Lift — where it appears
Named by 25 essays across 5 fields — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.
The story about air meeting up again
The most repeated explanation of lift says that air parting at the nose must rejoin at the tail, so the longer upper path forces a higher speed. The premise is false, and the speed it predicts is wrong by a factor of twenty.
What actually holds a wing up
Not the shape, and not the story about air meeting up again behind. A wing lifts because there is circulation round it, and the sharp trailing edge is what decides how much.
Air must be pushed down, and the usual sum is wrong
The momentum explanation of lift is the one physicists reach for, and it is right — a wing does hold itself up by throwing air downwards. The version usually given then does the accounting badly, and the face of the control volume it keeps turns out to carry the least of it.
Lift with no wing at all
A spinning cylinder has no camber, no aerofoil section and no trailing edge, and it lifts exactly as hard as its circulation says it should. Which settles what lift is caused by.
Nothing sucks
The upper surface of a wing is universally described as being under suction, which sounds like a pull. A fluid cannot pull. The lowest absolute pressure on a wing at sixty metres a second is 96 kilopascals — a five per cent dip in a hundred — and the force does not depend on where zero was put, because the normals of a closed body sum to nothing.
How much circulation is too much
Spin a cylinder faster and it lifts harder, with no limit in the equations. What does have a limit is the flow's willingness to stop anywhere on the surface — the two points where the air is at rest slide round towards each other, meet at the bottom, and leave the body altogether.
Faster than the wind that drives it
An ice yacht in a fifteen-knot breeze does forty. That is not a trick and it does not need a special sail — it follows from two drag angles and a triangle, and the best speed a boat can reach is one over the sine of their sum.
Drag with nothing to rub
d'Alembert's paradox says a closed body in a steady, inviscid flow has no drag, and four separate arguments establish it, none of them wrong. Above Mach one it is false — the flow is still inviscid, still steady, and the drag is real, finite and quadratic in incidence.
A body with no lift, and a moment anyway
A fuselage in ideal flow carries no lift at any incidence and still tries to turn the aeroplane over. The couple is computable in one line, it is why tails are the size they are, and the line comes from applying the wall condition to a place where there is no wall.
Inviscid does not mean irrotational
Dropping viscosity gives Euler's equations. Assuming nothing is spinning gives Laplace's — one scalar, linear, unique. The second step is a separate hypothesis about the flow's history, and a flow that fails it is still an inviscid flow with exact solutions of its own.
The one thing that does not add up
Laplace's equation is linear, so flows can be laid on top of one another and almost every classical result is built that way. The two things anybody actually wants out of a flow — the pressure and the force — are quadratic in the velocity, and neither of them adds at all.
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.
The constant a hole leaves behind
In a region without holes, Laplace's equation and the boundary values have exactly one solution. Cut a hole and they have a one-parameter family. Nothing in the mathematics chooses between its members, which is why the Kutta condition has to exist and why it cannot be derived.
One formula, and it does not ask what the shape is
Kutta–Joukowski gives the lift of any two-dimensional body from one number. Six bodies with nothing else in common are put at that number here and come out with identical lifts — and with pitching moments, load distributions and suction peaks that are not even close.
Two lifts at one incidence
A wing pitched up and down through the stall does not retrace its own lift curve. At twelve degrees it carries 0.22 more lift going up than coming down, and the loop that opens between the two is the work the airstream does on it — which is where the energy for a stall flutter comes from.
The drag a wake keeps however it rolls up
A plane drawn across the wake of a finite wing contains its induced drag as the kinetic energy of the swirling crossflow. The trailing sheet then rolls up into two vortices, and the energy does not change at all — roll-up moves the drag around the plane without spending any of it. What does spend it is viscosity, which turns crossflow energy into a total-pressure defect, so a plane farther back reads less induced drag, more profile drag, and the same total.
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.
Nothing in the present picks the flow
Six flows past one cylinder satisfy the same equation and let nothing through the wall, to the last bit of double precision. Their lifts run from zero to 37.7 and their peak suctions differ by a factor of twenty-one. The equations do not choose between them, and the thing that does is the history.
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.
The upper parcel leads by the circulation
Transit time looked like a quantity that could not be measured: a parcel released near the dividing streamline crawls past the nose for as long as one likes. The difference between two parcels' transit times, one either side of that streamline, does not crawl. It converges, and on a thin section it is the circulation divided by the square of the speed — the lift, measured in seconds. The upper parcel arrives first by that much, and behind the wing the two never close the gap.
Inside the layer the upper parcel leads by more
Two parcels parting at a wing's attachment point arrive at different times, and outside the boundary layer the difference is the circulation over the speed squared. Inside the layer one might expect the slow, sticky fluid to wash the difference out. It does the opposite: deep in the layer the upper parcel's lead is several times the inviscid one, because the suction side's layer is fuller than the pressure side's. Only the layer's outer quarter reads the inviscid lead, and on the suction side the laminar layer gives out before the trailing edge.
Behind a finite wing the wake face keeps its share
Draw a box round a two-dimensional section and the face behind it carries almost none of the lift, so "the air is thrown down" keeps the wrong term. A finite wing is different. Its trailing vortices carry downward momentum through the face behind it however far back the face is. The share is set by the face's own shape — all of the weight through a tall face, half through a square one, none through a wide one — and the only things a box cannot change are the total and the induced drag.
Free to rise and fall, a ground-effect craft rides its own cushion over the swell
A wing held still over a swell sees its gap change and its lift swing with it. A real ground-effect craft is not held: its weight sits on that lift, and ground effect, whose lift rises as the gap closes, gives it a height stiffness — a spring made of its own cushion — while its vertical speed changes its angle of attack and damps it. Free in heave it is an oscillator driven through that spring. Over long swells it follows the sea and keeps twice the held wing's clearance; over short ones it flies level and rides a dozen centimetres higher, because the cushion's swing is convex; and it comes closest to the crests over the swells it meets near its own natural frequency, never as close as the held wing does.
A NACA section multiplies its lift by nearly one plus its thickness, and a nose correction cannot supply it
On Joukowski's exact sections, thickness — which lifts nothing alone — multiplies the lift of camber and incidence by 1 + 0.77 t/c. Solved by panels, the NACA four-digit sections that real wings use do more: their lift slope grows as about 1 + 0.84 t/c, and a cambered 2412 lifts 11.5 per cent more than thin-aerofoil theory says. The more of the thickness sits near the nose, the more it multiplies. Added as thin-aerofoil theory adds them, the parts lose a quarter of the suction peak and put the centre of pressure two hundredths of the chord too far aft. Riegels's nose factor, the classical repair, makes the nose speed finite and moves the peak, and adds no lift at all: the missing lift is not a nose effect.
Busemann's biplane lifts only on its outer faces, and its channel turns the lift into a quarter-chord load
Tilt Busemann's biplane to make it lift and the same cancellation that removed its wave drag removes the lift of its channel: at the design Mach number the waves the incidence sends across the gap meet and cancel just as the thickness's did, and every bit of lift is carried by the two outer faces — half what two separate plates would give. The channel does not go idle. It carries a couple, lift on the front half and download on the rear, which moves the centre of pressure from mid-chord, where every supersonic plate has it, to the quarter chord. The pair pays for its lift two and a half times as steeply as flat plates do, and still beats a diamond fourfold.
Named alongside it
The objects these essays reach for when they reach for this one.
CirculationModel limitPotential flowKutta conditionControl volumed'Alembert's paradoxDownwashInduced dragKutta–Joukowski theoremMeasurementPressure coefficientStagnation point