Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Vortex Lift And Wing Sweep Angle?  
User currently offlineLehpron From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 7028 posts, RR: 21
Posted (9 years 3 months 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 4805 times:

I always thought it was 45-degrees swept back, but watching video of the Eurofighter demo at airshows, I'm starting to think 50-degrees.

What do you folks think, at what angle does the induced (spanwise) flow appear to spill over the leading edge?


The meaning of life is curiosity; we were put on this planet to explore opportunities.
11 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineSlamClick From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 10062 posts, RR: 68
Reply 1, posted (9 years 3 months 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 4771 times:

Not to brag here, but my ignorance of this is postively encylopedic.

I'd guess it depends on some other factors almost as much. For example, viewed from above, the fuselage forces some air to flow out and around it. This must impart some outboard vector to the airflow. I've seen inflight video of the F-117 in the cloud tops and it was producing the shock-vapor that we associate with the upper surface of a wing, but it was in streams out above the wingtips and clearly off the body of the airplane.




Happiness is not seeing another trite Ste. Maarten photo all week long.
User currently offline2H4 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 8955 posts, RR: 60
Reply 2, posted (9 years 3 months 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 4751 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD DATABASE EDITOR



By the time the airflow spills over the leading edge of the wing, I'd have to think the wing would have already exceeded the critical AOA.


2H4





Intentionally Left Blank
User currently offlineLehpron From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 7028 posts, RR: 21
Reply 3, posted (9 years 3 months 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 4738 times:

Sorry 2H4, I should have noted that I meant planform angle, not angle of attack. Wrong axis there, bud. Big grin

But I think you are correct; wait, are you? I never considered streaklined flow paths, like where fluid element was or is and when or where. Sounds like something for CFD's.



The meaning of life is curiosity; we were put on this planet to explore opportunities.
User currently offline2H4 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 8955 posts, RR: 60
Reply 4, posted (9 years 3 months 23 hours ago) and read 4632 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD DATABASE EDITOR

Lehpron....I think we're talking about the same thing.

On a highly-swept wing, if the spanwise flow starts to spill over the leading edge of the wing, wouldn't the airflow separation (on top of the wing) occur near the leading edge? If it did so, I don't think it would reattach, and this would leave the wing in a stalled condition.

AeroWeanie! We need your help!


2H4



Intentionally Left Blank
User currently offlineSlamClick From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 10062 posts, RR: 68
Reply 5, posted (9 years 3 months 23 hours ago) and read 4633 times:

Guys I believe that you are talking about a transient phenomenon here. Sudden pitch up causes it, it goes away as soon as the plane is once again flying in the direction it is pointed.

I've seen Art Scholl and Sean Tucker and a long list of others do the same thing with a straight wing.



Happiness is not seeing another trite Ste. Maarten photo all week long.
User currently offlineFredT From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2002, 2185 posts, RR: 26
Reply 6, posted (9 years 3 months 10 hours ago) and read 4584 times:

2H4, with enough leading edge sweep (delta wing), the spanwise flow will spill around the leading edge of the wing, just as it does around the wing tip on other wings and in other conditions. This sets up a complex vortex flow pattern on top of the wing, complete with reattachment. This generates lift, known as vortex lift. Such wings don't really have a critical AoA at all. They don't stall, there's just a significant increase in drag.

Nope, not a transient phenomenon (dynamic stall) either.

Regards,
Fred



I thought I was doing good trying to avoid those airport hotels... and look at me now.
User currently offlineSlamClick From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 10062 posts, RR: 68
Reply 7, posted (9 years 3 months 6 hours ago) and read 4559 times:

FredT I remember the F-102 and F-106 having a tremendous droop to the leading edges especially out near the tips. I suppose it is for this reason.

Clearly it must be a controllable phenomenon since they keep designing and building planes with this wing configuration.



Happiness is not seeing another trite Ste. Maarten photo all week long.
User currently offlineFredT From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2002, 2185 posts, RR: 26
Reply 8, posted (9 years 3 months 5 hours ago) and read 4549 times:

It is controllable, understood and desired. It allows for high instantaneous lift coefficients, if you can take the drag penalty, and gives good nose pointing ability. One of the main drawbacks is a susceptibility to super stalls (or deep stalls, for those who prefer that terminology).

The most common use for LE droop is to make the stall/low speed characteristics of an aircraft more benign.

Regards,
Fred




I thought I was doing good trying to avoid those airport hotels... and look at me now.
User currently offline2H4 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 8955 posts, RR: 60
Reply 9, posted (9 years 2 months 4 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 4523 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD DATABASE EDITOR



Thanks for the info, FredT. Interesting stuff.  Smile


2H4





Intentionally Left Blank
User currently offlineB2707SST From United States of America, joined Apr 2003, 1369 posts, RR: 59
Reply 10, posted (9 years 2 months 4 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 4514 times:

I think Lehpron is talking about vortex lift as used on Concorde and a few other delta-wing aircraft (e.g. Saab Draken). I am sure there is no "magic number" -- the creation of vortex flow would depend on airspeed, wing sweep, camber, the leading edge radius, and a lot of other factors.

IIRC, another very factor is the compound curvature that induces the spanwise flow to wrap around the leading edge and twist into a vortex over the wing. I recall reading that the S-shaped curvature on Concorde's leading edge existed to produce a smooth transition from vortex lift to attached flow.

On a highly-swept wing, if the spanwise flow starts to spill over the leading edge of the wing, wouldn't the airflow separation (on top of the wing) occur near the leading edge? If it did so, I don't think it would reattach, and this would leave the wing in a stalled condition.

Yes, the airflow does stall, insofar as it becomes turbulent and separates from the upper surface of the wing. However, the rotation of the vortex over the wing re-energizes the boundary layer and creates additional non-linear lift. The only problem is that it creates tremendous drag. The lift-drag ratio on a conventional aircraft on approach with flaps and slats extended is probably around 12. On Concorde, with no high-lift devices and an ogive-delta wing, it was about 4.



Concorde actually required more thrust at 160 knots than at 250 knots, because vortex lift generation puts you on the back side of the drag curve (slower = more thrust). On a "normal" aircraft operating on the upward-sloping portion of its drag curve, slowing down will reduce drag and the aircraft will stabilize again at the point where drag and thrust are equal.

But Concorde at low speeds was in a disequilibrium situation, in that the problem is self-reinforcing: if you slow down a little, drag rises, so you slow down a little more, drag rises a little more, and so on. If you don't watch your thrust margin, you can end up running out of power to maintain level flight. The wing never "stalls" since it's already technically stalled, but drag increases so fast that the engines can't compensate. This is what happened to AF4590 -- with two engines out and the gear locked down, Concorde needed to be going at least 220 knots to maintain altitude. They never reached this airspeed.

--B2707SST



Keynes is dead and we are living in his long run.
User currently offlineLehpron From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 7028 posts, RR: 21
Reply 11, posted (9 years 2 months 4 weeks 1 day ago) and read 4474 times:

>>" I am sure there is no "magic number" -- the creation of vortex flow would depend on airspeed, wing sweep, camber, the leading edge radius, and a lot of other factors"<<

I guess I mean where it becomes obvious, like the figure of assuming incompressible flow up to M0.3 simply because the air compresses to 95% at that point. Like say it is barely there by 40-degrees and obviously there by 55-degrees, I think it is full blown by then, but I also feel further increasing the sweep at that point may kill of the span wise flow. I am figuring that leading edge sweep will vary the amount of induced drag/lift.

Slightly different question: is the source of the vortex on top of a differentiate delta wing from the induced flow of the previously differentiated chord times the half-span, i.e, the pix below?



The only problem I am having with is that the vortex drag/lift might not be integration but more like sumation becuase the induced piece adds to each next wing section's pattern, because of which I have postulated the crap in the red boxes.

For those of you ahead of me, was that correct of me to asert?



The meaning of life is curiosity; we were put on this planet to explore opportunities.
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Vortex Lift And Wing Sweep Angle?
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Tech/Ops related posts only!
  • Not Tech/Ops related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
Wing Sweep - What Does It Actually Do? posted Fri Jul 21 2006 21:48:12 by Ptrjong
A340-500 Frames And Wing Difference Over A343? posted Sun Jan 29 2006 02:28:13 by SWISSER
A380 Wing Sweep Not Constant? posted Sun Dec 11 2005 00:18:16 by Lehpron
The Most Lift On A Wing posted Sun Sep 1 2002 06:19:46 by UALPHLCS
737NG Vs Classic Wing Sweep posted Wed Jun 5 2002 20:30:17 by Barney captain
Bank Angle Protection Airbus And Boeing Question posted Sun May 21 2006 12:00:09 by JulianUK
Off-wing Slides And Others In Enclosures posted Wed Mar 22 2006 18:19:55 by Doktor
MD11 Wing Tips And Their Down Facing Counterparts posted Tue Feb 7 2006 07:20:28 by Videns
Wing Lift Comparison posted Mon Jan 23 2006 19:13:27 by Frequentflyer
757 Wing,flaps, And Spoiler Diagram posted Wed Mar 30 2005 21:14:12 by Jerplane

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format