An Introduction to Aspects of Transonic Wing

Design for Civil Transport Aircraft

Prof. Frank Ogilvie FRAeS.

20160208 Cranfield Transonic Wing Design 1

 Second world war experience of transonic effects

Towards the latter half of the second world war it become clear that many of the
Higher speed aircraft of the time were beginning to operate in the transonic
regime. Resulting in :
Control ineffectiveness and heaviness, buffet , Mach Number induced instability and
Aero-elastic effects, both static and dynamic such as control reversal and flutter
During the second world war major advances in the science of high speed flight were
made in Germany and at the end of the war this knowledge became available to
the Allies with a number the Germany scientists relocating to Allied countries.
Amongst those who relocated to the UK were Dietrich Küchmann and Johanna
Weber
A substantial programme of research followed, primarily in the case of military aircraft
spurred by the potential of Jet propulsion. In the UK a considerable body of
research took place which led to a plethora of experimental aircraft ranging from
those with straight wings, through swept wings, to delta wings
In the USA advances in swept wing technology were typified by the development in the
the Boeing B47 aircraft, which set the trend for the US transonic transport aircraft,
such as the Boeing 707 and the rest of the world until the present time.
20160208 Cranfield Transonic Wing Design 2
The Boeing B47 Strategic Bomber

20160208 Cranfield Transonic Wing Design 3

 Post War Civil Transport Development

Activity was concentrated on the further development of military transport

aircraft with reciprocating engines driving propellers.
Such as Lockheed, Douglas and Boeing civil transports , an examples of which
are shown on the next slide.

20160208 Cranfield Transonic Wing Design 4

The last of the Big Propliners: Lockheed L1049 Constellation
Cruise Mach Number 0. 465

20160208 Cranfield Transonic Wing Design 5

 Later Civil Developments

The development of reliable Turbo prop engines of significantly higher power

than their reciprocating predecessors produced transport aircraft faster ,
and much more reliable. The wings of these aircraft were truly transonic
in nature, having at cruise conditions, regions of both supersonic and
subsonic flow on the wing upper surfaces

20160208 Cranfield Transonic Wing Design 6

Last of the Big Prop-Liners – Lockheed Electra:
(Cruise Mach Number 0.613)

Delta Mach Number

due to Prop-wash =
0.15

Unswept Wing

20160208 Cranfield Transonic Wing Design 7

The Ultimate Big Prop-Liners – Tupolev Tu 114:
Cruise Mach Number 0.650

Delta Mach Number

Due to Prop-wash =
0.22

25 degree swept20160208
wing Cranfield Transonic Wing Design 8
The Start of the Transport Aircraft Jet Age –
De Havilland Comet 1
Cruise Mach Number 0.76

20 Degrees Quarter Chord sweep

20160208 Cranfield Transonic Wing Design 9

 The Boeing 707-120
Cruise Mach Number 0.78

35 Degrees Quarter Chord sweep

20160208 Cranfield Transonic Wing Design 10

 Typical Transport Aircraft Flight Envelope
Maximum Certificated
Altitude 1.3g to Buffet
Onset

MD 0.96
OWE VS1g
Primary Cruise
Design Point

MMO 0.89
0 0.1 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6

Minimum
Mach Number
operating altitude 20160208 Cranfield Transonic Wing Design 11
 Wing Sizing Aspects

The wing designer is required to deliver not only the best L/D max
at the primary cruise design point but must in addition ensure
acceptable lifting capability.
The lifting capability of a wing is dependant on the size of the wing
and the sectional characteristics of the aerofoil chosen, and in particular
the Buffet Onset Boundary. The buffet onset boundary may limit the
altitude at which the aircraft can operate, or alternatively the weight
of the aircraft if it is necessary to fly at particular altitude
At transonic speeds the Buffet Onset Boundary
is dependant on both Mach Number and Lift Coefficient and arises
when separated flow is sufficiently energetic to result in the onset of
significant vibration of the airframe
Other wing sizing criteria:-
Box volume ( Fuel Capacity)
Take off and Landing Field lengths

20160208 Cranfield Transonic Wing Design 12

Comparison of First and Second Generation Civil Transport
Wing Equivalent Section Pressure Distributions

-Cp -Cp

Mlocal=1

Mlocal=1

x/c x/c

Typical of NACA 64 Series Aerofoils.

Comet 1 Internal D H design for Trident based
Boeing 707 on work at RAE and NPL in late 1950s
Similar Boeing Internal designs early 1960’s
for 727, 737, and 747

20160208 Cranfield Transonic Wing Design 13

2nd Generation Jet. Hawker Siddeley Trident:
Cruise Mach Number 0.78 to 0.9

Quarter chord Sweep

35o

20160208 Cranfield Transonic Wing Design 14

The Boeing 747: The Earth Shrinker
Cruise mach Number 0.85 to 0.92

Quarter chord Sweep

40.5o

20160208 Cranfield Transonic Wing Design 15

 Development of Theoretical wing Design Methods 1

Prior to 1972, theoretical methods for application to wing design were limited to
subsonic flow only and /or supersonic flow only
For 2D aerofoil design both analytical and design codes were available in the UK
developed largely by the RAE.
For 3D wings analytical codes were available, the most widely used in the UK, being
the RAE Standard Method Subsonic Inviscid, (subsonic inviscid) developed by
Küchemann and Weber.
The general process for design of transonic wings was to establish, by wind tunnel
tests, the characteristics shapes of aerofoils which would lead to good
characteristics in the transonic range of operation, based on extensive research by
the RAE and the NPL in this area These shapes were then applied to 3D wings and
tuned using RAE Standard Method. The resulting shapes were then wind tunnel
tested and subjected to an iterative ” cut and fill” process to get the desired 3D
Characteristics.
In the UK all transonic aircraft up to, and including the A300 were designed using this
approach with considerable success.
20160208 Cranfield Transonic Wing Design 16
 Development of Theoretical wing Design Methods 2
In the late 1960s, Garabedian, Korn and Bauer produced the first analytical method
to deal with transonic flows, using transonic small perturbation, (TSP), theory. This
method is known universally as G&K, and later developed into VGK , incorporating
boundary layer modelling in the method. Prior to this, use was made of a stand
alone boundary layer method used to calculate a distribution of displacement
thickness based on an initial inviscid calculation of pressures, which was then
applied to the inviscid geometry prior to recalculating the pressure distributions.
Further refinement led to AVK and then BVK .
In the early 1970s Clive Albone of the RAE developed a TSP method for 3D Wings,
which when used with a frozen boundary layer displacement surface gave
aerodynamic designers the opportunity to analysis 3D wing shapes for the first
time in transonic conditions. The A310 wing was designed using this approach.
This method was subsequently modified by Colin Forsey of the Aircraft Research
Association to include nacelle and pylon modelling. TSP was replaced by Full
potential , used for the A330/A340 design, which has ultimately been replaced by
Euler and Navier –Stokes methods for complex configurations.

20160208 Cranfield Transonic Wing Design 17

Airbus A300-B1 First Twin Aisle Twin.
Cruise Mach Number 0.82

Quarter Chord Sweep 28o

20160208 Cranfield Transonic Wing Design 18

Comparison of Third and Forth Generation Civil
Transport Wings: Equivalent Section Pressure
Distributions
-Cp
-Cp -Cp

MM =1=1 Mlocal=1
local
local

Mlocal=1

HSA Section based on NPL and HSA section designed

RAE Research work using Transonic methods
A300 For the first time
20160208 Cranfield Transonic Wing Design A310 19
 Airbus A320
Cruise Mach Number 0.78

Quarter Chord Sweep 25o

20160208 Cranfield Transonic Wing Design 20

Comparison of Fifth and Sixth Generation Civil Transport Wings:
Equivalent Section Pressure Distributions

-Cp -Cp

Mlocal=1
Mlocal=1

BAC section featuring more forward HSA section with increased aft loading
loading and higher trailing edge angle and rear camber. Zero trailing edge
A320 angle
A330/A340
20160208 Cranfield Transonic Wing Design 21
 Airbus A340-300
Cruise Mach Number 0.82

20160208 Cranfield Transonic Wing Design 22

 Historical Trend of ML/D with Date of First Flight for
Civil Jet Transport Aircraft
ML/D trend with time

20

19

18

17

16

15
ML/D

14

13

12

11

10

8
1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
Date of First flight

20160208 Cranfield Transonic Wing Design 23

Typical Transonic Flow Development with CL on
the Critical Section of a Transport Aircraft Wing

20160208 Cranfield Transonic Wing Design 24

20160208 Cranfield Transonic Wing Design 25
2 Dimensional Aerofoil to 3D Dimensional Wing

20160208 Cranfield Transonic Wing Design 26

Characteristics of a Constant Chord Infinitely Swept Wing

20160208 Cranfield Transonic Wing Design 27

Characteristics of an Infinitely Swept Tapered Wing

20160208 Cranfield Transonic Wing Design 28

 Equivalent 2D section

-Cp -Cp

Cp* =- .680 Cp* =- 0.585

Cp* =- 0.697

x/c x/c

2D Aerofoil 3D Infinite Tapered Wing

at M=0.695 at M=0.78

20160208 Cranfield Transonic Wing Design 29

The Lock Transformation.

20160208 Cranfield Transonic Wing Design 30

 The Effect of Wing Taper Ratio on Sectional Loading.

Span-wise Local Lift

Load Coefficients
Distribution Distributions

20160208 Cranfield Transonic Wing Design 31

 Effects of Finite span and Fuselage effects on wing
Isobars
Note! In order to have similar flow across the
portion of the wing free from end effect the wing must
be twisted to allow for the increasing influence of the
trailing vortex system. This condition will not result in an
Elliptical loading , a high trailing vortex drag as a result

Isobars parallel with

Lines of constant t/c

De-sweeping of Isobars
De- sweeping Due to presence of fuselage side
and forward
movement of
Isobars at the
tip
20160208 Cranfield Transonic Wing Design 32
Diagrammatic Representation of Isobar Pattern on a Finite Span
Swept Tapered Wing without Root and Tip Treatment at a Sub-
critical Mach Number

20160208 Cranfield Transonic Wing Design 33

 Diagrammatic Representation of Isobar Pattern on a finite span
swept tapered wing without root and Tip Treatment at a
Transonic Mach Number

Forward sweeping shockwave

Becoming week near the tip due
To reduced loading towards the tip

Very strong unswept

shock wave into fuselage side, with potential
The shock wave in the mid span region of for BL separation in this region
the wing tends to have less than geometric
sweep with the inner wing having a dominant effect
20160208 Cranfield Transonic Wing Design 34
Examples of Varying Aerofoil Shape and Twist along
the Span of Typical Transport Aircraft wings

Airbus A380

HS121 Trident

20160208 Cranfield Transonic Wing Design 35

 Diagrammatic Representation of the Shock Wave Pattern on a
Finite Span Swept Tapered Wing with Root and Tip Treatment
and Revised 1 g twist at a Transonic Mach Number
Highly swept strong forward shock
with weak aft shock. Reduced aft pressure pressure gradients.

Note ! Crank region is a major

aerodynamic design challenge

Mid wing shock sweep close

to geometric sweep, with revised twist

Planform crank added to increase physical thickness

Revised wing section towards the tip with of root section. Rear Camber reduced , root incidence
maximun thickness of the section moved aft , increased and maximum thickness moved forward.
camber reduced and slight increase in tip region Planform Crank is known in the US as a “Yehudi”.
twist 20160208 Cranfield Transonic Wing Design 36
 Wing Root Treatment on the Boeing 707 -320C

Highly cambered leading edge

at root coupled with realtively
flat trailing edge line indicating low
wing root incidence.

20160208 Cranfield Transonic Wing Design 37

An Example of 3-Dimensional Lofting of a Transonic Wing and
Wing Root Treatment the A-380

20160208 Cranfield Transonic Wing Design 38

Root Treatment on Bombardier Global Express

20160208 Cranfield Transonic Wing Design 39

 The Real Thing
Multi-block Euler flow calculation for the fully developed
high speed 1g cruise shape for the A330 at its primary design point

20160208 Cranfield Transonic Wing Design 40

Visualisation of Shock Waves on A380 in Flight
Weak unswept aft shock wave
on inner wing Shock wave image on
Inner wing and fuselage side

20160208 Cranfield Transonic Wing Design 41

Airbus A340-600 showing Wing Flexibility

20160208 Cranfield Transonic Wing Design 42

 Thank You

20160208 Cranfield Transonic Wing Design 43