Skip to main content

Numerical Investigation of Wing–Multiple Propeller Aerodynamic Interaction Using Actuator Disk Method

A Correction to this article was published on 14 June 2022

This article has been updated


This study examines the aerodynamic performances of a wing and multiple propellers through a parametric analysis of wing–propeller interactions. A flow analysis was conducted via simulations based on actuator disk method. The parameters analyzed included the number of propellers, rotating direction, and propeller interval. An increment in the number of propellers increased the wing lift and drag, in addition to the propeller thrust and power. Although the lift-to-drag ratio decreased, the ratio of the wing lift to the propeller power increased. The lift and lift-to-drag ratio of the co-rotating systems were larger than those of the counter rotating systems; however, the lift-to-drag ratio of the latter exceeded that of the former when the number of propellers was seven. An increment in the required thrust increased the lift-to-drag ratio of the counter rotating system in comparison with that of the co-rotating system. Configuration with propellers concentrated at the wing tip increased the lift and drag. However, when the tip propeller was fixed at the wing tip, with the other propellers concentrated in the vicinity of the wing center, the lift increased more, while the drag decreased.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17
Fig. 18
Fig. 19
Fig. 20
Fig. 21
Fig. 22
Fig. 23
Fig. 24

Change history


\(A\) :


\({A}_{\rm BET}\) :

Area in BET

\({A}_{\rm CFD}\) :

Area in CFD

\(b\) :


\({C}_{D}\) :

3D drag coefficient

\({C}_{L}\) :

3D lift coefficient

\({C}_{P}\) :

Pressure coefficient

\({C}_{T}\) :

Thrust coefficient

\({C}_{d}\) :

2D drag coefficient

\({C}_{l}\) :

2D lift coefficient

\(c\) :

Chord length

\(D\) :


\({D}_{\rm tip}\) :

Tip propeller diameter

\({{\varvec{F}}}_{\rm BET}\) :

Force in BET

\({{\varvec{F}}}_{\rm CFD}\) :

Force in CFD

\({F}_{n}\) :

Normal force

\({F}_{t}\) :

Tangential force

\({\varvec{F}}, {\varvec{G}}, {\varvec{H}}\) :

Inviscid flux terms

\({{\varvec{F}}}_{v}, {{\varvec{G}}}_{v}, {{\varvec{H}}}_{v}\) :

Viscous flux terms

\(J\) :

Propeller advance ratio

\(L\) :


\(L/D\) :

Lift-to-drag ratio

\(L/P\) :

Overall efficiency ratio

\({M}_{\rm tip}\) :

Tip Mach number

\({N}_{b}\) :

Number of blades

\(P\) :


\({\varvec{Q}}\) :

Conservative variables

\(R\) :

Propeller radius

\(r\) :

Radius of a point

\({\varvec{s}}\) :

Source term

\(T\) :


\(T/P\) :

Power loading

\(U\) :

Velocity in BET

\({\varvec{V}}\) :


\({V}_{\rm slipstream}\) :

Slipstream velocity

\({V}_{\infty }\) :

Freestream velocity

\(\alpha \) :

Angle of attack

\(\theta \) :

Pitch angle

\(\rho \) :


\(\varnothing \) :

Induced angle

\(\psi \) :

Azimuth angle of a point

\({\omega }_{x}\) :

\(x\)-Vorticity component


  1. Jansen R (2017) Overview of NASA electrified aircraft propulsion activities. NASA.

  2. Stoll A (2015) Analysis and full scale testing of the Joby S4 propulsion system. Trans Vert Flight Works

  3. EV News (2020) Wisk (Kitty Hawk) Cora.

  4. EV News (2020) Lilium jet.

  5. Duffy MJ, Wakayama SR, Hupp R, Lacy R, Stauffer M (2017) A study in reducing the cost of vertical flight with electric propulsion. In: 17th AIAA Aviation Technology, Integration, and Operations Conference, Denver, Colorado, USA.

  6. Borer NK, Moore MD, Turnbull AR (2014) Tradespace exploration of distributed propulsors for advanced on-demand mobility concepts. In: 14th AIAA Aviation Technology, Integration, and Operations Conference, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.

  7. Patterson MD (2016) Conceptual Design of high-lift propeller systems for small electric aircraft. Ph.D. thesis, Georgia Institute of Technology

  8. Moens F, Gardarein P (2001) Numerical simulation of the propeller/wing interactions for transport aircraft. In: 19th AIAA Applied Aerodynamics Conference, Anaheim, California, USA.

  9. Catalano F, Stollery J (1993) The effect of a high thrust pusher propeller on the flow over a straight wing. In: 19th AIAA Applied Aerodynamics Conference, Monterey, California, USA.

  10. Johnson JL, White ER (1983) Exploratory low-speed wind-tunnel investigation of advanced commuter configurations including an over-the-wing propeller design. In: AIAA Aircraft Design, Systems and Technology Meeting, Fort Worth, Texas, USA.

  11. Borer NK et al. (2016) Design and performance of the NASA SCEPTOR distributed electric propulsion flight demonstrator. In: 16th AIAA Aviation Technology, Integration, and Operations Conference, Washington, D.C., USA.

  12. Veldhuis LLM (2005) Propeller wing aerodynamic interference. Ph.D. thesis, Delft University of Technology

  13. Witkowski DP, Lee AKH, Sullivan JP (1989) Aerodynamic interaction between propeller and wings. J Aircr 26(9):829–836.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Lim JW (2019) Fundamental investigation of proprotor and wing interactions in tiltrotor aircraft. In: 75th Vertical Flight Society Annual Forum & Technology Display, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA

  15. Misiorowski M, Gandhi F, Anusonti-Inthra P (2020) Computational analysis of rotor-blown-wing for electric rotorcraft applications. AIAA J 58(7):2921–2932.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Deere KA, Viken SA, Carter MB, Viken JK, Wiese MR, Farr N (2017) Computational analysis of powered lift augmentation for the LEAPTech distributed electric propulsion wing. In: 35th AIAA Aviation Forum, Denver, Colorado, USA.

  17. Sinnige T, van Arnhem N, Stokkermans TCA, Eitelberg G, Veldhuis LLM (2019) Wingtip-mounted propellers: aerodynamic analysis of interaction effects and comparison with conventional layout. J Aircr 56(1):295–312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Le Chuiton F (2004) Actuator disc modelling for helicopter rotors. Aerosp Sci Technol 8(4):285–297.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  19. O’Brien DV, Smith MJ (2005) Analysis of rotor-fuselage interactions using various rotor models. In: 43rd AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, Reno, Nevada, USA.

  20. Kim TW (2015) The development of the actuator model for single and multi rotor analysis based on open source CFD. Ph.D. thesis, Pusan National University

  21. Troldborg N (2009) Actuator line modeling of wind turbine wakes. Ph.D. thesis, Technical University of Denmark.

  22. Stokkermans TCA, van Arnhem N, Sinnige T, Veldhuis LLM (2019) Validation and comparison of RANS propeller modeling methods for tip-mounted applications. AIAA J 57(2):566–580.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Park SH, Kwon JH (2004) Implementation of k-w turbulence models in an implicit multigrid method. AIAA J 42(7):1348–1357.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Kim JW, Park SH, Yu YH (2009) Euler and Navier-Stokes simulations of helicopter rotor blade in forward flight using an overlapped grid solver. In: 19th AIAA Computational Fluid Dynamics, San Antonio, Texas, USA.

  25. Hoffmann KA, Chiang ST (2000) Computational fluid dynamics. Eng Edu Syst.

  26. Kang HM, Kim KH, Lee DH (2010) A new approach of a limiting process for multi-dimensional flows. J Comput Phys 229(19):7102–7128.

    MathSciNet  Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  27. Kim KH, Kim C (2005) Accurate, efficient and monotonic numerical methods for multidimensional compressible flows: part 1: Spatial discretization. J Comput Phys 208(2):527–569.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  28. Pulliam T, Chaussee D (1981) A diagonal form of an implicit approximate-factorization algorithm. J Comput Phy 39(2):347–363.

    MathSciNet  Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  29. Rumsey CL (2007) Apparent transition behavior of widely-used turbulence models. Int J Heat Fluid Flow 28(6):1460–1471.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Spalart P, Allmaras S (1992) A one-equation turbulence model for aerodynamic flows. In: 30th Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, Reno, Nevada, USA.

  31. Leishman JG (2006) Principles of helicopter aerodynamics. Cambridge University Press

    Google Scholar 

  32. Caradonna FX, Tung C (1981) Experimental and analytical studies of a model helicopter rotor in hover. NASA TM 81232

  33. Hong YP, Lee DW, Yee KJ, Park SH (2021) Enhanced high-order scheme for high-resolution rotorcraft flowfield analysis. AIAA J doi 10(2514/1):J060803

    Google Scholar 

  34. Hartman EP, Biermann D (1938) The aerodynamic characteristics of full-scale propellers having 2, 3, and 4 blades of Clark y and R.A.F. 6 airfoil sections. NACA TR-640

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations


Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kwanjung Yee.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

The original online version of this article was revised: During the correction process figs. 9 and 11 have been given erroneously.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Seo, Y., Hong, Y. & Yee, K. Numerical Investigation of Wing–Multiple Propeller Aerodynamic Interaction Using Actuator Disk Method. Int. J. Aeronaut. Space Sci. (2022).

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI:


  • Distributed electric propulsion
  • Urban air mobility
  • Wing–propeller interaction
  • Actuator disk method
  • Parametric study
  • Aerodynamic performance