Is Turbulence Necessary for Lift on a Wing?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter person123
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Fluid Lift Turbulence
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on whether turbulence is necessary for lift on a wing, exploring various theoretical and practical aspects of lift generation in aerodynamics. Participants examine the relationship between circulation, vortices, and lift in different flow conditions, including laminar and turbulent flows.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that the circulation around a wing, due to faster flow on top, is balanced by vortices formed off the tail, suggesting that turbulent flow may be necessary for lift.
  • Others argue that while vortices may form behind a plane, they are not necessarily required for lift, as demonstrated in laminar flow scenarios.
  • There is a discussion about whether vortices and turbulence are the same, with some suggesting that vortices can exist without turbulence.
  • Some participants question the sufficiency of momentum change to explain lift, suggesting that it may not be the sole factor.
  • There is a proposal to test lift generation in a pipe with an airfoil to see if lift can occur without vortices.
  • Participants express differing views on the relevance of the Kutta–Joukowski theorem in explaining lift, with some asserting that it requires vortices while others disagree.
  • Concerns are raised about the potential derailment of the discussion into broader debates about the causes of lift, which some participants wish to avoid.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on whether turbulence is necessary for lift. Multiple competing views remain regarding the role of vortices, the sufficiency of momentum change, and the implications of different theoretical frameworks.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights limitations in understanding the relationship between turbulence, vortices, and lift, particularly in varying flow conditions. There is an acknowledgment of the complexity of the topic and the need for further exploration of specific scenarios.

  • #61
Arjan82 said:
@russ_watters, regarding post #48, I've tried to infer your way of viewing lift. Am I correct in my description of your thoughts below?
...
Yes, that's basically what I'm saying. Also, I really dislike the flat plate since the airflow over the top surface is just such a mess. But at least in that pic you can see the stagnation point down under the "chin" and the airflow curving up to meet the airfoil before it even gets to it.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #62
Just to be clear, I look at this now strictly from an earth-fixed reference frame, so the foil is moving and the box is standing still.

russ_watters said:
I'm not sure if you mean that literally. A point by definition has zero size. While I guess it is possible that a single molecule is sitting on the leading edge, straddling the stagnation point, I doubt it. Air certainly doesn't pile-up there.

That there is a forward velocity component doesn't mean the air piles-up. Take an air parcel as close to the stagnation point as you can. At this stagnation point a tangent line to the foil is vertical. What you suggest is that if the foil starts moving this air parcel never moves forward but just directly upward (or downward). I find that unlikely since the wall can only push in horizontal direction (ignoring friction) or, because a parcel has a finite size and the tangent point is indeed a point, the wall will move the parcel nearly only forward. Because of continuity the other parcels around it also need to have a forward velocity component albeit somewhat lower.

russ_watters said:
If air molecules get slowed down as they approach the stagnation point, they must be accompanied by air molecules further away (vertically) that speed up, so the average velocity is higher.

So, following the frame of reference of the foil the approaching air 'slows down' as you say. But from the frame of reference of the box, the air was already not moving. Thus the approaching foil 'speeds up' the air in the other direction, forward that is :).
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
5K
  • · Replies 124 ·
5
Replies
124
Views
15K
  • · Replies 63 ·
3
Replies
63
Views
7K
  • · Replies 52 ·
2
Replies
52
Views
7K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
6K