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

Lifting line — where it appears

Prandtl's theory of a finite wing, in which the wing is a single bound vortex whose strength varies along the span and which trails vorticity into the wake. It gives the induced drag, the lift slope and the optimal loading, all in closed form.

Named by 19 essays across 4 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 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 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 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 on any wing that was close to elliptic the standard fix costs span efficiency for every degree of it 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 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 The local sweep of the isobars, across the span. The sweep of the half-load line at each spanwise station, for four geometric sweeps. Over the middle of the span it is the wing's own sweep, which is the simple theory being right. At the root it collapses — by twenty-one degrees at a geometric thirty-five — and at the tip it falls again. That root region is where the shock forms first on every swept wing ever built, and it is why they have waisted fuselages.

The sweep a root does not have

Simple sweep theory is one of the cleanest arguments in aerodynamics: an infinite yawed wing cannot know about the velocity along its own span, so only the normal component matters. A real wing has a root and two tips, and at the root of a thirty-five-degree wing the isobars are swept fourteen.

circulation · Sweep 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 The V in which every bird pays the same is curved. Nine birds one span apart, flying up the page, in plan: each short line is a wing, its height its distance behind the leader in spans. The straight V at 7.5° — the fairest straight V — and the V whose members' positions are solved so that every one pays exactly the same share of the induced drag. The equal-share arms leave the leader almost abreast and bend back ever more steeply: 1.6°, 7.6°, 17°, 32° from the apex to the tips.

A fair V is a curved V

In a straight V of birds somebody always pays more than somebody else: at the fairest angle the leader and the two birds at the tips pay half again what the birds between them pay. The V in which every bird pays exactly the same can be solved for, and it is not straight. Its arms leave the leader almost abreast and bend back ever more steeply, to thirty-two degrees at the tips of a flock of nine. The share every bird then pays is the flock's average, fixed by Munk's theorem before any position is chosen — so fairness costs nothing, and the only thing that can make the flock cheaper is flying closer together sideways.

circulation · Formation An elliptic wing filters the gust like a round aperture. How much of a gust component with spanwise wavenumber k₂ survives the span average, against κ = k₂b/2, for three weights. A uniform strip is a slit and its filter is sinc², falling as κ⁻² between its zeros. An elliptic loading is a circular aperture and its filter is the Airy pattern (2J₁(κ)/κ)², whose first zero is at 3.83 and whose envelope falls as κ⁻³, but which stays near one to larger κ: the ellipse's weight is narrower, so its filter is wider. A rectangular wing of aspect ratio nine weights the span by its own loading and lies between, with the ellipse's κ⁻³ fall because its loading too goes to zero at the tips as a square root.

A wing averages a gust through its own loading

A finite span averages a turbulent gust and so tames the load it causes, but it does not average uniformly. The reverse-flow theorem says exactly how it weights the span: by the loading the wing makes at a uniform incidence. An elliptic wing therefore filters the gust the way a round aperture diffracts light, passes eight per cent more of its short scales than a uniform strip, and crosses its mean load up to four per cent more often.

circulation · Gust 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 The face behind a finite wing carries the share its own shape gives it. The share of the lift leaving through the face of the box 500 spans behind the wing as downward momentum, and the share carried as pressure on the faces above and below, against the box's height over its width, for boxes of thirty-six square spans, with the far-wake share (2/π)·arctan(H/W). A box sixteen times as tall as it is wide sends 0.96 of the weight through the face behind, a square one 0.501, and one sixteen times as wide 0.04.

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.

misconceptions · Momentum lift A bending-moment wing has no best span until its tips are forbidden to push down. The least induced drag for the elliptic wing's lift and bending moment, against span, for a spar sized by its root moment and one sized by the moment along its whole span. Free, both fall without limit: at 1.7 times the span the root-sized optimum is 0.815 of the elliptic drag and the other 0.79, with the tips carrying downloads. With no section allowed to push down both stop where the free loading's tip load first reaches zero: at 1.225 and 0.8889 for the whole-span measure, and near 1.33 and 0.84375 for the root moment. Longer spans then leave their tips unloaded and gain nothing.

A bending moment never chooses a span

Hold a wing's lift and its bending moment and ask for the least induced drag, and the answer does not stop: the span grows for ever and the tips push down. Both celebrated answers — Prandtl's bell at √(3/2) of the span for 8/9 of the drag, and the root-moment wing at 4/3 for 27/32 — are the span at which the least-drag loading's tips stop lifting. The structure sets how much is saved; a condition nobody states sets where the saving ends.

circulation · Bell shape A root's bending moment weighs the gust by the loading of a wing twisted like its moment arm. Across the span of an elliptic wing of aspect ratio 9, each normalised to unit area: the lift's weight, the loading at uniform incidence; the two roots' bending moment's, the loading of a wing washed in as |y|, with a hole at the root; and the right root's alone, the loading of a wing washed in as y on the right half and not at all on the left. The one-root weight reaches across to the left wing through the induced flow, and it is not symmetric.

One wing root feels the rolling gust its lift cannot

The reverse-flow theorem says the gust weight of any load is the loading the wing would carry at an incidence shaped like that load's arm. For the lift that is the familiar uniform-incidence loading. For the bending moment at one root it is the loading of a wing washed in towards one tip only — a weight that is not symmetric, and so passes the rolling half of a gust that the lift and the two roots together cancel. That half is a sliver of the variance and adds up to a fifth to how often the root's moment crosses its mean.

circulation · Gust The washout a mission wants rises with the lift coefficient; a twist driven by dynamic pressure rises the other way. Washout against lift coefficient for the trainer's sortie: each lift coefficient's own best washout, 7.87° per unit of it; the best fixed washout, 3.43°; the best twist that varies with dynamic pressure, which has to wash in as the aeroplane speeds up; and a twist of the natural sign, one degree of extra washout at cruise growing with dynamic pressure, from a nose-down pitching moment. The four segments sit at Cₗ 0.82, 0.33, 1.3, 0.92.

A wing that twists with its speed washes out the wrong way

A fixed washout is right at one lift coefficient, and a flight that spends its time at four of them pays for the spread. A wing whose twist changed in flight could follow — but the twist a real wing gets for free is driven by dynamic pressure, and it adds washout as the aeroplane speeds up, exactly where less is wanted. On a trainer's sortie a degree of it at cruise raises the induced energy by a third of a point. The best twist driven by dynamic pressure washes in, and only one that follows the incidence itself removes the spread entirely.

circulation · Taper A symmetric panel with no spring stiffness washes out exactly as each lift coefficient wants. The outer panel's washout against the wing's lift coefficient over the trainer's sortie, with a spring stiffness of 0 cruise dynamic pressures: each lift coefficient's own best, 5.31° per unit of it; the best fixed washout, 2.31°; a symmetric panel at its best hinge and preload, 1.34% above an elliptic wing; and a panel with a cambered trainer section's moment of −0.05, 9.31%. The fixed twist spends 2.65% and the floor is 1.34%.

A pivoted wingtip follows the lift only with no spring stiffness and no camber

The washout a trainer's sortie wants grows in proportion to the lift coefficient, and the twist a wing gets for free follows the dynamic pressure instead. A tip panel free to pivot on a hinge ahead of its own aerodynamic centre can do better, and on one condition it does exactly what is wanted: held by a constant torque and carrying no camber moment, its own lift coefficient stays in proportion to the wing's, and every segment of the sortie flies at its own best twist. Every unit of spring stiffness gives part of that back, a cambered section's moment turns the panel into the wrong law altogether, and the free panel sheds a quarter of a gust's lift for nothing.

circulation · Taper Inboard the spar is sized by its load, outboard by a stiffness floor its load cannot lower. The spar's weight per unit span along the semi-span, as a share of the payload's weight per unit of the reference span, at the best wing when the stiffness floor is 0.4: the weight the bending moment needs, and the floor. The floor governs the outer 53.1 per cent of the semi-span; the best loading has a third-harmonic ratio of -0.0993 and the spar is 32.1 per cent of the lift.

A stiffness floor keeps the span and gives the tips their load back

A spar sized by strength alone thins to nothing at the tips, and charged as lift it stops the best span where it weighs a quarter of everything the wing carries, with the tips a little unloaded. A real outer wing is sized by stiffness, and stiffness sets a floor under the spar's weight that no reduction of the tip load can lower. Put that floor in and the tips get their load back — the best loading slides from a sixth of the way to the bell towards the ellipse — the quarter does not survive, rising to two fifths as the floor spreads over the outer two thirds of the span, and the span itself barely moves. A weight per metre cannot stop a span.

circulation · Bell shape

Named alongside it

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

Induced dragModel limitSpan loadingSpan efficiencyOptimisationAspect ratioDownwashBending momentStallCirculationGustLift coefficient

All concepts