Aircraft Design -

Wing Aerodynamics
Design

For more detailed notes please refer

to www.rmcs.cranfield.ac.uk/aeroxtra

12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 1

 Configuration - Overview
• Aerofoil Selection
– Geometry & definitions, design/selection, families/types, design
lift coefficient, thickness/chord ratio, lift curve slope,
characteristic curves.
• High Lift Devices
– Trailing edge and leading edge.
• Wing Planform Shape & Geometry
– Aspect ratio, taper ratio, sweep, dihedral, wing area & loading.
• Other Wing Design Features
– Vortex generators, wing stall fences, spoilers.

12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 2

 Non-Dimensional Coefficients
• Used for comparing wing aerodynamics
characteristics:
• Lift Coefficient (CL) = lift / 1  V 2
S  L / qS
2
1
• Drag Coefficient (CD) = drag / 2 V S  D / qS
2

• Pitching Moment Coefficient (CM)

pitching moment / 1 V Sc  M / qSc
2
= 2
Where A = aspect ratio, S = planform area, c = mean chord, V = flight
speed,  = air density, q = dynamic pressure.

12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 3

 Aerofoil Selection
• Affects many aspects of aircraft performance:
– Cruise speed, stall speed, take-off and landing distances,
handling qualities (especially near stall), overall
aerodynamic efficiency, etc.
• Usually designed/selected with primary operating
mode in mind, e.g. cruise flight for transport
aircraft.
• Variable geometry (e.g. high lift devices) then used
to match up better with low-speed requirements.

12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 4

 Aerofoils – Geometry & Definitions
• Chord line: straight line
connecting leading edge (LE)
and trailing edge (TE).
• Chord (c): length of chord line.

• Thickness (t): measured perpendicular to chord line as a %

of it (subsonic typically 12%).
• Camber (d): curvature of section - perpendicular distance
of section mid-points from chord line as a % of it
(subsonically typically 3%).

12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 5

Aerofoils – Geometry & Definitions
Other parameters of interest (with typical
subsonic section values given) include:
• position of maximum thickness (as a % of chord length
aft of LE) (30%),
• position of maximum camber (as a % of chord length
aft of LE) (40%),
• leading edge radius (as a % of chord length) (4%),
• angle of attack - angular difference between chord line
and airflow direction.

12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 6

 Aerofoil Design & Selection
• Previously selected from existing catalogues considering
factors such as cruise drag, stall/pitching moment
characteristics, thickness available for fuel/structure, ease
of manufacture, etc.
• Nowadays custom-designed with existing computational
(CFD) aerofoil design tools based upon desired aerofoil
pressure distributions.
• Main aerofoil parameters affecting above:
– Maximum t/c and its chordwise location, nose radius,
camber and its distribution, trailing edge angle.

12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 7

 Early Aerofoil Families
• A variety is shown below:

12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 8

 Aerofoil Categories
• Early – based on trial & error.
• NACA 4 digit – 1930’s.
• NACA 5-digit – aimed at pushing position of
max camber forwards for increased CL,max.
• NACA 6-digit – designed for lower drag by
increasing region of laminar flow.
• Modern – mainly based upon need for
improved aerodynamic characteristics at speeds
just below speed of sound.
12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 9
 Aerofoils – NACA 4 Digit
• Rarely used today except for in simple
symmetrical tailplane and fin sections.
– 1st digit: maximum camber (as % of chord).
– 2nd digit (x10): location of maximum camber (as %
of chord from leading edge (LE)).
– 3rd & 4th digits: maximum section thickness (as % of
chord).
• Thus NACA 2412 has 2% camber at 40%
chord from LE & is 12% thick (max).
12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 10
 Aerofoils – NACA 5 Digit
• Much better low-speed characteristics than 4
digit series.
– 1st digit (x0.15): design lift coefficient.
– 2nd & 3rd digits (x0.5): location of maximum camber
(as % of chord from LE).
– 4th & 5th digits: maximum section thickness (as % of
chord).
• Thus NACA 23012 has CL of 0.3 with max
camber at 15% chord from LE & is 12% thick
(max).
12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 11
 Aerofoils – NACA 6 Digit
• Still represents good basis for some subsonic & high-
speed applications (e.g. Mach 2 F-15 uses 64A series).
– 1st digit: identifies series type.
– 2nd digit (x10): location of minimum pressure (as % of chord
from leading edge (LE)).
– 3rd digit: indicates acceptable range of CL above/below design
value for satisfactory low drag performance (as tenths of CL).
– 4th digit (x0.1): design CL.
– 5th & 6th digits: maximum section thickness (%c)
• Thus NACA 632-315 is 6-series with minimum pressure
30% of chord back from LE, design CL of 0.3 ± 0.2 & is
15% thick (max).
12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 12
 Modern Computationally-Designed
Sections
• First use was to improve transonic behaviour – much
pioneering work done by Pearcey at NPL in the 1960’s.
• Produced the peaky section, featuring:
– Relatively flat upper surface
– Marked suction peak near to leading edge.
– Cusped trailing edge for increased rear loading.

12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 13

 Supercritical Sections
• These were developed by Whitcomb (NASA
Langley) – first flew on an F-8 in 1971.
• Sections designed to minimize transonic effects
and allow aircraft to travel at higher speeds
without suffering from too much wave drag.
• Sections feature:
– Very flat upper surfaces to spread out lift.
– Increased lower surface camber at rear end.
– Increased leading edge radius to reduce leading edge
velocities.
– Blunt trailing edge to increase structural strength.

12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 14

 Supercritical Sections
The effect regarding
shock formation and
its effect upon the
pressure distribution
is shown here.

Vought F-8 Crusader

12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 15

 Supercritical Sections
• May be used in several ways:
– Allow the aircraft to fly faster (increase Mcrit).
– Increase the section thickness (for more fuel capacity)
or reduce sweep angle while maintaining same speed.
• Two main disadvantages:
– Increased pitching moment
– Thin at rear of section where flaps and ailerons are
generally situated.
• Used on many fighters, trainers and also
transport aircraft (e.g. Boeing 777).

12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 16

 Use of Supercritical Sections
Main requirement for
the AV8-B was to
improve payload/range
capability.

Use of supercritical section allowed for thicker section to be

used (thus larger fuel capacity) with less sweep but at the
same Mcrit & cruise speed.

12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 17

 Design Lift Coefficient
• First consideration in initial aerofoil selection –
CL at which aerofoil has best L/D.

• Typical values are:

– 0.5 for subsonic airliner in cruise.
– 0.3 for fighter in cruise.

12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 18

 Design Lift Coefficient
• As a first approximation, it may be assumed for steady
level flight that:

1  2 W 
L W  V SCL  CL  
2
2  
2  V   S 
Where W/S = wing loading
• W/S reduces as fuel is used up so if CL is to be kept
constant then either V or must be reduced.
• Explains why long-range transports tend to cruise-
climb.
12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 19
 Maximum Lift Coefficient (CL,max)
• Can vary over a wide range for a basic 2-D aerofoil.
• Main influences are: camber, thickness and nose radius
(decreases as radius decreases).
• Typical values are:
– 1.6 for low speed aerofoils and advanced high-speed subsonic
– 1.0 for thin supersonic and older high-speed subsonic

• Main purpose of high-lift devices is to increase

available value of CL,max.

12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 20

 Thickness/Chord Ratio (t/c)
• Affects CL,max and Mcrit (see later) and also wave drag
rise for transonic/supersonic designs.
• Value chosen is also influenced by structural design
and volume requirements.
• For low-speed subsonic aircraft relatively high t/c
values (up to 0.2) acceptable at wing root – gives good
structural depth with small profile drag penalty.

12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 21

 Thickness/Chord Ratio (t/c) – cont.
• For high-speed subsonic and transonic aircraft,
compressibility effects are more important and much
thinner sections used – typically 0.1 to 0.15 at wing root.
• Tip values are typically 2/3 of the root values, though not
necessarily a linear spanwise variation, especially if a
cranked trailing edge.
• For supersonic speeds t/c values of between 0.02 and 0.06
are typical , with small spanwise variations.
12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 22
 Critical Mach Number (Mcrit)
• Mach number at which supersonic flow appears on the
upper surface, terminated by a shock wave.
• This produces a significant amount of drag and Mcrit is
usually defined as the Mach number giving an increase of
0.002 over its subsonic constant value.

12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 23

 Critical Mach Number Estimation
• Mainly dependent upon t/c, design standard of
aerofoil and lift coefficient (or angle of attack)

Typical t/c effect

upon Mcrit for
unswept wing.

12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 24

 Critical Mach Number Estimation
• Approximate formula for Mcrit is:

Mcrit = AF – 0.1 CL – t/c

• Where AF depends upon design standard of aerofoil section
but may be taken as 0.95 for advanced types:
• Hence for 2-D unswept aerofoils:
– Subsonic airliner (CL = 0.5), Mcrit = 0.9 – t/c

– Fighter (CL = 0.3), Mcrit = 0.92 – t/c

• See later notes for effect of sweep.

12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 25
 Stall Characteristics
• This often plays an important role in subsonic aerofoil selection.
• Important factors are:
– Suddenness & magnitude of lift loss.
– Increase in pitching moment.

• Some aerofoils have a gradual reduction in lift (generally

preferred, especially for light aircraft) – others experience
violent losses with rapid pitching moment changes.

12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 26

 Stall Characteristics (cont.)

• Stall characteristics of thin aerofoils may be improved

with leading edge devices (slots, slats, etc.)
• Stall effects more important for high aspect ratio wings.
• Tip stalling is undesirable as it produces large roll rates.
12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 27
 Lift Curve Slope (a)
• Theoretical 2-D value for lift-curve slope (a =
dCL/d) is 2 per radian = 0.11 per degree.

12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 28

 Lift Curve Slope (a)
• Value falls with both aspect ratio and sweep angle.
• Approximate value is:
  1 

  
2
0.16 A 2
a3 D  a2 D /  0.32   1  M N cos  1  
 cos  1   4  
 4  
Where: A = aspect ratio, MN = flight Mach number,
¼ = sweep of quarter-chord line.
• Deployment of high lift devices usually has small effect
upon lift curve slope.
12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 29
 Characteristic Curves
• Available for all
classes of standard
aerofoils.
• Include plots of CD,
CL, L/D, CP, Mo &
geometry co-
ordinates.
Example – NACA 2421

12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 30

 High Lift Devices
• Used to reduce take-off and landing speeds/distances.
• Since stall speed (Vs) may be found from:

Vs  2W /  SCL ,max

and touch-down speed  1.3 Vs,

lift-off speed  1.2 Vs
• Increase in either S or CL,max will reduce Vs and hence
touch-down and lift-off speeds.
12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 31
 High Lift Devices – Further
Comments
• Many different types available, both active and passive.
• All work in on or more of three ways:
– Increasing chord length (and thus wing area)
– Increasing camber (and thus CL,max).

– Improving state of boundary layer, thus increasing s and

CL,max.

• Generally categorised as leading-edge (LE) or trailing-

edge (TE) types with the latter usually preferable.
12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 32
 High Lift Devices – Examples

12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 33

 TE High Lift Devices
• Simplest types (plain/split flaps) change camber to
increase CL,max.
• More complex types (slotted, Fowler) also increase wing
area and possibly state of boundary layer to provide
further increases.
• Usually occupy between 15% and 40% of chord.
• Maximum deflection angle varies with type but usually
between 35o & 45o.
• Penalties of use: nose-down pitching moment (needs to be
trimmed) & reduced effectiveness of LE devices.
12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 34
 TE High Lift Devices

• TE flap deployment
usually increases CL for a
given , increases CL,max
and reduces stall angle.
• Little change to lift curve
slope.

12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 35

 TE High Lift Devices
Plain Flap

• Simplest type (similar to ailerons, etc.) – flap rotation

changes camber to increase lift for given .
• Stall angle reduced as separation occurs earlier on more
highly cambered upper surface.
• Maximum CL,max of about 0.75 for 40% chord at flap
deflection of about 40o.
12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 36
 TE High Lift Devices
Split Flap

• Takes form of hinged plate on lower surface.

• Produces slightly more CL,max than plain flap and lower
change in pitching moment but more drag.
• Upper surface stalling effect is less pronounced than for
plain flap so higher stall angle.
12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 37
 TE High Lift Devices
Slotted Flap

  • Flap moves slightly rearwards as it rotates to produce a

                                                                                                                                 
slot.
• High pressure air from the lower surface then travels
onto the upper to re-energise boundary layer and delay
separation/stall.
• Cures problem of early separation suffered with plain
flap.
12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 38
 TE High Lift Devices
Slotted Flap – Further Comments
• Profile drag is much less than for plain & split
flaps – better for take-off performance.
  • Multiple slot arrangements often used to
                                                                                                                                 

enhance effect though this increases cost &

complexity issues – trend nowadays is for less
slots.
• Produce a relatively large pitching moment
change.
12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 39
 TE High Lift Devices
Fowler Flap

• Very popular system – similar to slotted flap but moves

much further back along tracks to significantly increase
wing chord/area.
• Large lift increment available, CL,max of about 1.2 for
40% chord.
• Used on many jet transport aircraft and some fighters
(e.g. F-111, Tu-22).
12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 40
 Trailing Edge High Lift Devices

Triple slotted Fowler

flap on Boeing 737.

Fowler flaps on C-5

Galaxy.
12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 41
 TE High Lift Devices
• Effect on 2-D wing – assuming use of 25%
chord flaps deflected by 30o.

                                                                                                                                   

12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 42

 Leading Edge High Lift Devices
• Recommended (ref Howe) that only
incorporated into aircraft design when:
(W/S)o / cos¼  FLE

• Where (W/S)o = take-off wing loading

¼ = quarter-chord sweep
FLE = 4000 N/m2 for combat a/c
= 5500 N/m2 for transport a/c
12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 43
 Leading Edge High Lift Devices
• Main categories of leading edge devices are:
– Leading edge flap (can take form of plain
nose flap or droop nose).
– Krueger flap.
– Sealed slat.
– Slotted slat.
• Usually occupy between 10% and 20% of the
available wing chord – typically 16%.

12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 44

 Leading Edge High Lift Devices
Leading Edge Flap

• Usually only used on large transports.

• Small effect, typically CL,max = 0.4.
• Work by increasing camber (slightly) and reducing
severity of upper surface pressure peak.

12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 45

 Leading Edge High Lift Devices
Krueger Flap
• Nose flap formed by rotating part of
lower surface about a simple hinge.
• Increases chord (area), nose radius &
camber. Tornado
• Disadvantages include complexity,
costs & high profile drag.
Boeing
• Sometimes vented to re-energise upper 747
surface flow and increase stall angle.
• Often used on large airliners (Boeing
747) and some fighters (Tornado). Variable
Krueger flap
12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 46
 Leading Edge High Lift Devices
Slot/Slat Systems
• A slot is opened up and
high pressure air is
forced from the lower
surface onto the upper.
• This re-energizes the
boundary layer and
increases the stall angle
and CL,max (typically by
about 0.85).
12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 47
 Leading Edge High Lift Devices
Slot/Slat Systems – Further
Comments

 
• Usual system involves
movement of the forward
section (slat) along a track to
open up a slot.
• Problems/disadvantages:                                    
– Low drag affects landing
performance, system cost &
complexity, pilot’s visibility
impaired at high .
12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 48
 High Lift Devices
Part Span Effects
• High lift devices cannot be used over the full
span because of:
– Presence of fuselage.
– Interruptions for powerplants & pylons.
• LE devices also limited by wing tip shape.
• TE devices limited by provision for ailerons.

12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 49

 High Lift Devices
3-D Effects
• 2-D lift values not obtained on a finite span
wing, especially if swept.
• Losses will be due to tip losses and spanwise
angle of attack variations.
• Approximations for loss factors are:
– LE Devices: 0.85 cos¼
– TE Devices: 0.67 cos¼
• For all 3-D swept values of unswept CL,max,
multiply by cos¼ for approximate effect.
12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 50
 Typical Effectiveness of
TE High Lift Devices
Device (all TE) 2-D CL,max 3-D CL,max
Basic subsonic aerofoil 1.6 1.5
Basic supersonic aerofoil 1.0 0.95
Plain flap 20% chord 0.8 0.55
Plain flap 40% chord 1.1 0.75
Split flap 20% chord 0.9 0.6
Plain flap 40% chord 1.4 0.95
Single slotted flap 20% chord 1.2 0.8
Single slotted flap 20% chord 1.8 1.2

12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 51

 Typical Effectiveness of
High Lift Devices
Device 2-D CL,max 3-D CL,max
Double slotted flap 40% chord 2.5 1.65
Triple slotted flap 40% chord 2.9 1.9
Fowler flap 20% chord 1.2 0.8
Fowler flap 40% chord 1.8 1.2
Fowler + Split flap 40% chord 2.2 1.45
Plain LE flap 15% chord 0.5 0.4
Vented slat 18% chord 1.0 0.85
Krueger flap 20% chord 0.8 0.65

12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 52

 High Lift Devices
Extended Positions
• Two (or more) extended positions – at least for
landing and take-off.
• Take-Off – High lift/drag requirement so TE flap
deflection about half of landing setting and LE
slots at about 2/3 of maximum landing values.
• Landing – Need high lift and drag so use
maximum flap and slot deflections.
– Limits due to pitching moment and mechanical design
constraints.

12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 53

 Wing Planform Shape & Geometry
• A reference (trapezoidal) wing shape is
used for all initial calculations.

12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 54

 Wing Planform Shape & Geometry
• Aerofoil pitching data is generally provided
about the ¼ chord line where (subsonically)
the pitching moment is essentially constant
with changing (aerodynamic centre).
• Primary planform parameters of interest are:
– Aspect ratio (A) = b2/S
– Taper ratio () = ct/cr
– Sweep angle ()
• Leading or trailing edge sweep is sometimes
changed (crank).
12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 55
 Mean Aerodynamic Chord (MAC)
• Used as a reference dimension for many
aerodynamic design characteristics.

2  2  4  
• MAC = cr 1   ( S / A) 1  
3  (1   )  3  (1   )2 

12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 56

 Aspect Ratio (A)
• Aerodynamic preference is for a high
aspect ratio as this is the most efficient at
reducing lift-induced (trailing vortex)
drag
CD,i = CL2 / Ae
• Especially important for low speed
performance, when lift-induced drag is
dominant.
12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 57
 Aspect Ratio (A) – Further Comments
• However, a high aspect ratio leads to a high
wing structural mass so a compromise is
needed with due consideration given to
aerofoil and other geometric parameters.
• A limit may also be imposed by maximum
allowable span, e.g. on naval aircraft and
airliners due to airport gate widths.
• Wing-tip folding may be used but this is a
complex, costly and heavy option.
12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 58
 Aspect Ratio (A) – Examples
Aircraft Wing Span (m) Aspect Ratio
Narrow-Body Jet Transports
A319, A320-200 34.1 9.5
Boeing 737 28.9 8.8
Boeing 757 38.05 8.0
MD-81 32.0 9.6
Regional Turboprops
BAe Jetstream 41 18.29 10.26
Embraer 120 19.78 9.9
Shorts 330-200 22.76 12.3

12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 59

 Aspect Ratio (A) – Examples
Aircraft Wing Span (m) Aspect Ratio
Wide-Body Jet Transports
A310-200 43.9 8.8
A340-200 60.3 10.0
Boeing 747-200C 59.6 6.94
Boeing 747-400 64.3 7.87
Boeing 767-200 47.57 8.0
Boeing 777-200 60.9 8.68
L1011-250 47.35 6.95
MD-11 51.77 7.5
DC10-30 50.42 7.5

12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 60

 Aspect Ratio (A) – Examples
Aircraft Wing Span (m) Aspect Ratio
Combat Aircraft & Trainers
BAe Hawk 200 9.39 5.3
Sepecat Jaguar 8.69 3.12
Grumman F-14A 11.6 – 19.54 2.07 – 7.28
MDD F-15E 13.05 3.01
Lockheed F-16C 9.45 3.0
MDD F/A-18E 11.43 3.52
Su-27 14.69 3.57
Eurofighter Typhoon 10.52
Panavia Tornado 8.6 – 13.9 2.78 – 7.27

12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 61

 Taper Ratio ()
• Defined as the ratio of the tip chord to the
root chord.
• Wing taper is primarily chosen to produce a
near-elliptical spanwise lift distribution – this
reduces the trailing vortex drag component.
• This is preferable to employing an elliptical
planform shape as it is much less
complicated in terms of design, manufacture
and assembly.
12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 62
 Taper Ratio () – Further Comments
• Wing taper is also of structural benefit:
– The centre of pressure is moved inboard to reduce
the wing bending moment.
– The wing thickness and chord is largest at the root,
where the bending moment is largest.
• Too much taper can lead to tip-stalling and can
also reduce the area available for the ailerons
and high-lift devices.
1
• A typical design value is:   0.2 A 4
cos 2
1
4

12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 63

 Improving Spanwise Lift Distribution
• Even when an elliptical or
tapered wing is used its
intersection with the fuselage
will still produce a dip in the
lift distribution.
• Less critical for a high wing
location.
• Many combat aircraft counter
the effect by using a cambered
non-circular fuselage.
12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 64
 Wing Sweep ()
• Usually defined along the ¼ chord line.
• Generally used on high-speed aircraft to:
– Increase Mcrit, and/or
– Reduce peak wave/compressibility drag.

12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 65

 Wing Sweep () – Further Comments
• Only the velocity
component normal
to the leading edge
is accelerated, so
the higher the
sweepback angle
the higher the
value of Mcrit.
12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 66
 Wing Sweep () – Further Comments
• Sweepback much more common than
sweepforward as it also gives stability
and general layout advantages.
• Sweptforward wings are also prone to
aeroelastic divergence effects.
• Sweep angle is kept as low as possible for
given design flight conditions and
aerofoil configuration as large sweep
implies structural & handling penalties.
12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 67
 Sweep Effects – High Subsonic Speeds
• Methods for calculating 2-D Mcrit values
presented earlier.
• Approximate 3-D swept corrections are:
– For 0o  1/4  35o

(M crit )3D /(M crit ) 2D  1/  cos 1/ 4 

– For 1/4 > 45o
(M crit )3D /(M crit ) 2D  1/  cos 1/ 4 
0.6

• Interpolate for 35o  1/4  45o

12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 68
 Sweep Effects – High Subsonic Speeds
Combined effects of sweep and t/c

Shown here for a subsonic airliner, cruise CL = 0.5

12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 69
 Sweep Effects – Supersonic Speeds
Another advantage of sweepback at supersonic
speeds is gained by retaining a subsonic leading
edge so that it lies inside the Mach line (cone)
and shock wave generated.
This means that subsonic
aerofoil sections are still
aerodynamically efficient.
This reduces wave drag
increment, loss in CL and also
trim change requirement.
12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 70
 Sweep Angle Selection For
Supersonic Speeds
• The increment in zero-lift drag is close to a
minimum when:
  1 cot  LE  0.8
M 2

– For t/c  0.06 and 1  A(M2 – 1)1/2  4

• As an approximation, for 1.1  M  3.0
1
– Optimum  LE  cos (1/ M )  6 o

• Example: M = 1.6, LE = 57.3o.

12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 71

 Supersonic Leading Edges
• The Mach cone angle increases as M increases
so that at very Mach numbers the sweep must
be very high to retain a subsonic leading edge.

• This reduces the available wing area and

eventually there is a limit above which unswept
leading edges become preferable.
12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 72
 Supersonic Leading Edges
Straight wings used
on many high-speed
fighters and missiles
– such aircraft have
poor low-speed
performance
characteristics.

Lockheed F-104C
Starfighter
12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 73
 Wing Dihedral/Anhedral ()
• Often incorporated for lateral/rolling stability/control
purposes.
• Also often used for general layout reasons, e.g.
increased ground clearance requirements for wing-
mounted powerplants & stores (dihedral), reduction of
length of tip-mounted outriggers on Harrier (anhedral).

Typical range
of values
between –3o
and 5o.

12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 74

 Anhedral
• Too much dihedral (or combination of dihedral/high
wing/sweep) can lead to dutch roll (lateral dynamic
stability problem).
• Many swept high wing aircraft therefore adopt anhedral
to alleviate this effect.

BAe Harrier Lockheed C-5 Galaxy

12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 75

 Wing Area & Wing Loading
• Depends upon geometric parameters but mainly
determined by relationships with performance
requirements and available thrust.
• Wing area often expressed as:
– wing loading = Mg/S or W/S, where:
– M = aircraft mass, W = weight, S = gross wing
planform area.
• Usually taken at design take-off mass condition.
• Highly interconnected with aircraft’s thrust/weight
ratio for performance optimisation so a credible
estimate is required early in the design process.

12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 76

 Practical Range of Wing Loading
• Vary over a wide range but close correlations between
certain categories so may be used for initial selection.
Class of Aircraft Wing Loading Range (N/m2)
Ultra light 200 – 400
Light single piston engine 500 – 800
General single turboprop 1000 – 1800
General twin piston engine 1000 – 2000
Small commuter turboprop 1500 – 2000
Large commuter turboprop 2000 – 3000
Small executive jet 2200
Medium executive jet 3000

12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 77

 Practical Range of Wing Loading
Class of Aircraft Wing Loading Range (N/m2)
Large executive jet 4000
Military jet trainer 2500 – 3000
Turboprop transport 3000 – 4000
Naval strike/interceptor 3500 – 4000
Land-based strike/interceptor 4000 – 5000
Supersonic bomber/transport 5000
Subsonic long-range bomber 5000 – 6000
Short/medium range jet transport 5500 – 6500+
Long range jet transport 6200 – 7000+

12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 78

 Wing Twist
• The wing is often twisted, usually to reduce tip-stalling
effects.
• The usual method is to reduce the angle of attack
moving towards the tip, known as washout.

• An increase in angle of attack towards the tip is washin.

• A wing may also be aerodynamically twisted by using
different aerofoil sections.
12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 79
 Aerodynamics v Structure Conflict
• Direct conflict between wing aerodynamic and
structural requirements since low wing mass needs low
values of A, ,  and high t/c.
• Common to compromise using a structural design
parameter (SP):
 nA1.25 
SP  sec 1/ 4  
  t / c  

Where n is the ultimate maximum normal load factor

(greater of manoeuvre and gust conditions)

12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 80

 Aerodynamics v Structure Conflict (cont.)
• Typical SP values are:
– Executive jets 12 – 13
– Subsonic military strike/trainer 18
– Supersonic military strike/intercept 18 – 20
– Long range supersonic 10
– High performance sailplane > 30
– Others 15 - 16
• A good compromise between the aerodynamics and
structure may be made with the following correlation:
 SPcos1/ 4 
1.6

 t / c
0.4
A= 0.8
n
12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 81
 Other Wing Design Features
• Many other aerodynamic design aids and
features are incorporated onto modern wings.
• Some of the following are described below:
– Vortex generators
– Spoilers & Air Brakes
– Stall fences
– Tip plates and tanks
– winglets

12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 82

 Vortex Generators
• Small metal plates attached to the wing upper surface
to generate vortices, re-energise boundary layer and
delay separation and stall effects.

Boeing 707 wing

12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 83

 Vortex Generators
• May be used for several applications:
– Swept-wing transonic designs – to alleviate potential shock
stall problems (e.g. Harrier, Buccaneer, Javelin).
– To improve control surface effectiveness (e.g. Embraer 170).
– On STOL aircraft to improve low-speed performance (e.g. C-
17).

Javelin Buccaneer
12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 84
 Spoilers & Air Brakes
• Opposite function to high-lift devices in that they
“destroy” the wing lift.
• Usually hinged flaps located on wing upper surface
ahead of the TE flaps.
• Gliders tend to use simpler surfaces which rise
vertically out of the wing.

Airbus A319 Boeing 777

12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 85
 Spoilers – Further Comments
• Used to:
– Dump lift after touch-down, thus preventing aircraft
from bouncing back up into the air.
– Allow controlled descents without gaining excessive
aircraft speed.
– Increase drag to reduce landing distance.
– Provide roll control through differential operation,
either:
• In conjunction with ailerons, or
• As primary roll control method, leaving entire
trailing edge free for flap use.

12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 86

 Stall Fences
• Used on highly-swept wings to alleviate tip-stalling
problems (due to thickening boundary layer of
outwards flowing velocity component).

MiG-19 wing

12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 87

 Tip Plates & Tip Tanks
• Reduce strength of wing-
tip vortices and thus
reduce lift-induced drag.
• However, produce an
increase in skin friction
drag.
• Use not recommended
nowadays for reducing
drag.
MiG-19 wing
Learjet 23

12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 88

 Winglets
• Winglet produces its own closed vortex system
which partially cancels main wing trailing vortices.
• This reduces spanwise downwash and thus lift-
induced drag.
• Usually fitted above the tip for ground clearance
reasons.
• Cheaper, easier & more aerodynamically efficient to
increase wing span instead and for full effect should
be designed from outset, rather than as ad-hoc
feature.
MiG-19 wing
• May also be used as lateral stability/control surfaces.

12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 89

 Winglets on Aircraft

Embraer ERJ-145 Airbus A330 BWB design

Gulfstream G-1159
Beech Starship

12/08/21 Dr Derek Bray, DAPS 90