The Report is Generated by DrillBit Plagiarism Detection Software

Submission Information

Author Name Rajni

Title NTCC Report
Paper/Submission ID 538879
Submission Date 2022-06-08 12:13:02
Total Pages 30
Document type Project Work

Result Information

Similarity 6%
1 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Sources Type Report Content

Quotes
Internet 1.76%
3.27%
Journal/
Publicatio Words <
n 5.01% 14,
4.39%

Exclude Information

Quotes Excluded
References/Bibliography Excluded
Sources: Less than 14 Words Similarity Excluded
Excluded Source 0%
Excluded Phrases Not Excluded

A Unique QR Code use to View/Download/Share Pdf File

DrillBit Similarity Report

A-Satisfactory (0-10%)
B-Upgrade (11-40%)

6 7 A C-Poor (41-60%)
D-Unacceptable (61-100%)
SIMILARITY % MATCHED SOURCES GRADE

LOCATION MATCHED DOMAIN % SOURCE TYPE

1 www.scribd.com Internet Data

2

2 Thesis submitted to shodhganga - shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in Publication

1

3 www.scribd.com Internet Data

1

4 Knowledge in operation by Bollinger-1992 Publication

1

5 Microscopic Colitis is Associated with Several Concomitant Diseases by Publication

1
Roth-2013

6 To Pass or Not to Pass How Corporate Characteristics Affect Corporate Publication

<1
by Jonkman-2019

7 Coming into Ones Own John Lockes Theory of Property, God, and Publication
<1
Politics by Brubaker-2012
 NTCC Report On

Aerodynamic Study Of Delta Wing

Submitted To

Amity Institute of Aerospace Engineering

7
In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the award of the degree of

Master of Technology
Aerospace Engineering

Submitted To Submitted By
Dr. Jayant Sinha Rajni Verma
A3799221001
2021-2023
 Declaration by the student

7
I, Rajni Verma, student of M. Tech Aerospace Engineering, hereby declare that the
project titled “Aerodynamic study of delta wings” which is submitted by me to
Department of Aerospace Engineering, Amity Institute of Aerospace Engineering,
Amity University Uttar Pradesh, Noida, in partial fulfillment of requirement for the
3
award of the degree of Master Of technology in Aerospace Engineering, has not been
previously formed the basis for the award of any degree, diploma or other similar title
or recognition.

The Author attests that permission has been obtained for the use of any copy righted
material appearing the Dissertation/Project report other than brief excerpts requiring
only proper acknowledgement in scholarly writing and all such use is acknowledged.

Signature

2
Noida Name and Signature of Student

12-May-2021

CERTIFICATE

2
On the basis of seminar submitted by Rajni Verma, student of M.Tech Aerospace
Engineering, I hereby certify that the NTCC Report “Aerodynamic study of delta
1
wings” which is submitted to Amity Institute of Aerospace Engineering, Amity
University Uttar Pradesh, Noida in partial fulfillment of requirement of the award of
the degree of M.Tech in “Aerospace Engineering”, is an original contribution with the
existing knowledge and faithful record of work carried out by him under my guidance
and supervision.

To the best of my knowledge this work has not been submitted in part or full for any
Degree or Diploma to this University or elsewhere.

Noida

7-june-2022 Dr. Jayant Sinha

1
Amity Institute of Aerospace Engineering
AUUP, Noida

3
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

It is high privilege for me to express my deep sense of gratitude to those entire faculty
members who helped me in the completion of the project, especially my internal guide
Dr. Jayant Sinha, who has always been there at the hour of need.

7 3
I would like to thank Mr. Dr. Jayant sinha for teaching me the basics of aerodynamics,
which formed the foundation upon which I based my entire project and decided to
deepen my knowledge of the same.

My special thanks to all other faculty members, batch mate & seniors of Amity Institute
of Aerospace Engineering, Amity University, Uttar Pradesh for helping me in the
completion of project work and its report submission.

7
Last but not the least, I would like to thank my NTCC Coordinator Dr. Sharbari
Banerjee who helped me in registering for the NTCC, provided me with a wide range
of possible research topics, suggested me the proper guide once I had chosen my
respective topic and provided me the proper format for writing the report.

Rajni Verma
A3799221001

4
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

S.No. Topic Page No.

1. Declaration 3
2. Certificate 4
3. Acknowledgment 5
4. Abstract 9
5. Introduction 10
6. Types of delta wings 13
7. Litrature review 14
8. Research Methodology 27
9. Futuristic scope 29
10. conclusion 30
11. References/Bibliography 31

5
 LIST OF FIGURES

Figure No. Caption of Figure Page No.

1 delta wing shape 10
2 sharp and blunt leading edge 12
3 delta wing configurations 13
4 Types of delta wing 14
5 Bubble type of vortex breakdown 15

6 spiral type of vortex breakdown 16

7 Vortex flow illustration 17

8 vortex bursting 18
9 Flow Topology of a Rounded 19
Leading-Edge Delta Wing

10 Effect of Leading-Edge Vortex Flaps on 21

Longitudinal Stability
11 vortex separation 23
12 Flow classification of delta wing 25
4
13 Delta wing with subsonic leading- 26
edge
5
14 Delta wing with supersonic leading- 27
edge
4
15 Flow separation on delta wing with 28
subsonic leading edge. A =
attachment; S = separation; V =
vortex

6
 5
16 Flow separation on delta wing with 29
supersonic leading edge. SW = shock
wave

ABSTRACT

The vast development in technology is being observed throughout the world and in
every aspects of life . thus the demand of highly efficient , manooeuvrable with high
speed aircraft is rising for military as well as commercial sector of aviation .for the sake
of high performance and efficiency we can take account of delta wings . they are most
famous choice today and lot of researchers have devoted their contribution for it too.
In this study, a detailed discussion of the delta wing is mentioned in a very
systematic way. Examine the clear aspects of an aerodynamic approach to
the delta wing, including behavior at subsonic and supersonic currents.
Several theories such as linearization theory, fuselage effect, and flow
separation have been studied to explain the aerodynamics of delta wings. Describes
an additional concept of flow separation on a strongly retracted wing, which is very
comparable to a delta wing. Most importantly, the futuristic scope of the Delta is well
documented by modifications and developments. Further progress needed for research
is also suggested. This paper examines the study of different types of flow on
the leading edge and surface. A futuristic scope of research will draw more
information from this literature review and work on delta wing advances in new delta
wing technology areas.

7
 INTRODUCTION

A delta wing is a wing that, when viewed from above, resembles a triangle, with the
4
tip commonly cut off. The angle between the leading edge (front) of the wing and the
4
fuselage is often as high as 60 degrees, while the angle between the fuselage and the
trailing edge of the wing is roughly 90 degrees. Horizontal stabilisers are frequently
absent from delta-wing aircraft.Despite the fact that paper air is lighter than air, planes
with delta wings appear to fly well when launched from a high altitude; nonetheless,
delta wings operate badly at low speeds and are frequently unstable (i.e., they do not
stay in level flight on their own). Their key benefit is high-speed flying efficiency.
Almost all delta wings correspond to the low aspect-ratio group. AR = 4/tan(D),
where D is the leading edge sweep angle, is their aspect ratio (this lead to AR less
than 3 in most cases; about 1.8 in the case of Concorde). The average wing thickness
is only a few millimetres.

8
 Figure 1.-delta wing shape

The goal is to determine the wing's aerodynamic properties (CL, Cd, Cm, Cp
distribution, etc.) as well as the wing's lateral and longitudinal stability characteristics
at various operating locations.Delta wings are used by all supersonic aircraft, and they
frequently fly at high angles of attack. They must, for example, fly at a very high
angle of attack during the landing or takeoff phase due to their poor aerodynamic
performance at low speeds. In the reentry phase, future space planes may fly at
extreme angles of attack, even at transonic and supersonic speeds.
When a delta wing aircraft flies at low speeds with a high angle of attack, two huge
counter-rotating leading edge vortices develop.
When a delta wing aircraft travels at even greater speeds, however, the flow gets more
6
difficult because shock waves interact with vortices.The narrow delta wing with sharp
leading edges was the subject of early study on separation-induced leadingedge
vortices. The origin of the leading edge vortex corresponds with the apex of the delta
wing in this design, and main vortex separation is fixed at the sharp leading edge.
The basic structures and states of this flow are well understood (secondary vortices,
vortex collapse, etc.) and will not be discussed here.However, many essential
characteristics of this flow remain unclear, necessitating more experimental
investigation to solidify our understanding of the sharp-edged instance (1). Because
primary separation is no longer fastened at the leading edge, blunt-edged leading-edge
separation is essentially more difficult. In fact, flow conditions and wing shape will
9
influence the commencement of leading-edge vortex separation. The wing may create
completely connected flow at low to moderate angles of attack. Because of the
upwash distribution at the delta wing leading edge, leading edge separation will begin
near the wing tip and move up the leading edge as the angle of attack increases. The
wing will show partial span leading-edge vortex separation with connected flow on
the upstream section of the wing and leading edge vortex separation on the
downstream portion for an angle-of-attack range. Furthermore, separation will occur
near the leading edge at any given station, but not necessarily at the leading edge, as
was the case with the sharp edge.
The mechanics of this flow might be considerably different from the sharp-edged
scenario since the leading-edge separation now occurs from a smooth surface. Delta
wings have a distinct triangular or delta form that distinguishes them from other types
of wings. The first prototype was created in 1867, and many supersonic aircraft
presently rely on them. Low aspect ratios, high taper, and high sweeping are some of
their distinguishing characteristics (Zheng, Ahmed & Zhang 2014, p. 32). The delta
wing form, on the other hand, has several drawbacks.(2) When compared to more
traditional wings, it generates very little lift at low angles of attack (Zheng, Ahmed &
Zhang 2014, p. 31). Delta wings also produce a lot of induced drag because of their
form and high surface area. As a result, it has low aerodynamic efficiency and burns
more fuel. When flying at subsonic speeds, such as during takeoff and landing, this
becomes a problem. Delta wing planes are now seeking to tackle the problem by
taking off and landing at high speeds or utilising high angles of attack. (Zheng,
Ahmed & Zhang 2014, p. 33). These approaches, on the other hand, pose a risk to the
aircraft and those behind it, and therefore necessitate longer runways in order to
achieve faster speeds.(2)

10
 Figure 2: sharp and blunt leading edge

Furthermore, delta wings are commonly cropped, and their pointed wingtip is difficult
to build and structurally fragile, and they delay vortex bursting. On a delta wing, the
centre of gravity is aft, which implies that the horizontal tail can only be positioned in
this location, which is the aft wing. Moving forward, the benefits and drawbacks
might be explored as follows:
ADVANTAGES :-
 Delta wings have a long root chord, which allows them to have thick main spar
white while maintaining a low thickness to chord ratio.
 They also have a larger area with low wing loading during manoeuvres, which
allows them to have a lot of internal volume for fuel and landing gears.
 They can also produce a lot of additional thrust at low speeds and high angles of
attack due to leading edge vortices.
 They don't need a horizontal tail for additional structural support.

In addition, there has been a rising demand to improve aircraft speed and
manoeuvrability (Pevitt & Alam 2014, p. 156). Delta wings have the potential to
move at high speeds, have greater manoeuvrability, and have a high stall angle, as
previously stated. However, before it can be considered a financially viable solution,

11
the downsides must be properly addressed. Because of the increased speed required
during takeoff and landing, low lift generation leads in a significant fuel consumption.
There has been a need to re-examine the fuel burn needed for delta wings at subsonic
speeds and low angles of attack due to increased environmental concerns and the
demand for cost-effective energy efficient goods.(3)
To ameliorate the condition, flow modification and control can be applied. However,
because the flow is more complicated than for conventional wings, there are certain
problems (Zheng, Ahmed & Zhang 2014, p. 33). One proposed approach is to use
upward deflected flaps, which improve lift for low angles of attack and hence reduce
fuel consumption.

TYPES OF DELTA WINGS

Slender and non-slender delta wings are the two types of delta wings. Wings with a
sweep angle of less than 55° are non-slender, whereas those with a sweep angle of
more than 55° are slender. There are also many distinct delta wing variations within
these two categories, such as the lambda delta and cropped delta wing.

Figure 3 : delta wing configurations

The delta wing layout has several variations that improve on the fundamental
configuration.
 Delta canard – Many current fighter aircraft employ a mix of canard foreplanes
with a delta wing, such as the JAS 39 Gripen, the Eurofighter Typhoon, and the
Dassault Rafale.
 Tailed delta – improves handling by adding a traditional tailplane (with horizontal
tail surfaces). Typical of Soviet aircraft like the Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-21.
 Delta that has been cropped - the tip has been removed. At high angles of attack,
this helps sustain lift outboard and reduces wingtip flow separation (stalling). The
majority of deltas are cropped to some extent.

12
 The leading edge of the compound delta, double delta, or cranked arrow is not
straight. Increased sweepback in the inboard region creates a controlled high-lift
vortex without the need for a foreplane. The Saab Draken fighter, the prototype
General Dynamics F-16XL, and the High Speed Civil Transport research are all
examples.
 Similar to the ogee delta (or ogival delta) used on the Anglo-French Concorde
Mach 2 airliner, but with the two portions and chopped wingtip fused into a
smooth ogee curve.

LITERATURE REVIEW

1. UNDERSTANDING VORTEX BREAKDOWN:

13
Vortex collapse can occur with vortex filaments such as: B. Posterior
vertebra. This phenomenon is described by Benjamin (1962) as a rapid and
extreme structural change that sometimes occurs in swirling currents. However,
despite 30 years of research, the physical processes leading to the collapse of
the vortex remain a mystery. There are two forms of vortex collapse:
(1) bubble or axisymmetric type (figure 3)
(2) spiral type ( Figure 4).
The core expands rapidly with the first type of collapse, creating a
virtually axisymmetric bubble-like shape. The centerline of the vortex transforms into
a second type of spiral without a discernible increase in core size. The
axial flow required for splitting slows down along the vortex axis, which is an
important aspect of vortex splitting. Within a bubble, the general direction of axial
flow is often reversed. Photographic data show that bubble-type collapses occur more
frequently in the next vortex, but both types are found in the leading-edge vortex on
the delta wing. The vortex is weak in the collapse structure and the circulation spreads
over a wider area, resulting in a smaller velocity gradient. This does not mean that the
vortex itself subsides, but in either form of flow, the flow is almost always turbulent,
so the vortex dissipates rapidly downstream of the split.

Figure 5: Bubble type of vortex breakdown

14
 Figure 6 :Spiral type vortex breakdown

DELTA WING FOR SUBSONIC FLOW :

In low-speed, high-angle-of-attack flight, the flow surrounding a delta wing inevitably
leads to nonlinear aerodynamic properties. The nonlinear aerodynamic properties are
caused by extremely complicated flow features that are depending on geometry and
flying circumstances, and there are four aspects of particular importance in this study:
(1) the leading-edge vortex
(2)how the leading-edge shape affects delta wing performance
(3) the influence of Reynolds and Mach Number on the leading-edge vortex
(4) several passive and active ways for controlling the leading-edge vortex This part
will present and explore each point of interest, identifying its significance and relevance
for the design study, which led to the research's purpose and goals.

LEADING EDGE VORTEX

The leading-edge vortex, which occurs at high angles-of-attack in low-speed flight, is
a critical flow element of a delta wing. The value of the leading-edge vortex stems from
the additional lift contribution that the vortex provides. When compared to a more
traditional low leading-edge swept wing, this added vortex lift component dramatically
increases the stall angle-of-attack. Gursul et al. [4] have compiled a comprehensive
assessment of the historical and contemporary unstable aerodynamic properties of delta
wings with leading-edge sweeps less than or equal to 55 degrees. Non-slender delta
wings have a sweep of less than 60 degrees, whereas slender delta wings have a sweep
of greater than or equal to 60 degrees.The primary leading-edge vortex is formed by
boundary layer separation at the leading-edge, which rolls up into a primary vortex,
according to them. The leading-edge vortex is a main vortex formed by a collection of

15
separate vortices shedding from the leading-edge [5]. When the primary vortex is fully
generated, it interacts with the boundary layer on the wing's surface, promoting
additional boundary layer separation and resulting in the formation of a secondary
counter rotating vortex. Figure 5 shows an example of the vortex formations generated
on a delta wing.

Figure 7 :Vortex flow illustration

The creation of the secondary vortex is triggered by a high lateral pressure differential
at the first vortex's inboard reattachment site. After then, the boundary layer on the wing
surface at the inboard main vortex reattachment line splits and rolls up into the
secondary counter rotating vortex . The type of the boundary layer on the wing's
surface, whether laminar or turbulent, was discovered to have a significant influence on
the creation of the secondary vortex. When a secondary vortex forms from a laminar
boundary layer, it is substantially bigger than when a secondary vortex forms from a
turbulent boundary layer.
To better understand the leading edge vortex elements, it is important to identify
vortex collapses, commonly referred to as vortex "bursts." Leading
edge vortex collapse occurs when the angle of attack increases as the axial flow of the vortex
decreases rapidly. This causes the vortex to grow and eventually collapse into turbulence.
There are two common types of spiral collapse: bubbles and spirals [9]. As shown in Figure
6a), the collapse of a bubble vortex is defined as the stagnation point of the vortex axis,
causing an elliptical recirculating bubble and causing turbulence. As shown in Fig. 6b), when
the core flow of the spiral decelerates sharply, a spiral flow pattern occurs, and then it
collapses into a turbulent flow, a spiral collapse occurs.

16
 Figure 8 :vortex bursting

LEADING EDGE GEOMETRY

It directly affects the behavior of the vortex shedding. Matetal for a 65 degree sweep
delta. It was found that as the radius of the leading edge increased, the primary vortex
structure shrank, the size of the internal vortex structure increased 9, and
the internal vortex separation line advanced toward the leading edge [7].
Figure 7 shows a flow topology diagram showing vortex nomenclature and
related locations along the wing.

Figure 9 : Flow Topology of a Rounded Leading-Edge Delta Wing

17
Another striking feature of the rounded leading edge delta is the flow attached between
the leading edge and the primary vortex separation line. Luckring (8) measured the
vortex sensitivity and leading edge shape of a 65 degree sweep delta. Lucklings
show that vortices generated by a sharp leading edge tend to be emitted 10
times more upstream at the leading edge, whereas vortices generated by a
blunt leading edge are emitted 10 times further downstream. discovered. While it is
important to understand how the flow behaves in delta wings with different leading
edges, it is also important to understand how the shape of the leading edge affects
aerodynamic performance. Gursul etc. for delta wings swept 50 degrees. It was
found that the effect of the leading edge shape began to affect only the slope of the lift
curve in the stall state (4). The slopes of both the sharp and rounded leading edge lift
curves were constant up to an angle of attack of 20 degrees. Non-slim delta wings with
rounded leading edges have a higher maximum lift coefficient than sharp leading
edge delta wings after a 20 degree pitch. For a rounded leading edge delta, the
higher the maximum lift value, the less serious the stall scenario. On the other
hand, the shape of the tip did not appear to have a significant impact on the
aerodynamic performance of the thin delta wing.

REYNOLDS AND MACH NUMBER EFFECT ON L.E VORTEX

The leading-edge vortex has also been shown to be sensitive to Mach and Reynolds
number; particularly, Luckring discovered a link between changes in these parameters
and the separation position of the leading-edge vortex. The leading-edge vortex
separation is delayed farther downstream of the leading-edge when the Mach number
is kept constant (M = 0.4) and the Reynolds number is raised (6 – 60 million). The
leading-edge vortex separation point moves upstream on the leading-edge as the Mach
number increases (M = 0.4–0.6) but the Reynolds number remains constant (60 million)
[8]. Mat et al. also discovered that when the Reynolds number rises, the primary
leading-edge 11 vortex originates more downstream on the wing and the inboard vortex
shifts closer to the leading edge, [10]. Henderson [9] discovered that increased
Reynolds numbers had an influence on the lift coefficient and prospective lift theory.
The angle-of-attack at which the experimental lift curve deviates from potential flow
lift grows as the Reynolds number increases.

18
METHODS TO CONTROL L.E VORTEX

Edge vortices Due to the importance of cutting-edge vortices,

aggressive approaches to managing them have been considered. Recently,
technologies including active flow control devices are being considered. For example,
GadelHak [5] conducted a series of tests using a delta leading edge vent that
periodically expels high-pressure air in the same direction as the delta leading edge. It
has been discovered that the leading edge vortex can be altered using different pulsed
air frequencies from the leading edge port. Passive vertebral control is a means of
managing leading edge vortices that is more consistent with this study. Leading
edge vortex flaps are a typical passive control mechanism. When seeking to improve
maneuverability, leading edge vortex flaps can be a valuable addition to an aircraft by
affecting the lift-to-drag ratio of the wing. Rinoie [11] performed a series of tests on a
60 degree delta leading edge vortex flap to see how the leading edge radius
affects flap performance. It has been found that increasing the leading edge radius of
the flap significantly reduces drag. However, this reduction in drag was not seen in the
minimum drag zone with a lift coefficient of 0.0 to 0.25. Renoy also observed that the
deflected round vortex flap 12 at the leading edge had a better lift-drag ratio to a
larger lift coefficient than the deflected sharp flap [18]. Lift coefficients of 0.6 and 0.8
showed the greatest improvement

Figure 10: Effect of Leading-Edge Vortex Flaps on Longitudinal Stability

19
Marchman also looked at how a delta wing's aerodynamic properties might be affected
by an inverted leading-edge vortex flap [12]. An inverted leading-edge flap is deflected
upwards, whereas a standard leading-edge flap is deflected down (in the aircraft
reference frame). An inverted flap dramatically boosted lift for low angles-of-attack,
with a 60 percent improvement in lift coefficient for the delta wing evaluated at a 5
degree angle-of-attack.

LINEARIZED THEORY
The linearized theory for the slender body with modest angle of attack (Munk, 1924;
RT Jones, 1945) leads to a straightforward conclusion: lift is produced in the conical
flow caused by the streamwise change of span b. (x). At the apex of the delta, there is
a singularity where the theoretical pressure is infinite.
CL=2 is the lift coefficient expression, which is true only for very low aspect ratios
(AR=1). The induced drag coefficient is, which is less than half of the value predicted
at angle of attack. The pressure is also solitary at 2/3 chord from the sharp leading-edge,
where the centre of pressure is located.

FUSELAGE EFFECT
A more comprehensive formulation (Ashley-Landhal, 1965) may be used to evaluate
the influence of a fuselage, which produces a lift coefficient in the wing-body
configuration that is lower than the wing-alone design.
A better strategy to predicting the fundamental coefficients is to use lifting surface
theory (for example, the vortex lattice method). There are other ways for arrowhead
wings and wings in yawed flow (Mangler, 1955). (Carafoli, 1969).

1. DELTA WING IN SUPERSONIC FLOW:-

Delta wings are a good plan form for flying at supersonic and hypersonic speeds, thus
there's been a lot of interest in studying the impacts of high Mach numbers for a long
time.

20
The independence concept (Buseman, 1935) allows for distinct investigations of wings
with subsonic and supersonic leading edges (e.g.for which the normal Mach number is
below or above the speed of sound).

2. SEPARATION CHARACTERISTIC OF DELTA WING:-

Leading edge separation is a characteristic of wings with subsonic leading edges,
whereas Prandtl-Meyer expansion is a characteristic of wings with supersonic leading
edges.
Sweep, free-stream Mach number, angle of attack, and wing thickness are the major
characteristics of the wing issue. All of these factors' impacts may be condensed into a
single plane alfan-Machn, allowing the occurrence of subsonic or supersonic flow to be
diagnosed as a function of the parameters (Stanbrook- Squire, 1964).

Figure 11: vortex separation

Lifting Characteristics
When choosing the right wing shape, it's critical to consider the influence of airfoil
profile, aspect ratio, and Mach number on the lifting properties of delta wings. The
anticipated flow around a delta wing at zero lift has been demonstrated to be a strong

21
consequence of these characteristics, and the nonlinear effects would be expected to
develop dramatically when the wing is carried to a lifting state. The current linear
theory-based design philosophy for delta wings posits that a flat wing's lift and drag
owing to lift are merely a function of the leadingedge sweep angle and Mach number.
The lifting properties are displayed in summary graphs that emphasise the drag, lift,
and pitching-moment characteristics.
Lee-side flow characteristics
The flow across the top and lower surfaces of the wing is described as attached at zero
angle of attack; however, when the wing approaches angle of attack, the lee-side flow
characteristics can alter substantially (. In general, there are two types of lee-side flow
over a wing at angle of attack: connected and detached. In addition to the free-stream
flow conditions, the wing planform, airfoil profile, and wing camber influence the
formation and nature of each flow type. At the top of the picture, the values of MN and
CYN that are favourable to the occurrence of an associated flow over the lee side of a
zero-thick delta wing are displayed. Flow is subcritical in the cross-flow plane (small
crossflow velocity) in zero to low-lift circumstances, with streamwise flow as the
primary flow direction. As lift rises, the flow turning angle around the leading edge
rises, causing the flow to accelerate and the inboard flow component to rise. The cross
flow will eventually turn streamwise when the flow recompresses. As the lift increases,
so does the cross-flow component of the flow, as does the consequent recompression,
as seen in figure 9, eventually leading to a cross-flow shock. The presence of a
crossflow shock system indicates that nonlinear supercritical-type flow exists. Shock-
induced separation of the boundary layer and the creation of a leading-edge bubble
occurs as lift rises. A leading-edge separation system, which is characterised by a
viscous, rotating mass of air inboard of the wing leading edge, is the second kind of
flow that occurs on the lee side of a wing. (See the lower half of fig.). A leading-edge
bubble forms in low-lift circumstances, and as the angle of attack increases, the bubble
rises off the wing surface and transforms into a vortex. As the angle of attack is
increased, a secondary vortex forms, and finally a vortex with shock forms. The vortex
body is attached to the wing surface through the vortex stem or feed sheet in a vortex
system. The feed sheet is also a viscous flow area that originates at the wing leading
edge from the wing boundary layer. The form and position of the viscous vortex system
are determined by the flow field that interacts with the vortex until an equilibrium state
is reached. The vortex system operates as a physical border to the exterior flow field
22
system boundary in the steady-state model. As the flow revolves around the vortex, the
free-stream flow extends around the wing leading edge and follows the shape of the
vortex system, expanding and then recompressing

Figure 12: Flow classification of delta wing

REMARK :
The use of a nonlinear computational approach was used to calculate the zero-lift wave-
drag characteristics of delta wings with diamond, circular-arc, and NACA modified
four-digit-series airfoils. For all combinations of geometry and flow parameters under
examination, the nonlinear analysis differed significantly from accurate linear-theory
predictions. The nonlinear analysis revealed that the zerolift wave-drag correlation
relationship is maintained for slender wings with highly subsonic leading edges;
however, as wing geometry becomes nonslender, the flow around the wing becomes
nonlinear, and the relationships that define the zero-lift wave-drag correlation
parameter are lost.The effects of wing leading-edge sweep, leading-edge bluntness,
wing thickness and camber on the aerodynamic properties of delta wings at lifting
circumstances have been analysed and reported in the form of graphs that may be used
to examine the aerodynamics in the early design phase. For the lift-curve slope,

23
nonlinear lift effects, maximum lift, longitudinal stability, and distribution of lift
between the upper and lower surfaces of a wing, empirical curves have been created.
Furthermore, the effect of different airfoil specifications, wing leading-edge sweep, and
lift coefficient on drag-due-to-lift characteristics has been theoretically
demonstrated.The different graphs that illustrate the aerodynamics of delta wings at
zero-lift and lifting circumstances were then used to establish a preliminary wing design
approach that incorporated the low-lift and high-lift design requirements to define a
workable design space.

DELTA WING WITH SUBSONIC LEADING EDGE :

If the sweep angle is larger than the Mach angle, the wing is within the Mach cone,
resulting in totally subsonic leading edges, as seen in Fig. . Linearized theory yields
simpler formulations for the key aerodynamic characteristics, which are useful for
describing wing action.
According to an expression that is very close for incidences smaller than 5 degrees, the
lift coefficient is dependent on the aspect-ratio (Ashley-Landhal, 1965). According to
the idea, the high leading edge suction produces a leading edge push, which reduces
drag (in practise only a small amount of this suction can be realised)

Figure 13: Delta wing with subsonic leading-edge

24
5
DELTA WING WITH SUPERSONIC LEADING EDGE:
Because of the significantly wider sweep angle, the leading-edge is within the Mach
cone (Fig. 2). There is no interaction of flows between the top and lower surfaces in
this situation.
The pressure jump has a defined expression at every given position on the wind surface,
which is constant along lines across the wing vertex (conical flow). For as long as the
leading edge is supersonic, integration of the pressure jump reveals that the lift
coefficient is independent of the sweep angle, and the lift-curve slope is likewise
independent of the angle of attack.

Figure 14: Delta wing with supersonic leading-edge

Carafoli (1969) describes analytic analyses of a variety of delta wings, polygonal wings,
and T-wings in yawed flow.

FLOW SEPARATION ON HIGHLY SWEPT WINGS: -

Flow through thin delta wings (wings with tiny aspect ratios) is almost always and to a
large degree divided. Separation begins at the leading edge and progresses streamwise,
resulting in a sequence of vortical zones with a conical form. The slenderness
determines the angle of attack at which these vortices emerge.

25
When the leading edge is sharp, separation occurs, which results to performances that
are mostly independent of the Reynolds number. A multitude of events are caused by
the existence of leading-edge vortices.
The lift coefficient exceeds what linearized theory predicts (see below). The separating
vortices create a suction effect, which causes this. Vortex lift is defined as the difference
between the lift's linear value and its actual value.
On the suction side of the wing, the leading-edge vortices produce a low-pressure field.
A reason for higher lift is increased suction (point above).
Because of the vortex instability, stall occurs at a significant angle of attack, causing
vortex burst. The suction effect ceases when the vortex core explodes. If a vortex burst
occurs far beyond the trailing edge, it has little or no impact; but, if a vortex burst occurs
on the wing itself, it reduces vortex lift.
The vortex pattern behind the delta wing is determined by slenderness, which is
combined with angle of attack to determine the vortex burst.
Vortex aysmmetry emerges on extremely skinny wings at lower and lower angles of
attack, indicating that the vortex is reaching its physical limitations and becoming
unstable.
The features of flow separation are affected by speed (Mach number), wing sweep,
angle of attack, and wing thickness.
Leading edge separation dominates wings with a subsonic leading edge. Figure 15
shows secondary separation at moderate to high angles of attack.
A Prandtl-Meyer expansion behind the bow shock and an associated leading edge flow
define wings with supersonic leading edges. Figure 16

26
Figure 15: Flow separation on delta wing with subsonic leading edge. A = attachment;
S = separation; V = vortex.

27
Figure 16: Flow separation on delta wing with supersonic leading edge. SW = shock
wave

FUTURISTIC SCOPE OF STUDY :

Work in the Future For differences in angle-of-attack, the capabilities of the deflected
wing tips have been thoroughly investigated. The next stage in evaluating the
innovative delta wing platform would be to do side-slip experiments on all of the
deflected wing tip variants. Slide-slip testing for all of the different wing tip deflections
would reveal how the wing tips affect the aircraft model's lateral and directional
stability. Another series of testing involves skimming through side-slip angles while
running the model at various angles of attack. A new sting attachment bracket to the
parallelogram linkage must be developed and constructed for the combined pitch and
side-slip testing. Control surfaces must be fitted on the model in order to evaluate the
elevator and rudder efficacy for all wing tip configurations in order to fully comprehend
the model's stability characteristics. As a result of the fuselage's modular construction,
other delta wing planforms may be simply analysed moving ahead. A double delta and
an ogive delta are two options for delta wing configurations. Rotating wing tips might
be added to these novel planforms as well. It would be fascinating to examine if the
distinct tendencies shown in this thesis on a normal delta wing can also be noticed on
other delta wing designs.

CONCLUSION

The flow over a delta wing is unique due to the vortex element that separates off of
the leading-edge of the wing. The vortex provides additional lift generation and
enables a delta wing to produce lift for much higher angles-of-attack than that of a
rectangular wing. These unique flow characteristics of a delta wing are the focus of
this thesis. The low-speed aerodynamic characteristics of a novel delta wing layout
with deflected wing tips have been investigated and presented. The primary
motivation to investigate a delta wing and its subsonic capabilities was to advance the
research and development of UAV technologies that are of current interest at The
Ohio State University Aerospace Research Center. An increase in Reynolds number,
with Mach number held constant, was demonstrated to delay the onset of leading-
28
edge vortex separation. Conversely, and increase in Mach number, with Reynolds
number held constant, was demonstrated to promote leading-edge vortex separation.
These effects of Mach and Reynolds number can be comparable in magnitude but
opposite in sign and were shown to be significant at angles of attack representative of
maneuver conditions. It appears to be vital therefore to isolate Mach and Reynolds
number effects. Hence the study of major aspects of delta wing was studied
completely for future CFD analysis and research .

REFERENCES/BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. REYNOLDS NUMBER, COMPRESSIBILITY, AND LEADING-EDGE BLUNTNESS

EFFECTS ON DELTA-WING AERODYNAMICS James M. Luckring NASA Langley Research
Center Hampton, Virginia, U.S.A.

2. Zheng, Y, Ahmed, NA & Zhang, W 2014, 'ENHANCING SUBSONIC PERFORMANCE OF DELTA

WING AT LOW ANGLES OF ATTACK', Advances & Applications in Fluid Mechanics, vol 16, no.
1, pp. 31-56.

3. Pevitt, C & Alam, F 2014, 'Static Computational Fluid Dynamics simulations around a specialised
delta wing', COMPUTERS & FLUIDS, vol 100, pp. 155-164.

4. Gursul, I., Gordnier, R., and Visbal, M., “Unsteady Aerodynamics of Nonslender Delta Wings.”
Progress in Aerospace Sciences, Vol. 41, No. 7, 2005, pp. 515-557.
doi:10.1016/j.paerosci.2005.09.002.

5. Gad-el-Hak, M., and Ron F. B., “The Discrete Vortices from a Delta Wing.” AIAA Journal, Vol.
23, No. 6, 1985, pp. 961–962. doi: 10.2514/3.9016

6. Payne, F. M., Nelson, R. C., “An Experimental Investigation of Vortex Breakdown on a Delta
Wing.” NASA Langley Research Center Vortex Flow Aerodynamics, vol. 1, July 1986, pp. 135-
161.

29
7. Furman, A., and Breitsamter C., “Turbulent and Unsteady Flow Characteristics of Delta Wing
Vortex Systems.” Aerospace Science and Technology, Vol. 24, No. 1, 2013, pp. 32–44. doi:
10.1016/j.ast.2012.08.007.

8. Luckring, J., “Reynolds Number, Compressibility, and Leading-Edge Bluntness Effects on Delta-
Wing Aerodynamics.” 24th International Congress of The Aeronautical Sciences, 2004, doi:
10.2514/6.2002-419.

9. Henderson, W. P., “Effects of Wing Leading-Edge Radius and Reynolds Number on

Longitudinal Aerodynamic Characteristics of Highly Swept Wing-Body Configurations at
Subsonic Speeds.” NASA Technical Report, NASA-TN-D-8361, L-11017, December 1976

10. Mat S.B., Green, R., Galbraith, R., Coton, F., “The Effect of Edge Profile on Delta Wing Flow.”
Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part G: Journal of Aerospace Engineering,
vol. 230, no. 7, 2016, pp. 1252–1262., doi: 10.1177/0954410015606939. .

11. Rinoie, K., “Experiments on a 60-Degree Delta Wing with Rounded Leading-Edge Vortex Flaps.”
Journal of Aircraft, Vol. 37, No. 1, 2000. pp. 37-44. doi: 10.2514/2.2559.

12. Marchman, J. F., “Effectiveness of Leading-Edge Vortex Flaps on 60 and 75 Degree Delta
Wings.” Journal of Aircraft, Vol. 18, No. 4, 1981, pp. 280–286. doi: 10.2514/3.44702.

30