Induced drag confusion - More than one cause?

AI Thread Summary
Induced drag on an aerofoil arises from both the downwash created by wingtip vortices and the rearward component of lift due to the wing's angle of attack. This drag is a combination of these two factors, challenging the notion that it can be attributed to just one cause. The discussion clarifies that induced drag is a result of the change in momentum of the airflow around the wing, where the forward momentum decreases while the downward momentum increases. Mathematical derivations indicate that induced drag can be calculated based on the angle of deflection and lift. Understanding that induced drag encompasses both effects provides a clearer perspective on its nature in aerodynamics.
scanwinder
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Hi,

I'm a bit confused by induced drag on an aerofoil and hoping somebody can clear it up for me.

I understand that as air slips around the edges of the wing due to the pressure differential between the top and the bottom surfaces, the angle of attack at the ends of the wings is effectively reduced(as the air is being deflected downward).

What I'm unclear about is, some sources seem to state that component of lift opposing motion is the induced drag(i.e. if the wing is at an angle with respect to the airflow, the wing generates a force perpendicular to it, and a component of that is lift and a component of that is drag)

Below is an image illustrating the latter:
http://selair.selkirk.bc.ca/training/aerodynamics/images/induced-definition.gif

So my question is, is induced drag due to downwash from wingtip vortices, or the rearward component of lift since the force the wings generate isn't directly upward. Or is it a combination of both of these things?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
Induced drag is sort of a catchall term for the sources of drag that are unavoidable on anybody producing lift, for example the drag as a result of the wing being at an angle of attack and the drag associated the wingtip vortices. In short, the answer to your question is "both of these things".
 
Thanks for that, I thought that would be the case. It just seems that most textbooks explain one or the other but not that it's the combination of both. The derivation in the text I'm reading makes a whole lot more sense now that I realize it's a combination.
 
scanwinder said:
Is induced drag due to downwash from wingtip vortices, or the rearward component of lift since the force the wings generate isn't directly upward. Or is it a combination of both of these things?
For an ideal or perfect wing, using the wing as a frame of reference, this ideal wing diverts the relative air flow by only changing direction and not speed, so that there is no change in energy of the affected air. The change in direction means the "forwards" component of the momentum of the affected air is reduced, while the downwards component is increased from zero. The decrease in the forward component of momentum corresponds to the drag component of impulse, which is force x time. Induced drag can be calculated based on the angle of diversion and lift. If I did the math correctly, and defining θ as the angle of diversion, I get induced drag = lift (1 - cos(θ)) / sin(θ).

My math (induced drag calculated so that it's a postive number):

f = force
i = impulse
m = mass
v = velocity
t = time
θ = angle of deflection

i = f Δt = m Δv
f = m Δv / Δt

lift = m Δv / Δt = m v (sin(θ) - 0) / Δt
induced drag = m (-Δv) / Δt = m v (1 - cos(θ)) / Δt
lift / sin(θ) = m v / Δt
induced drag = lift (1 - cos(θ)) / sin(θ)
 
Last edited:
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Hello everyone, Consider the problem in which a car is told to travel at 30 km/h for L kilometers and then at 60 km/h for another L kilometers. Next, you are asked to determine the average speed. My question is: although we know that the average speed in this case is the harmonic mean of the two speeds, is it also possible to state that the average speed over this 2L-kilometer stretch can be obtained as a weighted average of the two speeds? Best regards, DaTario
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?

Similar threads

Replies
9
Views
5K
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
20
Views
3K
Replies
30
Views
4K
Replies
23
Views
5K
Replies
20
Views
2K
Back
Top