Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Super Critical Wing  
User currently offlinePilot1113 From United States of America, joined Aug 1999, 2333 posts, RR: 11
Posted (14 years 2 months 2 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 3708 times:

Is the Super Critical Wing in use on modern airliners?

I believe I've heard it was on 717, but I can't be sure. I don't see why more airplanes don't have it, as it does have a lot of advantages.

One of the biggest is that you can hover close to the speed of sound because when the air finally does slow to 759 from 760 MPH, the sonic boom is created at the end of the wing as opposed to the middle where it can create problems. Coffin corner, anyone?

- Neil Harrison

18 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineAaron atp From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 533 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (14 years 2 months 2 weeks 4 days ago) and read 3585 times:

the 777 was the first american airliner to use a true supercritical wing.

However the 757 has a hybrid (half and half) sort of supercritical design. The same goes for the A340. Cessna's Citation X is also a supercritical design.

I assume that you know how a supercritical wing is designed since you asked about it, but you should realize that they don't work very well at low speeds...


User currently offlineBuzz From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 697 posts, RR: 21
Reply 2, posted (14 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 3557 times:

Hi Aaron, and Pilot 1113, Buzz here. If you've changed wingtip lights on a 757 you can see the shape. It sure seems supercritical to me.
It looks like the A320 also has some supercritical shape to it.
I'd have to look in the ARG to see if the wing is something special. I wouldn't be suprised, if you can save a percent or two in drag it adds up over the life of the airplane.
g'day
Buzz Fuselsausage; Line Mechanic by night, DC-3 Crew Chief by choice.


User currently offlineRichie From Switzerland, joined Dec 1999, 143 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (14 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 3529 times:

Well, the 717s wing is certianlz not supercritical, as it is nothing but an pbeefed DC9-30 wing. Remember, the 717 (formerlz known as MD95) is a modernised DC9-30, nothing less, and a verz nice machine, also.

The problem with supercritical wings is, that thez are very likelz to used their efficiencz is contamination (rain, insects etc.) so that the ones used by the manufacturers are still a kind of compromise.


User currently offlineAaron atp From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 533 posts, RR: 2
Reply 4, posted (14 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 3519 times:

Buzz, take another look at that 757 wing, and tell me which part of the wing appears to be of a supercritical design, root/mid-span/tip...


aaron


User currently offlinePilot1113 From United States of America, joined Aug 1999, 2333 posts, RR: 11
Reply 5, posted (14 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 3516 times:

Thanks all, for your input!

I was under the impression that this was a relatively new technology and wasn't widely in use yet. In addition, I thought that it was the "Holy Grail" of wings. In that it was supposed to work at both high and low airspeeds while shoving the sonic boom off the wing.

- Neil Harrison


User currently offlineAaron atp From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 533 posts, RR: 2
Reply 6, posted (14 years 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 3503 times:

if you look at something like the original whitcomb supercritical airfoil, you'll be able to see a few of the disadvantages... the first: lift is centered at the rear of the wing because of the aft camber (imagine a flap at the end of the wing) which creates a bad pitching moment and a need for efficiency robbing taildown force. Secondly, it creates difficulty in providing strength and makes control surface/flap design very complex.

Whitcomb (the area rule guy) created his famous airfoil in the mid sixties, so they have indeed been around for a long time; but without the capability to predict supersonic airflow with precision, it took a long time to create feasible designs.

I think a lot of new ideas were discovered when designing the 777 wing because of the advances in analyzing the results and the greater ability to predict supersonic flow and compressibility properties. You'll certainly see even more advanced supercritical designs in the new airbus.

For people that don't have a clue about this discussion, supercritical airfoils work by creating a high pressure area underneath the airfoil, rather than low pressure above it. Much like using an aerating chopper-prop on a high speed racing boat to circumvent cavitation and prop "blow-out".



aaron


User currently offlinePilot1113 From United States of America, joined Aug 1999, 2333 posts, RR: 11
Reply 7, posted (14 years 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 3500 times:

Aaron atp wrote:
-------------------------------
For people that don't have a clue about this discussion, supercritical airfoils work by creating a high pressure area underneath the airfoil, rather than low pressure above it. Much like using an aerating chopper-prop on a high speed racing boat to circumvent cavitation and prop "blow-out".
------------------------------

To me the profile of the wing looked like it had a flat top and a flat bottom with a little indent towards the end of the wing. Correct me if I'm wrong, it's been awhile since I've seen the sketch.

- Neil Harrison


User currently offlineAaron atp From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 533 posts, RR: 2
Reply 8, posted (14 years 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 3497 times:

yep, that's it... the little flap at the end creates high pressure under the wing which creates positive lift

whitcomb supercritical airfoil
modern supercritical airfoils aren't designed with such a sharp trailing edge


it has to operate at a higher AOA at low speeds to develop the same amount of lift when compared to conventional wings on the same aircraft, but at high speeds, it is much more efficient. I'm going to hold off delving into the reasons for the sake of brevity.

When examining this airfoil, remember that the NACA 2412 on your cessna doesn't account for effects outside the realm of an ideal gas. Fluids act differently in the transonic realm of compressability. Normal thinking does not apply to the shape of supercritical airfoils, even if you think you have a perfect grasp of the writings of newton and bernoulli. You may think it looks a lot like a symmetric airfoil or an asym that develops negative lift from its camber; but it certainly doesn't act like either at high speeds


aaron


User currently offlineFr8tdog From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 120 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (14 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 3457 times:

aaron negative lift from a asyemtric airfoil ? never heard of it nor do my aerodynamic books reflect that .....
The only negative lift would be from a horizontal stab.....


User currently offlineAaron atp From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 533 posts, RR: 2
Reply 10, posted (14 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 3455 times:

umm.. I hope you misunderstood me. Of course an efficient aircraft design would never use a main wing that creates negative lift at neutral angles of attack, but I was only describing the appearance of some supercritical airfoils.

This statement gets me: negative lift from a asyemtric airfoil? never heard of it nor do my aerodynamic books reflect that. You seem to challenge the existense of asymmetric airfoils that create negative lift. More on that later...


The only negative lift would be from a horizontal stab..... This doesn't make sense when coupled with the first statement. Do you misunderstand the meaning of "airfoil" to mean "the main wing of any aircraft?"


an airfoil doesn't need a negative AOA or incidence to create negative lift if its mean camber is negative. What happens if you mount a NACA 2412 upside down as the horizontal stab? Negative lift from camber!

you can design any airfoil to create positive or negative lift from camber at zero AOA... besides, even the wings of your cessna 152 will create negative lift at negative angles of attack greater than about -3 degrees... How else would negative load factors be created?


in the context above, look at the cross-section... see that it has more lower camber from horizontal station .1 to .7 underneath the x-axis than upper camber. We'll call this negative mean camber for that portion of the wing. However, when you look at the wing as whole, you can see that the "flap" that occurs after station .7 gives the wing a positive CLo anyway.


Remember what the coefficient of lift is?
CL = (CLo +2pi(a)) / (1+(2/AR))

where:
CLo is the lift from camber
2pi(a) is lift from AOA "a" ("a" is AOA radians)


if the design of the wing creates low pressure below and high pressure above it at zero degrees AOA, CLo is negative. All you have to do is flip a "normal" asymmetric airfoil over and you now have one that creates negative lift from camber at zero degrees AOA... Of course, the wing can generate negative or positive lift; depending on whether the AOA is positive or negative, and regardless of the sign of CLo.

for the same reason a symmetric airfoil can generate negative or positive lift. CLo just happens to be zero with a symmetric design


Just realize that I was stating that it may look like it creates negative or no lift from camber in my post; but yes, the whitcomb supercritical does indeed have positive CLo. However, you seemed to challenge the fact that CLo could ever be negative...


aaron







User currently offlineChris28_17 From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 1439 posts, RR: 10
Reply 11, posted (14 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 3446 times:

My head hurts after reading all that! and I thought I was smart... you all have greatly humbled me !!!
Just thought you should know!!!!

--CHRIS--


User currently offlinePilot1113 From United States of America, joined Aug 1999, 2333 posts, RR: 11
Reply 12, posted (14 years 2 months 2 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 3428 times:

Wow!!!

Damn... I'm going to have to print that one out and translate it using my "Aircraft Basic Science" textbook!  

I've always wondered... what does that ATP stand for in your name? Is it Airline Transport Pilot?

- Neil Harrison


User currently offlineChris28_17 From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 1439 posts, RR: 10
Reply 13, posted (14 years 2 months 2 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 3416 times:

I'd like to think its related to our old UAX planes the BAe ATP's (advanced turbo prop)
they were horrible but i miss them.
i certainly doubt it but im curious too aaron!!


CHRIS


User currently offlineFr8tdog From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 120 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (14 years 2 months 1 week 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 3398 times:

Aaron , hmmmm tounge in cheek .... sorry I just reread your post and I misread what your meaning was intended for.... I truly thought that you where indicating the main airfoil.
Now as for negative lift ,the referance to that is, the horizontal stab for stabiliztion purposes between the Cp and Cg of the main lifting wing. Yes if you have a neg aoa there will be negative lift momentarily (unless the wing is in a continuous arc) however its primary design is to provide positive lift even if you roll inverted its still positive lift in climbing, level, or descending flight (provided you dont have neg G's)
I dont have my aerodynamic books with me and just did some quick research on the net. I was looking for pressure distribution and lift vectors on the SCW. you might want to look at RPI.edu under flow dynamics.
to me (which I have limited time) the Cl is at two points on around the leading edge and 2nd around the begining of the aft apex of the upper chamber. they did not do any testing at CLo (if I remember correctly, lift coefficient section at M where M=0) its been a while so dont chastize me to badly (wink)
Paul


User currently offlineAaron atp From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 533 posts, RR: 2
Reply 15, posted (14 years 2 months 1 week 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 3384 times:

I think we all know what it looks like in a more "normal" subsonic situation, so here's our DTE airfoil so everyone can get a visual picture of what's going on around a transonic airfoil:
pressure contours

I think we're getting past the scope of this forum now... If I have to explain what a bound vortex is, or prove that Bernoulli's priniple is just a derivitive of the first law of thermodynamics; I'll be pissed. The same goes for DTE airfoils.


I don't think there is anything to argue, so I'll shut up now



User currently offlineRayChuang From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 8018 posts, RR: 5
Reply 16, posted (14 years 2 months 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 3338 times:

I think the first airliner that used a wing that was strongly influenced by Whitcomb's work at NASA was the Airbus A300B2/B4 series.

While it was not a true Whitcomb shape, it was actually fairly close to the Whitcomb ideal.


User currently offlineJETPILOT From United States of America, joined May 1999, 3130 posts, RR: 29
Reply 17, posted (14 years 2 months 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 3340 times:

The A300 planes do have a hybrid supercritical airfoil.

The Airbus A300 has to be de-iced anytime the the temperature and dewpoint are within 3 degrees of each other, and the temperature is below 35 degrees F.

They do not take well to any wing contamination.


User currently offlinePilot1113 From United States of America, joined Aug 1999, 2333 posts, RR: 11
Reply 18, posted (14 years 2 months 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 3333 times:

I agree that they don't take well to contamination. Wasn't it you who said, "When you're flying a contaminated wing, you're basically flying an untested wing..."

- Neil Harrison

P.S. Thanks to all for the responses. Especially Aaron ATP with his pictures and rather indepth discusstion.


Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Super Critical Wing
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...
MIT/Cambridge To Unveil "silent" Flying Wing 11/06 posted Mon Nov 6 2006 02:24:03 by Lemurs
A380 Wing posted Wed Nov 1 2006 07:01:36 by GlobalVillage
Flying Wing/delta Wing Pitch Control posted Tue Oct 24 2006 08:34:00 by Speedracer1407
757 RR Engine On Wing Time posted Sat Oct 21 2006 23:14:31 by MarkC
Calculating An Aircrafts Wing Loading posted Fri Sep 29 2006 23:23:16 by Legoguy
What Exactly Is Wing Turbulence? posted Tue Sep 26 2006 02:45:57 by Lenbrazil
Extra Wing Extension. What Is It For (photo) posted Fri Sep 22 2006 19:26:39 by Airfoilsguy
Conversion From Tip Tanks To Wet Wing? posted Mon Sep 11 2006 22:50:37 by A342
Wing Position posted Fri Sep 1 2006 16:52:07 by Mlglaw
777 Wing Ultimate Load Test Photos/Video posted Tue Aug 29 2006 00:31:30 by 2H4

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format