Profile Drag and Pressure Drag?

  • Thread starter Thread starter kevjcarvalho
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Drag Pressure
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the differences and relationships between profile drag, pressure drag, and skin friction drag in the context of aerodynamics, particularly as it relates to airfoil design and performance. Participants explore theoretical aspects, definitions, and implications of these types of drag.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants inquire about the distinction between profile drag and pressure drag, questioning if they are the same or different.
  • One participant references a text by Raymer, suggesting that profile drag is influenced by thickness distribution and that pressure drag is related to separation, raising questions about their interdependence.
  • Another participant asserts that profile drag includes both skin friction and pressure drag, but the definitions and boundaries between these types of drag remain unclear.
  • A participant mentions that thickness distribution may not significantly affect lift, as it is often treated separately from camber in thin airfoil theory.
  • There is a suggestion that profile drag is related to frontal area, but this claim is met with skepticism and further inquiry.
  • One participant emphasizes the interdependency of pressure drag and frictional drag, noting that the separation of the boundary layer plays a crucial role in determining profile drag.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying interpretations of the definitions and relationships between profile drag, pressure drag, and skin friction drag. There is no consensus on the exact nature of these concepts, and multiple competing views remain throughout the discussion.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights limitations in definitions and assumptions regarding drag types, particularly in the context of airfoil theory and practical applications. Participants note that the sources of drag do not naturally separate, indicating a complex interplay between factors influencing drag.

kevjcarvalho
Messages
41
Reaction score
0
Profile Drag and Pressure Drag?

Can someone please tell me the difference between profile drag and pressure drag if there is one??.
 
Physics news on Phys.org


Try Google, this is very basic. If you don't get stuck there, repost here and I'll help you.
 


I tried but they are telling me that profile drag is skin friction and pressure drag...the thing is i read the following line in raymer
' For many aerodynamic calculations, it has been traditional to separate the airfoil into its thickness distribution and zero thickness camber line. The former provides the major influence on the profile drag, while the latter provides the major influence on lift and induced drag'
The thing if pressure drag is part of profile drag and since it is due to separation, shouldn't thickness distribution also change lift, since if pressure drag changes, pressure distribution changes and hence lift changes. Someone told me that profile drag is due to frontal area only, the stagnation part. Is this true?. Thanks.
 


kevjcarvalho said:
I tried but they are telling me that profile drag is skin friction and pressure drag...the thing is i read the following line in raymer
' For many aerodynamic calculations, it has been traditional to separate the airfoil into its thickness distribution and zero thickness camber line. The former provides the major influence on the profile drag, while the latter provides the major influence on lift and induced drag'
The thing if pressure drag is part of profile drag and since it is due to separation, shouldn't thickness distribution also change lift, since if pressure drag changes, pressure distribution changes and hence lift changes. Someone told me that profile drag is due to frontal area only, the stagnation part. Is this true?. Thanks.

Addressing your Raymer question specifically, zero thickness camber line is applied in thin airfoil theory and it surprisingly gives good results without accounting for thickness or viscous effects. The reason is that thickness tends to increase the lift slope while viscous effects decrease it and the resulting errors tend cancel each other out.

So then the two are used as Raymer says- airfoil thickness distribution provides the data for thickness and viscous effects complimented with thin airfoil theory for lift and induced drag absent of thickness & viscous effects.
 


kevjcarvalho said:
I tried but they are telling me that profile drag is skin friction and pressure drag...the thing is i read the following line in raymer
' For many aerodynamic calculations, it has been traditional to separate the airfoil into its thickness distribution and zero thickness camber line. The former provides the major influence on the profile drag, while the latter provides the major influence on lift and induced drag'
The thing if pressure drag is part of profile drag and since it is due to separation, shouldn't thickness distribution also change lift, since if pressure drag changes, pressure distribution changes and hence lift changes. Someone told me that profile drag is due to frontal area only, the stagnation part. Is this true?. Thanks.

Read carefully.
The airfoil is separated into thickness distribution and camber. This thickness distribution, then would be symmetrical abd won't have any effect on lift (atleast not much significant effect).
 
Last edited:


Thats true, but what is profile drag. Is it pressure drag, skin friction drag, or drag due to frontal area??
 


kevjcarvalho said:
Thats true, but what is profile drag. Is it pressure drag, skin friction drag, or drag due to frontal area??

It's pressure and friction drag.
 


dtango said:
Addressing your Raymer question specifically, zero thickness camber line is applied in thin airfoil theory and it surprisingly gives good results without accounting for thickness or viscous effects. The reason is that thickness tends to increase the lift slope while viscous effects decrease it and the resulting errors tend cancel each other out.

So then the two are used as Raymer says- airfoil thickness distribution provides the data for thickness and viscous effects complimented with thin airfoil theory for lift and induced drag absent of thickness & viscous effects.

Great post.
 


Cyrus said:
Great post.

Haha thanks. I happened to have my Phillips, Anderson, & Raymer texts nearby :smile:. This aero stuff still amazes me! The guys who thought of calculating vortex circulation on a zero thickness camber line 2D airfoil - geniuses :smile:.
 
  • #10


kevjcarvalho said:
Thats true, but what is profile drag. Is it pressure drag, skin friction drag, or drag due to frontal area??

The two so-called sources of drag don't naturally separate, especially for airfoils. The source of profile drag is due to separation of the boundary layer from the trailing edge. On a billboard, this constitutes the entire back surface. The lost energy is found in the turbulence of the trailing wake. Frictional drag, or viscous drag, determines the boundary where adverse pressure causes the boundary layer to separate, therefore the large interdependency of the two.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
Replies
9
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
4K