Bryan Hoffman

MAE 561 Wing Theory

Homework 2
July 6, 2015

1) The stall angle of attack was determined for four cases: constant chord (Figure 1); tapered
with a ratio of 0.3 (Figure 2); part-tapered (Figure 3); and elliptical (Figure 4). The parttapered wing has a constant chord until half the semi-span and then has a taper ratio of
0.5 to the wing tips.
Table 1: Stall angle of attack for each of the cases studied
Configuration
Constant Chord
Tapered (0.3 Ratio)
Part-Tapered
Elliptical

Alpha_Stall
13
12.5
13
12.6

Max Wing C_L

1.32
1.02
1.25
1.33

Figure 1: The location of stall occurs at the center of the wing for a constant-chord

Figure 2: The location of stall occurs at around half the semi-span for the tapered wing

Figure 3: The location of stall occurs at the center for the part-tapered wing

Figure 4: The location of stall occurs at the wing tips for the elliptical wing
2) For the tapered wing from Problem 1 (Figure 2), the maximum section lift coefficient at
0.7*b/2 (3.5m) is 1.4. Therefore, the local section lift coefficient at that location should
be no more than 1.3. With no twist in the tapered wing, this criterion is actually met for
an angle of attack of 12.5. However, twist should be added in the wing to avoid stall and
to move the location of stall toward the root.
Table 2: The effect of twist on stall angle and wing lift coefficient
Configuration

Twist

Alpha_Stall

Tapered, Untwisted
Tapered, Twisted

0
-4

12.5
13.7

Max Wing
C_L
1.02
1.02

Section C_l
at .7*b/2
1.30
1.19

Figure 5: The effect on local lift coefficients of adding twist to the tapered wing
3) The tapered, twisted wing of Problem 2 was used in this case. First, the basic and
additional loadings were studied and are shown in Figure 6. The basic loading was
determined by setting the wing lift coefficient to zero. The additional loading was
determined by setting the twist and zero-lift angle of attack (aerodynamic and geometric
twists) to zero.
In Figure 7, the additional and basic section lift coefficients, as well as the superposition
of the two, are shown for a wing lift coefficient of 0.5. One can see how the basic and
additional loadings combine to form the overall spanwise section lift coefficient
distribution.

Figure 6: The basic and additional section lift coefficients for the tapered, twisted wing

Figure 7: Overall, additional, and basic section lift coefficients for a wing C_L of 0.5

4) The effect of ailerons on the load distribution was studied for a rectangular wing with a
C_L of 1.0. The two cases studied were (1) ailerons not deflected and (2) ailerons
deflected by -10 and + 10 for the left and right flaps, respectively. The two cases along
with the rolling moment coefficients are compared in Figure 8 and Table 3.

Figure 8: The effect of aileron deflections on load distribution for a rectangular wing C_L of 1
Table 3: Rolling moment coefficients for the cases studied
Configuration

Rolling Moment Coefficient (C_R)

Ailerons Not Deflected

Ailerons Deflected 10

0.0825

5) During descent, deflected flaps produce strong trailing vortices which can become visible
due to condensation in high humidity environments. The sketch in Figure 9 shows a
couple perspectives (planform and rear) as well as a graph of the projected load
distribution. With no deflection, the load distribution would be roughly semi-circular.

However, the positive deflection (downwards) creates a higher section lift coefficient
across the flap and a sharp non-uniformity. From the image in the homework, the trailing
vortex at the outermost edge of the flap is visible. This would correspond to the
counterclockwise gamma_2 shown in the image below. Conversely, the other side of the
flap would produce a clockwise vortex since the load distribution has a positive slope at
that point.

Figure 9: Sketch of spanwise load distribution with a deflected flap