ACD506 - Day 3 Aircraft Wing Design

Session 3
Aircraft Wing Design

Session delivered by:
Dr. H. K. Narahari
1
Faculty of Engineering & Technology
M. S. Ramaiah University of Applied Sciences
Session Objectives
At the end of this session the students will be able to :
Choose Wing loading (W/S) based on different performance requirements
Choose the lowest point in the feasible solution space to get lowest Thrust requirement
Design Planform considering its dependence on various design elements

Select a Wing cross-section (airfoil)
Choose appropriate High lift devices
In order to reach required (L/D, CD0 etc)
2
Overview
The configuration of the wing is fundamental to the
design of the aircraft.
Interaction of the many parameters involved in wing
design can be described under:
Aerofoil section, including the use of high lift devices,
Planform shape and geometry : determined by the operating
Mach number of the aircraft and aerofoil shape..
Overall size, that is the wing area : decided by the planform and
aerofoil section.
3
Overview
Wing design starts with Wing loading parameter W/S
Based on historical data (to be refined later)
Constraint Diagram
Selection of Planform
Aspect ratio, root and tip chord
Sweep (LE, quarter chord and TE)
Taper ratio and twist
Selection of airfoil based on dominant requirement

eg. For a passenger a/c choose such that the cruise CL falls
in the drag bucket region of airfoil
Select high lift devices accordingly
4
Airfoil selection : Drivers

C L max at low and higher Mach numbers.
The stalling characteristics where a gentle loss of lift is
preferable, especially for light aircraft.
Drag especially in aircraft climb and cruise conditions,
when the lift to drag ratio should be as high as
possible, and at higher Mach numbers.
The aerofoil pitching moment characteristics which
may be particularly important at higher speeds.
If it is large there may be a significant trim drag penalty.
5
Airfoil Selection : Drivers

The depth and shape of the aerofoil
it effects the structural design
Affects potential volume for fuel.
The slope of the lift curve as a function of incidence in

that it effects overall aircraft attitude,
especially at high values of lift coefficient, such as are required
at landing.
6
Shape parameters
Aerofoil characteristics are determined by several
shape parameters of which the most significant are:
maximum thickness to chord ratio (t/c) and its
chordwise location.
Civil subsonic 8-10 % , supersonic 3-5%
Leading edge or Nose radius impacts C L max

Should be larger for subsonic aircraft
Sharp for trans and supersonic aircraft
the degree and distribution of camber, if any is used.

Control surfaces are usually uncambered.
7
Shape Parameters
Some degree of camber is normal for a wing
section as it gives better lift characteristics.
Normal flight is the criteria used for camber
choice
inverted flight would be possible of course
trailing edge angle, which is often best made as

small as is feasible.
8
Aerofoil Nomenclature
9
Span Influences the following

Climb
Induced drag important at climb airspeeds
Greater span good for rate of climb
Cruise
High altitude: induced drag significant, greater span
preferred
Low Altitude: parasite drag dominates, span less
important
Weight
Increasing span and aspect ratio makes the wing heavier.
Optimum is a compromise between wing weight and
induced drag
10
Wing Area Influences

Cruise Drag
Low altitude cruise favors high wing loading and low wetted
area.
Higher altitude cruise favors lower wing loading and greater
span.
Takeoff and Landing

Increasing wing loading increases takeoff and landing roll
Roll is proportional to the square of the takeoff or landing speed
11
Wing Area Influences

Maneuvering
Favors low wing loading, particularly for instantaneous turn rate.
Stall Speed
Most light airplanes wings are sized by stall speed requirements
FAR part 23, Part 103
Survivability
12
Wing Thickness influences

Wing weight is strongly affected by thickness
Thicker is lighter because deeper beams possible
Supersonic wave drag is a strong function of t/c

Variation of parasite drag with wing t/c is small at
subsonic, subcritical speeds.
Drag is primarily skin friction
Large drag increase if wing gets so thick that flow separates
Thickness taper
Wing weight most strongly affected by root depth
Tapering t/c from root to tip can provide lighter wing for
given parasite drag.
13
Wing Sweep
Delayed Drag Rise : postpone transonic drag shoot-up

Aerodynamic Center Moved Aft
Heavier Structure : torsion along with bending
Increased Additional Loading outboard (Decreased for
forward Sweep)
Pitch up at stall
Aero-elastic concerns
14
CL Max estimation
Most 2 D airfoils have a CL max rage between 1.6 to
1.7 (in a few cases could be higher)
Aero foil at the root is usually thicker than tip, so take
average between quoted CL max for root that
C L max swept wing = cos(sweep)*[ Cl max (aero foil+
(LE and TE) edge devices
Typical values for LED = 0.65
TE devices vary based on span , chord and type of
device
15
Parameter estimation
CL max for landing = 0.6 *( 1.5+ LED + TED) *
cos(sweep)
CL max for take off = 0.8 *( 1.5+ LED + TED )*
cos(sweep)
Trailing edge devices are common and simpler
Chord length vary from 20 to max 40 %
Twist is approximately equal to

= 0.2 * AR ^0.25 * cos (sweep ) ^2
16
High Lift Devices

High lift devices, as opposed to drag producing
devices such as spoilers, function differently :
Deflection of the trailing edge and, possibly, leading edge of the
aerofoil to increase the chordwise curvature or camber.
Greater lift results at the expense of more drag and pitching
moment.
Extension of the trailing edge and, possibly, leading

edge to increase the chord.
This effectively increases the wing area and gives higher lift with
relatively small drag penalty.
17
High Lift Devices

Introduction of slots between the lower and
upper aerofoil surfaces.
This enhances upper surface flow, delays flow separation,
and again results in more lift potential, but with a drag
penalty.
Increase of camber shifts the (C L - ) curve to the

left
i.e the angle at which lift is zero, o, is more negative.
the AOA at which the aerofoil stalls is slightly reduced,
the maximum lift coefficient is increased.
18
High Lift Devices

Increase of chord results in more lift at a given angle
of attack due to the effectively increased wing area.
Thus relative to the clean wing reference area there is
an increase of the slope of the (C L - ) curve.
Slots, especially those in the leading edge region,
delay the onset of stall.
There is an upward extension of the (C L - ) curve
along its initial slope.
19
Effect of High Lift devices
20
Trailing Edge Devices

The simplest systems, such as plain and split flaps,
change only the camber of the aerofoil.
More complex concepts, such as multi-slotted or
Fowler flaps, not only change camber but also extend
the chord.
Trailing edge devices are between 20% 40% of chord.
The maximum angle through which a flap is deflected
is between 35 to 45 deg.
Some High lift devices are seen in the next slide
21
TE Devices
22
TE Devices 2
23
Leading Edge devices

How do we decide on LE devices? Howe suggests the
following criteria for transport and combat a/c
Evaluate F L.E = {(W/S) takeoff / cos ( )}
For Transport a/c if F L.E > 5500 N/m2
For Combat a/c if F L.E > 4000 N/m2
Max increase in C L LED ~= 0.65

Max increase in C L TED higher values are possible
24
Leading Edge Devices
Plain Hinged Nose section
Kruger Flap : Section moves forward

and outward
25
Wing : 3D effects
A 3D finite wing produces vortex flow as a result
of tip effects (shown in next slide)
The high pressure from the lower surface rolls up
at the free end of the finite wing, creating the tip
vortex.
This vortex flow generates a downwash,
which is distributed spanwise at varying strengths.
Lift is a reaction force to this downwash
Energy lost in the downwash appears as lift

dependent induced drag , D i
and its minimization is a goal of aircraft designers.
Faculty
Engineering
& Technology
M. S. of
Ramaiah
University
of Applied Sciences
26
Wing : 3D effects
Downwash decreases for large span wings : aspect ratio

For large AR, flow can be approximated by 2D flow.
27
Faculty
Engineering
& Technology
M. S. of
Ramaiah
University
of Applied Sciences
Effect of 3D effects
28
Faculty
Engineering
& Technology
M. S. of
Ramaiah
University
of Applied Sciences
Typical values for max

The wing tip effect delays the stall by a few
degrees because the outer-wing flow
distortion reduces the local angle of attack
it is shown as max. is the shift of CL max;
this value of max is determined experimentally.
Typical empirical relationship

max = 2 deg, for AR > 5 to 12,
max = 1 deg, for AR > 12 to 20,
max = 0 deg, for AR > 20.
29
Faculty
Engineering
& Technology
M. S. of
Ramaiah
University
of Applied Sciences
Wing Planform
30
Faculty
Engineering
& Technology
M. S. of
Ramaiah
University
of Applied Sciences
Wing Definition
Sweep Angle
aspect ratio, AR = (b b)/(b c) = (b2)/(SW)

31
Faculty
Engineering
& Technology
M. S. of
Ramaiah
University
of Applied Sciences
Effect of 3D
Two-dimensional lift values are not obtained on a
practical wing of finite span especially when it is
swept.
The combination of finite aspect ratio, sweep and
taper of the planform causes spanwise flow
interactions
which increase the effective angle of attack of local chordwise
sections.
this gives rise to a tendency to higher lift coefficients outboard
resulting in the possibility of tip stall
Nose-up pitch when sweep is present.
32
Effect of 3D
Reduction of the local angles of attack outboard
relative to the root can overcome this problem.
This may be done by a leading edge device, such as a
droop nose, or by built-in geometric properties.
Wash out" is typically equivalent to about 2 o nose
down twist at the tip.
33
Effect of 3D : Taper Ratio

Rectangular wings are easy to fabricate but are
aerodynamically in-efficient due to wash out .
This can be addressed by different means, one of which is
Taper ratio, defined as ratio between tip & root chord
However taper has some other effects as well

It will change the wing lift distribution. such that the
spanwise lift distribution be elliptical.
it taper will increase the cost of the wing manufacture
it will reduce the wing weight, since the center of gravity
of each wing section (left and right) will move toward
fuselage center line.
34
Effect of 3D : Taper Ratio

wing mass moment of inertia about x-axis (longitudinal
axis) will be decreased. Consequently, this will improve
the aircraft lateral control.
taper will influence the aircraft static lateral stability, since
the taper usually generates a sweep angle
35
Effect of 3D : Elliptical Loading

Improves lift efficiency and has other beneficial
effects on structural design
36
Effect of 3D : Part-span
Leading and trailing edge high lift devices cannot
occupy all of the actual wing span.
further reductions of lift relative to the 2D case.
Leading edge devices are not full span because of:

Presence of fuselage.
Shape of wing tip required for good cruise performance which
restricts the outboard extremity of the slat.
Possible limitations in the region of engine pylons.
Trailing edge devices are limited by

Presence of Fuselage
Need for ailerons
37
Wing Thickness effects

Wing weight is strongly affected by thickness,
particularly for cantilever wings.
Thicker is lighter because of deeper beams
Supersonic wave drag is a strong function of t/c,

At subsonic speeds parasitic drag not affected by
t/c
Low M , drag is primarily skin friction
Large t/c flow separation large drag increase
Thickness taper
Wing weight most strongly affected by root depth
Tapering t/c from root to tip can provide lighter wing for
given parasite drag.
38
Effect of t/c on drag polar
CL
CD
39
Laminar flow Airfoils
40
Effect of Camber on Airfoils
41
Effect of Camber on Airfoils
CL
CD
For the same drag penalty, we can sustain higher

CL
42
Sweep angle
Improves the wing aerodynamic features (lift, drag, pitching
moment) at transonic, supersonic and hypersonic speeds
by delaying the compressibility effects.
Adjusting the aircraft C.G
Improves static lateral stability, but destroys elliptic loading
Impacting longitudinal and directional stability.
Increasing pilot view (especially for fighter pilots).
43
Typical Sweep angles
44
Effect Sweep and (t/c ) max

High speed drag rise is related to (t/c) max
Sweep reduces effective Mach number on the
wing and postpones drag rise.
Typical combinations of sweep and (t/c) max are shown
below
45
Typical Wing t/c Ratios
46
Faculty
Engineering
& Technology
M. S. of
Ramaiah
University
of Applied Sciences
Subsonic Sweep (t/c) combination
Note : Transport planes fly at M = 0.85 and normally use 10-11% t/c Sweep in
the range 30-35 deg
47
Typical Aspect Ratio and Sweep
48
Faculty
Engineering
& Technology
M. S. of
Ramaiah
University
of Applied Sciences
Transonic Sweep (t/c) combination
49
Effect of Wing Taper Ratio

Pros :
Thicker Root
Centroid of load moved inboard => reduced bending
moment
Lighter Structure, More Volume
Higher Span Efficiency
Cons :
Structural Complexity
High local Cl (additional) outboard
Reduced Reynolds number outboard
Poor Stall Characteristics Possible
50
FINITE WING LIFT CURVE SLOPE ( 2p)

a a eff a i
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, ai = 0, so plot is
CL vs. ageom or aeff and slope is a0
Figure (b) shows finite wing, ai 0
Plot CL vs. what we see, ageom, (or what
would be easy to measure in a wind
tunnel), not what wing sees, aeff
1. Effect of finite wing is to reduce lift curve slope

Finite wing lift slope = a = dCL/da 2p
2. At CL = 0, ai = 0, so aL=0 same for infinite or
51
finite wings
51
CALCULATING CHANGE IN LIFT SLOPE

If we know a0 (infinite wing lift slope, say from data) how can we
find finite wing lift slope, a, for wing with given AR?
dC L
a0
d a a i
Lift slope definition for infinite wing
C L a0 a a i const
Integrate
C L a0 a L const
peAR
a a const
CL 0
a
1 0
peAR
a0
dC L
a
a
da
1 0
peAR
Substitute definition of ai
Solve for CL
Differentiate CL with respect to a to find lift
slope for finite wing
Note: Equation is in radians
52
52
Lift Curve slope High AR & straight wing
53
Lift Curve slope Low AR & straight wing
54
Lift curve slope- Swept wings
55
Typical Wing Geometry (Howe)
56
Typical Wing Loadings (Howe)
57
Typical Wing Loadings
58
Typical T/W and W/S Ranges
59
Faculty
Engineering
& Technology
M. S. of
Ramaiah
University
of Applied Sciences
Subsonic Profile Drag

Drag Coefficient =
60
Where R is given by the figure shown below
61
Subsonic Body Profile Drag

Where
S B is max cross section area of body, S S is wetted

area and l B /d is body fineness ratio
62
CL CD various A/c
63
Drag rise with Mach no
64
Drag rise with Mach no
65
Faculty
Engineering
& Technology
M. S. of
Ramaiah
University
of Applied Sciences
Guidelines for Choice of CL

For Aspect Ratio > 5 (Transport, Bombers)
CL max = const * {CL max airfoil + LE Devices + TE devices } * cos ( 0.25c)

CL max airfoil =1.5 to 1.6, LE Devices =0.6 to 0.65
For Takeoff : Const = 0.8
For Landing : Const=0.6
L/D ~= AR +10 for M<1 and
L/D ~= 11 / sqrt(M)
66
CL required for max R&E
67
CL required for max R&E
68
L/D variation : Wing Parameters
69
Wing parameters : Summary
70
Session Summary
In this session the following topics were dealt with :
Wing loading (W/S) and its choice based on
different performance requirements
Planform design and its dependence on various
design elements
Wing cross-section (airfoil) selection
High lift devices and their use.
71
Thank you !
72
WING LOADING (W/S), SPAN LOADING (W/b) AND ASPECT RATIO (b2/S)
W W b

b S AR
Span loading (W/b), wing loading (W/S)

and AR (b2/S) are related
D0 q SC D , 0
Zero-lift drag, D0 is proportional to wing area
1 W
Di

peq b
Induced drag, Di, is proportional to square

of span loading
2
Di 1 W
1

D0 peq b q SC D , 0
S
W
W
S
b2
b2S
S
Di
1
D0 peq2 C D , 0
AR
S
W
AR
Take ratio of these drags, Di/D0

Re-write W2/(b2S) in terms of AR and substitute into drag
ratio Di/D0
1: For specified W/S (set by take-off or landing
requirements) and CD,0 (airfoil choice), increasing AR will
decrease drag due to lift relative to zero-lift drag
2: AR predominately controls ratio of induced drag to zero
lift drag, whereas span loading controls actual value of
induced drag
73
73

ACD506 - Day 3 Aircraft Wing Design

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

ACD506 - Day 3 Aircraft Wing Design

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Session 3

Aircraft Wing Design

M. S. Ramaiah University of Applied Sciences

Design Planform considering its dependence on various design elements

M. S. Ramaiah University of Applied Sciences

M. S. Ramaiah University of Applied Sciences

Selection of airfoil based on dominant requirement

M. S. Ramaiah University of Applied Sciences

Airfoil selection : Drivers

M. S. Ramaiah University of Applied Sciences

Airfoil Selection : Drivers

The slope of the lift curve as a function of incidence in

M. S. Ramaiah University of Applied Sciences

Leading edge or Nose radius impacts C L max

the degree and distribution of camber, if any is used.

M. S. Ramaiah University of Applied Sciences

trailing edge angle, which is often best made as

M. S. Ramaiah University of Applied Sciences

M. S. Ramaiah University of Applied Sciences

Span Influences the following

M. S. Ramaiah University of Applied Sciences

Wing Area Influences

Takeoff and Landing

M. S. Ramaiah University of Applied Sciences

Wing Area Influences

M. S. Ramaiah University of Applied Sciences

Wing Thickness influences

Supersonic wave drag is a strong function of t/c

M. S. Ramaiah University of Applied Sciences

Delayed Drag Rise : postpone transonic drag shoot-up

M. S. Ramaiah University of Applied Sciences

M. S. Ramaiah University of Applied Sciences

Twist is approximately equal to

M. S. Ramaiah University of Applied Sciences

High Lift Devices

Extension of the trailing edge and, possibly, leading

M. S. Ramaiah University of Applied Sciences

High Lift Devices

Increase of camber shifts the (C L - ) curve to the

M. S. Ramaiah University of Applied Sciences

High Lift Devices

M. S. Ramaiah University of Applied Sciences

Effect of High Lift devices

M. S. Ramaiah University of Applied Sciences

Trailing Edge Devices

M. S. Ramaiah University of Applied Sciences

M. S. Ramaiah University of Applied Sciences

M. S. Ramaiah University of Applied Sciences

Leading Edge devices

Max increase in C L LED ~= 0.65

M. S. Ramaiah University of Applied Sciences

Leading Edge Devices

Plain Hinged Nose section

Kruger Flap : Section moves forward

M. S. Ramaiah University of Applied Sciences

Energy lost in the downwash appears as lift

M. S. Ramaiah University of Applied Sciences

Downwash decreases for large span wings : aspect ratio

M. S. Ramaiah University of Applied Sciences

M. S. Ramaiah University of Applied Sciences

Typical values for max

Typical empirical relationship

M. S. Ramaiah University of Applied Sciences