (x) 2
! 2"D (x) =
#z(x)
Circulation about airfoil

%V (x)
c c Lower pressure on upper surface

! 2"D = $ # 2"D (x)dx = $ dx

0 0
%z(x)

see “Lift: A History of Explanations – in Plain English – for How Airplanes Fly, 1910-1950,”
6
Princeton A.B. Thesis, Mackenzie Hawkins, 2015.
 Relationship Between
Circulation and Lift
Differential pressure along chord section
$ 1 2' $ 1 2'
!p ( x ) = & pstatic + " # (V# + !V ( x ) 2 ) ) * & pstatic + " # (V# * !V ( x ) 2 ) )
% 2 ( % 2 (
1 $
= " # (V# + !V ( x ) 2 ) * (V# * !V ( x ) 2 ) '
2 2

2 % (
= " #V# !V ( x ) = " #V# !z(x)+ 2*D (x)

2-D Lift (inviscid, incompressible flow)

c c

( Lift )2!D = # "p ( x ) dx = $ %V% # & 2!D (x)dx = $ %V% ( ' )2!D
0 0

1
! ! "V" 2 c ( 2#$ )[ thin, symmetric airfoil] + ! "V" ( % camber )2&D
2
1
! ! "V" 2 c C L$
2
( )
2&D
$ + ! "V" ( % camber )2&D 7

Lift vs. Angle of Attack

2-D Lift (inviscid, incompressible flow)

1
( Lift )2-D ! %'
&2
! "V" 2 c C L# ( )
2$D
(
# * + %& ! "V" ( + camber )2$D ()
)
= [Lift due to angle of attack]
+ [Lift due to camber]
8
 Typical Flow Variation
with Angle of Attack

•! At higher angles,
–! flow separates
–! wing loses lift
•! Flow separation
produces stall

What Do We Mean by !
2-Dimensional Aerodynamics?
Finite-span wing –> finite aspect ratio
b
AR = rectangular wing
c
b ! b b2
= = any wing
c!b S

Infinite-span wing –> infinite aspect ratio

10
 What Do We Mean by !
2-Dimensional Aerodynamics?

Assuming constant chord section, the 2-D Lift


is the
same at any y station of the infinite-span wing

1 1
Lift 3!D = C L3!D "V 2 S = C L3!D "V 2 ( bc ) [Rectangular wing]
2 2
1
# ( Lift 3!D ) = C L3!D "V 2 c#y
2

% 1 ( 1
lim ! ( Lift 3#D ) = lim ' C L3#D $V 2 c!y* + "2-D Lift" = C L2#D $V 2 c
!y"0 !y"0 & 2 ) 2 11

Effect of Sweep Angle on Lift

Unswept wing, 2-D lift slope coefficient
Inviscid, incompressible flow
Referenced to chord length, c, rather than wing area

$ #C '
C L2!D = " & L )
% #" ( 2!D
= " C L" ( ) 2!D
= ( 2* )" [Thin Airfoil Theory]

Swept wing, 2-D lift slope coefficient

Inviscid, incompressible flow

( )
C L2!D = " C L"
2!D
= ( 2# cos $ )"

12
 Thin Airfoil Theory

Downward velocity, w, at xo due to vortex at x

Differential Integral

! ( x ) dx 1 1 " ( x)
dw ( xo ) = w ( xo ) = $ (x dx
2" ( xo # x ) 2! 0
o # x)

Boundary condition: flow tangent to mean camber line

w ( xo ) # dz &
=! "% (
V $ dx ' xo
McCormick, 1995 13

Thin Airfoil Theory

Integral equation for ! ( x )
1 1 " ( x) & dz )
$ (x dx = % # ( +
2! V o # x)
0 ' dx * xo

Coordinate transformation
1
x= (1! cos" )
2

Solution for ! ( x ) Coefficients

% 1+ cos" # ( 1 # dz
A0 = ! " d$
! = 2V ' A0
sin "
+ $ An sin n" * # %0 dx
& n=1 )
2 # dz
An = % cos n$ d$
# 0 dx

McCormick, 1995 14
 Thin Airfoil Theory
Lift, from Kutta-Joukowski theorem
1

L = # !V " ( x ) dx = 2$ A0 + $ A1
0

For thin airfoil with circular arc

A0 = ! , A1 = 4zmax
C L2!D = 2"# + 4" zmax = C L# # + C Lo [Circular arc]
=C L# # [Flat plate]

"C L
C L! = = 2#
"!
McCormick, 1995 15

Classic Airfoil
Profiles
NACA Airfoils
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NACA_airfoil

•! NACA 4-digit Profiles (e.g., NACA 2412)

–! Maximum camber as percentage of chord
(2) = 2%
–! Distance of maximum camber from leading
edge, (4) = 40%
–! Maximum thickness as percentage of chord
(12) = 12%

•! Clark Y (1922): Flat lower surface, 11.7%

thickness
–! GA, WWII aircraft
Fluent, Inc, 2007
–! Reasonable L/D
–! Benign theoretical stall characteristics
–! Experimental result is more abrupt Clark Y Airfoil
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clark_Y
16
 Typical Airfoil Profiles
Positive camber

Neutral camber

Negative camber

Talay, NASA SP-367

17

Airfoil Effects
•! Camber increases zero-! lift
coefficient
•! Thickness
–! increases ! for stall and
softens the stall break
–! reduces subsonic drag
–! increases transonic drag
–! causes abrupt pitching
moment variation

•! Profile design
–! can reduce center-of-
pressure (static margin, TBD)
variation with !
–! affects leading-edge and
trailing-edge flow separation

Talay, NASA SP-367 18

 NACA 641-012 Chord Section Lift,
Drag, and Moment (NACA TR-824)

Rough ~ Turbulent
CD
CL, 60° flap
CL Smooth ~ Laminar

CL, w/o flap “Drag Bucket”

Cm

Cm, w/o flap

Cm, 60° flap

! CL
19

!is"rical Fac"id
Measuring Lift and Drag with Whirling Arms
and Early Wind Tunnels
Whirling Arm Experimentalists

Otto Lillienthal Hiram Maxim Samuel Langley

Wind Tunnel Experimentalists

Frank Wenham Gustave Eiffel Hiram Maxim Wright Brothers 20

 !is"rical Fac"id
Wright Brothers Wind Tunnel

21

Flap Effects on
Aerodynamic Lift

•! Camber modification
•! Trailing-edge flap deflection
shifts CL up and down
•! Leading-edge flap (slat)
deflection increases stall !
•! Same effect applies for
other control surfaces
–! Elevator (horizontal tail)
–! Ailerons (wing)
–! Rudder (vertical tail)
22
 Aerodynamic Drag
1 2 1
Drag = C D
2
( )
!V S " C D0 + # C L2 !V 2 S
2
2 1
" %'C D0
&
( )
+ # C Lo + C L$ $ (* !V 2 S
)2

23

Parasitic Drag, CDo

•! Pressure differential,
viscous shear stress,
and separation

1 2
Parasitic Drag = C D0 !V S
2

Talay, NASA SP-367 24

Reynolds Number and Boundary Layer
!Vl Vl
Reynolds Number = Re = =
µ "
where
! = air density, kg/m 2
V = true airspeed, m/s
l = characteristic length, m
µ = absolute (dynamic) viscosity = 1.725 " 10 #5 kg / m i s
$ = kinematic viscosity (SL) = 1.343 " 10 #5 m / s 2

25

Reynolds Number,
Skin Friction, and
Boundary Layer
Skin friction coefficient for a flat plate
Friction Drag
Cf = Wetted Area: Total surface
qSwet area of the wing or aircraft,
subject to skin friction
where Swet = wetted area
Boundary layer thickens in transition, then
thins in turbulent flow

C f ! 1.33Re "1/2 [laminar flow ]

! 0.46 ( log10 Re )
"2.58
[turbulent flow ]
26
Effect of Streamlining on Parasitic Drag

CD = 2.0

CD = 1.2

CD = 0.12

CD = 1.2

CD = 0.6
Talay, NASA SP-367 27

Subsonic CDo Estimate (Raymer)

28
 !is"rical Fac"id
Samuel Pierpoint
Langley (1834-1906)
•! Astronomer supported by Smithsonian Institution
•! Whirling-arm experiments
•! 1896: Langley's steam-powered Aerodrome model
flies 3/4 mile
•! Oct 7 & Dec 8, 1903: Manned aircraft flights end in
failure

29

!is"rical Fac"id
Wilbur (1867-1912) and
Orville (1871-1948)
Wright
•! Bicycle mechanics from Dayton, OH
•! Self-taught, empirical approach to flight
•! Wind-tunnel, kite, and glider
experiments
•! Dec 17, 1903: Powered, manned
aircraft flight ends in success

30
 Description of Aircraft
Configurations!

31

A Few Definitions

Republic F-84F
Thunderstreak
32
 Wing Planform Variables
Aspect Ratio
Taper Ratio
b
AR = rectangular wing ctip tip chord
c != =
b ! b b2 croot root chord
= = any wing
c!b S
Delta Wing
Swept Trapezoidal Wing
Rectangular Wing

33

Wing Design Parameters

•! Planform
–! Aspect ratio
–! Sweep
–! Taper
–! Complex geometries
–! Shapes at root and tip
•! Chord section
–! Airfoils
–! Twist
•! Movable surfaces
–! Leading- and trailing-edge devices
–! Ailerons
–! Spoilers
•! Interfaces
–! Fuselage
–! Powerplants
–! Dihedral angle
34
Talay, NASA SP-367
 Mean Aerodynamic Chord and
Wing Aerodynamic Center
•! Mean aerodynamic chord (m.a.c.) ~ mean geometric chord

b2
1
c = " c 2 ( y ) dy ctip
S !b 2 tip chord
!= =
croot root chord
# 2 & 1+ ) + )
2
=% ( croot [for trapezoidal wing]
$ 3 ' 1+ )
Trapezoidal Wing
•! s subsonic
Axial location of the wing
aerodynamic center (a.c.)
–! Determine spanwise location of m.a.c.
–! Assume that aerodynamic center is at
25% m.a.c.
Mid-
chord
line

Elliptical Wing
from Raymer

from Sunderland
35

3-Dimensional Aerodynamic!
Lift and Drag!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S7V0awkweZc

36
•! Washout twist
–! reduces tip angle of attack
Wing Twist Effects
–! typical value: 2° - 4°
–! changes lift distribution (interplay with taper ratio)
–! reduces likelihood of tip stall
–! allows stall to begin at the wing root
•! separationburble
 produces buffet at tail surface, warning of stall
–! improves aileron effectiveness at high !

37
Talay, NASA SP-367

Aerodynamic Strip Theory

•! Airfoil section may vary from tip-to-tip
–! Chord length
–! Airfoil thickness
–! Airfoil profile
–! Airfoil twist
•! 3-D Wing Lift: Integrate 2-D lift coefficients
of airfoil sections across finite span
Incremental lift along span

dL = C L2!D ( y ) c ( y ) qdy
Aero L-39 Albatros
dC L3!D ( y )
= c ( y ) qdy
dy
3-D wing lift
b /2

L3! D = " C L2! D ( y ) c ( y ) q dy

!b /2
38
Bombardier Dash 8
Handley Page HP.115
Effect of Aspect Ratio on
3-Dimensional Wing Lift
Slope Coefficient
(Incompressible Flow)
High Aspect Ratio (> 5) Wing

# "C L & 2 * AR # AR &

C L! ! % ( = = 2* % (
$ "! '3)D AR + 2 $ AR + 2 '
Low Aspect Ratio (< 2) Wing

" AR # AR &
C L! = = 2" % (
2 $ 4 '
39

Effect of Aspect Ratio on 3-D

Wing Lift Slope Coefficient
(Incompressible Flow)
All Aspect Ratios (Helmbold equation)

" AR
C L! =
) 2,
#
+1+ 1+ % AR &
( .
+* $ 2 ' .-

40
 Effect of Aspect Ratio on 3-D
Wing Lift Slope Coefficient
All Aspect Ratios (Helmbold equation)
Wolfram Alpha (https://www.wolframalpha.com/)
plot(pi A / (1+sqrt(1 + (A / 2)^2)), A=1 to 20)

41

!is"rical Fac"ids
•! 1906: 2nd successful aviator: Alberto
Santos-Dumont, standing!
–! High dihedral, forward control surface
•! Wrights secretive about results until
1908; few further technical contributions

•! 1908: Glenn Curtiss et al incorporate

ailerons
–! Wright brothers sue for infringement
of 1906 US patent (and win)

•! 1909: Louis Bleriot's flight across

the English Channel

42
Wing-Fuselage Interference Effects
•! Wing lift induces
–! Upwash in front of the wing
–! Downwash behind the wing, having major effect on the tail
–! Local angles of attack over canard and tail surface are modified,
affecting net lift and pitching moment
•! Flow around fuselage induces upwash on the wing, canard,
and tail

from Etkin

43

Longitudinal Control Surfaces

Wing-Tail Configuration

Flap Elevator

Delta-Wing Configuration

Elevator
44
 Angle of Attack and
Control Surface Deflection
•! Horizontal tail with
elevator control
surface

•! Horizontal tail at
positive angle of attack

•! Horizontal tail with

positive elevator
deflection

45

Control Flap Carryover Effect on

Lift Produced By Total Surface

from Schlichting & Truckenbrodt

C L! E cf
vs.
C L" xf + cf

cf (x f + cf ) 46
Lift due to Elevator Deflection
Lift coefficient variation due to elevator deflection

"C L Sht
C L! E !
"! E
= # ht$ht C L%( ) ht S
&C L = C L! E ! E

! ht = Carryover effect
"ht = Tail efficiency factor
(C )
L#
ht
= Horizontal tail lift-coefficient slope
Sht = Horizontal tail reference area
Lift variation due to elevator deflection

!L = C L" E qS" E
47

Example of Configuration and

Flap Effects

48
 Next Time:!
Induced Drag and High-Speed!
Aerodynamics!
Reading:!
Flight Dynamics !
Aerodynamic Coefficients, 85-96!
Airplane Stability and Control!
Chapter 1!

Learning Objectives
•! Understand drag-due-to-lift and effects of
wing planform
•! Recognize effect of angle of attack on lift
and drag coefficients
•! How to estimate Mach number (i.e., air
compressibility) effects on aerodynamics
•! Be able to use Newtonian approximation to
estimate lift and drag 49

Supplementary Material

50
 Typical Effect of Reynolds
Number on Parasitic Drag
•! Flow may stay attached
farther at high Re,
reducing the drag

from Werle*

51
* See Van Dyke, M., An Album of Fluid Motion,
Parabolic Press, Stanford, 1982

Effect of Aspect Ratio on 3-Dimensional

Wing Lift Slope Coefficient

•! High Aspect Ratio (> 5) Wing

•! Wolfram Alpha

plot(2 pi (a/(a+2)), a=5 to 20)

•! Low Aspect Ratio (< 2) Wing

•! Wolfram Alpha

plot(2 pi (a / 4), a=1 to 2)

52
 Aerodynamic Stall, Theory and Experiment
•! Flow separation produces stall
•! Straight rectangular wing, AR = 5.536, NACA 0015
•! Hysteresis for increasing/decreasing !

Anderson et al, 1980

53

Maximum Maximum Lift of

Rectangular Wings
Lift
Coefficient,
CL max

Schlicting & Truckenbrodt, 1979

Angle of
Attack for
CL max

Aspect Ratio
! : Sweep angle
" : Thickness ratio 54
 Maximum Lift of Delta Wings with
Straight Trailing Edges
Maximum Lift Angle of Attack
Coefficient, CL max for CL max

Aspect Ratio Aspect Ratio ! : Taper ratio

Schlicting & Truckenbrodt, 1979 55

Aft Flap vs. All-Moving

Control Surface
•! Carryover effect of aft flap
–! Aft-flap deflection can be almost as effective as
full surface deflection at subsonic speeds
–! Negligible at supersonic speed
•! Aft flap
–! Mass and inertia lower, reducing likelihood of
mechanical instability
–! Aerodynamic hinge moment is lower
–! Can be mounted on structurally rigid main
surface
56
 Multi-Engine Aircraft of World War II
Boeing B-17 Consolidated B-24 Boeing B-29

Douglas A-26

•! Large W.W.II aircraft had

unpowered controls:
–! High foot-pedal force
North American B-25
–! Rudder stability problems
arising from balancing to
reduce pedal force
•! Severe engine-out problem Martin B-26
for twin-engine aircraft
57

Medium to High Aspect Ratio Configurations

Cessna 337 DeLaurier Ornithopter Schweizer 2-32

Vtakeoff = 82 km/h
hcruise = 15 ft

Vcruise = 144 mph

hcruise = 10 kft

Mtypical = 75 mph
hmax = 35 kft

Mcruise = 0.84
hcruise = 35 kft

•! Typical for subsonic aircraft

Boeing 777-300
58
 Uninhabited Air Vehicles
Northrop-Grumman/Ryan Global Hawk General Atomics Predator

Vcruise = 70-90 kt
hcruise = 25 kft
Vcruise = 310 kt
hcruise = 50 kft

59

Stealth and Small UAVs

Lockheed-Martin RQ-170 General Atomics Predator-C (Avenger)

Northrop-Grumman X-47B InSitu/Boeing ScanEagle

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stealth_aircraft 60
 Subsonic Biplane

•! Compared to monoplane
–! Structurally stiff (guy wires)
–! Twice the wing area for the same
span
–! Lower aspect ratio than a single
wing with same area and chord
–! Mutual interference
–! Lower maximum lift
–! Higher drag (interference, wires)
•! Interference effects of two wings
–! Gap
–! Aspect ratio
–! Relative areas and spans
–! Stagger

61

Some Videos
Flow over a narrow airfoil, with downstream vortices
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zsO5BQA_CZk
Flow over transverse flat plate, with downstream vortices

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0z_hFZx7qvE
Laminar vs. turbulent flow
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WG-YCpAGgQQ&feature=related

Smoke flow visualization, wing with flap

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=fvwp&NR=1&v=eBBZF_3DLCU/
1930s test in NACA wind tunnel
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3_WgkVQWtno&feature=related
62