AESF 5310

Advanced Aerodynamics

Lecture 6: 21 Sept 2022

Cirrus Vision SF50 Instructor: Prof Larry Li 1
 Your comments count!

Lectures Tutorials

Website
Homework

Supplemental Anything you

materials can think of!

Please email me: [email protected]

L6 2
 Homework 2

L6 3
 Today’s agenda [AS4.1−4.9]
• Thin airfoil theory (TAT) – Lecture 2 of 3 Max M. Munk: A German
aerospace engineer who began
• Review of basic ideas from the previous lecture working for NACA (now NASA) in
1920 and introduced TAT in 1922.
• Review of results for symmetric airfoils He also proposed and designed
the world’s first variable-density
• Extend to cambered airfoils wind tunnel.

• Aerodynamic moment: Symmetric and cambered airfoils

• Summary
NASA Langley Research Center

4
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variable_Density_Tunnel
 Review of TAT: Basic idea

Arbitrary airfoil Real airfoil

Vortex panel method (wrap vortex
sheet around entire airfoil) [AS4.10]

Thin airfoil theory [AF4.22]

Thin airfoil theory (TAT)

Advantages: Get closed-form expressions for the aerodynamic coefficients (𝐶𝑙 and 𝐶𝑚 ),
with results agreeing well with experimental data for thin airfoils
L6 Disadvantages: Many assumptions: 𝛼 not too high, thin airfoil (< 12% thick) and more… 5
 [AF4.22]

Review of TAT
The BASIC idea in TAT:
Find the distribution of vortex strength 𝛾 along the chord line that…
1) …makes the camber line a streamline of the flow, and
2) …satisfies the Kutta condition: 𝛾 𝑇𝐸 = 0 0 for symmetric
airfoil
1 𝑐 𝛾 𝜉 𝑑𝜉 𝑑𝑧
We do this by solving [AE4.18] ‫׬‬ = 𝑉∞ 𝛼 − in terms of
2𝜋 0 𝑥−𝜉 𝑑𝑥
the transformed independent variable 𝜃 in order to get the vortex
distribution 𝛾(𝜃).

Once found, 𝛾 𝜃 is integrated from LE to TE to get the total circulation!

We then apply the Kutta−Joukowski theorem to get the lift force and
the lift coefficient! 6
 Previous lecture

TAT: Symmetric airfoil

For a symmetric airfoil: in radians

𝐶𝑙

Lift coeff. (2D): 𝐶𝑙 = 2𝜋𝛼 [AE4.33]

𝑑𝐶𝑙
Lift slope: 𝑎0 ≡ = 2𝜋 [AE4.34] 𝐶𝑚, 𝑐/4
𝑑𝛼

The lift slope (𝑎0 ) is not particularly sensitive to 𝑅𝑒, but

the maximum lift coefficient (𝐶𝑙,𝑚𝑎𝑥 ) is. This makes
sense because 𝐶𝑙,𝑚𝑎𝑥 is governed by stall (a viscous
phenomenon) and 𝑅𝑒 quantifies the relative influence
of inertia and viscosity.

L6 7
 Today’s agenda [AS4.1−4.9]
• Thin airfoil theory (TAT) – Lecture 2 of 3 Max M. Munk: A German
aerospace engineer who began
• Review of basic ideas from the previous lecture working for NACA (now NASA) in
1920 and introduced TAT in 1922.
• Review of results for symmetric airfoils He also proposed and designed
the world’s first variable-density
• Extend to cambered airfoils wind tunnel.

• Aerodynamic moment: Symmetric and cambered airfoils

• Summary
NASA Langley Research Center

8
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variable_Density_Tunnel
 TAT: Cambered airfoil
Today’s lecture
Three main effects due to camber:

Lift coefficient (+)

High camber airfoil
Increase in max
lift coefficient Low camber airfoil
𝐶𝑙,𝑚𝑎𝑥
Symmetric airfoil

Angle of attack (+)

Decrease in Decrease in stall angle
zero-lift angle of of attack (coincides
attack 𝛼𝐿=0 with max lift)
L6 9
 TAT: Cambered airfoil

Flaps

No flaps

L6 10
 TAT: Cambered airfoil
For a cambered airfoil, the analysis is similar to that for a symmetric airfoil except that
we make the upper flow faster than the lower flow when 𝛼 = 0. The full form of
[AE4.18] is transformed to [AE4.42]:
Keep curvature term

1 𝜋 𝛾 𝜃 sin 𝜃 𝑑𝜃 𝑑𝑧
න = 𝑉∞ 𝛼 −
2𝜋 0 cos 𝜃 − cos 𝜃0 𝑑𝑥

As before, we will skip the lengthy proof and jump straight to the final result:

1+cos 𝜃
𝛾 𝜃 = 2𝑉∞ 𝐴0 + σ∞
𝑛=1 𝐴𝑛 sin 𝑛𝜃 [AE4.43]
sin 𝜃

1 𝜋 𝑑𝑧
where 𝐴0 = 𝛼 − ‫׬‬0 𝑑𝜃0 [AE4.50]
𝜋 𝑑𝑥
2 𝜋 𝑑𝑧
…and for 𝑛 ≥ 1: 𝐴𝑛 = ‫׬‬0 cos 𝑛𝜃0 𝑑𝜃0 [AE4.51]
𝜋 𝑑𝑥

Note that the 2nd term in [AE4.43] is a Fourier sine series, and sin 𝑛𝜃 = 0 at 𝜃 = 𝜋 for
11
any integer 𝑛, which helps to ensure that the Kutta condition is met.
 TAT: Cambered airfoil
𝑐 𝑐 𝜋
The total circulation from LE to TE: Γ = ‫׬‬0 𝛾 𝜉 𝑑𝜉 = ‫׬‬0 𝛾 𝜃 sin 𝜃 𝑑𝜃
2
Previous slide
Substituting [AE4.43] for 𝛾 𝜃 gives [AE4.53]:
𝜋 ∞ 𝜋
Γ = 𝑐𝑉∞ 𝐴0 න 1 + cos 𝜃 𝑑𝜃 + ෍ 𝐴𝑛 න sin 𝑛𝜃 sin 𝜃 𝑑𝜃
0 𝑛=1 0

Here the Fourier orthogonality relation is useful: In the calculation of Γ

𝜋 for 𝐶𝑙 , we need just one
𝜋Τ2 𝑚=𝑛
න sin 𝑛𝜃 sin 𝑚𝜃 𝑑𝜃 = ቊ term: 𝐴1 . Later, when
0 𝑚=1
0 𝑜𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑤𝑖𝑠𝑒 we derive expressions
𝜋 𝜋Τ2 𝑛=1 for 𝐶𝑚 , we will need 𝐴1
Hence: ‫׬‬0 sin 𝑛𝜃 sin 𝜃 𝑑𝜃 = ቊ and 𝐴2 .
0 𝑜𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑤𝑖𝑠𝑒

𝜋
This gives: Γ= 𝑐𝑉∞ 𝜋𝐴0 + 𝐴1 [AE4.54]
2
L6 12
 TAT: Cambered airfoil
Kutta−Joukowski [AE4.54]

𝜋
𝐿′ 𝜌𝑉∞ Γ 𝜌𝑉∞ 𝑐𝑉∞ 𝜋𝐴0 + 2 𝐴1
Lift coefficient: 𝐶𝑙 = 1 2𝑐
=1 2𝑐
= 1 2𝑐
2
𝜌𝑉∞ 2
𝜌𝑉∞ 2
𝜌𝑉∞

= 𝜋 2𝐴0 + 𝐴1 [AE4.56]
1 𝜋 𝑑𝑧
= 2𝜋 𝛼 + ‫׬‬0 cos 𝜃0 − 1 𝑑𝜃0 [AE4.57]
𝜋 𝑑𝑥

Usually this result is written as:

𝐶𝑙 = 2𝜋 𝛼 − 𝛼𝐿=0
1 𝜋 𝑑𝑧
where the zero-lift AOA ≡ 𝛼𝐿=0 = − ‫׬‬0 cos 𝜃0 − 1 𝑑𝜃0
𝜋 𝑑𝑥

L6 13
 TAT: Cambered airfoil
The design of an airfoil should be such that 𝛼𝐿=0 < 0 but small.

For both symmetric and cambered airfoils,

𝑑𝐶
TAT predicts the lift slope to be 𝑙 = 2𝜋
𝑑𝛼

𝑑𝑧
To evaluate 𝛼𝐿=0 , we need to express
𝑑𝑥
𝑐
in terms of 𝜃0 by using 𝑥 = 1 − cos 𝜃0 .
2

Examples can be found in HW2 and in the

textbook [AE4.61].

L6 14
 Today’s agenda [AS4.1−4.9]
• Thin airfoil theory (TAT) – Lecture 2 of 3 Max M. Munk: A German
aerospace engineer who began
• Review of basic ideas from the previous lecture working for NACA (now NASA) in
1920 and introduced TAT in 1922.
• Review of results for symmetric airfoils He also proposed and designed
the world’s first variable-density
• Extend to cambered airfoils wind tunnel.

• Aerodynamic moment: Symmetric and cambered airfoils

• Summary
NASA Langley Research Center

15
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variable_Density_Tunnel
 TAT: Aerodynamic moment
Each vortex filament of strength 𝛾 𝝃 𝑑𝝃 contributes to an incremental
lift force 𝑑𝐿′ = 𝜌𝑉∞ 𝛾 𝝃 acting at a distance 𝝃 from the LE.

The total moment (per unit span) about the LE is [force × distance]:
𝑐
𝑀′𝐿𝐸 = −𝜌𝑉∞ ‫׬‬0 𝝃 𝛾 𝝃 𝑑𝝃 [AE4.35]
L6 16
Sign convention: −’ve is pitch down
 TAT: Aerodynamic moment (symmetric)
For a symmetric airfoil, the moment coefficients are [AE4.39−41]:
′
𝑀𝐿𝐸 𝐶𝑙
𝐶𝑚,𝐿𝐸 = 1 2 𝑐2
= − 𝐶𝑚,𝑐/4 = 0
𝜌𝑉∞ 4
2 Sign convention: −’ve is pitch down
See also [AS1.6]
The center of pressure is defined as the point on the airfoil about which
the aero. moment is zero (i.e. point where resultant force vector acts)
→ For a symmetric airfoil, the center of pressure is at quarter-chord (4𝑐 ).

The aerodynamic center is defined as the point on the airfoil about

which the aero. moment is independent of 𝛼.
→ For a symmetric airfoil, the aerodynamic center is also at quarter-chord (4𝑐 ).

Therefore, for a symmetric airfoil, both the center of pressure and the
aerodynamic center are at quarter-chord (𝑐Τ4) from the LE.
L6 17
TAT: Aerodynamic moment (symmetric)

L6 18
 TAT: Aerodynamic moment (cambered)
For a cambered airfoil, the moment coefficients are [AE4.63−64]:
𝐶𝑙 𝜋 𝜋
𝐶𝑚,𝐿𝐸 = − + 𝐴1 − 𝐴2 𝐶𝑚,𝑐/4 = 𝐴2 − 𝐴1
4 4 4
Sign convention: −’ve is pitch down
𝐶𝑙
𝐶𝑚,𝐿𝐸 reduces to the symmetric result (𝐶𝑚,𝐿𝐸 = − ) when there is no camber
4
𝑑𝑧
= 0 because both 𝐴1 = 𝐴2 = 0 in [AE4.51].
𝑑𝑥

Unlike a symmetric airfoil, a cambered airfoil has a non-zero 𝐶𝑚,𝑐/4 , which

means that the center of pressure is NOT at quarter-chord. Instead it is at:
The center of pressure is not always a convenient point
around which to analyze an airfoil, because 𝑥𝑐𝑝 changes with
𝑐 𝜋
𝐶𝑙 and hence α. Indeed as 𝐶𝑙 → 0, 𝑥𝑐𝑝 → ∞, i.e. it leaves the 𝑥𝑐𝑝 = 1+ 𝐴1 − 𝐴2 [AE4.66]
airfoil! Instead, the force-and-moment system on an airfoil is 4 𝐶𝑙
more conveniently analyzed at the aerodynamic center.

Neither 𝐴1 nor 𝐴2 depends on 𝛼, so for a cambered airfoil, the

𝑐
aerodynamic center is at but the center of pressure is elsewhere. 19
4
 TAT: Aerodynamic moment (cambered)

L6 20
 TAT: Summary of key results
Symmetric Cambered
Lift coefficient 𝐶𝑙 = 𝜋 2𝐴0 + 𝐴1
= 2𝜋 𝛼 − 𝛼𝐿=0
Zero-lift angle of attack 1 𝜋 𝑑𝑧
𝛼𝐿=0 = 0 𝛼𝐿=0 = − න cos 𝜃 − 1 𝑑𝜃
𝜋 0 𝑑𝑥
TAT coefficients 1 𝜋 𝑑𝑧 2 𝜋 𝑑𝑧
𝐴0 = 𝛼 − න 𝑑𝜃 𝐴𝑛 = න cos 𝑛𝜃 𝑑𝜃
𝜋 0 𝑑𝑥 𝜋 0 𝑑𝑥
𝐴1 = 𝐴2 = 0 for symmetric
Moment coefficient 𝐶𝑙 𝐶𝑙 𝜋
about leading edge
𝐶𝑚,𝐿𝐸 =− 𝐶𝑚,𝐿𝐸 = − + 𝐴1 − 𝐴2
4 4 4
Moment coefficient 𝜋
about quarter chord
𝐶𝑚,𝑐/4 = 0 𝐶𝑚,𝑐/4 = 𝐴2 − 𝐴1
4
Location of center of 𝑐 𝑐 𝜋
𝑥𝑐𝑝 = 𝑥𝑐𝑝 = 1+ 𝐴 − 𝐴2
pressure (CP) 4 4 𝐶𝑙 1
Location of aerodynamic 𝑐
center (AC) 𝑥𝑎𝑐 = 21
4
 TAT: Summary of key assumptions
1) Thin airfoil → Use camber line (no upper or lower surface): OK if thickness <12%
2) Weak camber → Airfoil curvature is small
3) Small 𝛼 → Typically OK if 𝛼 < 10𝑜 : TAT cannot predict stall b/c inviscid analysis
4) 2D → Airfoil with ∞ span: No wingtip vortices
5) Constant density (incompressible) → OK if Mach # < 0.3
6) Weak viscous effects (no boundary layer but enforce Kutta condition) →
This is a subtle feature of inviscid theory. In TAT, which is inviscid, we do not account for
viscous effects directly (i.e. no BL). However, we account for them indirectly via the Kutta
condition, by imposing the exact amount of circulation necessary to cause the flow at the
TE to leave smoothly. In a real (viscous) flow, Nature enforces the Kutta condition using
viscous friction in the BL. In TAT, there is no inherent viscous mechanism in place to
enforce the Kutta condition (because there is no BL), so we must enforce it ourselves.
Incidentally, without a viscous BL, TAT fails to predict any drag (d’Alembert’s paradox).
[AS4.5.1] Why is it that inviscid theory (e.g. TAT) can predict lift accurately, but not drag?
It is because lift is produced mainly by the pressure distribution (i.e. by a force imbalance ⊥ to the free-
stream), which is governed by inviscid flow. By contrast, not much lift is produced by shear stresses (which
act parallel to the free-stream, in the drag direction). So although we neglect shear stresses in inviscid
theory, we don’t end up ruining our lift predictions. However, if we lived in a perfectly inviscid world, an
airfoil in that world would produce no lift at all. This is because circulation (and thus lift) arises from viscous
22
friction on the airfoil surface. In TAT, we model this viscous effect by manually imposing the Kutta condition.