Fluid Flow & Aerodynamics
why things fly, and why the usual explanation is wrong
Concept

Aspect ratio — where it appears

The ratio of a wing's span to its mean chord, or equivalently the square of the span over the area. It decides the induced drag, the lift-curve slope and how far the wing is from the two-dimensional idealisation, which is why gliders have so much of it.

Named by 10 essays across 3 fields — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.

Circulation across the span, for three planforms. How much circulation each part of the wing carries, plotted across the span. It has to reach zero at both tips, because a wing cannot carry circulation off its end, and the rate at which it falls is what determines the vorticity shed into the wake.

The price of having ends

An infinitely long wing in a fluid with no viscosity has no drag at all. Cut two ends into it and the drag appears — not from friction, which is still absent, but from the fact that circulation cannot be carried off the end of anything.

circulation · Finite wing Induced drag against aspect ratio, all at C_L = 0.6. Induced drag for wings of different aspect ratio, each flown at whatever incidence makes it carry the same lift coefficient. The drag falls as one over the aspect ratio, so the longest wing here pays a fraction of what the shortest does for exactly the same load.

The span is the whole story

Induced drag is the price of having ends, and the only thing that lowers it at a given lift is putting those ends further apart. Not more area, not a better section, not a cleverer planform — span, and everything else is a correction of a few per cent to it.

circulation · Finite wing The correction belongs to the wing, not to the air. Lift-curve slope against Mach number for three aspect ratios, each computed by solving the lifting line for the wing the transformation actually implies — one of aspect ratio βAR — and dividing by β. The dashed curve is the two-dimensional rule, which is what an aerofoil section gets. At Mach 0.7 the aspect ratio of 20 has gained 35 per cent of slope and the aspect ratio of 4 has gained 24, against the 40 per cent the section rule promises both. The β in the finite-wing term cancels the β in front of it, so the shorter the wing the less compressibility does to it.

The wing the equation is really solving

The Prandtl–Glauert rule is usually quoted as a factor on the answer. It is a change of shape — and in three dimensions the shape it changes is the aspect ratio, so a short wing is far less affected by compressibility than a long one.

regimes · Similarity A lift curve that keeps climbing to 49 degrees. The lift of a slender delta of aspect ratio 1, split into the potential term that an attached flow would give and the vortex term the separation adds, with a conventional wing's curve behind them. The delta's is nonlinear from the start and reaches 1.68 at 49 degrees, where a conventional wing stalled at fifteen. That is the whole design case for the shape: not that it is efficient — it is not — but that it still has lift at incidences where an ordinary wing has none, which is what a delta-winged aircraft needs on approach and in a turn.

Lift out of a failure

Separation is what ends an ordinary wing's lift curve. A slender delta with sharp leading edges separates on purpose, rolls the shed sheet into a pair of vortices above its upper surface, and takes most of its lift from the suction they induce — with a curve that climbs to forty-nine degrees.

circulation · Vortex lift Two theories, one composite, and the aspect ratio between them. The lift-curve slope against aspect ratio. Prandtl's lifting line is exact as the aspect ratio goes to infinity and Jones's slender-wing theory is exact as it goes to zero, and each is generous outside its own limit. Helmbold's formula reduces to both with no free constant, which is what a composite expansion is, and runs under them where they disagree.

Where the line stops being a line

Prandtl's lifting line replaces a wing with a single bound vortex and its trailing sheet, and the formula that comes out is the most quoted in low-speed aerodynamics. Solved numerically at aspect ratio one it returns its own closed form to sixteen decimals — and the answer is forty-one per cent too high.

circulation · Finite wing A keel pulls the best beat 12 degrees closer to the wind. Speed made good as a fraction of the wind against the course, in 3 m/s: for the boat with its keel solved as a wing, and for a boat whose λ is fixed at 25.69°, the value the keeled boat has on its own best course. The search puts the keeled boat's best beat at 45.83°; the fixed-angle rule puts it at 45° + λ/2 = 57.84°. Pointing higher loads the keel towards its best lift coefficient — 0.130 at 40° against 0.076 at 60° — and lowers its drag angle, so the curve peaks early and falls away faster on the far side. The fixed-angle curve promises 0.653 of the wind; the keeled boat can make 0.553, and only by sailing twelve degrees higher than the rule says.

A keel flies wherever the course puts it

A keel is a wing whose lift is whatever side force the rig happens to make, so its lift coefficient is chosen by the course and the wind rather than by its designer. Solved that way, the hull's drag angle stops being a property of the boat: it pulls the best beat twelve degrees closer to the wind, halves the reaching speed a fixed angle predicts, and finally charges for reefing.

applied · Sailing The rudder should carry an eighth of the side force. The drag of keel and rudder together, as a percentage of the keel carrying everything, against the rudder's share of the side force, for a rudder 0.809 of the keel's depth. The induced drag is least with the keel alone — a shallower rudder makes the combined loading less elliptic for any load it takes. The profile drag is least near equal lift coefficients. Their sum is least at 12.4 per cent, 0.97 per cent below the keel alone; for the yacht drawn here, a rudder 0.809 of the keel's depth, that is 12.4 per cent.

The rudder pays for the keel's wake

A rudder angled to carry side force feels drag out of all proportion to its share, and that is the sensation behind the rule that weather helm is slow. The pair's drag does not care who is billed. It is least with the rudder carrying an eighth of the load, at under a degree of helm, and that share does not change with how hard the boat is pressed.

applied · Sailing A washed-out rectangular wing is at its best at one lift coefficient. The span efficiency of a rectangular wing of aspect ratio 8 against lift coefficient, untwisted and with 2°, 4° and 6° of washout. Untwisted, it is 0.9367 at every lift coefficient. Each washout has one lift coefficient where it is best — 0.254, 0.509 and 0.763 — proportional to the twist, and each reaches the same peak, 0.9911, there. Below the peak the efficiency falls fast.

Washout is right at one lift coefficient

A twisted wing's loading is the sum of two shapes in a proportion that changes with speed, so its induced drag is a parabola in lift coefficient with its least at one design point, and that point moves in proportion to the twist. On a rectangular wing four degrees of washout puts it at a lift coefficient of 0.51 and recovers almost all the span efficiency the planform lost. On a well-tapered wing the same four degrees puts it at nineteen, and the washout is a drag paid at every speed for the stall alone.

circulation · Taper A trainer's sortie wants the washout of its cruise, not of its average. The span efficiency of a rectangular wing of aspect ratio 8 averaged over a training sortie — eight minutes' climb, thirty of cruise, ten of slow flight and twelve of circuits — against its linear washout. Untwisted it is 0.9367. The best washout for the sortie is 3.43°, reaching 0.9774: the optimum for a lift coefficient of 0.436, the distance-weighted harmonic mean of the sortie's. The cruise alone would want 2.6°; the time-averaged lift coefficient, 0.671, would want 5.28° and lose 1.2% of the efficiency.

One twist is chosen for the speed flown per metre

A twisted wing is best at one lift coefficient and an aeroplane flies at many. Average its induced drag over a flight the way fuel and height are actually spent, per metre, and the twist that wins is the one for the root-mean-square speed of the flight — so the cruise outvotes the slow flight, a glider's circling barely counts, and a trainer's usual three or four degrees of washout turn out to be right for reasons nobody fitted them for.

circulation · Taper Losing the leading-edge suction doubles a slender wing's drag due to lift and multiplies a long wing's by about half its aspect ratio. The drag due to lift with no leading-edge suction, Cₗ²/Cₗα, over the induced drag a full suction leaves, Cₗ²/(πAe), against aspect ratio, from a vortex lattice for rectangular, delta and elliptic flat wings; with the closed form 1 + √(1 + A²/4) that Helmbold's lift slope gives an elliptic wing. Rectangular: 2.15 at A = 1, 3.46 at 4, 5.33 at 8, 7.11 at 12; delta: 2.22 at 0.5 and 2.83 at 2. The slender limit is 2.

A wing that cannot hold its suction gains little from its span

The leading-edge suction is a small force concentrated at one edge, and on a finite wing it decides what the aspect ratio is worth. With it, the drag due to lift is the induced drag, which falls as the span grows. Without it, the drag due to lift is the lift tilted back by the incidence, and that falls only as fast as the lift slope rises — which stops at the section's 2π. A slender delta that loses its suction pays exactly twice its induced drag; a wing of aspect ratio eight pays more than five times it. Without the suction no span can lift a wing's best lift-to-drag ratio past a ceiling set by the section alone.

circulation · Leading edge suction

Named alongside it

The objects these essays reach for when they reach for this one.

Induced dragLifting lineModel limitSpan efficiencyDrag polarLift coefficientStallDownwashLift curve slopeOptimisationGlide ratioLeading edge suction

All concepts