Aerodynamic Characteristics of Ring Wings, a Bibliography

Terry, John E.

doi:10.21236/ad0452725

Cited by 8 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Non-planar wing configurations have been widely recognised as a means of reducing total drag compared to conventional planar wing systems of the same span and lift 8 . A number of unconventional configurations have so far been proposed including the blended-wingbody [15][16][17] , C-wings 18 , polyplane, ring wings 19 , box wings 20 , and joined wings [21][22][23] , including strut-and truss-braced wings [24][25][26] , however, very few exploratory experimental investigations have been conducted on such configurations. In fact, the box wing arrangement among all non-planer configurations was shown by Prandtl 27 to offer the 'best wing system', achieving the minimum possible induced drag for a given lift and height-to-span ratio 28 .…”

Section: Armentioning

confidence: 99%

Study of a C-wing configuration for passive drag and load alleviation

Skinner

Zare‐Behtash

2018

Journal of Fluids and Structures

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Non-planar wing configurations are often hypothesised as a means for improving the aerodynamic efficiency of large transport aircraft; C-wings may have the ability to exploit and unify drag reduction, aeroelasticity, and dynamics and control but their capacity to do so is ambiguous. The purpose of this work is to provide an experimental demonstration with the aim of verifying the C-wing configurations practical application. Thus, the main objective of this investigation is to

show abstract

Section: Armentioning

confidence: 99%

Study of a C-wing configuration for passive drag and load alleviation

Skinner

Zare‐Behtash

2018

Journal of Fluids and Structures

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…More extreme examples of non-planar lifting surfaces are ring wings, 21 box-wings 22 and joined wings. 23,24 Each of these are closed configurations with the aim of reducing the influence of wing tip vortices.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Aerodynamic Optimisation of Non-planar Lifting Surfaces

Skinner

Zare‐Behtash

2016

57th AIAA/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics, and Materials Conference

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A novel population structured genetic algorithm (sGA) with embedded potential flow vortex ring panel method (VRM) has been developed to minimise induced and parasitic drag subject to constraints on lift, root bending moment, and longitudinal static stability. The optimisation architecture can activate up to four independent wing segments allowing up to 28 design variables. Minimum drag of wing tip extensions and winglet configurations are compared using the non-linear stochastic optimisation method. The optimiser identified joined box wings as offering the greatest induced efficiency followed by C-wings. With span and root bending moment constraints winglets offered best total drag reduction. C-wings are further investigated for potential to enhance longitudinal static stability performance by staggering the horizontal extension of the winglet to balance moments around the wing's centre of gravity. Preliminary results suggest that while longitudinal static stability can be reached it would be very poor. Inclusion of more design constraints and additional analysis of the structural dynamics of C-wings, especially effecting the torsional mode, is necessary.

show abstract

“…Closed configurations such as ring wings [9], box wings [10], and joined wings [11,12] are other examples of nonplanar lifting-surface configurations. Closed lifting-surface arrangements aim to reduce the influence of the wingtip vortices.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Aerostructural Optimization of Nonplanar Lifting Surfaces

Jansen

Perez

Martins

2010

Journal of Aircraft

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Nonplanar lifting surfaces can lower the induced drag relative to planar surfaces by redistributing vorticity. Other sources of drag, such as viscous drag, as well as nonaerodynamic considerations, such as structural weight, also play an important role in assessing the overall efficiency of such lifting surfaces. In this paper we solve a series of problems to find optimal nonplanar lifting surfaces and to explain the various factors and tradeoffs at play. A panel method and an equivalent beam finite-element model are used to explore nonplanar lifting surfaces, while taking into account the coupling and design tradeoffs between aerodynamics and structures. Both single-discipline aerodynamic optimization and multidisciplinary aerostructural optimization problems are investigated. The design variables are chosen to give the lifting-surface arrangement as much freedom as possible. This is accomplished by allowing a number of wing segments to vary their area, taper, twist, sweep, span, and dihedral, with the constraint that they must not intersect each other. Because of the complexity of the resulting design space and the presence of multiple local minima, an augmented Lagrangian particle swarm optimizer is used to solve the optimization problems. When only aerodynamics are considered, closed lifting-surface configurations, such as the box wing and joined wing, are found to be optimal. When aerostructural optimization is performed, a winglet configuration is found to be optimal when the overall span is constrained, and a wing with a raked wingtip is optimal when there is no such constraint. Nomenclature b= projected wing semispan, ft

show abstract

Aerodynamic Characteristics of Ring Wings, a Bibliography

Cited by 8 publications

References 0 publications

Study of a C-wing configuration for passive drag and load alleviation

Study of a C-wing configuration for passive drag and load alleviation

Aerodynamic Optimisation of Non-planar Lifting Surfaces

Aerostructural Optimization of Nonplanar Lifting Surfaces

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About