LIFTING LINE THEORY (LLT)

TUTORIAL & EXAMPLE

Prepared by Juan Pablo Alvarado P.

This document presents a step-by-step methodology for the application of the Lifting Line Theory
(LLT) to subsonic straight wings. This material is a complementary material to the aerodynamics
lecture.

LLT assumes that even though the flow around an aircraft’s wing is 3-D, it may be satisfactorily
approximated by a linear summation of flows around the elemental aerofoils, which makes up the
overall wing, where the flow around each aerofoil is assumed to be 2-D. This approach gives a
reasonable result provided that the model flow considers the effect of the vortex sheet, which is shed
at the trailing edge of the wing. The trailing vortex sheet induces a downwash velocity, which varies
along the span wise direction.

The wing is assumed to be a flat plate lying on the x-y plane. Therefore, the theory does not consider
the wing’s thickness distribution. It is also unable to handle any dihedral or sweepback angle.
However, it can model a tapered wing with geometrical and aerodynamic twists (c/4 = 0 [deg]).

For the analysis of a wing with LLT the following wing information is need it:

Wing geometry:
• Wing span (bw)
• Wing taper ratio (w)
• Wing reference area (Sw)
• Wing twist angle (tip)
• Wing geometric angle of attack (geo)

Aerofoil aerodynamic characteristics:

• Aerofoil reference – name or reference of the tip and root aerofoils
• Lift slope (a0) [1/rad] – tip and root aerofoils
• Angle of attack for L = 0 (L=0) [deg]
• Profile drag (Cd_0)

Flying (airflow) characteristics:

• Air density (∞)
• Air speed (V∞)
• Air dynamic viscosity (∞)

The LLT procedure is described in the following steps:

Identify the wing geometry to be analysed

Calculate the wing aspect ratio
bw2
AR =
S

Calculate the wing average chord

= croot (1 + w ) = ctip (1 + w )
S 1 1
cav =
bw 2 2 w

Calculate the root aerofoil chord distance

2S
c root =
bw (1 +  w )

Calculate the tip aerofoil chord distance

ctip =  w  c root

Calculate the root to tip leading edge height difference (geometrical twist)
 htip
sin  tip =
ctip

Calculate the wing mean aerodynamic chord

2
c = croot
(
1 + w + 2w )
3 (1 + w )
Calculate the location of the mean aerodynamic chord
bw  (1 + 2 w )
Y =  
6  (1 + w ) 

Calculate the Reynolds number

 V c
Re =


With the previous information, the computational procedure can begin:

Divide the wing into a define number of spanwise stations. Here k + 1 stations are shown,
with n designating any specific station
For k = 1, 2, 3, .., N points, calculate the following: The N points along the span are chosen
so that they are equally spaced. In other words, the wing span is divided up into N equal
intervals, and the midpoint of each interval is chosen to be a control point. The port (left)
wing tip is located at y = -bw /2 whereas the starboard (right) wing tip is located at y = bw /2.

The coordinates of the control points are then given as follows, for each value of k, from 1 to
N, we have:

bw  2k − 1 
y(k ) = − 1 − 
2  2N 

Transforming the points:

 2 y (k ) 
 (k ) = cos −1  − 
 bw 

The chord length at y is then given by the following equation:

  −1 
c(k ) = c root  1 − 2 y(k )
 bw 

The specification for aerodynamic twist is quite complicated, since it requires knowledge of the shape
of the aerofoil section at each station y along the span. In the absence of such information, this
problem can simplify the problem somewhat by requiring that the tip aerofoil differs only slightly
from the root aerofoil such that the lift coefficient and zero angle of attack at y are given by the
following linear relationships

a0 _ tip − a0 _ root
a0 (k ) = a0 _ root − 2 y (k )
bw
 L =0 _ tip −  L =0 _ root
 L =0 (k ) =  L =0 _ root − 2 y(k )
bw

The geometric angle of attack (geo) may vary as a function of y if the wing is given a geometric twist.
A wing without twist is one where the geo is constant for all values of y, such that the leading edge
and the trailing edge of the wing are straight lines, which lie on the same horizontal plane when geo
= 0.

A wing may be given a wash-out, where the wing is twisted such that the leading edge of the wing
tip aerofoil is now lower than the leading edge of the root aerofoil (the root aerofoil is the aerofoil
located at the plane of symmetry if it is imagined that the fuselage is not there and the two halves of
the wing meet at the plane of symmetry). A wing with wash-in is one where the leading edge of the
tip aerofoil is now higher than the leading edge of the root aerofoil, whereas the trailing edge of the
wing remains on the horizontal plane. It follows, therefore, that the chord of the aerofoil at y may
have negative or positive geometric angle of attack values when geo = 0 at the wing root, depending
on whether the wing has a wash-out or a wash-in.
Let the height difference between the leading edge of the wing tip aerofoil from the leading edge of
the root aerofoil is htip, which is negative for wash-out and positive for wash-in.

It should be noted that the leading edge of the wing is required to remain as a straight line. Therefore,
the twist angle or the geometric angle of attack at y relative to the geometric angle of attack at the
wing root can be calculated as follows:

 2 y(k ) 
 (k ) = sin −1  −  htip ; htip = ctip sin  tip
 bw  c(k ) 

Let´s apply now LLT to find the solution in the form of span wise wing load or lift per unit span length
distribution, the overall wing’s lift coefficient (CL_w) and the induced drag coefficient of the wing
(CDi_w). From the Kutta-Joukowski Lift Theorem it is known that lift is directly proportional to
circulation or vortex strength. Therefore, the theory must be capable of predicting the span-wise
bound vortex strength per unit length distribution. The unknown vortex strength distribution, (y), is
approximated by a Fourier series:

N
( ) = 2bwV  An sin( n )
n =1

The basic problem is how to calculate the unknown Fourier series coefficients or amplitudes, An. The
approximation using a Fourier series becomes more accurate as the number of terms, N, increases.
The lifting line equation that needs to be solved is:

4bw N N
sin (n ( y ))
 A sin (n ( y )) +  nAn =  geo ( y ) −  L =0 ( y )
a( y )c( y ) n =1 sin ( ( y ))
n
n =1

Rearranging the equation:

N  4bw  
  a( y )c( y ) + sin ( ( y ))  sin (n ( y )) A ==  geo ( y ) −  L =0 ( y )
n
n
n =1   
Defining quantities:

 4bw  
C ( y, n ) =   sin (n ( y ))
n
+
 a( y )c( y ) sin ( ( y ))  

A(n ) = An

D( y ) =  geo ( y ) −  L =0 ( y )

With this the lifting line equation can be written as:

 C ( y, n)A(n) = D( y )
n =1

This equation contains N unknowns, namely A(n) for n = 1 to N. It is therefore necessary to apply the
last equation at N different control points or values of distance along the span, y, so that we have a
system of equations that can be solved simultaneously to calculate the values of A(n). The points
chosen should not include the wing tips, since regardless of the values of the Fourier coefficients, the
vortex strength distribution (( )) is always satisfied at those points. Selecting those 2 points will
not provide any new information regarding the values of the Fourier amplitudes. It is also
recommended that the midpoint (y = 0) should also not be selected as a control point, for similar
reasons. To get the most accurate result for a given number of control points, the following method
for selecting the control points is recommended. Firstly, N should be chosen to be an even integer,
such that for example N = 2M, say.

The N points along the span are chosen so that they are equally spaced. In other words, the span is
divided up into N equal intervals, and the midpoint of each interval is chosen to be a control point.
The port (left) wing tip is located at y = -bw /2 whereas the starboard (right) wing tip is located at y =
bw /2.

The equation of ( ) can be rewritten in a way, which separates the even terms from the odd terms
as follows:
 N
N N

( ) =  An sin (n ) = 2bwV  An sin ((2n − 1) ) +  An sin (2n )
n =1  n =1 n =1 

Therefore, if the load distribution is symmetrical then the last equation is simplified to:

N
N 
( ) =  A2 n −1 sin ((2n − 1) ) = 2bwV  An (2n − 1)sin ((2n − 1) )
n =1  n =1 

Keep in mind that is always assumed that the load distribution is symmetrical.

The lifting line equation, which is a system of equations, that must be solved to calculate the Fourier
sine coefficients, can now be written as follows

 C (k ,2n − 1)A (2n − 1) = D(k )

n =1
n

where the values of y are given by equation of y(k) and

 2k − 1 
 k =  (k ) =  ( y k ) = cos −1  1 − 
 2N 

 4bw 2n − 1 
C (k ,2n − 1) = C ( k ,2n − 1) =  +  sin ((2n − 1) k )
 a(k )c(k ) sin ( k ) 

D(k ) =  geo (k ) −  L =0 (k ) =  geo ( y k ) −  L =0 ( y k )

It should be noted that c(k) is the aerofoil’s chord length at the station y(k), or  (k ), whereas geo and
L = 0 (k) are the geometric and zero lift angle of attacks at y(k). The geometric angle of attack may
vary as a function of y if the wing is given a geometric twist. A wing without twist is one where the
geometric angle of attack is constant for all values of y, such that the leading edge and the trailing
edge of the wing are straight lines, which lie on the same horizontal plane when geo = 0.

A wing may be given a wash-out, where the wing is twisted such that the leading edge of the wing
tip aerofoil is now lower than the leading edge of the root aerofoil (the root aerofoil is the aerofoil
located at the plane of symmetry if it is imagined that the fuselage is not there and the two halves of
the wing meet at the plane of symmetry).

A wing with wash-in is one where the leading edge of the tip aerofoil is now higher than the leading
edge of the root aerofoil, whereas the trailing edge of the wing remains on the horizontal plane. It
follows, therefore, that the chord of the aerofoil at y may have negative or positive geometric angle
of attack values when geo = 0 at the wing root, depending on whether the wing has a wash-out or a
wash-in.

The height difference between the leading edge of the wing tip aerofoil from the leading edge of the
root aerofoil is htip, which is negative for wash-out and positive for wash-in. It should be noted that
the leading edge of the wing is required to remain as a straight line. Therefore, the twist angle or the
geometric angle of attack at y relative to the geometric angle of attack at the wing root can be
calculated as follows

 = sin −1  − 2 y(k )  htip  = sin −1   1 − 2k − 1  tip

 htip     h 
 (k ) = sin −1    b  c(k )  


 ctip   w   N  ctip 

The angle of attack of the wing or the aircraft be denoted by the angle of attack at the wing root, and
is given the symbol of geo. This angle obviously can be varied and represents the attitude of the
aircraft (when the aircraft is at a level cruising flight this angle may have a small positive value of not
more than 3 degrees). Using this definition, it can now calculate the geometric angle of attack at y as
follows

 geo (k ) =  geo +  (k )

Equation of D(k) can now be rewritten as follows:

D(k ) =  geo −  L =0 (k ) +  (k )

A wing may be given an aerodynamic twist as well as a geometric twist. This means that the aerofoil
shape at the wing root is different from that at the wing tip. The shape of the aerofoil in between the
two limiting stations is then determined by insisting that the wing cross-section should have a
smoothly varying shape along the span wise direction. Since the aerofoil shape at the wing tip is
different from that at the root, therefore the value of the sectional lift coefficient as well as its zero-
lift angle of attack may also vary along the span wise direction. Provided the variation of a0 (y) and
L = 0 (y) are given, equation of C (k, 2n-1) can still be used to compute the matrix coefficients, thus
the lifting line theory can handle such a problem.

The theory can also handle the problem involving a variation in the chord length of the sections as a
function of y, if the functional form of c(y) is given. This means that the theory is also applicable for
analysing tapered wing shape, so long as the quarter chord line is normal or almost normal to the
aircraft’s longitudinal axis. Obviously, the theory is not valid for a highly swept wing. For swept
wings, a more elaborated methodology like Vortex Lattice Method (VLM) should be used.

For each value of n = 1, 2, 3, …, N calculate the matrix coefficients:

 4bw 2n − 1  
C (k , n ) =  +  sin ((2n − 1) (k ))
 a0 (k )c ( y ) sin ( (k ))  

Next step in the LLT methodology is to solve the following system of simultaneous equations:

 C (k , n)A(n) = D(k ) , for k = 1, 2, 3, …, N

n =1

A simple direct method for computing the solutions of A(n), is the Gaussian Elimination Method.
Other methods, such as the Jacobi or Gauss-Seidel iterative methods may also be used.
After the Fourier coefficients, A(n), have been calculated it can now be compute the non-dimensional
wing load distribution as follows:

( y ) N
ND (k ) = =  A(n )sin ((2n − 1) )
2bwV 1

 2y 
 (k ) = cos −1  − 
 bw 

The wing´s lift coefficient can be calculated now:

C L =   AR  A(1)

The Oswald efficiency factor, e, is

 A(n ) 
2
N
e = (1 +  ) , where:  =  n
−1

n = 2  A(1) 

The induced drag coefficient CDi is obtained by:

C L2 1
C Di = = k  C L2 , where: k =
  e  AR   e  AR
Example:

For the acrobatic monoplane Extra EA-300, calculate (1) the aerodynamic characteristics of flight to
see if the actual geometry can counteract the Maximum Take-Off Weight (MTOW) for a normal cruise
condition with a wing incidence angle of 2 [deg]; and (2) find the distributed aerodynamic load (Lift
force) over the wing. An airplane 3-view picture is shown:

Specifications:

• MTOW = 950 [kg]

• Wing span (bw) = 8.0 [m]
• Taper ratio (w) = 0.45
• Wing reference area (Sw) = 10.7 [m2]
• Aerofoil information:
o Root – NACA 0015
o Tip – NACA 0012

Performance:

• Vcruise = 317.0 [km/h]

• Vstall = 102.0 [km/h]
• VNE = 408.0 [km/h]
Solution:

First, the geometric characteristics of the wing must be determined in order to begin with the LLT
methodology.

The Aspect Ratio of the wing is:

bw2 8.0 2
AR = = = 5.98
S 10.7

The average wing chord:

= 1.34m
S 10.7
c av = =
bw 8.0

Chord length at the root:

2S 2  (1.34 )
= 1.84m
2cav
croot = = =
bw (1 + w ) (1 +  ) (1 + 0.45 )

Chord length at the tip:

ctip =  w c root = 0.45  1.84 = 0.83m

Mean aerodynamic chord:

(1 + w + 2w ) (
 1 + 0.45 + 0.45 2  )
= (1.84 )  = 1.40m
2 2
c= croot
3 (1 + w ) 3  (1 + 0.45 ) 

Mean aerodynamic chord distance:

bw  (1 + 2w ) 8.0  (1 + 2(0.45))

Y =  = = 1.75m
6  (1 + w )  6  (1 + 0.45) 

Assuming sea-level conditions (∞ = 1.225 [kg/m3]; ∞ = 1.789 x 10-5 [kg/(m sec)]), and cruise flight
conditions, then:

 1000 
1.225   317    1.40
 V c  3600 
Re = = = 8451241
 1.789  10 −5

With this Reynolds number, the aerofoil characteristics can be obtained. The characteristic curves of
the two wing aerofoils aerodynamic characteristics are presented in the following graphs:
cl vs.  [deg] and cd vs.  [deg]

cl
cd

1,6 0,014

1,4

1,2 0,012

CL NACA 0015
1,0 CL NACA 0012
CD NACA 0015
0,8 0,010
CD NACA 0012

0,6

0,4 0,008

0,2

0,0 0,006

-0,2

-0,4 0,004

-0,6

-0,8 0,002

-1,0

-1,2 0,000
-12 -9 -6 -3 0 3 6 9 12 15
 [deg]
cm_a.c. vs.  [deg]

cm_a.c.

0,004

cm NACA 0015
0,003
cm NACA 0012
0,002

0,001

0,000

-0,001

-0,002
-12 -9 -6 -3 0 3 6 9 12 15
[deg]

cl vs. cd

cd

0,014

0,012 cl/cd NACA 0015

0,010 cl/cd NACA 0012

0,008

0,006

0,004

0,002

0,000
-1,5 -1,0 -0,5 0,0 0,5 1,0 1,5 2,0
cl
(cl /cd) vs.  [deg]

cl/cd

160

120

80

40

-40
(cl/cd)-alpha NACA 0015
-80

-120 (cl/cd)-alpha NACA 0012

-160
-12 -8 -4 0 4 8 12 16
[deg]

This curves were obtain through a software that uses Vortex Panel Method to give the characteristics
of cl, cd and cm_a.c. at different angles of attack [deg] for the two aerofoils used in this wing. These
curves were analysed at a Reynolds number of 8x106. From the curves, the following information is
obtained:

Wing position Aerofoil a0 [1/rad] L=0 [deg]

Root NACA 0015 6,436 0
Tip NACA 0012 6,363 0

As this wing has aerodynamic twist it can be assume that there is no need for a geometrical twist,
therefore tip = 0.

htip
sin  tip =  htip = ctip sin  tip
ctip
If no geometrical twist (tip = 0) is need it for the wing, then the length htip = 0.

First, the wing is divided into two symmetrical sections, the left wing (port side) and the right wing
(starboard side):

Then we can stablish an amount of control points (k) that will be calculated for the wing, In this case
we are going to put eight control points, which means that it is going to be four per half-wing.
Stablishing the above, the y-stations on the wing span (half in this case) can be found as follows:

bw  2k − 1 
y(k ) = − 1 − 
2  2N 

Results are shown in the following table:

k y(k) [m]
1 -3.5
2 -2.5
3 -1.5
4 -0.5

The local chord length values at each station (control point) are found by:

  −1 
c(k ) = c root  1 − 2 y(k )
 bw 

Results are shown in the following table:

k c(k) [m]
1 0.957
2 1.211
3 1.464
4 1.718

Next, the twist angle distribution is calculated using the relations:

 2 y(k ) 
 (k ) = sin −1  −  htip ; htip = ctip sin  tip
 bw  c(k ) 

In this airplane the wing has an aerodynamical twist instead of a geometric one, therefor the results
are:

k  (k) [deg]
1 0
2 0
3 0
4 0

The variation of the lift slope along the wing will vary because the root and tip aerofoils have different
references. This also happens with the zero lift angle of attack for the different points of control. The
variations are calculated using:
 a0 _ tip − a0 _ root
a0 (k ) = a0 _ root − 2 y (k )
bw
 L =0 _ tip −  L =0 _ root
 L =0 (k ) =  L =0 _ root − 2 y(k )
bw

The results are shown in the following table:

k a0(k)  L=0(k)
1 6.372 0
2 6.390 0
3 6.408 0
4 6.427 0

Note that for this wing, as booth aerofoils are symmetrical the zero lift angle of attack is equal to zero
for both cases, therefor the variation will also have this same value along the span.

Now, let’s calculate the transformation  (k) using:

 2y 
 (k ) = cos −1  − 
 bw 

Results of this relation are shown as follows,

k  (k) [deg]
1 28.955
2 51.318
3 67.976
4 82.819

With these values now the D(k) variation can be calculated:

D(k ) =  geo −  L =0 (k ) +  (k )

Results for this equation are:

k D(k) [rad]
1 0.035
2 0.035
3 0.035
4 0.035

Next, we want to create the 4x4 sized matrix coefficients with the following formula:
  4bw 2n − 1  
C (k , n ) =  +  sin ((2n − 1) (k ))
 a0 (k )c (k ) sin ( (k ))  

Where k = n = 4, this is because we are taking advantage of the symmetry of the wing loading
distribution we have N = 4 and we can use n = 1, 2, 3 and 4 (port wing only) or n = 5, 6, 7 and 8
(starboard wing only). If port wing control points only are chosen, then we can calculate the variation
for each point. For this example, we present only 4 points as reference:

For k = 1 and n =1
 4(8.0 ) 2(1) − 1  
C (1,1) =  +  sin ((2(1) − 1) (1))
 a0 (1)c (1) sin ( (1))  

 4(8.0 ) 2(1) − 1  
C (1,1) =  +  sin ((2(1) − 1)(28.955))
 (6.372)(0.957 ) sin (28.955)  

C (1,1) = 3.541

For k = 2 and n =1
 4(8.0 ) 2(1) − 1  
C (2,1) =  +  sin ((2(1) − 1) (2 ))
 a0 (2 )c (2 ) sin ( (2 ))  

 4(8.0 ) 2(1) − 1  
C (2,1) =  +  sin ((2(1) − 1)(51.318 ))
 (6.39 )(1.211) sin (51.318 )  

C (2,1) = 4.229

For k = 1 and n =2
 4(8.0 ) 2(2 ) − 1  
C (1,2 ) =  +  sin ((2(2 ) − 1) (1))
 a0 (1)c (1) sin ( (1))  

 4(8.0 ) 2(2 ) − 1  
C (1,2 ) =  +  sin ((2(2 ) − 1)(28.955))
 (6.372)(0.957 ) sin (28.955)  

C (1,1) = 11.428

For k = 2 and n =2
 4(8.0 ) 2(2 ) − 1  
C (2,2 ) =  +  sin ((2(2 ) − 1) (2 ))
 a0 (2 )c (1) sin ( (2 ))  
  4(8.0 ) 2(2 ) − 1  
C (2,2 ) =  +  sin ((2(2 ) − 1)(51.318 ))
 (6.39 )(1.211) sin (51.318 )  

C (2,2 ) = 3.504

Results for this equation are given in the following matrix:

3.541 11.428 8.984 − 7 .6

4.229 3.504 − 10.254 − 0.177
C (k = 4, n = 4 ) =
4.161 − 2.696 − 3.029 9.866
3.876 − 5.508 6.43 − 6.363

Next step in the LLT methodology is to solve the following system of simultaneous equations:

 C (k , n)A(n) = D(k ) , for k = 1, 2, 3, …, N

n =1

For this case the equation system gives:

 C (1,1) C (1,2 ) C (1,3 ) C (1,4 )   A(1)   D(1) 

     
N
 C (2,1) C (2,2 ) C (2,3 ) C (2,4 )  A(2 )  D(2 )
 C (k , n )A(n ) = D(k )    =
C (3,1) C (3,2 ) C (3,3 ) C (3,4 )  A(3 )  D(3 )
n =1
     
 C (4,1) C (4,2 ) C (4,3 ) C (4,4 )  A(4 )  D(4 )


 3.541 11.428 8.984 − 7.6   A(1)   0.035 

     
N
 4.229 3.504 − 10.254 − 0.177   A(2 )  0.035 
 C (k , n )A(n ) = D(k )    =
4.161 − 2.696 − 3.029 9.866   A(3 )  0.035 
n =1
     
 3.876 − 5.508 −   A(4 )  0.035 
 6 . 43 6 . 363     

This equation system can be solve by the Gaussian Elimination Method. Other methods, such as the
Jacobi or Gauss-Seidel iterative methods may also be used.

The solution of an equation system (matrices) by the Gaussian Elimination is:

C (k , n )A(n ) = D(k )  A(n ) = C (k , n )  D(k )

−1

Meaning that the inverse of the matrix C(k,n) must be find first, in order to solve the system, this is
done in this case by the Gauss-Jordan method:
  3.541 11.428 8.984 − 7 .6 1 0 0 0
 
 4.229 3.504 − 10.254 − 0.177 0 1 0 0
C (k , n )−1 =
4.161 − 2.696 − 3.029 9.866 0 0 1 0
 
 3.876 − 5.508 6.43 − 6.363 0 0 0 1 


1 0 0 0 0.038 0.057 0.076 

0.079
 
0 1 0 0 0.055 0.009 0.002 − 0.063 
C (k , n )−1 =
0 0 1 0 0.034 − 0.070 0.032 0.011 
 
0 0 0 1 0.010 − 0.043 0.079 − 0.046 


With the matrix inverse result, the system can be solve for A(n) by multiplying [C(k,n)]-1 by D(k):

 A(1)   0.038 0.057 0.079 0.076   0.035 

     
 A(2 )  0.055 0.009 0.002 − 0.063   0.035 
A(n ) = C (k , n )  D(k ) = 
−1
= 
A(3 )  0.034 − 0.070 0.032 0.011   0.035 
     
 A(4 )  0.010 − 0.043 0.079 − 0.046   0.035 
  

 A(1)   0.008734 
   
 A(2 )  0.000133 
 A(3 ) =  0.000244 
   
 A(4 )  − 0.000034 
   

With these results, the wing lift coefficient can now be found by the relation:

C L _ w =   AR  A(1) =   (5.98 )  (0.008734) = 0.164

The total lift force exerted by the wing is:

 V2 S w C L _ w = (1.225)(88.056 )2 (10.7 )(0.164 ) = 8340.38N 

1 1
Lw = q  S w C L _ w =
2 2

Lw = 8340.38N  = 850.192kg 

Analysing this result and comparing it with the opposing force (airplane´s MTOW) the geometric
angle of attack of two degrees it´s not enough to lift-off the airplane from the ground; Lw < MTOW.

It means that for a geometric angle of attack (incidence angle) of two degrees the airplane still needs
more lift force to counteract the MTOW. Some considerations must be considered to assure the wing
with its geometric and aerodynamic characteristics can achieve enough lift force, then a study of
different incidence angles must be made to study the possibilities of wing attitude with respect to the
horizontal plane of the aircraft.
The following figure illustrates the differences between the geometric (incidence) angle of attack, the
effective angle of attack and the induced angle of attack:

Examining the profile drag curves of both aerofoils, it is decided that the total profile drag coefficient
for the wing is cd_0 = 0.0054 for a geometric angle of two degrees.

Now, let´s calculate the total wing drag force at the established conditions:

The Oswald efficiency planform factor is crucial for the calculation of the wing induced drag at the
flight conditions given. The equation to find it is:

 A(n ) 
2
N
e = (1 +  ) , where:  =  n
−1

n = 2  A(1) 

The delta coefficient depends on the Fourier series coefficients, which were calculated previously.

 A(n ) 
2
 − 0.000034 
2 2 2
N
 0.000133   0.000244 
 =  n  = 2    + 3  + 4   = 0.002876
n = 2  A(1)   0.008734   0.008734   0.008734 

e = (1 +  ) = (1 + 0.002876 )
−1 −1
= 0.9971

As the result shows a high value, it is recommended to check it with some other methodology that
predicts the wing efficiency.

The induced drag coefficient CDi is obtained by:

C L2 1 1
C Di = = k  C L2 , where: k = = = 0.0534
  e  AR   e  AR  (0.9971)(5.98 )

C L2
C Di = = k  C L2 = (0.0534)(0.164 ) = 0.00144
2

  e  AR

The total wing drag coefficient will be:

C L2
C D _ w = cd _ prof + C Di = cd _ prof + = 0.00684
  e  AR
So, for this flight condition the total wing drag will be equal to:

 V2 S w C D _ w = (1.225)(88.056 )2 (10.7 )0.00684 = 347.466N 

1 1
Dw = q  S w C D _ w =
2 2

Dw = 347.466N  = 35.42kg 

Analysing the wing load distribution:

The main idea with this analysis is to establish how the lift load distribution over the wing is going to
be. For this it is expected to obtain a distribution that describe an elliptical shape to make it as
aerodynamically efficient as possible. First define the stations in which you want to study the local
lift load, for this help yourself with already y stations already stablished. In this case we are analysing
half span beginning at the root of the wing:

Station y(k) Points of control + ctip and croot – y Location [m]

y(0) = bw /2 0 4.0
y(1) 1 3.5
y(2) 2 2.5
y(3) 3 1.5
y(4) 4 0.5
y(5) 5 0
Recalling the transformation  (k) using:

 2y 
 (k ) = cos −1  − 
 bw 

This time the results include the values at the root and the tip of the wing,

Points of control + ctip and croot – y y [m]  (y) [deg]

0  
1 3.5 28.955
2 2.5 51.318
3 1.5 67.976
4 0.5 82.819
5 0 90.0

Keeping in mind that the load distribution is symmetrical then circulation on each station over the
wing can be calculated by the equation:

( y ) = ( ( y )) = 2bwV A(1)sin  ( y ) + ( A(2 ))sin (3   ( y ))

Results are presented in the following table:

Points of control + ctip and croot – y y [m]  (y) [m2/sec]

0  
1 3.5 5.958
2 2.5 9.606
3 1.5 11.408
4 0.5 12.209
5 0 12.306

Non-dimensionlazing the circulation it is obtained (0 – circulation at the root of the wing):

( y )
ND =
0

Points of control + ctip and croot – y y [m] ND

0  
1 3.5 0.484
2 2.5 0.781
3 1.5 0.927
4 0.5 0.992
5 0 1.0
Now, let´s compute the wing lift coefficient and the force in each station of the half-span. The local
wing lift coefficient and the correspondent force both can be calculated by the equations:

2( y ) CL _ w ( y)  2 ( y ) 
CL _ w ( y) =
1
 =  
V c( y ) CL _ w CL _ w  V c( y ) 

CL _ w (y)
L( y ) =  V2 c ( y )
1
2 CL _ w

Points of control + ctip and croot – y y [m] y/(bw /2) CL_w (y)/CL_w L(y) [N]
0    
1 3.5 0.875 0.862 3915.515
2 2.5 0.625 1.098 6313.475
3 1.5 0.375 1.078 7497.437
4 0.5 0.125 0.983 8024.157
5 0 0 0.923 8087.584

Using this information, the normalized local lift coefficient and the local circulation are plotted as
shown in the following graph:

CL_w(y)/CL_w
ND
1,2 1,2

1 1,0

0,8 0,8

0,6 Normalized Local Lift 0,6

Coefficient
Normalized
0,4 Circulation 0,4

0,2 0,2

0 0,0
0,0 0,2 0,4 0,6 0,8 1,0
y/(bw/2)
In addition, the lift distribution is plotted along the half wingspan in order to get the values of the
distributed load over the wing:

As stablished before, the net lift produced by this wing is not enough to counteract the MTOW, a
further study should be done to assure proper values of the wing incidence angle of attack.

Using the LLT mathematical model, we can find different values of the net wing lift coefficient at
different angles of attack. The following graphs show the results of this procedure:

CL_w vs.  [deg] and CD_w vs.  [deg]

CL_w CD_w
1,2 0,08
1,0 CL_w vs. alpha 0,07
0,8
0,06
0,6
0,4 0,05
0,2 0,04
0,0 0,03
-0,2
0,02
-0,4
-0,6 0,01
-0,8 0,00
-10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
 [deg]
CD_w.= cd_prof + CD_w vs.  [deg]

CD_w
0,08
Cd_prof
0,07 Cd_i
CD_w
0,06
0,05
0,04
0,03
0,02
0,01
0,00
-10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
 [deg]

Polar curve: CL_w vs. CD_w

CL_w
1,2

1,0

0,8

0,6

0,4

0,2

0,0

-0,2

-0,4

-0,6

-0,8
0,00 0,01 0,02 0,03 0,04 0,05 0,06 0,07 0,08
CD_w
(CL /CD)w vs.  [deg]

(CL/CD)w
40

30

20

10

-10
(CL/CD)w…
-20

-30

-40
-10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
 [deg]

The following graph shows the comparison between the aerofoils lift coefficient and the wing lift
coefficient showing the changes on the lift slope:

cl CL_w
1,6 1,6
1,4 1,4
cl 0015
1,2 1,2
1,0 cl 0012 1,0
0,8 0,8
CL_w
0,6 0,6
0,4 0,4
0,2 0,2
0,0 0,0
-0,2 -0,2
-0,4 -0,4
-0,6 -0,6
-0,8 -0,8
-1,0 -1,0
-1,2 -1,2
-12 -9 -6 -3 0 3 6 9 12 15
 [deg]
With all this information, a new value of the net wing lift coefficient can be found. We must first be
clear that in normal cruise flight at constant acceleration the MTOW of the airplane is equal to the
total net lift produced by the wing:

1
L w = MTOW =  V2 S w C L _ w = q S w C L _ w
2

From this relation the net wing lift coefficient is obtained:

MTOW
CL _ w = = 0.1834
q S w

From the graph CL_w vs.  [deg] the wing lift slope is calculated:

a=
CL _ w
 −  L =0
= 0.08213 1  = 4.705 1
 deg rad
 
With this same relation, the net wing lift coefficient is calculated. It is to note that in this graph (CL_w
vs.  [deg]) it can be seen that L=0 = 0 for this particular wing, then

C L _ w = a ( −  L =0 ) = C L _ w = a 

Equating the last relation, the angle of attack required for the cruise condition is found to be:

CL _ w
 2.24deg
0.1834
= =
a 0.08213

With this new value of the geometric (wing incidence) angle of attack, the values of the wing
aerodynamic characteristics are:

Wing Aerodynamic Characteristic Value Units

Lift force (Lw) 952.215 kgf
Induced drag coefficient (CD_i) 0.0018 -
Total drag force (Dw) 37.314 kgf

You could study more about the response to change of some variables like the altitude (height),
velocity, different aerofoils, applying of a geometric twist angle and even the change in the geometric
shape of the wing to check the consequences in the aerodynamic characteristics of this airplane wing.