Aircraft Design -Wing Aerodynamics Design

Configuration Overview
Aerofoil Selection
Geometry & definitions, design/selection, families/types, design lift coefficient,
thickness/chord ratio, lift curve slope, characteristic curves.
High Lift Devices
Trailing edge and leading edge.
Wing Planform Shape & Geometry
Aspect ratio, taper ratio, sweep, dihedral, wing area & loading.
Other Wing Design Features
Vortex generators, wing stall fences, spoilers.
Non-Dimensional Coefficients
Used for comparing wing aerodynamics characteristics:
Lift Coefficient (CL) =
lift / 1 V 2 S L / qS
2
Drag Coefficient (CD) =
drag / 1 V 2 S D / qS
2
Pitching Moment Coefficient (CM)
= pitching moment / 1 V 2 Sc M / qSc
2
Where A = aspect ratio, S = planform area,
= mean chord, V = flight speed, = air density, q =
dynamic pressure.
Aerofoil Selection
Affects many aspects of aircraft performance:
Cruise speed, stall speed, take-off and landing distances, handling qualities
(especially near stall), overall aerodynamic efficiency, etc.
Usually designed/selected with primary operating mode in mind, e.g. cruise flight for
transport aircraft.
Variable geometry (e.g. high lift devices) then used to match up better with low-speed
requirements
Aerofoils Geometry & Definitions

Chord line: straight line connecting leading edge (LE) and trailing edge (TE).
Chord (c): length of chord line
Thickness (t): measured perpendicular to chord line as a % of it (subsonic typically 12%).

Camber (d): curvature of section - perpendicular distance of section mid-points from

chord line as a % of it (subsonically typically 3%).

Other parameters of interest (with typical subsonic section values given) include:
position of maximum thickness (as a % of chord length aft of LE) (30%),
position of maximum camber (as a % of chord length aft of LE) (40%),
leading edge radius (as a % of chord length) (4%),
angle of attack - angular difference between chord line and airflow direction.
Previously selected from existing catalogues considering factors such as cruise drag,
stall/pitching moment characteristics, thickness available for fuel/structure, ease of
manufacture, etc.
Nowadays custom-designed with existing computational (CFD) aerofoil design tools
based upon desired aerofoil pressure distributions.
Main aerofoil parameters affecting above:
Maximum t/c and its chordwise location, nose radius, camber and its
distribution, trailing edge angle.
Early Aerofoil Families
A variety is shown below:

Aerofoil Categories
Early based on trial & error.
NACA 4 digit 1930s.
NACA 5-digit aimed at pushing position of max camber forwards for increased CL,max.
NACA 6-digit designed for lower drag by increasing region of laminar flow.

Modern mainly based upon need for improved aerodynamic characteristics at speeds
just below speed of sound.
Aerofoils NACA 4 Digit
Rarely used today except for in simple symmetrical tailplane and fin sections.
1st digit: maximum camber (as % of chord).
2nd digit (x10): location of maximum camber (as % of chord from leading edge
(LE)).
3rd & 4th digits: maximum section thickness (as % of chord).
Thus NACA 2412 has 2% camber at 40% chord from LE & is 12% thick (max).
Aerofoils NACA 5 Digit
Much better low-speed characteristics than 4 digit series.
1st digit (x0.15): design lift coefficient.
2nd & 3rd digits (x0.5): location of maximum camber (as % of chord from LE).
4th & 5th digits: maximum section thickness (as % of chord).
Thus NACA 23012 has CL of 0.3 with max camber at 15% chord from LE & is 12% thick
(max).
Aerofoils NACA 6 Digit
Still represents good basis for some subsonic & high-speed applications (e.g. Mach 2 F15 uses 64A series).
1st digit: identifies series type.
2nd digit (x10): location of minimum pressure (as % of chord from leading edge
(LE)).
3rd digit: indicates acceptable range of CL above/below design value for
satisfactory low drag performance (as tenths of CL).
4th digit (x0.1): design CL.
5th & 6th digits: maximum section thickness (%c)
Thus NACA 632-315 is 6-series with minimum pressure 30% of chord back from LE,
design CL of 0.3 0.2 & is 15% thick (max).
Modern Computationally-Designed Sections
First use was to improve transonic behaviour much pioneering work done by Pearcey
at NPL in the 1960s.
Produced the peaky section, featuring:
Relatively flat upper surface
Marked suction peak near to leading edge.
Cusped trailing edge for increased rear loading.

Supercritical Sections
These were developed by Whitcomb (NASA Langley) first flew on an F-8 in 1971.
Sections designed to minimize transonic effects and allow aircraft to travel at higher
speeds without suffering from too much wave drag.
Sections feature:
Very flat upper surfaces to spread out lift.
Increased lower surface camber at rear end.
Increased leading edge radius to reduce leading edge velocities.

Blunt trailing edge to increase structural strength

The effect regarding shock formation and its effect upon the pressure distribution is shown
here.

Vought F-8 Crusader

May be used in several ways:

Allow the aircraft to fly faster (increase Mcrit).
Increase the section thickness (for more fuel capacity) or reduce sweep angle
while maintaining same speed.
Two main disadvantages:
Increased pitching moment
Thin at rear of section where flaps and ailerons are generally situated.
Used on many fighters, trainers and also transport aircraft (e.g. Boeing 777).
Example 1
Identify Cli, Cdmin, Cm, (Cl/Cd)max, ao (deg), as (deg), Clmax, ao (1/rad), (t/c)max of the
NACA 63-209 airfoil section (flap-up). You need to indicate the locations of all
parameters on the airfoil graphs.

Cli

Cdmin

Cm

(Cl/Cd)max

0.2

0.0045

-0.03

66.7

ao
(deg)
-1.5

as
Clmax
(deg)
12

1.45

Cla
(1/rad)

(t/c)max

5.73

9%

Design Lift Coefficient

First consideration in initial aerofoil selection CL at which aerofoil has best L/D

Typical values are:

0.5 for subsonic airliner in cruise.
0.3 for fighter in cruise.
As a first approximation, it may be assumed for steady level flight that:
Where W/S = wing loading

2 W
1 V 2SC
CL
V or must be
L

2
W/S reduces as fuel is used up so ifLCL is to be kept constant
S either

V then
2
reduced.

Explains why long-range transports tend to cruise-climb.

Maximum Lift Coefficient (CL,max)
Can vary over a wide range for a basic 2-D aerofoil.
Main influences are: camber, thickness and nose radius (decreases as radius decreases).
Typical values are:
1.6 for low speed aerofoils and advanced high-speed subsonic
1.0 for thin supersonic and older high-speed subsonic
Main purpose of high-lift devices is to increase available value of CL,max.

Thickness/Chord Ratio (t/c)

Affects CL,max and Mcrit (see later) and also wave drag rise for transonic/supersonic
designs.
Value chosen is also influenced by structural design and volume requirements.
For low-speed subsonic aircraft relatively high t/c values (up to 0.2) acceptable at wing
root gives good structural depth with small profile drag penalty.
For high-speed subsonic and transonic aircraft, compressibility effects are more
important and much thinner sections used typically 0.1 to 0.15 at wing root.
Tip values are typically 2/3 of the root values, though not necessarily a linear spanwise
variation, especially if a cranked trailing edge.
For supersonic speeds t/c values of between 0.02 and 0.06 are typical , with small
spanwise variations.
Critical Mach Number (Mcrit)

Critical Mach Number Estimation

Mainly dependent upon t/c, design standard of aerofoil and lift coefficient (or angle of
attack)

Typical t/c effect upon Mcrit for unswept wing.

Approximate formula for Mcrit is:
Mcrit = AF 0.1 CL t/c
Where AF depends upon design standard of aerofoil section but may be taken as 0.95 for
advanced types:
Hence for 2-D unswept aerofoils:
Subsonic airliner (CL = 0.5), Mcrit = 0.9 t/c
Fighter (CL = 0.3), Mcrit = 0.92 t/c
See later notes for effect of sweep.
Stall Characteristics
This often plays an important role in subsonic aerofoil selection.
Important factors are:
Suddenness & magnitude of lift loss.
Increase in pitching moment.
Some aerofoils have a gradual reduction in lift (generally preferred, especially for light
aircraft) others experience violent losses with rapid pitching moment changes.

Stall characteristics of thin aerofoils may be improved with leading edge devices (slots,
slats, etc.)
Stall effects more important for high aspect ratio wings.
Tip stalling is undesirable as it produces large roll rates.
Lift Curve Slope (a)
Theoretical 2-D value for lift-curve slope (a = dCL/d) is 2 per radian = 0.11 per degree.

Value falls with both aspect ratio and sweep angle.

Approximate value is:
1

2
0.16 A
2

a3 D a2 D / 0.32
1 M N cos 1
4

cos 1

4

Where:
A = aspect ratio, MN = flight Mach number,
= sweep of quarter-chord line.
Deployment of high lift devices usually has small effect upon lift curve slope.
Available for all classes of standard aerofoils.
Include plots of CD, CL, L/D, CP, Mo & geometry co-ordinates.

Example NACA 2421

High Lift Devices
Used to reduce take-off and landing speeds/distances.
Since stall speed (Vs) may be found from:

Vs 2W / SCL,max

touch-down speed
1.3 Vs,
lift-off speed
1.2 Vs
Increase in either S or CL,max will reduce Vs and hence touch-down and lift-off speeds.
Many different types available, both active and passive.
All work in on or more of three ways:
Increasing chord length (and thus wing area)
Increasing camber (and thus CL,max).
Improving state of boundary layer, thus increasing s and CL,max.
Generally categorised as leading-edge (LE) or trailing-edge (TE) types with the latter
usually preferable.
and

TE High Lift Devices

Simplest types (plain/split flaps) change camber to increase CL,max.
More complex types (slotted, Fowler) also increase wing area and possibly state of
boundary layer to provide further increases.
Usually occupy between 15% and 40% of chord.
Maximum deflection angle varies with type but usually between 35 o & 45o.
Penalties of use: nose-down pitching moment (needs to be trimmed) & reduced
effectiveness of LE devices.
TE flap deployment usually increases CL for a given , increases CL,max and reduces stall
angle.
Little change to lift curve slope.

Plain Flap

Simplest type (similar to ailerons, etc.) flap rotation changes camber to increase lift for
given .
Stall angle reduced as separation occurs earlier on more highly cambered upper surface.
Maximum CL,max of about 0.75 for 40% chord at flap deflection of about 40 o.
Split Flap

Split Flap

Takes form of hinged plate on lower surface.

Produces slightly more CL,max than plain flap and lower change in pitching moment but
more drag.
Upper surface stalling effect is less pronounced than for plain flap so higher stall angle.

Slotted Flap
Flap moves slightly rearwards as it rotates to produce a slot.
High pressure air from the lower surface then travels onto the upper to re-energise
boundary layer and delay separation/stall.
Cures problem of early separation suffered with plain flap.
Profile drag is much less than for plain & split flaps better for take-off performance.
Multiple slot arrangements often used to enhance effect though this increases cost &
complexity issues trend nowadays is for less slots.
Produce a relatively large pitching moment change.

Fowler Flap
Very popular system similar to slotted flap but moves much further back along tracks
to significantly increase wing chord/area.
Large lift increment available, CL,max of about 1.2 for 40% chord.
Used on many jet transport aircraft and some fighters (e.g. F-111, Tu-22).

Triple slotted Fowler flap on Boeing 737

Fowler flaps on C-5 Galaxy.

Effect on 2-D wing assuming use of 25% chord flaps deflected by 30o.

Leading Edge High Lift Devices

Recommended (ref Howe) that only incorporated into aircraft design when:
(W/S)o / cos FLE
Where (W/S)o = take-off wing loading

= quarter-chord sweep
FLE
= 4000 N/m2 for combat a/c
= 5500 N/m2 for transport a/c
Main categories of leading edge devices are:
Leading edge flap (can take form of plain nose flap or droop nose).
Krueger flap.
Sealed slat.
Slotted slat.

 Usually occupy between 10% and 20% of the available wing chord typically 16%.
Leading Edge Flap

Usually only used on large transports.

Small effect, typically CL,max = 0.4.
Work by increasing camber (slightly) and reducing severity of upper surface pressure
peak.

Krueger Flap
Nose flap formed by rotating part of lower surface about a simple hinge.
Increases chord (area), nose radius & camber.
Disadvantages include complexity, costs & high profile drag.
Sometimes vented to re-energise upper surface flow and increase stall angle.
Often used on large airliners (Boeing 747) and some fighters (Tornado).

Slot/Slat Systems
A slot is opened up and high pressure air is forced from the lower surface onto the
upper.
This re-energizes the boundary layer and increases the stall angle and CL,max (typically by
about 0.85).
Usual system involves movement of the forward section (slat) along a track to open up a
slot.
Problems/disadvantages:
Low drag affects landing performance, system cost & complexity, pilots visibility
impaired at high .

Part Span Effects

High lift devices cannot be used over the full span because of:
Presence of fuselage.
Interruptions for powerplants & pylons.
LE devices also limited by wing tip shape.
TE devices limited by provision for ailerons
3-D Effects
2-D lift values not obtained on a finite span wing, especially if swept.
Losses will be due to tip losses and spanwise angle of attack variations.
Approximations for loss factors are:
LE Devices: 0.85 cos
TE Devices: 0.67 cos
For all 3-D swept values of unswept CL,max, multiply by cos for approximate effect.
Typical Effectiveness of TE High Lift Devices
Device (all TE)

2-D CL,max

3-D CL,max

Basic subsonic aerofoil

1.6

1.5

Basic supersonic aerofoil

1.0

0.95

Plain flap 20% chord

0.8

0.55

Plain flap 40% chord

1.1

0.75

Split flap 20% chord

0.9

0.6

Plain flap 40% chord

1.4

0.95

Single slotted flap 20% chord

1.2

0.8

Single slotted flap 20% chord

1.8

1.2

Double slotted flap 40% chord

2.5

1.65

Triple slotted flap 40% chord

2.9

1.9

Fowler flap 20% chord

1.2

0.8

Fowler flap 40% chord

1.8

1.2

Fowler + Split flap 40% chord

2.2

1.45

Plain LE flap 15% chord

0.5

0.4

Vented slat 18% chord

1.0

0.85

Krueger flap 20% chord

0.8

0.65

Extended Positions
Two (or more) extended positions at least for landing and take-off.
Take-Off High lift/drag requirement so TE flap deflection about half of landing setting
and LE slots at about 2/3 of maximum landing values.
Landing Need high lift and drag so use maximum flap and slot deflections.
Limits due to pitching moment and mechanical design constraints.

Wing Planform Shape & Geometry

A reference (trapezoidal) wing shape is used for all initial
calculations.

Aerofoil pitching data is generally provided about the chord line

where (subsonically) the pitching moment is essentially constant
with changing (aerodynamic centre).
Primary planform parameters of interest are:
Aspect ratio (A) = b2/S
Taper ratio () = ct/cr
Sweep angle ()
Leading or trailing edge sweep is sometimes changed (crank).
Mean Aerodynamic Chord (MAC)
Used as a reference dimension for many aerodynamic design
characteristics.

 MAC =

2 2

4 ( S / A) 1
cr 1

(1 ) Aspect
(1 )2
Ratio
(A)
3
3

Aerodynamic preference is for a high aspect ratio as this is the

most efficient at reducing lift-induced (trailing vortex) drag
CD,i = CL2 / Ae
Especially important for low speed performance, when liftinduced drag is dominant.
However, a high aspect ratio leads to a high wing structural mass
so a compromise is needed with due consideration given to
aerofoil and other geometric parameters.
A limit may also be imposed by maximum allowable span, e.g. on
naval aircraft and airliners due to airport gate widths.
Wing-tip folding may be used but this is a complex, costly and heavy
option
Aspect Ratio (A) Examples
Aircraft

Wing Span (m)

Aspect Ratio

A319, A320-200

34.1

9.5

Boeing 737

28.9

8.8

Boeing 757

38.05

8.0

MD-81

32.0

9.6

BAe Jetstream 41

18.29

10.26

Embraer 120

19.78

9.9

Narrow-Body Jet Transports

Regional Turboprops

Shorts 330-200

22.76

12.3

Wide-Body Jet Transports

A310-200

43.9

8.8

A340-200

60.3

10.0

Boeing 747-200C

59.6

6.94

Boeing 747-400

64.3

7.87

Boeing 767-200

47.57

8.0

Boeing 777-200

60.9

8.68

L1011-250

47.35

6.95

MD-11

51.77

7.5

DC10-30

50.42

7.5

Aircraft

Wing Span (m)

Aspect Ratio

Combat Aircraft & Trainers

BAe Hawk 200

9.39

5.3

Sepecat Jaguar

8.69

3.12

Grumman F-14A

11.6 19.54

2.07 7.28

MDD F-15E

13.05

3.01

Lockheed F-16C

9.45

3.0

MDD F/A-18E

11.43

3.52

Su-27

14.69

3.57

Eurofighter Typhoon

10.52

Panavia Tornado

8.6 13.9

2.78 7.27

Taper Ratio ()
Defined as the ratio of the tip chord to the root chord.
Wing taper is primarily chosen to produce a near-elliptical
spanwise lift distribution this reduces the trailing vortex drag
component.
This is preferable to employing an elliptical planform shape as it is
much less complicated in terms of design, manufacture and
assembly.

 Wing taper is also of structural benefit:

The centre of pressure is moved inboard to reduce the wing
bending moment.
The wing thickness and chord is largest at the root, where the
bending moment is largest.
Too much taper can lead to tip-stalling and can also reduce the
area available for the ailerons and high-lift devices.
A typical design value is:
1
0.2 A 4 cos 2 1
Improving Spanwise Lift Distribution
4
Even when an elliptical or tapered wing is used its intersection
with the fuselage will still produce a dip in the lift distribution.
Less critical for a high wing location.
Many combat aircraft counter the effect by using a cambered noncircular fuselage.

Wing Sweep ()
Usually defined along the chord line.
Generally used on high-speed aircraft to:
Increase Mcrit, and/or
Reduce peak wave/compressibility drag.

Only the velocity component normal to the leading edge is accelerated,

so the higher the sweepback angle the higher the value of Mcrit

 Sweepback much more common than sweepforward as it also

gives stability and general layout advantages.
Sweptforward wings are also prone to aeroelastic divergence
effects.
Sweep angle is kept as low as possible for given design flight
conditions and aerofoil configuration as large sweep implies
structural & handling penalties.
Sweep Effects High Subsonic Speeds
Methods for calculating 2-D Mcrit values presented earlier.
Approximate 3-D swept corrections are:
For 0o 1/4 35o

(Mcrit )3D /(Mcrit )2D 1/

For 1/4 > 45o

cos 1/ 4

(Mcrit )3D /(Mcrit )2D 1/ cos 1/ 4

0.6

Interpolate for 35o 1/4 45o

Combined effects of sweep and t/c

Shown here for a subsonic airliner, cruise CL = 0.5

Sweep Effects Supersonic Speeds
Another advantage of sweepback at supersonic speeds is gained by
retaining a subsonic leading edge so that it lies inside the Mach line
(cone) and shock wave generated.

This means that subsonic aerofoil sections are still aerodynamically

efficient.
This reduces wave drag increment, loss in CL and also trim change
requirement.
Sweep Angle Selection For Supersonic Speeds
The increment in zero-lift drag is close to a minimum when:

1 cot LE 0.8

For t/c 0.06 and 1 A(M2 1)1/2 4

As an approximation, for 1.1 M 3.0
1
o

cos
(1/
M
)

6
LE
Optimum

Example: M = 1.6, LE = 57.3o.

Supersonic Leading Edges
The Mach cone angle increases as M increases so that at very
Mach numbers the sweep must be very high to retain a subsonic
leading edge.
This reduces the available wing area and eventually there is a limit
above which unswept leading edges become preferable.

Straight wings used on many high-speed fighters and missiles such

aircraft have poor low-speed performance characteristics.

Lockheed F-104C Starfighter

Wing Dihedral/Anhedral ()
Often incorporated for lateral/rolling stability/control purposes.
Also often used for general layout reasons, e.g. increased ground
clearance requirements for wing-mounted powerplants & stores
(dihedral), reduction of length of tip-mounted outriggers on
Harrier (anhedral).

Typical range of values between 3o and 5o.

Anhedral

 Too much dihedral (or combination of dihedral/high wing/sweep)

can lead to dutch roll (lateral dynamic stability problem).
Many swept high wing aircraft therefore adopt anhedral to alleviate this
effect

BAe Harrier

BAe Harrier

Wing Area & Wing Loading

Depends upon geometric parameters but mainly determined by
relationships with performance requirements and available thrust.
Wing area often expressed as:
wing loading = Mg/S or W/S, where:
M = aircraft mass, W = weight, S = gross wing planform area.
Usually taken at design take-off mass condition.
Highly interconnected with aircrafts thrust/weight ratio for
performance optimisation so a credible estimate is required early
in the design process.
Practical Range of Wing Loading
Vary over a wide range but close correlations between certain
categories so may be used for initial selection.
Class of Aircraft

Wing Loading Range (N/m2)

Ultra light

200 400

Light single piston engine

500 800

General single turboprop

1000 1800

General twin piston engine

1000 2000

Small commuter turboprop

1500 2000

Large commuter turboprop

2000 3000

Small executive jet

2200

Medium executive jet

3000

Large executive jet

4000

Military jet trainer

2500 3000

Turboprop transport

3000 4000

Naval strike/interceptor

3500 4000

Land-based
strike/interceptor
Supersonic
bomber/transport
Subsonic long-range bomber

4000 5000

Short/medium range jet

transport
Long range jet transport

5500 6500+

5000
5000 6000

6200 7000+

Wing Twist
The wing is often twisted, usually to reduce tip-stalling effects.
The usual method is to reduce the angle of attack moving towards
the tip, known as washout.

An increase in angle of attack towards the tip is washin.

A wing may also be aerodynamically twisted by using different aerofoil
sections.
Aerodynamics v Structure Conflict
Direct conflict between wing aerodynamic and structural
requirements since low wing mass needs low values of A, , and
high t/c.
Common to compromise using a structural design parameter (SP):

 nA1.25

SP sec 1/ 4
t / c
Where n is the ultimate maximum normal load factor (greater of
manoeuvre and gust conditions)
Typical SP values are:
Executive jets
12 13
Subsonic military strike/trainer
18
Supersonic military strike/intercept
18 20
Long range supersonic
10
High performance sailplane
> 30
Others
15 - 16
A good compromise between the aerodynamics and structure
may be made with the following correlation:

SPcos1/ 4

A=

1.6

0.8

t / c

0.4

Other Wing Design Features

Many other aerodynamic design aids and features are
incorporated onto modern wings.
Some of the following are described below:
Vortex generators
Spoilers & Air Brakes
Stall fences
Tip plates and tanks
winglets
Vortex Generators
Small metal plates attached to the wing upper surface to generate
vortices, re-energise boundary layer and delay separation and stall
effects.

Boeing 707 wing

May be used for several applications:
Swept-wing transonic designs to alleviate potential shock
stall problems (e.g. Harrier, Buccaneer, Javelin).
To improve control surface effectiveness (e.g. Embraer 170).
On STOL aircraft to improve low-speed performance (e.g. C17).

Spoilers & Air Brakes

Opposite function to high-lift devices in that they destroy the
wing lift.
Usually hinged flaps located on wing upper surface ahead of the
TE flaps.
Gliders tend to use simpler surfaces which rise vertically out of the
wing.

 Used to:
Dump lift after touch-down, thus preventing aircraft from
bouncing back up into the air.
Allow controlled descents without gaining excessive aircraft
speed.
Increase drag to reduce landing distance.
Provide roll control through differential operation, either:
In conjunction with ailerons, or
As primary roll control method, leaving entire trailing
edge free for flap use.
Stall Fences
Used on highly-swept wings to alleviate tip-stalling problems (due
to thickening boundary layer of outwards flowing velocity
component).

Tip Plates & Tip Tanks

Reduce strength of wing-tip vortices and thus reduce lift-induced
drag.
However, produce an increase in skin friction drag.
Use not recommended nowadays for reducing drag.

Winglets
Winglet produces its own closed vortex system which partially
cancels main wing trailing vortices.
This reduces spanwise downwash and thus lift-induced drag.
Usually fitted above the tip for ground clearance reasons.
Cheaper, easier & more aerodynamically efficient to increase wing
span instead and for full effect should be designed from outset,
rather than as ad-hoc feature.
May also be used as lateral stability/control surfaces