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 9 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 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 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 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

Named alongside it

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

Induced dragDownwashSpan efficiencyAspect ratioModel limitSpan loadingLift coefficientCirculationConvergenceCritical machDrag polarGlide ratio

All concepts