Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
where
Very high aspect ratio wing of the Glaser-Dirks DG-808 glider (AR=27.4)
is the aircraft drag coefficient is the aircraft zero-lift drag coefficient, is the aircraft lift coefficient, is the circumference-to-diameter ratio of a circle, is the Oswald efficiency number is the aspect ratio.
There are several reasons why not all aircraft have high aspect wings: Structural: A long wing has higher bending stress for a given load than a short one and therefore requires higher structural-design (architectural and/or material) specifications. Also, longer wings have greater deflection for a given load, and in some applications this deflection is undesirable (e.g. if the deflected wing interferes with aileron movement). Maneuverability: a high aspect-ratio wing will have a lower roll rate than one of low aspect ratio, because in a high-aspect-ratio wing, an equal amount of wing movement due to aileron deflection (at the aileron) will result in less rolling action on the fuselage due to the greater length between the aileron and the fuselage. A higher aspect ratio wing will also have a higher moment of inertia to overcome. Due to the lower roll rates, high aspect ratio wings are usually not used on fighter aircraft. Parasitic drag: While high aspect wings create less induced drag, they have greater parasitic drag, (drag due to shape, frontal area, and surface friction). This is because, for an equal wing area, the average chord (length in the direction of wind travel over the wing) is smaller. Due to the effects of Reynolds number, the value of the section drag coefficient is an inverse logarithmic function of the characteristic length of the surface, which means that,
Aspect ratio (wing) even if two wings of the same area are flying at equal speeds and equal angles of attack, the section drag coefficient is slightly higher on the wing with the smaller chord. However, this variation is very small when compared to the variation in induced drag with changing wingspan. For example,[8] the section drag coefficient of a NACA 23012 airfoil (at typical lift coefficients) is inversely proportional to chord length to the power 0.129: A 20 percent increase in chord length would decrease the section drag coefficient by 2.38 percent. Practicality: low aspect ratios have a greater useful internal volume, since the maximum thickness is greater, which can be used to house the fuel tanks, retractable landing gear and other systems. Airfield Size: Airfields, hangars and other ground equipment define a maximum wingspan, which cannot be exceeded, and to generate enough lift at the given wingspan, the aircraft designer has to lower the aspect-ratio and increase the total wing area.
Notes
[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] Kermode, A.C. (1972), Mechanics of Flight, Chapter 3, (p.103, eighth edition), Pitman Publishing Limited, London ISBN 0-273-31623-0 Anderson, John D. Jr, Introduction to Flight, Equation 5.26 Clancy, L.J., Aerodynamics, sub-section 5.13(f) Clancy, L.J., Aerodynamics, section 5.15 Anderson, John D. Jr, Introduction to Flight, section 5.14 Clancy, L.J., Aerodynamics, sub-equation 5.8 Anderson, John D. Jr, Fundamentals of Aerodynamics, Equation 5.63 (4th edition) Dommasch, D.O., Sherby, S.S., and Connolly, T.F. (1961), Airplane Aerodynamics, page 128, Pitman Publishing Corp. New York
References
Anderson, John D. Jr, Introduction to Flight, 5th edition, McGraw-Hill. New York, NY. ISBN 0-07-282569-3 Anderson, John D. Jr, Fundamentals of Aerodynamics, Section 5.3 (4th edition), McGraw-Hill. New York, NY. ISBN 0-07-295046-3 Clancy, L.J. (1975), Aerodynamics, Pitman Publishing Limited, London ISBN 0-273-01120-0 John P. Fielding. Introduction to Aircraft Design, Cambridge University Press, ISBN 978-0-521-65722-8 Daniel P. Raymer (1989). Aircraft Design: A Conceptual Approach, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc., Washington, DC. ISBN 0-930403-51-7
License
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported //creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/