olddominion727
Topic Author
Posts: 421
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2012 8:16 pm

Winglets For The 777?

Sat Jun 16, 2012 11:24 pm

I am not going to profess to know much about science etc. But how come there are no winglets for the 777? Wouldn't it have the legs to fly further on less fuel? I thought that's why all of the newer commercial equipment have them?
 
egll
Posts: 11
Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2010 4:58 pm

RE: Winglets For The 777?

Sat Jun 16, 2012 11:36 pm

The 777 has Raked wingtips which are supposed to reduce drag even further than other types

(From wikipedia - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wingtip_device#raked_winglets )

"In testing by Boeing and NASA, raked wingtips have been shown to reduce drag by as much as 5.5%, as opposed to improvements of 3.5% to 4.5% from conventional winglets"

The 767-400, 787 and the 747-8 have the same type as well

[Edited 2012-06-16 16:50:38]
300,310,319,320,321,332,333,342,343,346,734,741,742,743,744,752,762,763,764,772,77W,DC10,MD82,MD87,Q400,ERJ145
 
Viscount724
Posts: 19287
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 7:32 pm

RE: Winglets For The 777?

Sat Jun 16, 2012 11:41 pm

Quoting EGLL (Reply 1):
The 777 has Raked winglets

I think you mean raked wingtips. The 772LR, 773ER and 777F have the raked wingtips. The earlier models (772, 773 and 772ER) do not.
 
ghifty
Posts: 890
Joined: Sun Jul 25, 2010 9:12 pm

RE: Winglets For The 777?

Sat Jun 16, 2012 11:46 pm

I wonder how well the raked wingtip design will hold up against the 737 MAX's AT winglet. Or.. I assume the 737 MAX doesn't have raked wingtips (or the kind the B787 has) because of gate-space restrictions.
Fly Delta (Wid)Jets
 
egll
Posts: 11
Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2010 4:58 pm

RE: Winglets For The 777?

Sat Jun 16, 2012 11:52 pm

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 2):
I think you mean raked wingtips

woops, my bad.. thanks for the correction
300,310,319,320,321,332,333,342,343,346,734,741,742,743,744,752,762,763,764,772,77W,DC10,MD82,MD87,Q400,ERJ145
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 23504
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Winglets For The 777?

Sun Jun 17, 2012 12:01 am

Back in 2004, Boeing and Aviation Partners looked into winglets for the 777, but nothing seems to have come of it.

There just might not be enough frames to justify moving forward: while the 777-200ER was a strong seller, the 777-200 and 777-300 both delivered under 100 units, each. Compare this to the over 1000 757s and 767s delivered.

As for the 737, the P-8 does have raked wingtips, which were chosen in part, I believe, because they don't block the onboard sensors and because the P-8 spends much longer in cruise and that is where raked wingtips are most-advantageous.
 
User avatar
jetjack74
Posts: 6607
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2003 6:35 am

RE: Winglets For The 777?

Sun Jun 17, 2012 12:02 am

Quoting ghifty (Reply 3):
I wonder how well the raked wingtip design will hold up against the 737 MAX's AT winglet. Or.. I assume the 737 MAX doesn't have raked wingtips (or the kind the B787 has) because of gate-space restrictions.

The P-8 has them, which is a 737
Made from jets!
 
User avatar
1337Delta764
Posts: 4972
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2005 4:02 am

RE: Winglets For The 777?

Sun Jun 17, 2012 12:45 am

Quoting ghifty (Reply 3):

I wonder how well the raked wingtip design will hold up against the 737 MAX's AT winglet. Or.. I assume the 737 MAX doesn't have raked wingtips (or the kind the B787 has) because of gate-space restrictions.

Actually, the 737 MAX wingtip devices resemble a three-way hybrid of a blended winglet, raked wingtip, and wingtip fence.
The Pink Delta 767-400ER - The most beautiful aircraft in the sky
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 20154
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

RE: Winglets For The 777?

Sun Jun 17, 2012 12:49 am

Quoting Stitch (Reply 5):
As for the 737, the P-8 does have raked wingtips, which were chosen in part, I believe, because they don't block the onboard sensors and because the P-8 spends much longer in cruise and that is where raked wingtips are most-advantageous.

Why are raked wingtips better in cruise and winglets not as optimal for longer trips?
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
solarflyer22
Posts: 1468
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 7:07 pm

RE: Winglets For The 777?

Sun Jun 17, 2012 1:25 am

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 8):

Raked wingtips incur slightly less drag than winglets and have the added bonus of not needing to be checked as often (according to some other forum threads). Winglets are apparently better at high cycle (lots of take off and landings) vs raked wingtips which are better for long distance cruise (ie 777). 787 and 748 also fall into that category.

Winglets have the advantage of advertising (great sign post) and can be retrofitted. They also reduce gate space. I would not be surprised at all if the P-8 raked wingtip is on the 737 max but that wing is much stronger and heavier than a regular commercial plane so the entire design cannot be used. More likely, they'll do something similar to what Airbus does. A vertical element and smaller down element.

Personally, I would rather see a flexible but strong wingtip that can provide more lift at low speed (i.e. take off and landing) and then sweep backward above 300 knots (i.e. at high cruise). I think if you use a strong woven material like Kevlar like it would work.
 
User avatar
atcsundevil
Crew
Posts: 1187
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2010 12:22 pm

RE: Winglets For The 777?

Sun Jun 17, 2012 1:25 am

Winglets on a 777-200 and -200ER would not improve performance enough to justify the costs. They came without winglets or raked wingtips because the -200 and -200ER were developed prior to their widespread use. As it is, it's a pretty well-designed aircraft aerodynamically. API looked into it a few years ago, but my understanding is the ROI wouldn't have been worth it to bother with flight testing.

Now that some of the 777-200s and -200ERs are getting old, my guess is there will be more research into this to improve their efficiency, thus allowing them to stay in service longer. I wonder if they'll come up with a way to install raked wingtips featured on the rest of the 777 line.
Forum Moderator
 
User avatar
1337Delta764
Posts: 4972
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2005 4:02 am

RE: Winglets For The 777?

Sun Jun 17, 2012 1:34 am

Here is the 737 MAX wingtip device:


A hybrid of a blended winglet, wingtip fence, and raked wingtip.
The Pink Delta 767-400ER - The most beautiful aircraft in the sky
 
cheeken
Posts: 131
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2010 10:21 am

RE: Winglets For The 777?

Sun Jun 17, 2012 2:22 am

Quoting 1337Delta764 (Reply 11):

Here is the 737 MAX wingtip device:


A hybrid of a blended winglet, wingtip fence, and raked wingtip.

Is it just me, or does that look like an enlarged version of the Airbus winglets on the A320s and A380s?
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 23504
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Winglets For The 777?

Sun Jun 17, 2012 2:28 am

Quoting cheeken (Reply 12):
Is it just me, or does that look like an enlarged version of the Airbus winglets on the A320s and A380s?

Those wingtip devices are fences and are quite different in geometry from the 737 MAX.

The 737 MAX wingtip shares a closer relationship to the MD-11's.
 
User avatar
LAXintl
Posts: 20503
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

RE: Winglets For The 777?

Sun Jun 17, 2012 2:53 am

Something might be around the corner...  
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
PHX787
Posts: 7881
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 7:46 pm

RE: Winglets For The 777?

Sun Jun 17, 2012 2:57 am

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 2):
772, 773 and 772ER) do not.

I think the anti-drag was built into the wing, however. Different from the raked winglets but still designed as such. I highly doubt we'll see actual winglets on the early models of the T7.

Quoting 1337Delta764 (Reply 11):
A hybrid of a blended winglet, wingtip fence, and raked wingtip.

Kinda resembles a larger version of the Airbus winglet
Follow me on twitter: www.twitter.com/phx787
 
travelhound
Posts: 1235
Joined: Fri May 23, 2008 9:13 pm

RE: Winglets For The 777?

Sun Jun 17, 2012 3:13 am

Quoting Stitch (Reply 5):
As for the 737, the P-8 does have raked wingtips, which were chosen in part, I believe, because they don't block the onboard sensors and because the P-8 spends much longer in cruise and that is where raked wingtips are most-advantageous.

You would think 737BBJ's would be better suited to the raked winged tips as the custiomers tend to fly longer trips?
 
tdscanuck
Posts: 8572
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 7:25 am

RE: Winglets For The 777?

Sun Jun 17, 2012 3:59 am

Quoting ghifty (Reply 3):
I wonder how well the raked wingtip design will hold up against the 737 MAX's AT winglet.

Better. Aerodynamically, it's always better to go out (tip extension) than up (winglet). You only go up (and down) if there's some other constraint: wingspan, retrofit capability, etc.

If you don't have another constraint, you go out...that's why the most recent designs (787, 747-8, A350) all went with raked tips.

Quoting ghifty (Reply 3):
I assume the 737 MAX doesn't have raked wingtips (or the kind the B787 has) because of gate-space restrictions.

Bingo.

Tom.
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 20154
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

RE: Winglets For The 777?

Sun Jun 17, 2012 5:22 am

Quoting solarflyer22 (Reply 9):
Winglets are apparently better at high cycle (lots of take off and landings) vs raked wingtips which are better for long distance cruise (ie 777). 787 and 748 also fall into that category.

Yes, but... why? What about raked wingtips make them better for cruise? What about winglets make them better for takeoff and climb? Why doesn't Airbus really use raked wingtips?

I know that Boeing has offered a PIP for existing 777's that replaces the vortex generators on the upper surface of the wing with smaller, more streamlined ones from the 737NG wing. It reprograms the outboard aileron to droop down by two degrees, which improves wing loading and twist. It also replaces the Ram Air intake with a more aerodynamic profile. Offers 1-1.5% improvement in performance.
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
RubberJungle
Posts: 302
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2010 10:16 am

RE: Winglets For The 777?

Sun Jun 17, 2012 8:46 am

Quoting olddominion727 (Thread starter):
But how come there are no winglets for the 777?

Boeing's 777 test crew told me that winglets were considered, but that they would have needed to be extremely tall to be worth the effort, and the idea was dropped.
 
User avatar
Loran
Posts: 592
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 11:13 am

RE: Winglets For The 777?

Sun Jun 17, 2012 8:47 am

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 17):
Aerodynamically, it's always better to go out (tip extension) than up (winglet). You only go up (and down) if there's some other constraint: wingspan, retrofit capability, etc.

Thats the key point. Drag is a function of the wing's aspect ratio. So the higher the aspect ratio, the lower the drag. That's why modern gliders have extremely large wingspans with a short chord. Hence raked wingtips contribute to a higher aspect ratio while generating lift whereas winglets do not provide as much additional lift. Of course other factors contribute such as weight, cost, gate clearance, etc.
703 717 727 732-9 747 757 767 777 788 AB2/6 310 318-321 330 340 380 D8M D91/3/5 D1C M11 M81-90 L10 IL1/8/6/7/W/9/4 TU3/5/2 YK4/2
 
ha763
Posts: 3170
Joined: Mon Jan 06, 2003 5:36 pm

RE: Winglets For The 777?

Sun Jun 17, 2012 9:08 am

This is a better view of what the 737 MAX's look like compared to the MD-11 winglet and Airbus wingtip fence


MD-11

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Andrew Hunt - AirTeamImages



Airbus wingtip fence

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Q. Tseng



Much closer to the MD-11, which has both upper and lower parts canted outward, while a wingtip fence is straight vertical.
 
egll
Posts: 11
Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2010 4:58 pm

RE: Winglets For The 777?

Sun Jun 17, 2012 10:08 am

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 18):
Why doesn't Airbus really use raked wingtips?

On the A380 airbus went for wingtip fences so that it would not increase the length of the wing which would have caused a problem with space when the aircraft was at a gate.
300,310,319,320,321,332,333,342,343,346,734,741,742,743,744,752,762,763,764,772,77W,DC10,MD82,MD87,Q400,ERJ145
 
Slcpilot
Posts: 578
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 3:32 am

RE: Winglets For The 777?

Sun Jun 17, 2012 11:32 am

Quoting EGLL (Reply 22):

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 18):
Why doesn't Airbus really use raked wingtips?

On the A380 airbus went for wingtip fences so that it would not increase the length of the wing which would have caused a problem with space when the aircraft was at the gate.

It's also safer for people in buildings near the airport!

http://www.airlinereporter.com/2011/...ng-hits-building-at-paris-airshow/

Cheers!

SLCPilot.  
I don't like to be fueled by anger, I don't like to be fooled by lust...
 
connies4ever
Posts: 3393
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2006 10:54 pm

RE: Winglets For The 777?

Sun Jun 17, 2012 11:55 am

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 17):
Better. Aerodynamically, it's always better to go out (tip extension) than up (winglet). You only go up (and down) if there's some other constraint: wingspan, retrofit capability, etc.

If you don't have another constraint, you go out...that's why the most recent designs (787, 747-8, A350) all went with raked tips.

What about structurally ? The longer a high aspect ratio wing gets, I would assume the bigger aeroelasticity issues you bring into the picture. You would counter this I suppose by beefing up the wing structure itself, and that puts a weight penalty into the picture. Winglets themselves impose a bit of a weight penalty, of course. I believe something around 150kg for the 73G might be fairly accurate.

Quoting Loran (Reply 20):
Thats the key point. Drag is a function of the wing's aspect ratio. So the higher the aspect ratio, the lower the drag.

I always thought the winglet effectively increased the aspect ratio for a given wing. ?? Also, it tends to reduce "lost" air due to tip vortex generation, to my understanding.
Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.
 
richiemo
Posts: 150
Joined: Fri Jul 11, 2008 1:15 pm

RE: Winglets For The 777?

Sun Jun 17, 2012 1:58 pm

Not only would winglets for the 777-200 and 200ERs be too tall but I think they determined that the wings were pretty well designed even without winglets, that the added weight would cancel out any advantage.
 
tdscanuck
Posts: 8572
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 7:25 am

RE: Winglets For The 777?

Sun Jun 17, 2012 3:44 pm

Quoting connies4ever (Reply 24):
What about structurally ? The longer a high aspect ratio wing gets, I would assume the bigger aeroelasticity issues you bring into the picture. You would counter this I suppose by beefing up the wing structure itself, and that puts a weight penalty into the picture. Winglets themselves impose a bit of a weight penalty, of course. I believe something around 150kg for the 73G might be fairly accurate.

Turning corners is a pain; if you're designing from scratch and you don't have some constraint (typically span) you go outwards (tip extension). They both add weight but the raked tip is easier to implement *if you design it in*. Retrofit is a different matter; this is why you see winglets much more commonly as retrofits (they don't impose as much of a structural margin demand on an existing wing).

Quoting connies4ever (Reply 24):
I always thought the winglet effectively increased the aspect ratio for a given wing. ??

It does. So does a tip extension. Tip extensions produce more effective aspect ratio increase for their weight than winglets, which is why they perform better aerodynamically.

Quoting connies4ever (Reply 24):
Also, it tends to reduce "lost" air due to tip vortex generation, to my understanding.

In aerodynamic speak, that the same thing as having a higher effective aspect ratio.

Quoting richiemo (Reply 25):
Not only would winglets for the 777-200 and 200ERs be too tall but I think they determined that the wings were pretty well designed even without winglets, that the added weight would cancel out any advantage.

Any wing will always have less induced drag with properly designed winglets (or tips), regardless of how good it was to start with. The key is the trade off...is it better enough to pay for itself. That's a pretty easy trade to make for tips, pretty difficult for winglets.

What skews all the options around are all the other trades going on: cost, weight, retrofitability, gate spacing, flutter, etc.

Tom.
 
User avatar
JerseyFlyer
Posts: 865
Joined: Fri May 25, 2007 7:24 pm

RE: Winglets For The 777?

Sun Jun 17, 2012 4:08 pm

Quoting atcsundevil (Reply 10):
They came without winglets or raked wingtips because the -200 and -200ER were developed prior to their widespread use.

The 777s were developed after the MD 11, B744, A330 and A340 which all had winglets.

My recollection is that the 777 wings were designed to bend upwards more in flight than those earlier designs to create a similar effect to winglets. That at least was the "spin" at the time.
 
amccann
Posts: 124
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2008 9:14 pm

RE: Winglets For The 777?

Sun Jun 17, 2012 4:18 pm

Quoting connies4ever (Reply 24):
What about structurally ? The longer a high aspect ratio wing gets, I would assume the bigger aeroelasticity issues you bring into the picture. You would counter this I suppose by beefing up the wing structure itself, and that puts a weight penalty into the picture.

Something interesting to think about in regards to raked wingtips is that because they produce additional lift they induce a moment on the wing. This moment is much greater with raked wingtips because the moment arm is much longer when the aerodynamic force of the wingtip is primarily vertical. This is the primary reason retrofitted airplanes have blended winglets and not raked wingtips. Blended winglets do not induce as great of a moment on the wing as do raked wingtips.
What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving. - Ronald Reagan
 
pikachu
Posts: 88
Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2002 5:58 pm

RE: Winglets For The 777?

Sun Jun 17, 2012 5:46 pm

No discussion about the 777 and winglets is complete without knowing the aircraft has a supercritical wing. 757/767 has the same but early generation. Retrofits in progress now. Maybe another twenty years of computer advancement will find more efficiencies in the 777 wing design.
 
connies4ever
Posts: 3393
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2006 10:54 pm

RE: Winglets For The 777?

Sun Jun 17, 2012 6:13 pm

Quoting amccann (Reply 28):
Something interesting to think about in regards to raked wingtips is that because they produce additional lift they induce a moment on the wing. This moment is much greater with raked wingtips because the moment arm is much longer when the aerodynamic force of the wingtip is primarily vertical. This is the primary reason retrofitted airplanes have blended winglets and not raked wingtips. Blended winglets do not induce as great of a moment on the wing as do raked wingtips.

Exactly what I was trying to get at. So to counter the bending moment, the wing structure itself has to be stiffer, and not just around the wingtip, I'm thinking.

OTOH, Boeing apparently doesn't worry about the extreme bend in the 787 wing - that thing really bends a lot as Vr is reached, and then on landing it seems to flap a little. I wonder about fatigue issues, but I am sure Boeing thought this through.
Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.
 
ferpe
Posts: 2651
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2010 7:44 am

RE: Winglets For The 777?

Sun Jun 17, 2012 8:28 pm

There is a thread in Tech/Ops that goes into the subject a bit deeper (there were several before who also discussed the subject);

Winglets Efficiency For SA Questioned (by ferpe Apr 10 2012 in Tech Ops)

Here a synopsis on what was said there:

1. The effective wingspan from a wing with upswept winglet is the wingspan + about 45% of the physical length of the winglet. A raked tip wing counts 80% of the raked tip length, ie the raked tip is more efficient for the same structural mass and wetted area of the tip device, it does build span and therefore landing fees and gatespace however.

2. CM which worked on the 777 and the 787 stated that a raked tip gives an overall lighter wing for the same effective wingspan not only because because a smaller device gives the same effect as a larger winglet but a raked tip induces less torsional forces to the wingbox then an upward going winglet.

3. In the thread CM also gave references to Airbus research with downward going winglets, they gave similar effects to an upward going winglet, had some wing bending moment advantage but decreases of course your free roll margin for landing and start.

4. The Max winglet uses this fact to get more effective wingspan for the same gate wingspan with a shorter downward going blade, it should also even out the torsional stress a bit.

5. The Airbus wingfence uses a different flow principle, at low speed it works as a deltawing (60° sweep angle and therefore vortex flow ) to keep some effect for start and landing, at cruise it has attached flow. The raked tip and winglet work with conventional aero for cruise, landing and start. At stall at least the raked tip uses it's high sweep angle to switch to vortex flow (not to have a total loss of tip lift when the wing stalls, you never want the tip to stall more then the root), if it didn't one would need to extend the slats to the raked tip area.

[Edited 2012-06-17 13:34:51]
Non French in France
 
PlymSpotter
Posts: 10022
Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2004 7:32 am

RE: Winglets For The 777?

Sun Jun 17, 2012 8:34 pm

A major consideration is the wingspan. The -200/200ER and -300 have a 60.9m span and the -200LR/300ER have a 64.8m span. In ICAO terms the maximum span for a Code E aircraft is 64.99m, anything above that and the aircraft would be considered Code F (A380/B748 territory) and would enter a whole different set of regulations which would significantly restrict where it could be used and what taxiways could accommodate it. So whilst a blended winglet could probably be developed for the earlier 777 versions within Code E it could not (unless the span somehow remained unchanged) be applied to the latest 200LR or 300ER without changing their operational parameters.


Dan  
...love is just a camouflage for what resembles rage again...
 
brilondon
Posts: 3021
Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2005 6:56 am

RE: Winglets For The 777?

Sun Jun 17, 2012 8:46 pm

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 8):
Why are raked wingtips better in cruise and winglets not as optimal for longer trips?
Quoting DocLightning (Reply 18):
Yes, but... why? What about raked wingtips make them better for cruise? What about winglets make them better for takeoff and climb? Why doesn't Airbus really use raked wingtips?

I am not an engineer so this may be way off but the raked winglets on the longer range aircraft allow for the increased performance at altitude for long distances. Where as on the 737/757/767 the winglets they have increase lift over the non-winglet aircraft and thus, on short haul routes give a bigger savings economically.
Rush for ever; Yankees all the way!!
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 20154
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

RE: Winglets For The 777?

Sun Jun 17, 2012 8:58 pm

Quoting brilondon (Reply 33):
I am not an engineer so this may be way off but the raked winglets on the longer range aircraft allow for the increased performance at altitude for long distances.

But you just answered my question by repeating it. What specifically are raked winglets doing to airflow that makes them superior to winglets in cruise and what about them makes them inferior during climb?
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
connies4ever
Posts: 3393
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2006 10:54 pm

RE: Winglets For The 777?

Sun Jun 17, 2012 9:36 pm

Quoting ferpe (Reply 31):
2. CM which worked on the 777 and the 787 stated that a raked tip gives an overall lighter wing for the same effective wingspan not only because because a smaller device gives the same effect as a larger winglet but a raked tip induces less torsional forces to the wingbox then an upward going winglet.

I find this to be interesting, I would have thought out of ignorance that by generating more lift there would be more torsion.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 34):
But you just answered my question by repeating it. What specifically are raked winglets doing to airflow that makes them superior to winglets in cruise and what about them makes them inferior during climb?

I think Ferpe's point #1 is your answer; for a given size the raked wing tip produces more effective lift, at the cost of a larger gate footprint.

Quoting ferpe (Reply 31):
1. The effective wingspan from a wing with upswept winglet is the wingspan + about 45% of the physical length of the winglet. A raked tip wing counts 80% of the raked tip length, ie the raked tip is more efficient for the same structural mass and wetted area of the tip device, it does build span and therefore landing fees and gatespace however.
Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.
 
brilondon
Posts: 3021
Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2005 6:56 am

RE: Winglets For The 777?

Sun Jun 17, 2012 9:43 pm

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 34):

Quoting brilondon (Reply 33):
I am not an engineer so this may be way off but the raked winglets on the longer range aircraft allow for the increased performance at altitude for long distances.

But you just answered my question by repeating it. What specifically are raked winglets doing to airflow that makes them superior to winglets in cruise and what about them makes them inferior during climb?

Sorry. The raked winglets are more aerodynamic and produce less drag on the aircraft. It allows for the air flow to be less turbulent thus allowing for easier travel through the air and there for using less fuel. I am sure that there are engineers that can explain this better then me, but from my memory of high school physics, this seems to be the answer.
Rush for ever; Yankees all the way!!
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 20154
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

RE: Winglets For The 777?

Sun Jun 17, 2012 9:49 pm

So what I am getting is that the raked wingtip is superior in all cases (given an original build), except that because it enlarges the span, for shorter-range aircraft that incur landing fees as a higher percentage of their operating costs, this would be disadvantageous.

Quoting connies4ever (Reply 35):
I find this to be interesting, I would have thought out of ignorance that by generating more lift there would be more torsion.

As I understand it, winglets convert some vortex energy into forward thrust. Given that they extend well above the plane of the wing, that implies that they would cause a forward twisting moment at the wingbox. A raked tip, which increases lift, would increase bending moment but not necessarily torsion.

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 17):
If you don't have another constraint, you go out...that's why the most recent designs (787, 747-8, A350) all went with raked tips.

So my next question is: why are the tips raked? What is about raking them that makes them superior to just putting a triangular extension on the wingtip?
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
solarflyer22
Posts: 1468
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 7:07 pm

RE: Winglets For The 777?

Mon Jun 18, 2012 2:29 am

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 18):
Yes, but... why? What about raked wingtips make them better for cruise? What about winglets make them better for takeoff and climb? Why doesn't Airbus really use raked wingtips?
Quoting DocLightning (Reply 34):
But you just answered my question by repeating it. What specifically are raked winglets doing to airflow that makes them superior to winglets in cruise and what about them makes them inferior during climb?

I'm splaining it to you Lucy! Its the drag issue. Winglets induce more drag and are longer and add more weight to the frame than raked wingtips. Think of a winglet and if it were folded down. It would be an additional 7-9 ft of wing whereas a raked wingtip is only an extra 2-3 feet or so.

Winglets do help more at low speed where there is less drag and necessarily are more beneficial during take off and landing. Thats why high cycle aircraft (i.e. 737) benefit more because they spend more of their careers flying slow and taking off or landing. Raked wingtips don't help much during takeoff and landing.
 
tdscanuck
Posts: 8572
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 7:25 am

RE: Winglets For The 777?

Mon Jun 18, 2012 7:59 pm

Quoting pikachu (Reply 29):
No discussion about the 777 and winglets is complete without knowing the aircraft has a supercritical wing.

I'm not really sure how those two things are related...you can do winglets or raked tips on supercritical or non-supercritical airfoils.

Quoting connies4ever (Reply 30):
OTOH, Boeing apparently doesn't worry about the extreme bend in the 787 wing - that thing really bends a lot as Vr is reached, and then on landing it seems to flap a little. I wonder about fatigue issues, but I am sure Boeing thought this through.

The bend is designed in. The aerodynamics guys figure out where they want the wing in flight, the structures guys figure out the build position ("jig position") so that the wing ends up where the aero guys wanted it once it's subject to flight loads.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 37):
As I understand it, winglets convert some vortex energy into forward thrust.

Strictly from an energy point of view that's sort of valid but it's aerodynamically dangerous territory. It's better to think of winglets as causing a weaker vortex in the first place.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 37):
So my next question is: why are the tips raked? What is about raking them that makes them superior to just putting a triangular extension on the wingtip?

It's the balance between lift and structural weight...as the chord goes down, the lift generated goes down. If you run the wing out as a triangle to a point, the point is basically making "zero" lift therefore not really doing anything. Hence you want to, at least, chop the point off. I think sweeping the leading edge back rather than having an abrupt corner gives you an aerodynamically cleaner setup (and probably helps with torsion) but that's somewhat out of my field.

Tom.
 
connies4ever
Posts: 3393
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2006 10:54 pm

RE: Winglets For The 777?

Mon Jun 18, 2012 8:41 pm

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 39):
Quoting DocLightning (Reply 37):
As I understand it, winglets convert some vortex energy into forward thrust.

Strictly from an energy point of view that's sort of valid but it's aerodynamically dangerous territory. It's better to think of winglets as causing a weaker vortex in the first place.

Thinking about this aspect, your explanation makes more sense to me.   
Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.
 
ferpe
Posts: 2651
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2010 7:44 am

RE: Winglets For The 777?

Mon Jun 18, 2012 9:26 pm

US Patent 5039032 is the first basic B patent on the raked wingtip, it gives the reason for the high sweep of the forward surface:

- to avoid wingtip stall without having to go to the complication of slats.

The sweep angle gets to the area where a stable wintip wortex is formed at high AOA from the leading edge like for a deltawing aircraft and therefore the rake tip also works in start and landing without any leading edge device to increase it's AOA tolerance.
Non French in France
 
777222LR
Posts: 166
Joined: Fri Feb 17, 2012 2:19 am

RE: Winglets For The 777?

Tue Jun 19, 2012 4:01 pm

Here's what it would look like, given a blended style winglet:

http://www.cardatabase.net/modifiedairlinerphotos/photos/big/00006777.jpg

[Edited 2012-06-19 09:10:57]
 
PHX787
Posts: 7881
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 7:46 pm

RE: Winglets For The 777?

Tue Jun 19, 2012 6:57 pm

Quoting 777222LR (Reply 42):
Here's what it would look like, given a blended style winglet:

THAT is trippy! Those winglets would have to be as tall as an ERJ135 fuselage!
Follow me on twitter: www.twitter.com/phx787

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos