Formation of a Starting Vortex for Symmetric Aerofoils (NACA 0015)

  • Thread starter Thread starter JackFyre
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
An aerofoil generates lift due to a pressure difference created by varying flow velocities over its surfaces, influenced by the conservation of angular momentum and the formation of a starting vortex. Symmetric aerofoils, such as the NACA 0015, do not produce lift at a 0 angle of attack because they maintain an equal pressure distribution on both sides, resulting in no net lift. The absence of a starting vortex at zero angle of attack for symmetric foils is key to this phenomenon. The pressure profile and flow characteristics are determined by the airflow's interaction with the airfoil's shape and angle. Understanding these principles is essential for grasping the aerodynamic behavior of symmetric airfoils.
JackFyre
Messages
15
Reaction score
7
TL;DR Summary
Question regarding lift force on a symmetric aerofoil
Greetings!

An aerofoil experiences life because the velocity of flow at the top surface of the airfoil is higher, causing a pressure difference. This higher velocity is attained as a consequence of the conservation of angular momentum due to the formation of a starting vortex at the trailing edge of an aerofoil. However, I have read that symmetric aerofoils (like the NACA 0015) do not generate lift at a 0 angle of attack. Why is this so? Is it because there is no starting vortex at zero angle of attack for symmetric foils? And if so, why? What determines the formation of the strating vortex and subsequent lift genaration?
Starting vortex - MIT.gif
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
Symmetric airfoils facing airflow at zero AOA induce an exactly equal pressure distribution profile (amount of disturbance to the molecules of air) on each side.

That pressure profile is a reflection of the ways in which the velocity of the molecules in contact with each surface varies from the stagnation point (at the leading edge) all the way to the trailing edge of the wing.

The vertical stabilizer of any airplane is a good example of this.
Please, see:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vertical_stabilizer

Pressure-distribution-for-a-symmetric-airfoil-at-0-and-10-angle-of-attack.png


ztMCG.png


 
Last edited:
Uh, fit flaps / ailerons and/or analogous devices ?
Given you need such to control the wannabe lawn-dart in absence of thrust vectoring etc...
Or have I misunderstood the question ??
 
Nik_2213 said:
Uh, fit flaps / ailerons and/or analogous devices ?
Given you need such to control the wannabe lawn-dart in absence of thrust vectoring etc...
Or have I misunderstood the question ??
I was just curious about the formation of the starting vortex in symmetric airfoils, and how it may explain why symmetric foils show 0 lift at 0 AoA. Thanks!
 
Venus does not have a magnetosphere, so the Galactic Cosmic Rays (GCRs) environment shall be much worse than in a LEO environment. Looking to the std radiation models for Venus, the standard radiation-hard space level electronic component with tested immunity LET = 85 MeV-cm2/mg seems not enough, so, for example, a 1cm2 Si die will suffer considerable flux above this level during a long mission (10 years for example). So, the question is, usually we are not paying attention to latch-up...
Due to the constant never ending supply of "cool stuff" happening in Aerospace these days I'm creating this thread to consolidate posts every time something new comes along. Please feel free to add random information if its relevant. So to start things off here is the SpaceX Dragon launch coming up shortly, I'll be following up afterwards to see how it all goes. :smile: https://blogs.nasa.gov/spacex/
Thread 'SpaceX Starship development: 7th flight January 10'
Watch the progress live This is a fully stacked Starship (top) and Super Heavy (bottom). A couple of too-small-to-see cars near the bottom for scale, I also added a Saturn V and the Statue of Liberty for comparison. 120 meters tall, about 5000 tonnes when fully fueled. Twice the mass and over twice the thrust of Saturn V. The largest rocket ever built by mass, thrust, height, and payload capacity. N1 had the largest diameter.[/size] But its size is not the revolutionary part. It is designed...

Similar threads

Replies
11
Views
20K
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
30
Views
4K
Replies
32
Views
13K
Replies
16
Views
13K
Replies
4
Views
5K
Back
Top