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

Induced drag — where it appears

The drag a finite wing pays for the kinetic energy left in its wake. It depends only on the vorticity in the plane far downstream, so it has no viscosity in it at all, and it is the price of having ends rather than of having friction.

Named by 22 essays across 4 fields — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.

A wing's two drags, and the lift at which they are equal. Friction drag and induced drag plotted against lift coefficient, with their sum above them. Friction is flat, because a surface costs the same whatever the wing is doing; induced drag rises as the square of the lift. The total is least where the two are equal, and that is also the point of best glide.

The two drags a wing pays

A wing pays for having a surface, and it pays for making lift with a finite span. One of those bills falls as it flies faster and the other rises, so there is a speed at which the total is least — and the condition for it turns out to be that the two are equal.

viscous · Drag budget 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 The speed for least drag is not the speed for least power. Drag and power against airspeed, in units of the speed at which drag is least. Power is drag times speed, so its minimum sits slower — at the fourth root of a third of the least-drag speed, which is 0.76 of it. Flying for range and flying for endurance are therefore different speeds, and the difference is not a rule of thumb.

The cheapest way to stay up

There is a speed at which an aircraft's drag is least, and a different, slower speed at which its power is least. The ratio between them is the fourth root of a third — a number that does not depend on the aircraft, the altitude, or anything else about the flight.

viscous · Drag budget 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 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 a wing's lift curve everywhere else on this site. 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 What the ground actually gives a wing. Induced drag near the ground as a fraction of the same wing's in free air, against height in spans, at constant lift. The ground is a plane of symmetry, so the wake is joined by a mirrored wake of opposite circulation below it, and the upwash from that image is what takes the drag away. At a tenth of a span the wing keeps 0.516 of its induced drag — a saving of 48 per cent — and by a span and a half the effect is 1.3 per cent and going. The lift is held fixed all the way along this curve: what the ground gives here is not more lift, it is the same lift for less drag, and the two are different claims about a landing aeroplane.

The cushion that is not there

Ground effect is usually explained as air trapped under the wing and compressed into a cushion. At the heights an aeroplane actually flies at, the air under the wing is moving at four fifths of flight speed and most of what the ground gives is a drag saving the story never mentions.

misconceptions · Ground cushion The rectangular wing stalls at the root; the tapered one stalls at the tip. Section lift coefficient across the half span for three planforms, each drawn at the wing incidence where its own worst section first reaches 1.5. A rectangular wing's peak is at the root, which is where a designer wants it: the stall starts inboard, ahead of the ailerons, and the pilot feels it. A tapered wing's peak has moved out to 0.62 of the semi-span — over the ailerons — because taper takes chord away from the tip faster than it takes circulation. The elliptic wing is the degenerate case: every section reaches the limit at once, which is elegant and is the worst possible stall behaviour.

Which part of a wing stalls first

A wing has one lift coefficient and its sections have a hundred, and no section is at the wing's. Which of them runs out first is decided by the planform, it decides whether the pilot keeps the ailerons, and the standard fix costs span efficiency in exact proportion to how much of it is applied.

circulation · Taper Five quarters of the span, the same bending moment, 64/75 of the drag. The bell-loaded wing's induced drag and root bending moment against its span, both as fractions of an elliptic wing of unit span carrying the same lift. At equal span the bell is worse: its span efficiency is exactly three quarters. But its bending moment is exactly four fifths, and bending moment grows in proportion to span while drag falls as its square — so there is a span at which the bell has bought back the structure and is ahead on drag. It is at exactly five quarters, where the two curves are at 1 and 0.8533. Both numbers are rational and neither was put in by hand.

The loading nobody used

Elliptic loading is the least-drag answer to a question no aeroplane asks. Constrain the moment the lift makes about the wing root instead of the span, and a different curve comes out — five quarters of the span for sixty-four seventy-fifths of the drag, both exact — with an upwash over the outer wing and a yaw that turns the right way.

circulation · Bell shape The wake, and the velocity it gives itself. The cross-section of the wake far behind a wing with turned-up tips, with the velocity the wake induces on itself drawn as arrows normal to the trace. Induced drag is the integral of the circulation against that velocity and nothing else — this picture contains the entire quantity. It also contains no information whatever about where the surfaces were: two wings a chord apart and two wings ten chords apart produce the same picture and therefore the same drag, which is Munk's stagger theorem stated as a fact about what the arithmetic can see.

A wing that leaves the plane

A winglet is not a fence and it does not block anything escaping round the tip. The induced drag of any system of lifting surfaces depends on one cross-section of its wake and on nothing else whatever, and a wake that reaches upwards is cheaper for the same reason a wake that reaches sideways is.

circulation · Winglet Four aeroplanes, one number. Four biplanes with the same gap and the same loadings, staggered by nothing, by four tenths, by nine tenths and by one and six tenths of a chord. Their induced drags agree to the last bit of the arithmetic — the calculation cannot even express the stagger, because the Trefftz plane is a cross-section and everything drawn here projects onto the same one. That is Munk's stagger theorem, and stating it as the drag is unchanged understates it: there is no place in the computation where the stagger could be entered.

Two wings and it does not matter where

Move one wing of a biplane a chord forward and the induced drag does not change. Not approximately, not to a good approximation — the calculation that gives the induced drag has nowhere to put the stagger, because everything projects onto the same cross-section of the wake.

circulation · Biplane Tip to tip, two wings cost exactly half of what they cost apart. The induced-drag saving of a pair of wings against the gap between their tips, as a fraction of what the two pay flying alone. With the tips touching the pair is one wing of twice the span carrying twice the lift, and the arithmetic of that is exact: the drag halves, and the computation returns 0.499257 of the separate figure. Pull them apart and the saving falls away with the square of the distance. Birds fly in a V because the tips are the part worth overlapping, and the spacing that pays is a small fraction of a span rather than any distance a formation could hold by eye.

The lift beside a wing

Fly two aeroplanes with their wingtips touching and the pair costs exactly half what the two cost apart. Not approximately half — the arithmetic is a closed form, because two wings tip to tip are one wing of twice the span, and induced drag goes as the square of it.

circulation · Formation Elliptic loading rolls up to πb/4, and it is π that puts it there. Three loadings on the same span carrying the same lift, with the rolled-up core positions marked below each. The core sits at the centroid of the shed vorticity, which is a quadrature over the loading and needs nothing about the roll-up itself. Elliptic loading gives πb/8 from the centreline, so the pair ends up 0.7854 of the span apart — the number every wake-separation rule is written against, and one of the few places in this subject where π turns up in an answer an engineer uses directly. The bell rolls up to 0.586 and a nearly rectangular loading to 0.978, because it sheds at the tips.

Where the wake ends up

The sheet a wing sheds rolls up into two cores within a few spans, and nobody can compute the roll-up cheaply. Nobody has to: what the cores conserve is fixed before they form, and for an elliptically loaded wing the answer contains π and comes out at 78.5 per cent of the span.

circulation · Tip vortex A closed wake, and the loading of least drag on it. The wake of a box wing in the plane that decides its drag, with the circulation of least induced drag drawn as a thickness along it. The horizontal members carry a loading close to elliptic and the vertical ones carry a share that lifts nothing — they contribute no lift, since lift is Γ dy and dy is zero on a vertical, and they change the drag by changing where the wake's vorticity is. At a gap of 20 per cent of span this system costs 67.1 per cent of what a single wing of the same span and lift would.

A wake that closes on itself

Prandtl's best wing system is a rectangle, not a wing. Solving for the loading on a closed wake turns up a circulation that costs nothing and does nothing — a gauge freedom in the middle of an optimisation — and a drag that keeps falling with no floor under it.

circulation · Box wing The wall is a boundary condition, solved for rather than reflected. A model's trailing vortices in a closed working section, with the sheet of sources that makes the wall a wall drawn as a displacement of the wall itself. The interference is an upwash — the model looks better than it is, and the correction factor comes to 0.1242 against the exact value 0.1250 that the image at the inverse point gives for a circle. The arrows are the interference velocity alone, with the model's own downwash removed, drawn to a common scale set by the longest of them.

The walls are in the answer

A wind tunnel measures a wing in a box the aeroplane will never fly in, and the box is worth a fifteenth of the induced drag. The correction is exactly an eighth for a closed circular section and exactly minus an eighth for an open jet, and the sign is the whole argument.

circulation · Tunnel interference Why a flat plate has no drag, drawn as a triangle. A flat plate at incidence with the three forces that must balance. Pressure can only act along the plate's normal, so the pressure force is the arrow perpendicular to the plate. Kutta–Joukowski says the resultant is perpendicular to the free stream. The difference between the two directions is the suction force at the leading edge, which acts forwards along the plate and is exactly L sin α. Without it the plate would have a drag of L sin α, and an inviscid fluid does not permit one.

A finite force from an infinite speed

Pressure on a flat plate can only act along the plate's normal. Kutta–Joukowski says the force is perpendicular to the free stream. Those two directions differ by the angle of attack, and the discrepancy is made up at a single point where the velocity is infinite and the area is zero.

circulation · Leading edge suction How the weight is shared between the two surfaces, against the centre of gravity. The wing's load and the tail's, for an aeroplane in level flight, against the static margin. The two must sum to the weight and their moments must cancel, and those two equations decide the split. At a forward centre of gravity the tail carries down and the wing carries more than the weight; the crossing is where the tail carries nothing.

More lift than weight

An aeroplane in level flight is drawn with one arrow up and one arrow down, equal and opposite. That equation collapses the whole configuration onto one number, and it is not true of any aeroplane with a tail behind it: there are two surfaces, two equations, and the second decides the split.

circulation · Trim 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 How flat the optimum is. The same curve near its maximum, with the bands within a tenth and a half of one per cent of the best shaded. Every taper ratio from 0.31 to 0.42 is within a tenth of a per cent of the optimum, and the whole band from 0.25 to 0.51 is within half a per cent. The optimum is exact, and choosing it rather than its neighbour buys nothing a wing can measure.

The optimum that does not matter

Elliptic loading gives the least induced drag, exactly, and the proof is one line: the penalty is a sum of squares. Which is also why the optimum is flat enough that a quarter of the design space sits inside a tenth of a per cent of it.

circulation · Taper A force ceiling ends the similarity: a breeze makes the boat slower as a share of the wind. Speed made good to windward as a fraction of the true wind, on the best course for each wind, for a rig that is flattened once the righting moment binds and for one that is reefed, with the hull's drag angle held at 6°. Below 3.70 m/s the two are the same boat, and the fraction does not depend on the wind — 1.122 at every speed, which is the similarity the two-angle polar rests on. Above it the flattened rig's fraction falls: 0.918 at 6 m/s, 0.572 at 10 m/s, 0.321 at 15 m/s and 0.169 at 20 m/s. The reefed rig's stays at 1.122, because a reefed sail keeps its least drag angle and the hull's angle is held. Once a force is limited, the triangle is no longer the same shape in every wind.

A breeze the boat cannot use

The two-angle polar makes a boat's speed a fixed fraction of the wind, in any wind. A righting moment ends that at 3.7 metres a second on the beat. Past it the crew must spill force, a flattened sail's drag angle climbs, and the best course to windward moves closer to the wind rather than away from it — which 45° + λ/2 cannot say, because λ now depends on the course.

applied · Sailing 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 What is left behind, and what it is made of. The two rolled-up vortices behind a large aircraft, drawn to scale against its span. They sit at 78.5 per cent of the span apart, each carries 508 square metres a second of circulation, and the pair descends at 1.72 metres a second under its own induction.

A wake that says what made it

Two vortices sitting behind an aeroplane carry its weight and its span in a form that can be read back out: circulation times separation times density times speed is the lift, exactly. The reading is exact for about a minute and worth nothing after four.

circulation · Tip vortex What every wing pays to bend its root less. Least induced drag against the root bending moment of the lift, both as fractions of the elliptic monoplane of the same span and lift, for the monoplane and for box wings with gaps of a tenth, a fifth and two-fifths of the span. Each curve is a parabola with its minimum at that wing's unconstrained optimum. The box wings' minima sit to the right of the monoplane's — they load their lift further out — and their parabolas are shallower: the gap-of-a-fifth box can bend its root 21 per cent less than the elliptic monoplane and still match its drag.

A lighter spar turns a box wing into a biplane

Prandtl's best wing system has two-thirds of a monoplane's induced drag at a gap of a fifth of the span, and part of that saving is carried by circulation turning the corner into its fins. Ask the box to bend its root less and it pays about half what a monoplane pays — but a biplane with no fins pays nearly as little, and by the time the spar is a fifth lighter the fins carry almost nothing and the box has become the biplane it was built from.

circulation · Box wing

Named alongside it

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

Model limitCirculationDownwashSpan loadingThe Trefftz planeLift coefficientOptimisationLifting lineSpan efficiencyDrag polarAspect ratioConstraint

All concepts