INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW

This chapter introduces the aerodynamic loads acting

on the aircraft such as lift and drag. One of the major
problem acting on the aircraft performance is drag
force so; its component must be illustrated. Also study
how to reduce the vortices at wing tip that causes
induced drag type by winglet addition. The winglet
types and parameters of winglet are illustrated.
 Advantages of winglets

Tip vortices are major problem in aircraft conditions, which increase drag on the aircraft wing.
Drag is a phenomenon needs to solved, specially induced drag. To avoid this phenomenon of drag,
tip fens and winglet is appeared to decrease fuel consumption, improve aircraft performance, caring
in air traffic control and decrease tip vortices. Winglet is mechanism attached to the wing tip. A
winglet is a device used to improve the efficiency of the aircraft by reducing induced drag without
adding greatly to the structural stresses. Advantages of the winglet are following:

⮚ Reduced induced drag

⮚ Improved fuel efficiency
⮚ Increased range and more payload
⮚ Reduced noise effects due to vortex effects
⮚ Reduced the amount of carbon emissions
⮚ Helpful in air traffic control
The four forces acting on an airplane

Drag is directed along and opposed to the

flight direction. Like lift, there are many
factors that affect the magnitude of the drag
force, including the shape of the aircraft, the
"stickiness" of the air, and the velocity of the
aircraft. Like lift, we collect all of the
individual components' drags and combine
them into a single aircraft drag magnitude.
And like lift, drag acts through the aircraft's
center of pressure
 Vortex drag (induced drag in subsonic flow)
The induced drag is the drag directly associated with the production of lift. This results from the dependency of the
induced drag on the angle of attack. As the angle of attack of the aircraft (i.e., lift coefficient) varies, this type of
drag is changed. The wing is the major aircraft component contributor for the lift production. Thus, about 80% of
the induced drag comes from the wing; about 10% comes from the tail; and the rest originates from other
components. Fluid flow pattern around a simple wing alone is presented on the left and the wingtip flow feature on
the right of Fig. below.

Flow around simple wing and its wingtip

 When a wing profile is not symmetrical (or when there is a nonzero angle of incidence), a velocity difference
is uphold between upper and lower surfaces. This creates a pressure difference and a circulation around the
wing: lift is generated. At wingtip, fluid from the high pressure surface tends to go to low pressure. There is a
secondary flow at the wingtip illustrated in Fig. below that leads to vortex creation. Induced drag comes from
this wingtip vortex.

(a) Front view of the wing, (b) Isometric of the wing showed a secondary flow
 Vortices behind wing due to secondary flow

(a) Flow pattern of the velocity (b) Vortex sheet from the trailing edge
 Types of winglets
The winglet is the name for the physical device attached to the tip of the wing. Different types of winglet exist but
they have the same purpose: reducing induced drag. First winglet principle is detailed then particular cases like
wingtip fences or blended winglets are focused.

This winglet could be simply seen as a plate stuck to

Simple winglet with sharp edge wingtip. The Figures shows examples of this type of
connection winglet. This means that between the wing and winglet,
there is a corner with a sharp angle.

Advantage is the low cost of manufacture and

assembling. Indeed, this is less time and cost consuming
than building a perfect fitted winglet to the wing.

Simple winglet on B747-400 Simple winglet on A340-200

 Blended Winglet
Blended winglet was developed by Grazter from Seattle in
1994. The unique design in this winglet is no sharp edge found
at the wing/winglet intersection and followed by a smooth curve
shown in fig1.16. The blended winglet is the simplest of all of
them. A winglet blocking the airflow and elimination the large
vortices discussed earlier shown in fig below.
Blended winglet
Shifted downstream winglet
Another way to prevent the risk of a flow separation due to
high adverse pressure gradient at the junction is to create a
winglet that is shifted downstream. This kind of winglets is
also well-known as wingtip fence. Indeed, it is like a barrier at
wingtip that blocks secondary flows. The winglet shifted
downstream leads to the same effect as the blended winglet:
the fluid cannot be separated. In this case, there are the
advantages of blended winglet and the weight is still limited wingtip fence A380
because the wingtip fence is rather small compared to the
blended one.
 Raked tip
The raked tip is attached with the
main wingtip with higher angle of
sweep than the main wing. Boeing
777 long-range jets have been
designed with raked wingtip, as
shown in Fig. 1.17.
Raked winglet on Boeing 777 long-range
jets
spiroid tip
One end of the spiroid tip is attached to the forward
part of the wing tip and continues to form a spiral
loop which ends at the aft portion of the wing tip, as
shown in Fig. 1.18. Hence it looks oval shaped
when viewed from front. Spiroid tipped wing was
created to reduce the induced drag and also to
reduce the noise effects associated with the tip
vortices.
Spiroid tipped wing
 Outline of thesis
The present work, study numerical and experimental effect of winglet shape (simple winglet
& blended winglet) on wing aircraft aerodynamic performance and structure analysis. Chapter
one, the introduction of the winglet and how to reduce induced drag is introduced. As following
chapters this study performed for this thesis. Chapter two is a review of the different shapes of
winglets research and winglets design approach description. Chapter three introduces governing
equation. Chapter four illustrates rectangular wing validation. Chapter five is the aerodynamics
characteristics on performance of aircraft wing using CFD analysis. Chapter six is Experimental
study for different shapes winglets in the institute of aviation engineering and technology,
aerodynamics laboratory wind tunnel Chapter seven structural analyses of different shapes
winglets is carried out under steady state conditions using FE software. Chapter eight,
conclusions and discussion of results and data analysis is introduced.
literature
Review
 This chapter presents a historical overview of winglet
developments over the past years, with a focus on
improvements of winglet performance, structure and
experimental researches.
Introduction
- the first idea for a wingtip device was by British aerodynamicist Frederick W. Lanchester in 1897.
-Unfortunately, his theory did not reduce the overall drag of the aircraft, even if the induced drag was
reduced.
-An increase in viscous drag under cruise conditions takes precedence over a decrease in induced
drag.
-In July 1976, Dr. Whitcomb conducted research at NASA's Langley Research Center to develop the
concept of winglet technology.
-According to Whitcomb, winglets can be thought of as small wing-like vertical structures extending
from the wingtip that allow for reduced induced drag compared to other wingtip devices or wingtip
extensions.
-In his study, he also hypothesized that the winglet reduced the induced drag by 20% of his compared
to the tip extension and also improved the lift-to-drag ratio.
-In 1994, Aviation Partners Inc. (API) promoted a new winglet design called Blended Winglet.
Lewis B. Gratzer of Seattle holds a patent for the blended winglet, the purpose of which is to reduce
drag from sharp edges like Whitcomb's winglets. In addition, Gratzer patented his 1992 invention of
a wing with a spyroid tip. Then in 1996 his La Roche in Switzerland developed the "vane grid"
concept and patented the invention.
-The main purpose of these inventions is to reduce wingtip vortices and induced drag.
Aircraft wing aerodynamic
performance survey
Numerical analysis of
aircraft wing
performance
• The market for civil aviation,
fuel price is an essential factor
for effectiveness. Rise in fuel
price, the tickets prices raise
and number of passengers
decrease. Fuel consumption is
must be reduced by two
possible methods: performance
of engine and/or aerodynamic
performance. Flow chart below
illustrated two methods on fig
2.1
 Aviation Partners Boeing (APB) winglet development
In 1999, Aviation Partners Boeing (APB) was formed, a partnership
with Seattle-based Aviation Partners Inc. and the Boeing Company. The
companies created APB initially to equip Boeing Business Jets, a 737
derivative, with Aviation Partners’ unique take on the NASA-proven
winglet technology (Blended Winglets).
 • Reduces Drag
• Take advantage of the energy for wingtip
vortices
Blended • Generating additional forward thrust like a
sailboat tacking upwind
Winglets •
•
Get over interference Drag
Reducing fuel consumption with percent 4% :
Advantag •
6%
Reduce pollution by giving 6% reduction in
e Co2 emmition & 8% from No2 Due to less fuel
Burn
• Due to Drag reducing A/C can operate over
greater range & carry more payload
• A/C with winglet are able to climb with less
drag at T.O
• Helps A/C operate more quitly by reducing
noise by 6.5%
 Winglet types

spiroid multi- blended split-

winglets winglets winglets scimitar
 split-scimitar
• The split-scimitar winglets
feature a traditional blended
winglet design retrofitted with a
secondary lower ventral strake.
Both the blended winglet and
the ventral strake are caped
with a blended-sweptback tip
spike. The effects of each of
these individual components
were investigated in this work.
A multi-objective optimization
was carried out to find a design
satisfying the four simultaneous
objectives: minimize coefficient
of drag and the magnitude of
the coefficient of moment, and
maximizing the coefficient of
lift and lift-to-drag ratio.
 Table 2. 1: Range for different wingtip shapes at cruise mode

Cruise Mode (M=0.9)

wingtip type CL 0.5/CD L (KM) % IMPROVE

blended 38.86 8096.6 3.78

wing fence 39.07 8140.4 4.3

spiroid 38.77 8077.9 3.56

maxi 39.38 8205 5.05

no winglet 37.9 7790.3 -

spiroid 2 38.31 7982 2.4

Table 2. 2: Percentage Increase of Different Winglet Types in Lift-To-
Drag-Ratio, CL/CD over A Rectangular Wing

winglet types lift to drag ratio performance

Elliptic 45 degree 17.62

Elliptic 60 degree 7.61

Semi-circle 45 degree 133.52

Semi-circle 60 degree 8.3

 Table 2. 3: Lift coefficient CL for V = 30 m/s [39]

winglet config 0 5 10 19

no winglet 0.01 0.1272 0.341 0.717

B=55 degree 0.02 0.177 0.050501 0.991

B=65 degree 0.04 0.22961 0.50241 0.9541

B=75 degree 0.01 0.06203 0.36601 0.818

GOVERNING EQUATIONS
❖ This chapter presents the conservation equations of continuity,
momentum, and energy which are solved to get the aerodynamic
solution around the aircraft wings. Short description of the
turbulence model, solution algorithm, numerical discretization
scheme, and the equations of mechanical stresses used in the
present investigation.
 Mass conservation equation:
•
 Momentum equations:
•
 Energy equation:
•
Solution Algorithm :
Composite Failure Criteria:

figure 3:3 Maximum stress failure envelope

Orientation dependence of strength

Figure 3‑4 : Normal stress analysis with fiber

orientations
 Stresses and stress resultants
•
 NUMERICAL INVESTIGATION
PRINCIPLES
the wing geometry, grid used, and numerical solution details and
procedures built in FLUENT; computational fluid dynamics software with Three turbulence
models (K-ω, K-ε and Spalart-Allmaras) and used in the present work to obtain the
aerodynamic characteristics of three dimensional subsonic rectangular wing with
NACA653218 airfoil are presented.
Boundary Conditions:
The flow field, temperature, pressure and Mach number in the numerical model of
NACA653218airfoil studied, are solved using FLUENT, using the following boundary
conditions:
Pressure farfield:
Reynolds number for the Pressure farfield boundary as shown in Figure4.1 is
Re=2.89x105, the same with the literature experimental and computational studies from
[11-
13], in order to validate the present simulation. The free stream temperature is 216 K,
which

is the same as the environmental temperature. The density of the air at the given
temperature is ρ=0.30415kg/m3, the pressure is 2.72 psi and the viscosity is μ=1.432×10-
5
kg/m s. A segregated, implicit solver is utilized FLUENT processor [50] Calculations were
done for angles of attack ranging from 0° to 12°.
Domain [Inlet , Far-field , Symmetry , Outlet, Wing surface]

CFD

Figure : Whole Domain

Domain

Figure : WinSug
rface

Figure : Whole Domain

Boundary Conditions at Cruise Velocity
At 12,000 m Altitude
• Pressure of air =19305 pa
• Density of air=0.30415kg/m^3
• Viscosity=1.432*10^-5 m^2/s
• Temperature=216K
• Cruise Speed =231 m/s
• Using Turbulance Model Spallart Allamars
Residuals

Figure : Residuals
• Lift Coeff & Value

Figure : Lift Coefficent

Drag Coeff & Value

Figure : Drag Coefficent

 Pressure Contours

Figure : Pressure Contours

Velocity Pathlines-1

Figure : Velocity Pathlines

Velocity Pathlines-2

Figure : Velocity Pathlines

Pathlines of velocity

Figure : Velocity Pathlines

 Wing Airbus A321neo
• Design using SOLIDWORKS
• We Divide the wing into 3sections as in stackup Tables

Figure : Isometric View

Wing Airbus A321neo

Figure : Drawing Layout

 Top View

Figure : Top View

 Front View

Figure : Front View

Airfoils usied in Rips
a) NACA 23016, at root section Spar & Rips
b) NACA 23014, at mean section
c) NACA 23012, at tip section

Figure : Rips Shapes & Spars

All Surfaces

Figure : Isometric View

NUMERICAL RESULTS AND
DISCUSSION
• Case study selection (A321 neo)

Figure 5‑1: A321 neo Aircraft Dimensions.

• Effect of sharp edge and blended winglets on aircraft
performance

• A321 Neo aircraft wing without winglets

Figure 5‑2: A321 Neo aircraft wing airfoil profiles.

• Pressure contours distribution along semi-span

pressure (pa) contour of a A321 Neo aircraft semi-span wing isometric at air
stream angle, α =12o.
• Figure 5‑6: Upper static pressure contours (in pa) for wing without winglet with M=0.2 at sea level.
• Figure 5‑7: Lower static pressure contours (in pa) for Wing without winglet with M=0.2 at sea level
• Pathlines

Figure 5‑8: Particle pathlines in case wing without winglet at air stream angle
α=0o.
• Figure 5‑9: Particle pathlines in case wing without winglet at air stream angle 12 degree.
• A321 Neo Aircraft wing with sharp edge winglet

Figure 5‑10: A321 Neo aircraft wing with sharp edge winglets with cant angle
45 degree.
• Pressure contours distribution along semi-span

Figure 5‑11: pressure contour of a A321 Neo aircraft semi-span wing with
sharp edge winglets with cant angle 45 degree isometric view at air stream
angle 12 degree.
• Figure 5‑12: Upper static pressure contours (in Pa) for wing with sharp edge winglets with M=0.2 at sea level.
• Figure 5‑13: Lower static pressure contours (in Pa) for wing with winglet vertically upward with M=0.2 at sea level.
• Pathlines

Figure 5‑14: Particle pathlines in case wing with sharp edge winglets at air
stream angle 0 degree.
• Figure 5‑15: Particle pathlines in case wing with sharp edge winglets at air stream angle 12 degree.
• A321 Neo aircraft wing with blended winglets

Figure 5‑16: A321 Neo aircraft wing with sharp edge winglets with cant angle
45 degree.
• Static pressure contours and distribution along semi-span

Figure 5‑17: pressure contour of a A321 Neo aircraft semi-span wing with blended
winglets with cant angle 45 degree isometric view at air stream angle 12 degree.
• Figure 5‑18: Upper static pressure contours (in pa) for wing with blended winglets with M=0.2 at sea level.
Figure 5‑19: Lower static pressure contours (in Pa) for wing with winglet vertically upward with M=0.2 at sea level.
• Pathlines

Figure 5‑20: Particle pathlines in case wing with blended winglets at air
stream angle 0 degree.
Figure 5‑21: Particle pathlines in case wing with blended winglets at air stream angle 12 degree.
• Lift coefficient, CL analysis

Figure 5‑22: Lift coefficient, CL Comparison between wings without winglet

and with sharp edge or blended winglet configurations, versus air stream
angles α with M=0.2 at sea level.
• Drag coefficient, CD analysis

Figure 5‑23: Drag coefficient, CD Comparison between wings without winglet

and with sharp edge or blended winglet configurations, versus air stream
angles α with M=0.2 at sea level.
• Lift to drag ratio analysis

Figure 5‑24: Lift-to-drag ratio, CL/CD Comparison between wings without

winglet and with sharp edge or blended winglet configurations, versus air
stream angles α with M=0.2 at sea level.
 FINITE
ELEMENT
ANALYSIS OF A
COMPOSITE
WING
 Wing components
1. Flaps: for lift augmentation
during landing and takeoff.
2. Aileron: for banking the airplane
during turning
Aircraft Wing Configuration
 Wing Aerodynamic Characteristics
1. Low wing
2. Wing Rips
3. Cantilever wing
4. Incidence Angle
 Wing model
The main structural
component
1. Root rib
2. Tip rib
3. Three transitional ribs
Wing structural design - composite materials

Carbon fibre Reinforced-epoxy Fibre glass

 Advantages of composite materials
1- lightweight
2-Corrosion Resistant
3- Design Flexibility
4- durability
5- dimensional stability
6- part consolidation
 disdvantages
1- hight cost
2- delamination
3- complex manufacturing process/fabrication
4- strenuous damage inspection
5- composite to metal joining
 FEA

Figure : Top View

Mesh
We specify every faces as
Mention in Cases tables Figure : Side View
as a separate mesh sizing
value to get results near to
reality
Figure TopView
Mesh Photos to shown closely to the surfaces
Statistics [Nodes 696790 & Elements 674941]

Figure : Mesh Distributions

Mesh Photos to shown closely to the surfaces

Figure : Mesh Distributions

Figure : Rips Mesh Distributions
Figure : Internal Mesh Distributions
Figure : Internal Mesh Distributions
❑ Cases studies :-

Using ANSYS Composite Prepost on the geometry of the wing

• Rosettes :-
Rosettes are coordinate systems that used to set the Reference Direction of
Oriented Selection Sets
Case1 Using epoxy carbon UD 230 Gpa
Fabrics
mm)) Thickness Fabrics

0.5 Epoxy Carbon UD (395 GPa) Prepreg

Carbon fiber Stuckups

Material Fabric Angle 1

Epoxy Carbon UD (395 GPa) Prepreg 0

Epoxy Carbon UD (395 GPa) Prepreg 45

Epoxy Carbon UD (395 GPa) Prepreg -45

Epoxy Carbon UD (395 GPa) Prepreg 90

Density =1490 kg/m^3

 TYPE NO OF STACKUP
SKIN-1 8
SKIN-2 6
SKIN-3 3
RIP 1-9 10
RIP 9-17 8
RIP 17-28 6
WEB I-1 8
WEB I-2 5
WEB I-3 3
WEB C-1 8
WEB C-2 5
WEB C-3 3
FLANGES I-1(UP &DOWN) 8
FLANGES I-2(UP &DOWN) 5
FLANGES I-3(UP &DOWN) 3
FLANGES C-1(UP &DOWN) 8
FLANGES C-2(UP &DOWN) 5
FLANGE C-3(UP &DOWN) 3

Table : Case 1
 Figure :Displacement distribution in x

Figure : Displacement distribution in y

Figure : Displacement distribution in z

Figure : Total Deformation

Figure : Equivalent stress distribution
Figure : Equivalent stress distribution

Figure : Equivalent stress distribution

Figure : Inverse Reserve Factor Skin-1

Figure : Inverse Reserve Factor Skin-2

Figure : Inverse Reserve Factor Skin-3

Figure : Inverse Reserve Factor Skin-3

Figure : Inverse Reserve Factor Rips & spars-2
 Figure : Inverse Reserve Factor Rips & spars-3

Figure : Inverse Reserve Factor Rips & spars-1

Case2 Using epoxy carbon UD 230 Gpa
Fabrics
mm)) Thickness Fabrics

0.5 Epoxy Carbon UD (395 GPa) Prepreg

Carbon fiber Stuckups

Material Fabric Angle 1

Epoxy Carbon UD (395 GPa) Prepreg 0

Epoxy Carbon UD (395 GPa) Prepreg 45

Epoxy Carbon UD (395 GPa) Prepreg -45

Epoxy Carbon UD (395 GPa) Prepreg 90

Density =1490 kg/m^3

 TYPE NO OF STACKUP
SKIN-1 20
SKIN-2 15
SKIN-3 5
RIP 1-9 20
RIP 9-17 15
RIP 17-28 12
WEB I-1 15
WEB I-2 10
WEB I-3 8
WEB C-1 15
WEB C-2 10
WEB C-3 8
FLANGES I-1(UP &DOWN) 12
FLANGES I-2(UP &DOWN) 10
FLANGES I-3(UP &DOWN) 8
FLANGES C-1(UP &DOWN) 12
FLANGES C-2(UP &DOWN) 10
FLANGE C-3(UP &DOWN) 8

Table : Case 2
STATIC RESULTS

Figure: Displacement distribution in x

Figure : Displacement distribution in y

 Figure : Displacement distribution in z

Figure : Total Deformation

Figure : Total Deformation
Figure : Total Deformation
 Figure : Inverse Reserve Factor Rips

Figure : Inverse Reserve Factor Skin 1

Figure : Inverse Reserve Factor Spars
Figure : Inverse Reserve Factor Skin 3
Case3 Using epoxy carbon UD 230 Gpa
Fabrics
mm)) Thickness Fabrics

0.5 Epoxy Carbon UD (395 GPa) Prepreg

Carbon fiber Stuckups

Material Fabric Angle 1

Epoxy Carbon UD (395 GPa) Prepreg 0

Epoxy Carbon UD (395 GPa) Prepreg 45

Epoxy Carbon UD (395 GPa) Prepreg -45

Epoxy Carbon UD (395 GPa) Prepreg 90

Density =1490 kg/m^3

 TYPE NO OF STACKUP
SKIN-1 10
SKIN-2 8
SKIN-3 5
RIP 1-9 15
RIP 9-17 10
RIP 17-28 8
WEB I-1 10
WEB I-2 6
WEB I-3 4
WEB C-1 10
WEB C-2 6
WEB C-3 4
FLANGES I-1(UP &DOWN) 8
FLANGES I-2(UP &DOWN) 6
FLANGES I-3(UP &DOWN) 4
FLANGES C-1(UP &DOWN) 8
FLANGES C-2(UP &DOWN) 6
FLANGE C-3(UP &DOWN) 4

Table : Case 3
Figure : Displacement distribution in x

Figure : Displacement distribution in y

 Figure 7. 41: Displacement
distribution in z

Figure 7. 42: Total

Deformation
Figure : Total Deformation
Figure : Total Deformation
Figure : Inverse Reserve Factor Skin 1
Figure : Inverse Reserve Factor Skin 3
Figure : Inverse Reserve Factor Skin
Figure : Inverse Reserve Factor Skin Rips & Spars
Figure : Inverse Reserve Factor Skin Rips & Spars
Reserve factor=2.7747 > 1 Not Safe
Reserve factor=3.9792 > 1 Not Safe
 Comparison of All Cases
So the best we have a lot iterations due to our laptop or pc simulation loads

So, we used trail and error method to detect failure of composite ply using Tsia
Wu method by using Inverse Reserve Factor Which should be less than 1.

Case 3 is the best of all

 ❑ Modal shapes

• Modal analysis is a technique to

study the dynamic characteristics of
structure under vibrational
Mode Frequency [Hz]
excitation .
1. 9.3419
• Natural frequencies ,mode shapes 2. 21.737
can be determined by modal 3. 32.883
analysis in ANSYS 4. 38.559

▪ Modal table frequencies 5. 45.921

6. 50.474
Mode 1 : Frequency 8.99 HZ
Mode 2 : Frequency 20.851 HZ
Mode 2 : Frequency 30.366 HZ
Mode 4 : Frequency 37.325 HZ
Conclusions and Recommendation
for Future Works
8.1 The main conclusions of the present
work can be summarized as follow:
• the benefits of winglets that connected at the wing tips.
• the wing with blended connection performs better than the winglet with
sharp connection.
• the stresses that happen on wing without winglets and winglet with sharp
edge.
• benefits that happen from The replacement of Aluminum alloy by Epoxy.
8.2 Recommendation for future work:
• Repeating the same present work but with direct numerical simulations.
• Simulation of the full aircraft geometry with winglets at the wing tips.
• Studying winglets that vary their cant angle at different sea levels or flight
conditions.
THANK YOU