To investigate and compare the wing planform’s

effect on the aerodynamic parameters of aircraft

wings using computational uid dynamics (CFD)
Salman Khan (  [email protected] )
Ghulam Ishaq Khan (GIK) Institute of Engineering Sciences and Technology, Swabi (Topi)
Muhammad Sohail Malik
Pak-Austria Fachhochschule Institute of Applied Sciences and Technology (Haripur),
Massab Junaid
Ghulam Ishaq Khan (GIK) Institute of Engineering Sciences and Technology, Swabi (Topi)
Ali Turab Jafry
Ghulam Ishaq Khan (GIK) Institute of Engineering Sciences and Technology, Swabi (Topi)

Research Article

Keywords: Computation uid dynamics, Aerodynamic characteristics, Wing planforms, Taper ratio, Aspect
ratio, Sweptback wing, Angle of Attack

Posted Date: July 14th, 2022

DOI: https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-1806010/v1

License:   This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Read Full License
 To investigate and compare the wing planform’s effect on the
aerodynamic parameters of aircraft wings using
computational fluid dynamics (CFD)

Salman Khan1*, Muhammad Sohail Malik2, Massab Junaid3, Ali Turab

Jafry4
Faculty of Mechanical Engineering (FME), Ghulam Ishaq Khan (GIK) Institute
1,3,4

of Engineering Sciences and Technology, Swabi (Topi), Pakistan.

2Faculty of Mechanical Engineering (FME), Pak-Austria Fachhochschule Institute

of Applied Sciences and Technology (Haripur), Pakistan.

[email protected],[email protected],[email protected],

[email protected]

Abstract

A high lift wing’s design is a critical aerodynamic parameter of aircraft. Research has been
performed to enhance the wing performance by altering the wing planform, out-of-plan
transformation, and airfoil modification. Herein, the wing planforms, airflow velocity (5 – 35 m/s),
and their effect on aerodynamic parameters as a function of an angle of attack (-20° - +50°) are
investigated numerically. The NACA 0012 profile 3D wing with varying aspects, taper ratios, and
sweptback angles is investigated using computational fluid dynamics (CFD). The study exposed
that, a rectangular wing has a high lift and drag coefficient among all the wing planforms. It also
reveals that there will be no lift generation for symmetric airfoil at an angle of attack (AoA) of 0°.
Furthermore, the effect of changing the leading-edge sweptback angle (LESA) on the lift and drag
is prominent at higher AoA. It changes airflow from wing root to wing tip however, it also
increases the tip vortices. The lift and drag increase with the increase of flow velocity and taper
ratio (TR) and becomes more prominent after an AoA of 9°. Similarly, with the increase of aspect
ratio (AR), lift and drag decrease to a certain limit (in this case AR 10), beyond this limit, it starts
increasing with an increase in AR and its effect is more visible at an AoA of 15°. The TR and LESA
are the best parameters for the aircraft wing to get better flight conditions depending upon the
applications.

Keywords: Computation fluid dynamics, Aerodynamic characteristics, Wing planforms, Taper

ratio, Aspect ratio, Sweptback wing, Angle of Attack.

1. Introduction
The wing is made up of an airfoil that generates lift. The design of low-weight and high-lift
generating wings is one of the most important needs of the modern world. An efficient wing can
be generated by optimizing its geometrical (wing planforms) and aerodynamic parameters (lift
and drag). It has different configurations and geometries depending upon the application. With
the increase of aircraft speed, the air friction around the wing also increases. Due to this, the
aerodynamic parameters like turbulence and drag increase, and hence cause an imbalance of the

Corresponding author: Salman Khan

Email address: [email protected]
 aircraft with more fuel consumed. Researchers and engineers are trying to develop aircraft for high
lift, low drag, and fast transportation with a reduction in fuel consumption.
The morphing of the wing is the wing’s ability to adopt various geometrical shapes during its
flight. The aircraft will be able to accommodate numerous flying modes to achieve improved flight
performance. This wing offers a lot of potential for improving aircraft performance and efficiency
for a variety of missions flight [1]. Wing morphing can be divided into three categories: wing
planform modification, wing out of plane transformation, and airfoil modification. Each morphing
concept aims to enhance the aircraft's performance in a variety of missions[2]. The flight dynamics
of various morphing wing shapes that can be used in small-scale UAVs were studied. The goal
was to see how in-flight wing sweep and wingspan morphing affected aerodynamic and flight
stability properties[3].
The wing with various span and sweptback angles was analyzed to determine the most optimum
combinations. It has been discovered that combining a variable span with a tapered wing
technology and a variable swept angle can enhance aerodynamic efficiency by up to 32.93%.
Furthermore, when the wing is extended to its full length, the range flight mission improves by
46.89% as compared to the original posture[4]. The sweptback wing in unmanned aerial vehicles
(UAVs) was analyzed using the Eppler 562 airfoil. The results show that there is more air flow
separation occurs on the wing root at an AoA of 0°, whereas it happens on the wingtip side at an
AoA of 15° -30°. At AoA of 15°, the area of the airflow separation grows as the AoA increases [5].
The wing of a high aspect ratio with varied taper ratios and its effect on the aerodynamic
characteristics of the wing was investigated. The taper ratio of 0.2 - 1.2 (increment of 0.2) was
analyzed using XFLR5 CFD. The results uncovered that, TR of 0.4 has the highest Oswald
efficiency factor at the angle between -4° - +6°, while TR of 1.2 has the lowest. However, TR of 1.2
has a minimum while TR of 0.4 has a maximum induced drag coefficient. Furthermore, it was
discovered that with the decrease in TR as for TR of 0.2, the wing-tip vortices grew larger [6]. The
Selig’s S1223 airfoil wing was investigated for the taper ratio, which was created in CATIA V5 and
was analyzed in ANSYS. The results indicate that, If there is no sweep angle, dihedral, or
polyhedral angle involved, a wing with TR of 0.4 or 0.5 was determined to be the optimum TR for
RC planes [7]. The aerodynamic parameters such as stall angle, Cl/Cd ratio, downwash, and lift
distribution over the wingspan of several wing shapes (rectangular wing, tapered wing, and
swept-back wing) were compared. There is a high lift distribution at the tip of a rectangular wing,
but it is nearly the same in tapered and sweptback wings. When the results are compared to other
wings, the airfoil efficiency (Cl/Cd) for the sweptback wing is high as compared to other wings at
zero AoA[8].
The effect of Renold number (Re) on the aerodynamic lift and drag of two-dimensional NACA
0012 airfoil was carried out with or without a Gurney flap of 3% chord length using CFD. The
results reveal that the lift coefficient (Cl) drops rapidly when the Re is reduced below the critical
range, and the drag coefficient (Cd) increases. The flow pattern is shifted near the Gurney flap at
low Re[9]. The impact of changing wing design components (airfoil, taper ratio, winglets, and
aspect ratio) on aerodynamic parameters with the angle of attack and flow velocities are studied.
The wing performance (Cl/Cd) ratio for all wings is determined as the AoA and speed increase.
The wing performance using the EPPLER 559 airfoil increases instead of other wings. When the
planform is modified from rectangular to tapered, the aspect ratio is raised, and it enhances the
aerodynamic parameters [10].
Corresponding author: Salman Khan
Email address: [email protected]
 The aerodynamic characteristics of the NACA 0015 airfoil were analyzed numerically as a function
of AoA and flap deflection at the Renold number of 106 using the realizable k-Ɛ turbulence model.
The Cl of the wing increased with increasing flap deflections. Shifting from the zero-lift AoA to a
more negative value can lower the stall angle, but the Cl remains constant and the lift curve climbs
higher [11]. The aerodynamic characteristics of different types of airfoils with a Renold number of
ranges of 104 – 106 were investigated numerically. For the conventional airfoil, the drag increases
with the decrease of Renold number which in turn decreases the lift of the wing. For flat plates,
the lift and drag are improved with a decrease in thickness to chord (t/c) ratio and a thickness of
one percent is more efficient at a low Renold number. Similarly, for an increase in camber of thin
plate airfoil, the lift and drag increase and six percent of thickness is optimum at a low Renold
number[12].
Numerous wing designs are studied and compared for their lift distribution using aerodynamic
and structural simulations. Various wing designs were modified for desired lift and bending
moment to reduce its drag and fuel consumption. The results revealed that the optimized wing
saved roughly six percent of its fuel and the highest drag is for the rectangular wing [13]. To
investigate the effect of introducing curvature at the leading edge on the aerodynamic
performance of the wing was analyzed experimentally. The results reveal that the leading-edge
curvature wing planform has greater Cl and lower Cd coefficient than the rectangular wing. As a
result, the wing efficiency (Cl/Cd) of the leading-edge curved wing is greater than that of the
rectangular wing [14].
In the present study, the effect of wing planforms i.e., (LESA, TR, AR), airflow velocity, and their
combinations, on the aerodynamic characteristics (Cl, Cd, and Cl/Cd) of the wing as a function of
AoA was investigated numerically. This investigation was carried out at a Re of 20.54 × 103 using
the k-ω SST fluent model. The investigation shows that there is no lift generation for the symmetric
airfoil wing at zero AoA. However, the rectangular wing has a high lift and drag coefficient. With
the increase of aspect ratio, the aerodynamic characteristics decrease up to a certain limit, then it
increases however, it adds up the wing weight. The taper ratio is the best wing planform that
enhances the aerodynamic characteristics as well as the reduction of wing mass. But it also
increases the tip vortices which cause induced drag. The sweptback angle effect is more visible at
a higher angle of attack. The wing is efficient at 6° which is the stall angle. Beyond the stall angle,
the wing performance decreases rapidly. It is because of the flow separation from the wing surface
which decreases the lift (Cl), and increases drag (Cd).

2. Methodology
2.1. Planforms of wing
A planform is the top view of a wing that interacts with three-dimensional airflow. The wing
planforms that are critical to optimizing the overall aerodynamics parameters of the wing are
LESA, TR, AS, AoA, the geometry of the airfoil, and its configuration and airflow velocity. The
ratio of wingspan to its chord length is expressed as an aspect ratio. Although increasing the aspect
ratio helps reduce drag, it also increases the weight of the wing. The ratio of the airfoil tip chord
(Ct) to its root chord (Cr) is known as the taper ratio. Tapering the wing can also help to reduce
drag as well as the wing’s weight. Sweep back is the wing's rearward inclination from root to tip
of the wing [15]. The LESA of the wing can also enhance the aerodynamic parameter by shifting
the flow pattern from root to tip. The various parameters of the airfoil are given in figure 2.

Corresponding author: Salman Khan

Email address: [email protected]
 The cross-section of the wing is determined by the profile of the airfoil. The shape of the airfoil is
designed so that when it moves in the air, it generates pressure difference which creates lift to the
wing. The performance of the airfoil was affected by various parameters like airspeed, density, the
shape of the airfoil, and its configurations. The effect of five different variable parameters i.e., AoA,
flow velocity, TR, AR, and LESA on the aerodynamic characteristics of the wing was investigated
using computational fluid dynamics (CFD). For the present study, a 3D wing with NACA 0012
airfoil was selected. The various wing planform along with their modification is shown in figure
3.

Sweep

Planform Span
Morphing wing types

chord

Twist

Out of plan Chord wise bending

Span wise bending

Camber
Airfoil
Thickness (b)
(a)
Figure 1. (a) The various types of morphing in the aircraft wing (b) The various parameters of the airfoil.

(a) (b)

Corresponding author: Salman Khan

Email address: [email protected]
 (c) (c)

Figure 2. The various types of wing planforms (a) Sweptback of the rectangular wing (b) Sweptback of
the wing with a taper ratio of 0.5 (c) The taper ratios of the wing (d) The aspect ratios of the wing.

2.2. Aerodynamics parameters

The main aerodynamic parameters of the wing are the lift (Cl) drag (Cd) coefficients, lift
(Fl) and drag (Fd) forces and the airfoil efficiency (Cl/Cd). A fluid flowing around an airfoil
can exerts a force on it. This force can be resolved into two components, lift force and drag
force as shown in figure 4. Fl is the component that is normal to the fluid flow. The airfoil
shape is design so that it generates a pressure difference between up and lower surface
flow, due to which lift is generated. Fl is acting upward to counter the effect gravity,
although it can be acting in any direction normal to the fluid flow. In contrast, the Fd is the
component that is acting parallel to the fluid flow. Drag force is acting in opposite direction
to the fluid velocity. The Cd is the sum of zero-lift drag (Cdo) and the induced drag (Cdi).
The ratio of lift (Cl) to drag coefficient (Cd) determines the aerodynamic performance of the
wing. The Cl /Cd shows the amount of lift generated by an airfoil to its drag. The Cl/Cd ratio
represents the efficiency or performance of the airfoil. The Cl/Cd determine the stall angle
where the wing efficiency is maximum.

𝐶𝐶𝑑𝑑 = 𝐶𝐶𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑 + 𝐶𝐶𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑 (1)

2𝐹𝐹𝑑𝑑
𝐶𝐶𝑑𝑑 = (2)
𝜌𝜌𝜌𝜌𝑉𝑉 2

2𝐹𝐹𝑙𝑙
𝐶𝐶𝑙𝑙 = (3)
𝜌𝜌𝜌𝜌𝑉𝑉 2

Corresponding author: Salman Khan

Email address: [email protected]
 Figure 3. The force distribution on the airfoil [15].

3. Numerical analysis
The main aim of the investigation is to design wing which generates high lift and low drag to
reduced fuel consumptions. For this purpose, the effect of wing planforms mostly TR, AR and
LESA edge are investigated numerically. For the outer profile of the wing, NACA 0012 airfoil was
considered in this study with chord of 0.3 m and span of 1.1 m. However, these investigations are
carried out at a lower Re of 20.54 × 103. The air density (ρ) is 1.225 kg/m3 and its dynamic viscosity
(μ) of 1.7894 × 10−5 kg/m-s. The fluent turbulence model of k-ω SST with two-equation was used.
The k-ε model is the turbulent flow model and assumes that the molecular viscosity effect is
minimal. The transport equation was derived by using the assumption. This model is valid for
fully developed turbulent flow only. While the SST K-ω assumes that the turbulent flow viscosity
is changing. The turbulent viscosity of fluid is varying to account for the transfer of the primary
turbulent shear stress. By comparing the SST K-ω model to the K-ω model, this changing flow
viscosity gives an advantage to SST K-ω over both the standard k-ω model and the standard k-ε
model. The transport equation of SST k − ω model is given by [10]:
𝜕𝜕 𝜕𝜕 𝜕𝜕 𝜕𝜕𝜕𝜕
(𝜌𝜌𝜌𝜌) + (𝜌𝜌𝜌𝜌𝑢𝑢𝑑𝑑 ) = (𝛤𝛤𝑘𝑘 ) + 𝐺𝐺𝜕𝜕 − 𝑌𝑌𝜕𝜕 + 𝑆𝑆𝜕𝜕 (4)
𝜕𝜕𝜕𝜕 𝜕𝜕𝑥𝑥𝑖𝑖 𝜕𝜕𝑥𝑥𝑗𝑗 𝜕𝜕𝑥𝑥𝑗𝑗

𝜕𝜕 𝜕𝜕 𝜕𝜕 𝜕𝜕𝜔𝜔
(𝜌𝜌𝜌𝜌) + (𝜌𝜌𝜌𝜌𝑢𝑢𝑑𝑑 ) = (𝛤𝛤𝜔𝜔 ) + 𝐺𝐺𝜔𝜔 − 𝑌𝑌𝜔𝜔 + 𝐷𝐷𝜔𝜔 + 𝑆𝑆𝜔𝜔 (5)
𝜕𝜕𝜕𝜕 𝜕𝜕𝑥𝑥𝑖𝑖 𝜕𝜕𝑥𝑥𝑗𝑗 𝜕𝜕𝑥𝑥𝑗𝑗

Where effective diffusivity of K and ω are ΓK and Γω the respectively. Yk and Yω represent the
dissipation of K and ω due to turbulence and Dω represents the cross-diffusion term. Sk and Sω are
user defined source terms. GK represents the generation of turbulence kinetic energy due to mean
velocity gradients and Gω represents the generation of ω. The boundary condition for the
investigation is:

1. Airfoil is considered as solid-wall with no-slip condition.

2. The inlet of the fluid domain is assigned as velocity inlet.
3. The outlet of the fluid domain is pressure.

Corresponding author: Salman Khan

Email address: [email protected]
 (a) b
Figure 4. (a) The wing model with the fluid domain (b) The wing meshing with the boundary
conditions.

3.1. Sweptback of a rectangular wing

Sweptback is the rearward or slant angle given to the wing from the root to the tip of the wing. A
rectangular wing is one of the wing configurations that generate more lift in the Subsonic regime
with a lesser induced drag. It has a constant TR of one. Sweptback and delta wings are designed
at speeds close to and beyond the speed of sound (332 m/s). The most widespread wing planform
for high-speed i.e., transonic (Mach=1) and supersonic (Mach >1) jet aircraft is the sweptback wing.
The most common wing profile is sweptback, however forward swept, and variable swept wings
are also used. The main purpose of the sweptback angle is to reduce turbulence. Sweptback wings
are suited best for sonic flight operating situations because of their Cl/Cd ratio and low-speed
takeoff conditions. Many studies on sweptback wings have been conducted in the past, and many
more are currently being conducted by various research centers around the world and aircraft
manufacturers, but the performance and aerodynamics of swept wings at transonic speeds and
under various turbulence levels and conditions remain a grey area that must be addressed. [10].
The various leading-edge sweptback angle for the rectangular wing with 1.1m spans and 0.3m
cord length is given in table 1.

Table 1. The sweptback angle of the rectangular wing.

S. No Chord length (m) Taper ratio Span length Sweptback angle (ᴧ)
Root Tip (TR) (m)
chord chord
1 0.3 0.3 1 1.1 0°
2 0.3 0.3 1 1.1 5.2°
3 0.3 0.3 1 1.1 10.3°
4 0.3 0.3 1 1.1 15.3°
5 0.3 0.3 1 1.1 20°

3.2. Sweptback wing with taper ratio (tr 0.5)

A wing with a combined effect of TR of 0.5 with a sweptback angle is applied to study its effect on
the aerodynamic parameters. For the subsonic speeds (Mach <1), an elliptical, tapered, and

Corresponding author: Salman Khan

Email address: [email protected]
 rectangular shapes wing is needed. The main concern at these speeds is induced drag. The wing
may be swept backward, forward and variable swept. Swept forward wings are wings with swept
forward leading edges. The flow features of the wings cause the outer wings to stall before the
flaps. Swept backward wings have a leading edge that is swept back. This is done to reduce drag
at transonic speeds, which is dictated by the velocity normal of the wing. Swept wings with
variable angles are best suited for high-speed (transonic and supersonic) flight, whereas unwept
wings are better suited for low-speed (subsonic) flight. Variable sweep wings were employed to
improve the wing planform across a wide variety of speed conditions. Almost all high-speed
commercial aircraft employ this planform. The various LESA wings with a taper ratio of 0.5 are
given in table 2.

Table 2. The sweptback angle of wing with a taper ratio of 0.5.

S. No Chord length (m) Taper ratio Span length Sweptback angle λ

Root Tip (TR) (m) LESA
chord chord
1 0.3 0.3 1 1.1 Rectangular
2 0.3 0.15 0.5 1.1 0°
3 0.3 0.15 0.5 1.1 4°
4 0.3 0.15 0.5 1.1 7.8°
5 0.3 0.15 0.5 1.1 15.3°

3.3. Wing with a varied taper ratio

Taper ratio (λ) is the ratio of tip chord (Ct) length to root chord (Cr) length of the wing. Tapering is
the planform in which the length of the chord from the root of the wing to the tip is decreasing.
Taper ratio decreases Cd (which is most effective at high speeds) and increases Cl up to stall angle.
There is also weight reduction of the wing with the tapering. The wing with various TR is given
in table 3. The taper ratio of the wing is:

𝐶𝐶𝜕𝜕
𝜆𝜆 = (6)
𝐶𝐶𝑟𝑟

Table 3. The wing with various taper ratios.

S. No Chord length (m) Span length (m) Taper ratio TR

Root chord Tip chord
1 0.3 0.05 1.1 0.17
2 0.3 0.1 1.1 0.33
3 0.3 0.15 1.1 0.5
4 0.3 0.2 1.1 0.67
5 0.3 0.25 1.1 0.83
6 0.3 0.3 1.1 1

Corresponding author: Salman Khan

Email address: [email protected]
 3.4. Wing with a varied aspect ratio
Aspect ratio (AR) is the ratio of span (b) of a wing to its aerodynamic mean chord (Cm). It is also
can be obtained from the square of the wingspan (b2) divided by the wing area (S). A wing with a
greater AR has less Cd and somewhat more Cl than a wing with a lower aspect ratio. Because a
glider's glide angle is determined by the Cl/Cd, a glider is often constructed with a high AR.
Mathematically, the aspect ratio is:
𝑏𝑏 𝑏𝑏2
𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴 = = (7)
𝐶𝐶 𝑆𝑆

Table 4. The wing with various aspect ratios.

S. No Chord length (m) Span length Aspect ratio AR

(m)
Root chord Tip chord
1 0.5 0.5 1.5 3
2 0.3 0.3 1.5 5
3 0.25 0.25 1.5 7.5
4 0.15 0.15 1.5 10
5 0.15 0.15 2 13.3

3.5. Wing with varied velocity

The flow velocity has also a great impact on the Cl and Cd of the wing. Its increase can increase
the Cl greater than the Cd up to stall angle. Beyond stall and the Cd increases more than the Cl,
hence the airfoil efficiency drops down rapidly. The effect of velocity on the rectangular wing
with a chord of 0.15m and span of 1.1m is given in table 5.

Table 5. The wing parameters with varying velocity.

S. No Chord length (m) Span length Velocity (m/s)

Root chord Tip chord (m)
1 0.15 0.15 1.1 5
2 0.15 0.15 1.1 10
3 0.15 0.15 1.1 15
4 0.15 0.15 1.1 20
5 0.15 0.15 1.1 25
6 0.15 0.15 1.1 30
7 0.15 0.15 1.1 35

Results

Lift and drag Forces are dependent upon the density (ρ) of the fluid in which the airfoil is moving,
area (A) of the airfoil, the square of the fluid velocity (V2) and Lift (Cl), drag (Cd) coefficients. Lift
(Cl), drag (Cd) coefficients and the airfoil performance (Cl/Cd), for the wing of 1.1 m span and 0.3
m chord length are computed using k-ω SST turbulence model of Fluent at various wing
planforms. The results are plotted as function of AOA. These investigations are carried out at a

Corresponding author: Salman Khan

Email address: [email protected]
 lower Re of 20.54 × 103. The aims of the study are investigating the best planforms that can enhance
the airfoil aerodynamic characteristics and performance.

1.1. Drag coefficient (cd)

The effect of planforms (sweptback, aspect and taper ratio) and flow velocity on the aerodynamic
Cd is shown in figure 6. The Cd has small values at small AoA. The Cd increase progressively at
higher rate with the increase an AoA. As the stall angle approach, the Cd increases at higher rate
due the flow separation which decrease the wing performance [16]. The Cd versus AoA
characteristics for the rectangular wing with LESA is presented in Figure 6(a). The figure shows
that the Cd increase with increasing of the sweptback angle of the wing. However, its effect on
aerodynamic Cd is more visible at higher AoA. Figure 6(b) shows the combine effect with both
(LESA as well as TR of 0.5 on Cd. The rectangular wing without TR gives the maximum Cd. The
sweptback wing with TR has no significant effect on Cd of wing. The TR has no significant effect
on the Cd of wing in the range of AOA -6° to +6° as presented in figure 6(c). With the increase of the
taper ratio, the Cd increases and become more visible at an AOA higher than +6°. However, there
is an advantage of weight reduction of the wing. The effect of aspect ratio is also prominent at an
AoA higher than +6°. The Cd decreases with increase of aspect ratio up to certain limit (AR 10).
After that, further increase in AR can increase the Cd as given in figure 6(d). The Cd also increases
with the increase of flow velocity as given in figure 6 (e).

(a) (b)

(c)
(d)

Corresponding author: Salman Khan

Email address: [email protected]
 (e)

Figure 5. The drag coefficient (Cd)with angle of attack (a) The Cd of the rectangular wing (b) The Cd of
rectangular wing with taper ratio of 0.5 (c) The Cd of taper wing (d) The Cd of aspect ratio (e) The Cd
with varying velocity.

1.2. Lift coefficients (cl)

The effect of various wing planforms and flow velocity on the aerodynamic lift coefficient (Cl) as
function of AoA are shown in figure 3. The Cl increases with increase in AoA up to stall angle of
airfoil. Beyond stall angle, the Cl decreases sharply due to the flow separation form the airfoil
separation [16].The results show that, at 0° AoA, there is no lift generation for symmetric airfoil as
NACA 0012 used in the study. There is no pressure difference generated between the upper and
lower surfaces of the wing. The Cl for rectangular wing versus AoA with LESA is presented in
Figure 7(a). The Cl increase with increasing of the sweptback angle of the wing. The sweptback
angle of 20°, gives the maximum lift
coefficient but is more effective at higher AOA of 22°. The rectangular wing has no LESA with TR
0.5 gives the maximum Cl. Figure 7(b) shows the combine effect of wing with LESA and TR of 0.5
on Cl. The sweptback wing with TR has no more significant effect on Cl of wing. The TR has
significant effect on the Cl of wing and give maximum efficiency at an AoA of 6° as presented in
figure 8(c). With the increase of the TR, the Cl increases. However, another advantage increase in
TR is reduction of wing weight. The thin larger wing has higher Cl. The Cl decreases with increase
of AS up to certain limit (AR 10). After that, further increase in aspect ratio can increase the Cl as
given in figure 7(d). But there is also an increase in weight of the wing occur. The Cl also increases
with the increase of flow velocity as given in figure 7(e).

Corresponding author: Salman Khan

Email address: [email protected]
 (b)
(a)

(d)
(c)

(e)
Figure 6. The drag coefficient (Cl)with angle of attack (a) The Cl of the rectangular wing (b) The Cl of
rectangular wing with taper ratio of 0.5 (c) The Cl of taper wing (d) The Cl of aspect ratio (e) The Cl with
varying velocity.

Corresponding author: Salman Khan

Email address: [email protected]
 1.3. Lift-to-drag ratio (cl/cd)
The lift-to-drag ratio is presented as Cl/Cd at different angles of attack are shown in ffigure 8. The
ratio of Cl/Cd determine the efficiency of the aircraft and it is maximum at the stall angle. The stall
angle (αs) is the AoA at which the airfoil stalls, which means that the Cl no longer increases as the
angle of attack increases[17]. The wing has greatest efficiency just prior to the stall angle but there is
also an induced drag is generated by the wing. The minimum lift and drag occur at lower AoA.
When the AoA increases, the Cl/Cd is also increases up to the stall angle where the efficiency of airfoil
is maximum. Beyond this angle, the Cd increases more than Cl due to which the efficiency drop down
sharply[16]. The stall angle for the sweptback rectangular wing is 6° as shown in figure 8(a). The
sweptback rectangular gives the maximum efficiency at LESA of 15.3°. The maximum efficiency of
the sweptback taper wing is as presented in figure 8(b). The airfoil efficiency increases with increase
in taper ratio as given in figure 8(c). The maximum efficiency of the airfoil occurs at TR of one
Similarly, the stall of the wing occurs at an AR of five as shown in figure 8(d). With the increase in
flow velocity, the stall angle of the wing is increase as given for 35 m/s in figure 8(e).

(a) (b)

(c) (d)

Corresponding author: Salman Khan

Email address: [email protected]
 (e)
Figure 7. The wing performance Cl / Cd the angle of attack (a) The Cl / Cd of the rectangular wing
(b) The Cl / Cd of rectangular wing with taper ratio of 0.5 (c) The Cl / Cd of taper wing (d) The Cl /

2. Conclusions
An investigation on the effects of wing planforms on the aerodynamic characteristics of
NACA0012 airfoil wing with a chord length of 0.3 m and span length of 1.1m has been carried out.
ANSYS FLUENT with two-equation k-ω SST turbulence model is used for the RE of 20.54 × 103.
The major conclusions of the investigation are:

1. The rectangular wing has high lift and drag coefficient with no or little vertex indices.
2. As NACA 0012 airfoil is symmetric. So, for the symmetric airfoil, there is no lift generation at
an
3. angle of 0°. This is due to the same flow on the upper and lower surface of wing. Hence no
pressure difference is generated due to no lift is produced.
4. The sweptback wing has nearly the same or a little effect on the values of lift and drag
coefficient. However, its effect is more visible at higher angle of attack (30°).
5. Taper ratio is most effective planform parameter which nor only improve the aerodynamic
characteristics to a greater extend but there is also weight reduction. With the increase of taper
ratio, the aerodynamic characteristics increases up to stall and vice versa. However, it is effect
on drag coefficient is more visible an AOA of 6.2° while for lift coefficient is at an AOA of 2°.
6. Aspect ratio has also tremendous effect on the aerodynamic characteristics of wing. With the
increase of aspect ratio, the aerodynamic characteristics decreases up to an AR of 10. After
that, an increase in aspect ratio, increase the aerodynamic characteristics. But there is also an
increase in weight of the wing occurs with the increase of aspect ratio.
7. The analyzed wing has a stall angle of 6. The efficiency of the wing is increasing and becomes
maximum at this angle. Prior to stall angle, the value of Cl is greater than the Cd, however its
value is decreases after the stall angle.

Supplementary Materials: All the figures, graphs and image are the copyright of this paper
except figure 1 (b) and 2. It has been taken from the paper which is cited there.

Corresponding author: Salman Khan

Email address: [email protected]
 Author Contributions: All the work and research has been performed by S.K under the
supervision of M.S.M. This paper has been reviewed by A.T.J and M.J and decided that it
should be submitted in the conference.

Funding: This research received no external funding.

Acknowledgments: I gratefully thank to M. Sohail Malik who provide me a complete

guidance and support to me. I would also thanks to my advisor Massab Junaid and Ali Turab
Jafry.

Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

3. References

[1] S. Barbarino, O. Bilgen, R. M. Ajaj, M. I. Friswell, and D. J. Inman, “A review of morphing

aircraft,” J. Intell. Mater. Syst. Struct., vol. 22, no. 9, pp. 823–877, 2011, doi:
10.1177/1045389X11414084.

[2] H. Zaini and N. I. Ismail, “A Review of Morphing Wing(综述),” Mech. Eng. Colloq. (MEC
2016), no. August, pp. 110–115, 2016.

[3] H. Muhammad Umer, A. Maqsood, R. Riaz, and S. Salamat, “Stability Characteristics of

Wing Span and Sweep Morphing for Small Unmanned Air Vehicle: A Mathematical
Analysis,” Math. Probl. Eng., vol. 2020, 2020, doi: 10.1155/2020/4838632.

[4] M. Elelwi, M. A. Kuitche, R. M. Botez, and T. M. Dao, “Comparison and analyses of a

variable span-morphing of the tapered wing with a varying sweep angle,” Aeronaut. J.,
vol. 124, no. 1278, pp. 1146–1169, 2020, doi: 10.1017/aer.2020.19.

[5] S. P. Setyo Hariyadi, Sutardi, Sukahir, and Jamaludin, “Characteristics of Separation and
Induced Drag in the Use of Swept-back Wing Unmanned Aerial Vehicle,” J. Phys. Conf.
Ser., vol. 2117, no. 1, 2021, doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/2117/1/012013.

[6] İ. H. Güzelbey, Y. Eraslan, and M. H. Doğru, “Effects of Taper Ratio on Aircraft Wing
Aerodynamic Parameters: A Comperative Study,” Eur. Mech. Sci., vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 18–23,
2019, doi: 10.26701/ems.487516.

[7] Tejas Dhekane and Dr. Nitin Sherje, “CFD Simulation of Different Taper Ratio Wings,
Performing Trade-off Assessment and Development of A New Methodology to Plot Lift
Distribution Curve and 3D Local Coefficient of Lift Distribution Graph,” Int. J. Eng. Res.,
vol. V9, no. 04, pp. 517–535, 2020, doi: 10.17577/ijertv9is040471.

[8] A. Nath, “Comparative Aerodynamic Analysis of Different Wing Configurations,” Int. J.

Res. Appl. Sci. Eng. Technol., vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 407–410, 2021, doi:
10.22214/ijraset.2021.33087.

[9] S. Jain, N. Sitaram, and S. Krishnaswamy, “Effect of reynolds number on aerodynamics of

airfoil with gurney flap,” Int. J. Rotating Mach., vol. 2015, no. 1, 2015, doi:
10.1155/2015/628632.

[10] Z. Siddiqi and J. W. Lee, “A computational fluid dynamics investigation of subsonic wing

Corresponding author: Salman Khan

Email address: [email protected]
 designs for unmanned aerial vehicle application,” Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part G J. Aerosp.
Eng., vol. 233, no. 15, pp. 5543–5552, 2019, doi: 10.1177/0954410019852553.

[11] S. Obeid, R. Jha, and G. Ahmadi, “RANS simulations of aerodynamic performance of

NACA 0015 flapped airfoil,” Fluids, vol. 2, no. 1, 2017, doi: 10.3390/fluids2010002.

[12] J. Winslow, H. Otsuka, B. Govindarajan, and I. Chopra, “Basic understanding of airfoil

characteristics at low Reynolds numbers (104–105),” J. Aircr., vol. 55, no. 3, pp. 1050–1061,
2018, doi: 10.2514/1.C034415.

[13] P. Hospodář, A. Drábek, and A. Prachař, “Aerodynamic Design and Strength Analysis of
the Wing for the Purpose of Assessing the Influence of the Bell-Shaped Lift Distribution,”
Aerospace, vol. 9, no. 1, 2022, doi: 10.3390/aerospace9010013.

[14] M. N. Haque, M. Ali, and I. Ara, “Experimental investigation on the performance of

NACA 4412 aerofoil with curved leading edge planform,” Procedia Eng., vol. 105, no. June
2016, pp. 232–240, 2015, doi: 10.1016/j.proeng.2015.05.099.

[15] Federal Aviation Administration, “Pilot’s handbook of Aeronautical Knowledge:

Aerodynamics of Flight,” no. Cl, 2016.

[16] L. D. Ratio, “4 Lift / Drag,” Textbook, pp. 4–10, 2008, [Online]. Available:
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwjvl
pHQxuHqAhUS4zgGHT5jBZsQFjABegQIMxAF&url=https%3A%2F%2Ffanyv88.com%3A443%2Fhttps%2Fwww.nordian.n
et%2FREPOSITORY%2F117_jaa_principles_of_flight_demo.pdf&usg=AOvVaw1SMFIvOc
TFxl3R1GxdyQf2.

[17] D. W. College, “Mohammad Sadraey,” Design.

Corresponding author: Salman Khan

Email address: [email protected]