Linear Aerodynamics of Wings and Bodies

  • Josef Rom


The beginnings of modern mathematical analysis of Fluid Mechanics may be attributed to Euler (1707–1783). The differential equations representing the conservation rules of mass, momentum and energy for inviscid potential flows are known as Euler equations. Analytical solutions to Euler equations have been obtained for some two-dimensional and a few three-dimensional flow problems. For small disturbances in subsonic (below the critical Mach number) and supersonic flows, the equations for the perturbation velocities can be linearized, and exact or approximate analytical or numerical solutions can be developed. Small disturbance conditions require that aerodynamic configurations consist either of thin lifting surfaces and/or slender elongated bodies at small angles of attack. Linearized potential equations for subsonic and supersonic flows, the Laplace and the Wave equations, respectively, can be solved by superposition of elementary solutions of the corresponding subsonic or supersonic singularities — source, doublet and/or vortex. The full potential flow equations for transonic speeds, which are inherently nonlinear, can be solved by numerical methods.


Control Point Supersonic Flow AIAA Paper Lift Coefficient Vortex Lattice 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Bristow, D.R. and Hawk, J.D. (1983), “Subsonic Panel Method for Designing Wing Surfaces from Pressure Distribution”, NASA CR 3713.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Callaghan, J.G. and Beatty, T.D. (1972), “A Theoretical Method for the Analysis and Design of Multi-Element Airfoils”, Douglas Aircraft Co. Engineering Paper No. 5967.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Carmichael, R.L. and Woodward, F.A. (1966), “An Integrated Approach to the Analysis and Design of Wings and Wing-Body Combinations in Supersonic Flow”, NASA TN D-3685.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Carmichael, R.L. and Erickson, L.L. (1981), “PAN AIR - A Higher Order Panel Method for Predicting Subsonic or Supersonic Linear Potential Lows About Arbitrary Configurations”, AIAA Paper 81–1255.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cenko, A., Tinoco, E.N., Dyer, R.D. and DeJongh, J. (1981), “PAN AIR Applications to Weapon Carriage and Separation”, Journal of Aircraft, Vol. 18, No. 2, pp. 128–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Coppersmith, R.M., Youngren, H.H. and Bouchard, E.E. (1983), “Quadrilateral Element Panel Method (QUADPAN)”, Theoretical Report (Version 3), Lockheed-California Co. LR-30500.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Derbyshire, T. and Sidewell, K.W. (1982), “PAN AIR Summary Document (Version 1.0)”, NASA CR-3250.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ehlers, F.E., Johnson, F.T. and Rubbert, P.E. (1976), “A Higher Order Panel Method for Linearized Supersonic Flow”, AIAA Paper 76–381.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ehlers, F.E., Epton, M.A., Johnson, F.T., Magnus, A.E. and Rubbert, P.E. (1979), “A Higher Order Panel Method for Linearized Supersonic Flow”, NASA CR-3062.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Erickson, L.L. and Strande, S.M. (1983), “PAN AIR: Evolution and New Directions”, AIAA Paper 83–1831.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Falkner, V.M. (1947), “The Solution of the Lifting Plane Problems by Vortex Lattice Theory”, British ARC R&M 2591.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Falkner, V.M. (1948), “Calculated Loadings Due to Incidence of a Number of Straight and Swept Back Wings”, British ARC R&M 2596.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Fornasier, L. (1984), “Treatment of Supersonic Configurations by an Updated Low-Order Panel Method” Journal of Aircraft, Vol. 21, No. 4, pp. 227–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Fornasier, L. (1984), “HISSS — A Higher-Order Subsonic/Supersonic Singu-larity Method for Calculating Linearized Potential Flow” AIAA 84–1646.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Geising, J.P. and Smith, A.M.O. (1967), “Potential Flow About Two-Dimensional Hydrofoils”, Journal of Fluid Mechanics, Vol. 28, pp. 113–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Geising, J.P. (1910), “Two-Dimensional Potential Flow Theory for Multiple Bodies in Small Amplitude Motion”, AIAA Journal, Vol. 8, pp. 1944–1953.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Goodsell, A., Madson, M.D. and Melton, J. (1989), “TRANAIR and Euler Computations of a Generic Fighter Including Comparisons with Experiments”, AIAA Paper 89–0263.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hess, J.L. and Smith, A.M.O. (1965), “A General Method for Calculat-ing Low Speed Flows About Inlets”, AGARDograph 103, Aerodynamics of Power Plant Installation.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hess, J.L. and Smith, A.M.O. (1966), “Calculation of Potential Flow About Arbitrary Bodies”, in Progress in Aeronautical Sciences, Vol. 8, pp. 1–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Hess, J.L. (1972), “Calculation of Potential Flow About Arbitrary Three-Dimensional Lifting Bodies”, Final Technical Report, McDonald-Douglas Co., Report No. MDC J5679–01, (AD 755 480).Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hess, J.L. (1975), “Review of Integral Equation Techniques for Solving Potential Flow Problems with Emphasis on the Surface-Source Method”, in Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, Vol. 5, pp. 145–196.CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Hunt, B. (1978), “The Panel Method for Subsonic Aerodynamic Flows: A Survey ofMathematical Formulations and Numerical Models and an Outline of the New British Aerospace Scheme”, Von-Karman Institute for Fluid Dynamics, Lecture Series 1978–4.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Johnson, F.T. and Rubbert, P.E. (1975), “Advanced Panel-Type Influence Coefficient Methods Applied to Subsonic Flows”, AIAA Paper 75–50.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Johnson, F.T. (1980), “A General Panel Method for the Analysis and Design of Arbitrary Configurations in Incompressible Flow”, NASA CR-3079.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kraus, W. (1978), “Panel Methods in Aerodynamics”, in Numerical Methods in Fluid Dynamics, Wirz, H.J. and Smolderen, J.J. (eds.), McGraw-Hill Book Co., N.Y., pp. 237–297.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Lamar, J.E. (1968), “A Modified Multhopp Approach for Predicting Lifting Pressure and Camber Shape for Composite Planforms in Subsonic Flow”, NASA TN D-4427.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Landrum, E.J. and Miller, D.S. (1981), “Assessment of Analytic Methods for the Prediction of Supersonic Flow Over Bodies”, AIAA Journal, Vol. 19, No. 2, pp. 160–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Madson, M.D. (1987), “Transonic Analysis of the F-16A with Under-Wing Fuel Tanks: An Application of the TRANAIR Full-Potential Code” AIAA Paper 87–1198.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Margason, R.J. and Lamar, J.E. (1971), “Vortex Lattice Fortran Program for Estimating Subsonic Aerodynamics Characteristics of Complex Planforms”, NASA TN D 6142.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Margason, R.J., Kjelgaard, S.O., Sellers, W.L. III, Morris, C.E.K. Jr., Walkey, K.B. and Shields, E.W. (1985), “Subsonic Panel Methods — A Comparison of Several Production Codes”, AIAA Paper 85–0280.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Maruyama, Y. and Akishita, S. (1986), “Numerical Simulations of Supersonic Flows About Arbitrary Configurations Using A New Panel Method Program”, AIAA Paper 86–2181.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Maskew, B. (1982a), “Prediction of Subsonic Aerodynamic Characteristics: A Case for Low-Order Panel Methods”, Journal of Aircraft, Vol. 19, No. 2, pp. 157–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Maskew, B. (1982b), “Program VSAERO, A Computer Program for Calculating the Nonlinear Aerodynamic Characteristics of Arbitrary Configurations”, NASA CR-166476.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Miller, S.G. and Youngblood, D.B. (1983), Applications of USSAERO-B and the PAN AIR Production Code to the CDAF Model a Canard/Wing Configuration“ AIAA Paper 83–1829.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Miranda, L.R., Elliot, R.D. and Baker, W.M. (1977), “A Generalized Vortex Lattice Method for Subsonic and Supersonic Flow Applications”, NASA CR 2865.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Morino, L. (1974), “A General Theory of Unsteady Compressible Potential Aerodynamics”, NASA CR 2464.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Morino, L. and Kuo, C.C. (1974), “Subsonic Potential Aerodynamics for Complex Configurations: A General Theory”, AIAA Journal, Vol. 12, No. 2.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Morino, L., Chen, L.T. and Suciu, E.O. (1975), “Steady and Oscillatory Subsonic and Supersonic Aerodynamics Around Complex Configurations”, AIAA Journal, Vol. 13, No. 3, pp. 368–374.CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Morino, L. (1980), “Steady, Oscillatory and Unsteady Subsonic and Supersonic Aerodynamics — Production Version (SOUSSA - P1.1), Vol. I. Theoretical Manual”, NASA CR-159130.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Multhopp, H. (1950), “Methods for Calculating the Lift Distribution of Wings (Subsonic Lifting-Surface Theory)”, British ARC R&M No. 2884.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    “PAN AIR — A Computer Program for Predicting Subsonic or Supersonic Linear Potential Flows About Arbitrary Configurations Using a Higher Order Panel Method (Version 1).Google Scholar
  42. Vol. I — Theory Document, NASA CR-3251, 1980.Google Scholar
  43. Vol. II — Users Manual, NASA CR-3252, 1980.Google Scholar
  44. Vol. III — Case Manual, NASA CR-3253, 1980.Google Scholar
  45. Vol. IV — Maintenance Manual, CR-3254, 1980.Google Scholar
  46. 42.
    Robinson, A. (1948), “On Source and Vortex Distributions in Linearized Theory of Steady Supersonic Flow”, Quart. J. Mech. Appl. Math. I, pp. 408–432, also in Selected Papers of Abraham Robinson, Yale University Press, 1979, pp. 126–150.Google Scholar
  47. 43.
    Roggero, F. and Larguier, R. (1990), “Aerodynamic Calculation of Complex Three-Dimensional Configurations”, ICAS Paper 90–6.4.3. pp. 770–781.Google Scholar
  48. 44.
    Rom, J., Almosnino, D. and Gordon, R. (1981), “Method for the Calculation of the Non-Linear Aerodynamic Characteristics of Thick Wings and Bodies Including Symmetric Vortex Separation in Subsonic Flow”, TAE Report No. 437, Dept. of Aerospace Engineering, Technion, I.I.T., Haifa, Israel.Google Scholar
  49. 45.
    Rubbert, P.E. and Saaris, G.R. (1972), “Review and Evaluation of a Three-Dimensional Lifting Potential Flow Analysis Method for Arbitrary Configurations”, AIAA Paper 72–188.Google Scholar
  50. 46.
    Samant S.S., Bussoletti, J.E., Johnson, F.T., Burkhart, R.H., Everson, B.L., Melvin, R.G., Young, D.P., Erickson, L.L., Madson, M.D. and Woo, ABC. (1987), “TRANAIR: A Computer Code for Transonic Analysis of Arbitrary Configurations”, AIAA Paper 87–0034.Google Scholar
  51. 47.
    Sears, W.R. (ed), (1954), High Speed Aerodynamics and Jet Propulsion; Vol. VI: General Theory of High Speed Aerodynamics, Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  52. 48.
    Tennenbaum, M.G. (1991), “Calculation of the Interaction between Close-Coupled Surfaces in Supersonic Flow”, M.Sc. Thesis, Faculty of Aerospace Engineering, Technion, I.I.T., Haifa, Israel.Google Scholar
  53. 49.
    Thomas, J.L. and Miller, D.S. (1979), “Numerical Comparisons of Panel Methods at Subsonic and Supersonic Speeds”, AIAA Paper 79–0404.Google Scholar
  54. 50.
    Thomas, J.L., Lurcking, J.L. and Sellers, W.L. III (1983), “Evaluation of Factors Determining the Accuracy of Linearized Subsonic Panel Methods”, AIAA Paper 83–1826.Google Scholar
  55. 51.
    Tseng, W., Feinberg, E. and Cenko, A. (1989), “TRANAIR Applications to Fighter Configurations”, AIAA Paper 89–2220 CP.Google Scholar
  56. 52.
    Tinoco, E.N., Johnson, F.T. and Freeman, L.M. (1979), “The Application of a Higher Order Panel Method to Realistic Supersonic Configurations”, AIAA Paper 79–0274. Also, Journal of Aircraft, Vol. 17, No. 1, 1980, pp. 38–44.Google Scholar
  57. 53.
    Ward, G.N. (1955), Linearized Theory of Steady High-Speed Flow,Cambridge University Press.MATHGoogle Scholar
  58. 54.
    Woodward, F.A. (1968), “Analysis and Design of Wing-Body Combinations at Subsonic and Supersonic Speeds”, Journal of Aircraft, Vol. 5, No. 6, pp. 528–534.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 55.
    Woodward, F.A. (1973), “An Improved Method for the Aerodynamic Analysis of Wing-Body-Tail Configurations in Subsonic and Supersonic Flow, Part I - Theory and Application”, NASA CR-2228.Google Scholar
  60. 56.
    Woodward, F.A. (1980), “USSAERO Computer Program Development, Versions B and C”, NASA CR 3227.Google Scholar
  61. 57.
    Woodward, F.A. and Landrum, E.J. (1980), “The Supersonic Triplet - A New Aerodynamic Panel Singularity with Directional Properties”, AIAA Journal, Vol 18, No. 2, pp. 138–142.CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  62. 58.
    Woodward, F.A. and Fornasier, L. (1984), “Investigation of the Triplet Concept Using a Higher-Order Supersonic Panel Method”, ICAS Paper 84–1.1.1. pp. 31–40.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag New York, Inc. 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • Josef Rom
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Aerospace EngineeringTechnion-Israel Institute of TechnologyHaifaIsrael

Personalised recommendations