2014

Assignment 2
MLD 780
B.H. Kent - 29061416

VDG
University of Pretoria
8/12/2014

Contents
List of Figures .................................................................................................................................................................... ii
List of Equations ................................................................................................................................................................ ii
Nomenclature .................................................................................................................................................................. iii
Problem 1 .......................................................................................................................................................................... 1
Part A............................................................................................................................................................................. 1
Part B ................................................................................................................................................................................. 1
Part C ................................................................................................................................................................................. 4
Part D ............................................................................................................................................................................ 5
Problem 2 .......................................................................................................................................................................... 7
Part A............................................................................................................................................................................. 7
Part B ............................................................................................................................................................................. 7
Part C ............................................................................................................................................................................. 9
References ...................................................................................................................................................................... 11
Appendix A Code for Problem 1 ................................................................................................................................... 12
Appendix B Code for Problem 2 ................................................................................................................................... 15

List of Figures
Figure 1 - Span Efficiency Factor versus Coefficient of Lift ............................................................................................... 2
Figure 2 - Induced Drag Coefficient versus Lift Coefficient............................................................................................... 3
Figure 3 - Enlarged Operating Point - CDi vs CL ................................................................................................................ 3
Figure 4 - Normalised Sectional Coefficient of Lift ........................................................................................................... 4
Figure 5 - Normalised Load Distribution ........................................................................................................................... 6
Figure 6 - Span Efficiency Factor Twisted and Untwisted ................................................................................................. 8
Figure 7 - Induced Drag versus Lift Coefficient ................................................................................................................. 8
Figure 8 - Normalised Sectional Lift Coefficient................................................................................................................ 9
Figure 9 - Normalised Loading Distribution .................................................................................................................... 10
Figure 10 - Lift Slope ....................................................................................................................................................... 10

List of Equations
1 ........................................................................................................................................................................................ 1
2 ........................................................................................................................................................................................ 1
3 ........................................................................................................................................................................................ 2
4 ........................................................................................................................................................................................ 2
5 ........................................................................................................................................................................................ 4
6 ........................................................................................................................................................................................ 4
7 ........................................................................................................................................................................................ 4
8 ........................................................................................................................................................................................ 4
9 ........................................................................................................................................................................................ 4
10 ...................................................................................................................................................................................... 5
11 ...................................................................................................................................................................................... 5
12 ...................................................................................................................................................................................... 5
13 ...................................................................................................................................................................................... 7

ii

Nomenclature
Symbol

)
(

)
)

c(
S

AR

Description
Unique span positions
Prandtls lifting line constants
Angle of attack at unique span positions
Angle of zero lift at unique span positions
Chord at unique span positions
Wing span
Wing area
Induced drag factor
Span efficiency factor
Aspect ratio
Taper ratio
Finite wing lift coefficient
Sectional lift coefficient
Induced drag coefficient
Freestream Dynamic Pressure

Unit
rad
NA
rad
rad

NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA

Freestream Density
Freestream Velocity

iii

Problem 1
Part A

Prandtls lifting line equation implemented at four locations along a half span of the wing can be expressed in matrix
form as:
(
(
(
[

( )
( )
( )
( )

) (
) (
)

( )
( )
( )
( )

) (
) (
)

( )
( )
( )
( )

) (
) (
)

( )

( )

( )

( )

(
(
{
(
(

)
)
}
)
)

(
(
(
(

)
)
)
)}

( 1 )

Equation 1 is a generalised system of equations considering four unique positions along a symmetric wing of any
twist or geometry. Solving the system will yield the four
constants. For problem 1, Equation 1 can be simplified by
noting that the angle of zero lift will remain constant as well as the angle of attack at any point along the wing. Thus
the left hand side of Equation 1 will reduce to a column array of equal elements. Calculating the angle of zero lift for
a NACA 4412 foil and performing the simplification yields the following simplified form of Equation 1:
(
(
(
[

( )
( )
( )
( )

) (
) (
)

( )
( )
( )
( )

The angle of zero lift of -

) (
) (
)

( )
( )
( )
( )

) (
) (
)

( )

( )

{
)

( )

( )

(
{

( 2 )
}

is calculated using thin airfoil theory as in given the lecture example.

Further simplification is possible by selecting the four locations to be at

substitution of these values will be carried out in Matlab, for the specific cases to follow.

. However the

Equation 2 is of the form EA = B and A can be solved using Matlabs backslash operator to attain the constants

Part B
The geometry of the four possible wing configurations is determined from the given values of aspect ratio (AR) and
taper ration ( ) where:

Yielding the following values for the wing span :

4
8

5
10
1

For these four wing configurations the span efficiency factor and induced drag coefficient are calculated using the
determined values of
as per Equation 3 and 4 respectively:
(

( 3 )

And the induced drag coefficient is determined by:

(
The span efficiency factor as a function of
sweeping the geometric angle of attack.

is illustrated in Figure 1. Note that the range of

( 4 )
is attained by

Figure 1 - Span Efficiency Factor versus Coefficient of Lift

A constant span efficiency factor for all untwisted wings is observed. Therefore the span efficiency factor of an
untwisted wing does not depend upon the coefficient of lift, and by virtue of this independence does not depend
upon the geometric angle of attack either.
The coefficient of induced drag as a function of the lift coefficient is illustrated by Figure 2. Note that the operating
points of each wing at the given conditions are indicated by the circles on the individual
curves. Figure 3 is
an enlarged view of this region.

Figure 2 - Induced Drag Coefficient versus Lift Coefficient

Figure 3 - Enlarged Operating Point - CDi vs CL

It is observed that:

For a given aspect ratio, an increase in taper ratio only slightly increases the induced drag.
In contrast to the above observation: For a given taper ratio, an increase in aspect ratio drastically decreases
the induced drag. Therefore the aspect ratio has a greater influence upon the induced drag than does the
taper ratio.
The wing with taper ratio of 1 and aspect ratio of 10 has the lowest induced drag.
3

This wing does however have the second lowest coefficient of lift, which could yield unsatisfactory
performance.

Part C
The sectional coefficient of lift is affected by the induced angle of attack. For this reason the value of
follows:
( )

( )

is derived as

( )]

( 5 )

Where:
( )

( 6 )

And:
( )

( )

( )

( 7 )

And:
( )

( 8 )

Substituting Equation 8 into 7, and the result into Equation 5 yields an expression of
( )

[ ( )

( )]

readily calculable:
( 9 )

The sectional lift coefficient along the half-span of each wing configuration is illustrated by Figure 4 where the results
are normalised with respect to span position. Note that x = 0 represents the root of the wing.

Figure 4 - Normalised Sectional Coefficient of Lift

It is observed that:

For the wings with a taper ratio of unity:

o The maximum sectional lift coefficient occurs at the root of the wing for both cases of taper ratio.
For the wings with a taper ratio of 60% :
o And an aspect ratio of 5 the maximum sectional lift coefficient occurs at 45% of the half-span.
o And an aspect ratio of 10 the maximum sectional lift coefficient occurs at 48% of the half-span.

This means that increasing the aspect ratio generally increases the lift produced at a particular section by negating
the effects of the induced angle of attack (due to downwash), eventually approaching the behaviour of an infinite
wing if the aspect ratio becomes large enough.
Decreasing the taper ratio (increasing amount of taper) moves the point of maximum lift coefficient outward from
the root to somewhere mid-half-span.
This means that the rectangular wings will stall at the root first, whereas the tapered wings will stall at these
maximum locations first.
In addition to the above the large aspect ratio tapered wing will produce the most lift versus induced drag by better
mimicking an elliptical wing. The large aspect ratio rectangular wing will produce the highest overall lift but will
produce the highest drag too. The low aspect ratio tapered wing will produce the least lift as well as the least drag
with a span efficiency factor approaching that of an elliptical wing. The low aspect ratio rectangular wing will
produce neither good lift nor low drag thus performing poorly in comparison to the other wings.

Part D

In contrast to an elliptical wing (with no geometric or aerodynamic twist) a tapered or rectangular wing does not
have a constant induced angle of attack along the half-span. This yields a sectional lift coefficient as a function of
half-span position.
( )
From the definition of lift coefficient:
( 10 )
Rearranging and writing as a function of half-span position yields:
( )
Normalising with respect to

( ) ( )

( 11 )

yields the relationship:

( )

( ) ( )

( 12 )

The above relation effectively describes in a normalised manner the load distribution of various wings, as illustrated
by Figure 5:

Figure 5 - Normalised Load Distribution

At cruise the largest loads occur at the root of the wings. Moving toward the wing tip the local lift produced
decreases non-uniformly to zero. The short span tapered wing experiences the lowest bending moments as opposed
to the long rectangular wing which generates the largest bending moment characteristic.
Furthermore the rectangular wing stall at the locations where most lift is produced. This can result in unfavourable
handling characteristics such as tip stall. The tapered wings will stall yet still produce a portion of lift at the roots, this
too could lead to tip stall occurring.
It is observed that the long tapered wing and short rectangular wing have very similar characteristics from 20% of
the half-span onwards.

Problem 2
Part A

The only difference between the untwisted wings system of equations as represented by Equation 2 and that of the
twisted wings system of equations is that the geometric angle of attack is not constant at 4 degrees. Equation 1 is
listed below and then modified to represent the twisted wings properties.
(
(
(
[

( )

) (

( )

) (

( )

( )

( )

) (

( )

) (

( )

( )

( )

) (

( )

) (

( )

( )

( )

( )

( )

( )

(
(
{
(
(

)
)
}
)
)

(
(
(
(

(
(
(
(

)
)
)
)}

Becomes:
(
(
(
[

( )
( )
( )
( )

) (
) (
)

( )
( )
( )
( )

) (
) (
)

( )
( )
( )
( )

) (
) (
)

( )
( )
( )
( )

)
)
{

)
)

)
)
)
)}

( 13 )

The above changes in the geometric angle of attack as span position changes results in different constants being
solved for.

Part B

Analogous to the method implemented in Problem 1, the following values of span efficiency factor and induced drag
coefficient versus lift coefficient are attained. Note that Equations 3 and 4 apply to the wing with geometric twist as
well as to the untwisted wing.
As illustrated by Figure 6 the span efficiency factor of the twisted wing is not constant. The efficiency factor varies in
a highly non-linear fashion with a minimum at
. The untwisted wing has a higher span efficiency factor below
, beyond which the twisted wing yields a better span efficiency factor. This is expected due to the washout where portions of the wings will reach excessive angles of attack while others are still at moderate angles.
The coefficient of drag as a function of the induced angle of attack is illustrated by Figure 7. It is observed that the
coefficient of induced drag as a function of the coefficient of lift for both the twisted and untwisted wings is
effectively the same. This carries the implication that a wing with washout has no drag penalties when compared to
the untwisted wing, meaning a wing with washout will produce the same lift and induced drag as that of an
untwisted wing with the same wing plan.

Figure 6 - Span Efficiency Factor Twisted and Untwisted

Figure 7 - Induced Drag versus Lift Coefficient

Part C

Analogous to the method implemented in Problem 1, the following normalised values of sectional lift coefficient
distribution and loading distribution are attained. Note that Equations 9 and 12 apply to the wing with geometric
twist as well as to the untwisted wing.
The normalised sectional lift coefficient of the wing configurations is illustrated by Figure 8:

Figure 8 - Normalised Sectional Lift Coefficient

It is observed that the sectional lift coefficient of the geometrically twisted tapered wing peaks at the root, whereas
the otherwise identical but geometrically untwisted wing has a peak sectional lift coefficient at 48% of the half-span.
Furthermore the twisted wing maintains a higher sectional lift coefficient in the vicinity of the wing tip as opposed to
the untwisted wing which reaches
prematurely.
As illustrated by Figure 9 the loading of the twisted wing varies along the half-span in a more uniform manner. As
opposed to the untwisted wing the washout will allow the wing tips to produce lift even though the inner wings have
stalled, thereby maintain control by avoiding tip stall. The lift coefficient a function of the angle of attack at the root
is illustrated by Figure 10 from which we observe no stall point. This is the result of assuming inviscid and irrotational
flow. Note that the angle of zero lift (
) decreases from -4.16 degrees to -5.46 degrees.

Figure 9 - Normalised Loading Distribution

Figure 10 - Lift Slope

10

References
Anderson, J. D. (n.d.). Fundamentals of Aerodynamics 5th. McGraw Hill.

11

Appendix A Code for Problem 1

clc, close all, clear all ;
set (0,'DefaultFigureWindowStyle','docked')
%% Question 1
% Part A
%% Constants
alpha = 4 ; % angle of attack
Cr = 1 ;
% root chord
Ct = [0.6 0.6 1 1] ;
% tip chord
theta = linspace(0.5,0.99999999,4)*pi ;
AR = [5 10 5 10] ;
b = [4 8 5 10] ;
% Wing Spans

% Span positions considered

%% Build System of Equations

for config = 1:4
c = interp1([0 1],[1 Ct(config)],((theta./pi)-0.5)*2) ;
for p = 1:4
N = 1 ;
for n = 1:4
E{config}(p,n) = ((2*b(config)*sin(N*theta(p)))/(pi*c(p))) +
((N*sin(N*theta(p)))/(sin(theta(p)))) ;
N = N + 2 ;
end
end
end
B = ones(4,1)*(((4+4.16)*pi)/180) ;
%% Solve for An
A{1}
A{2}
A{3}
A{4}

=
=
=
=

E{1}\B
E{2}\B
E{3}\B
E{4}\B

;
;
;
;

%% Calculate Spanwise Efficiency

delta = zeros(1,4) ;
for k = 1:4
N = 1 ;
for n = 2:1:4
N = N + 2 ;
delta(k) = delta(k) + N*(A{k}(n)/A{k}(1))^2
end
end

e = 1./(1+delta) ;
%% Calculate Coefficient of Lift (and plot e vs CL)
CL = [A{1}(1)*pi*AR(1) A{2}(1)*pi*AR(2) A{3}(1)*pi*AR(3) A{4}(1)*pi*AR(4)] ;
figure(1)
hold on

12

plot([-1.1 CL(1) 1.1] , [e(1) e(1) e(1)] , '-or'

plot([-1.1 CL(2) 1.1] , [e(2) e(2) e(2)] , '-ok'
plot([-1.1 CL(3) 1.1] , [e(3) e(3) e(3)] , '-og'
plot([-1.1 CL(4) 1.1] , [e(4) e(4) e(4)] , '-om'
axis([-1 1 0.86 1])
title('Span Efficiency Factor vs. Coefficient of
xlabel('C_L')
ylabel('e')
legend('\lambda = 0.6 and AR = 5','\lambda = 0.6
AR = 5','\lambda = 1 and AR = 10')
hold off

,
,
,
,

'linewidth'
'linewidth'
'linewidth'
'linewidth'

,
,
,
,

2)
2)
2)
2)

Lift')
and AR = 10','\lambda = 1 and

%% Calculate Cdi (and plot CDi vs CL)

CDi = @(cl,n) ((cl.^2)./(pi*AR(n)))*(1+delta(n)) ;
figure(2)
hold on
plot(-1:0.01:4 , CDi(-1:0.01:4 , 1) , '-r' , 'linewidth' , 2)
plot(-1:0.01:4 , CDi(-1:0.01:4 , 2) , '-k' , 'linewidth' , 2)
plot(-1:0.01:4 , CDi(-1:0.01:4 , 3) , '-g' , 'linewidth' , 2)
plot(-1:0.01:4 , CDi(-1:0.01:4 , 4) , '-m' , 'linewidth' , 2)
plot(CL(1) , CDi(CL(1) , 1) , '-or' , 'linewidth' , 2)
plot(CL(2) , CDi(CL(2) , 2) , '-ok' , 'linewidth' , 2)
plot(CL(3) , CDi(CL(3) , 3) , '-og' , 'linewidth' , 2)
plot(CL(4) , CDi(CL(4) , 4) , '-om' , 'linewidth' , 2)
axis([-1 4 0 1.1])
title('Induced Drag Coefficient vs. Coefficient of Lift')
xlabel('C_L')
ylabel('C_D_i')
legend('\lambda = 0.6 and AR = 5','\lambda = 0.6 and AR = 10','\lambda = 1 and
AR = 5','\lambda = 1 and AR = 10')
hold off
%% Calculate Cl vs y/(b/2) (and plot)
ClFunc = @(eff) 2*pi*(eff+(4.16*(pi/180))) ;
for config = 1:4
for p = 1:1:100
pos = interp1([0.999 100.001],[0.5*pi 1*pi],p) ;
N = 1 ;
alphaInd = 0 ;
for n = 1:2:7
alphaInd = alphaInd + n*A{config}(N)*(sin(n*pos)/sin(pos)) ;
N = N + 1 ;
end
eff{config}(p) = ((4*pi)/180) - alphaInd ;
end
Cl{config} = ClFunc(eff{config}) ;
end
figure(3)
hold on
plot(linspace(0,1,100) , Cl{1} , '-r' , 'linewidth' , 2)
plot(linspace(0,1,100) , Cl{2} , '-k' , 'linewidth' , 2)
plot(linspace(0,1,100) , Cl{3} , '-g' , 'linewidth' , 2)
plot(linspace(0,1,100) , Cl{4} , '-m' , 'linewidth' , 2)
%axis([-1 2 0 0.09])
title('Secional Lift Coefficient vs. Span Position')
xlabel('y/(b/2)')
ylabel('C_l')
legend('\lambda = 0.6 and AR = 5','\lambda = 0.6 and AR = 10','\lambda = 1
and AR = 5','\lambda = 1 and AR = 10')

13

hold off
%% Plot cl(y)*c(y)/cr versus y/(b/2)
for config = 1:4
for p = 1:1:100
c = interp1([0.999 100.001],[1 Ct(config)], p) ;
LiftDis{config}(p) = Cl{config}(p)*(c/Cr) ;
end
end
figure(4)
hold on
plot(linspace(0,1,100) , LiftDis{1} , '-r' ,
plot(linspace(0,1,100) , LiftDis{2} , '-k' ,
plot(linspace(0,1,100) , LiftDis{3} , '-g' ,
plot(linspace(0,1,100) , LiftDis{4} , '-m' ,
%axis([-1 2 0 0.09])
title('Lift Distribution vs. Span Position')
xlabel('y/(b/2)')
ylabel('C_l*c(y)/C_r')
legend('\lambda = 0.6 and AR = 5','\lambda =
and AR = 5','\lambda = 1 and AR = 10')
hold off

'linewidth'
'linewidth'
'linewidth'
'linewidth'

,
,
,
,

2)
2)
2)
2)

0.6 and AR = 10','\lambda = 1

14

Appendix B Code for Problem 2

clc, close all, clear all ;
set (0,'DefaultFigureWindowStyle','docked')
%% Question 1
% Part A
%% Constants
Cr = 1 ;
% root chord
Ct = 0.6 ;
% tip chord
theta = linspace(0.5,0.99999999,4)*pi ;
AR = 10 ;
b = 6 ;
% Wing Span

% Span positions considered

%% Build System of Equations

count = 1 ;
for alpha = -10:1:4
c = interp1([0 1],[1 Ct],((theta./pi)-0.5)*2) ;
for p = 1:4
N = 1 ;
for n = 1:4
E(p,n) = ((2*b*sin(N*theta(p)))/(pi*c(p))) +
((N*sin(N*theta(p)))/(sin(theta(p)))) ;
N = N + 2 ;
end
end
B{1} = ones(4,1)*(((alpha+4.16)*pi)/180) ;
B{2} = (((linspace(alpha,-1,4)'+4.16)*pi)/180) ;
%% Solve for An
A{1} = E\B{1} ;
A{2} = E\B{2} ;
%% Calculate Spanwise Efficiency
delta = zeros(1,2) ;
for k = 1:2
N = 1 ;
for n = 2:1:4
N = N + 2 ;
delta(k) = delta(k) + N*(A{k}(n)/A{k}(1))^2
end
end

e(:,:,count) = 1./(1+delta) ;
%% Calculate Coefficient of Lift (and plot e vs CL)
CL(:,:,count) = [A{1}(1)*pi*AR A{2}(1)*pi*AR] ;
count = count + 1 ;
end
figure(1)
hold on
plot(squeeze(CL(1,1,:)) , squeeze(e(1,1,:)) , '-r' , 'linewidth' , 2)

15

plot(squeeze(CL(1,2,:)) , squeeze(e(1,2,:)) , '-k' , 'linewidth' , 2)

% axis([-1 1 0.86 1])
title('Span Efficiency Factor vs. Coefficient of Lift')
xlabel('C_L')
ylabel('e')
legend('Untwisted','Twisted')
hold off

%% Calculate Cdi (and plot CDi vs CL)

CDi = @(cl,n) ((cl.^2)./(pi*AR))*(1+delta(n)) ;

%
%

figure(2)
hold on
plot(squeeze(CL(1,1,:)) , CDi(squeeze(CL(1,1,:)) , 1) , '-r' , 'linewidth' , 2)
plot(squeeze(CL(1,2,:)) , CDi(squeeze(CL(1,2,:)) , 2) , '-k' , 'linewidth' , 2)
plot(CL(1) , CDi(CL(1) , 1) , '-or' , 'linewidth' , 2)
plot(CL(2) , CDi(CL(2) , 2) , '-ok' , 'linewidth' , 2)
%axis([-1 2 0 0.09])
title('Induced Drag Coefficient vs. Coefficient of Lift')
xlabel('C_L')
ylabel('C_D_i')
legend('Untwisted','Twisted')
hold off

%% Calculate Cl vs y/(b/2) (and plot)

ClFunc = @(ef) 2*pi*(ef+(4.16*(pi/180))) ;
alp{1} = ones(1,100)*4 ;
alp{2} = linspace(4,-1,100) ;
for config = 1:2
for p = 1:1:100
pos = interp1([0.999 100.001],[0.5*pi 1*pi],p) ;
N = 1 ;
alphaInd = 0 ;
for n = 1:2:7
alphaInd = alphaInd + n*A{config}(N)*(sin(n*pos)/sin(pos)) ;
N = N + 1 ;
end
eff{config}(p) = ((alp{config}(p)*pi)/180) - alphaInd ;
end
Cl{config} = ClFunc(eff{config}) ;
end
figure(3)
hold on
plot(linspace(0,1,100) , Cl{1} , '-r' , 'linewidth' , 2)
plot(linspace(0,1,100) , Cl{2} , '-k' , 'linewidth' , 2)
%axis([-1 2 0 0.09])
title('Secional Lift Coefficient vs. Span Position')
xlabel('y/(b/2)')
ylabel('C_l')
legend('Untwisted','Twisted')
hold off

%% Plot cl(y)*c(y)/cr versus y/(b/2)

for config = 1:2

16

for p = 1:1:100
c = interp1([0.999 100.001],[1 Ct], p) ;
LiftDis{config}(p) = Cl{config}(p)*(c/Cr) ;
end
end
figure(4)
hold on
plot(linspace(0,1,100) , LiftDis{1} , '-r' , 'linewidth' , 2)
plot(linspace(0,1,100) , LiftDis{2} , '-k' , 'linewidth' , 2)
%axis([-1 2 0 0.09])
title('Lift Distribution vs. Span Position')
xlabel('y/(b/2)')
ylabel('C_l*c(y)/C_r')
legend('Untwisted','Twisted')
hold off
%% Plot lift slope
figure(5)
hold on
plot(-10:1:4 , squeeze(CL(1,1,:)) , '-r' , 'linewidth' , 2)
plot(-10:1:4 , squeeze(CL(1,2,:)) , '-k' , 'linewidth' , 2)
%axis([-1 2 0 0.09])
title('Lift Distribution vs. Span Position')
xlabel('y/(b/2)')
ylabel('C_l*c(y)/C_r')
legend('Untwisted','Twisted')
hold off

17