This study investigates the aerodynamic coupling between propeller slipstream and asymmetric wing configurations with height differences through numerical simulations. Results show that increasing propeller speed enhances lift and drag, intensifies the lift imbalance between the wings, and strengthens the negative rolling moment. The analysis further reveals that increasing the horizontal distance between the propeller and wing alleviates slipstream interference and reduces rolling asymmetry, while increasing the vertical offset enlarges the slipstream-affected region, strengthens pressure differences on the left wing, and amplifies the negative roll tendency. Overall, the findings highlight the strong sensitivity of asymmetric wing aerodynamics to propeller–wing positioning and provide theoretical guidance for the design and control of loitering munitions, missiles, and other asymmetric aerial platforms.
WattsTFABodeI. Automation and autonomy in loitering munitions catalogue. University of Southern Denmark, 2023.
4.
XuXZhouZ. Analytical study on the synthetic jet control of asymmetric flow field of flying wing unmanned aerial vehicle. Aero Sci Technol2016; 56: 90–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ast.2016.07.007
5.
GaoLLiCJinH, et al.Aerodynamic characteristics of a novel catapult launched morphing tandem-wing unmanned aerial vehicle. Adv Mech Eng2017; 9(2): 168781401769229. https://doi.org/10.1177/1687814017692290
6.
ChenJKZhijunWGuodongW, et al. Numerical simulation for influence of asymmetric wing on rolling moment of small UAV. J Project Rock Missil Guid. 2016; 36(1): 10–14.
7.
RosidNHIrsyad LukmanEAhmadFM, et al.Aerodynamic characteristics of tube-launched tandem wing unmanned aerial vehicle. J Phys Conf2018; 1005: 012015. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1005/1/012015
8.
ShahGHillM. Flight dynamics modeling and simulation of a damaged transport aircraft. In: AIAA Modeling and Simulation Technologies Conference. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 2012.
9.
KimKAhnJKimS, et al.Analysis of partial wing damage on flying-wing unmanned air vehicle. Proc Inst Mech Eng G J Aerosp Eng2014; 228(3): 355–374. https://doi.org/10.1177/0954410012472292
10.
CaoYBianQZhuC, et al.Unsteady numerical simulations of aircraft icing based on the dynamic grid method. Proc Inst Mech Eng G J Aerosp Eng2025; 239(6): 557–577. https://doi.org/10.1177/09544100241290591
11.
KhannaAMukherjeeBKSinhaM. High-α maneuver under lateral centre of gravity uncertainty: a robust adaptive backstepping control scheme. Proc Inst Mech Eng G J Aerosp Eng2024; 238(13): 1357–1373. https://doi.org/10.1177/09544100241263613
12.
TanBMaJZhangY. Analysis of aerodynamic characteristics for a flying-wing UAV with asymmetric wing damage. In: 2018 33rd Youth Academic Annual Conference of Chinese Association of Automation (YAC). IEEE, 2018, pp. 276–280.
13.
OkamotoMAzumaA. Aerodynamic characteristics at low Reynolds number for wings of various planforms. AIAA J2011; 49(6): 1135–1150. https://doi.org/10.2514/1.j050071
14.
SiPWuMHuoY, et al.Effect of wing sweep and asymmetry on flight dynamics of a sweep-morphing aircraft. Aero Sci Technol2025; 161: 110120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ast.2025.110120
15.
WangSWangYZhouF, et al.Investigating the unsteady flow mechanism at the lip of a ducted fan in crosswind. Proc Inst Mech Eng G J Aerosp Eng2024; 238(12): 1179–1192. https://doi.org/10.1177/09544100241260101
16.
WhitfieldDLJamesonA. Euler equation simulation of propeller-wing interaction in transonicflow. J Aircraft1984; 21(11): 835–839. https://doi.org/10.2514/3.45052
17.
JohnsonRTWitkowskiDPSullivanJP. Experimental results of a Propeller/Wing interaction study. In: General, Corporate & Regional Aviation Meeting & Exposition, 1991, p. 910998.
18.
VeldhuisLLM. Experimental analysis of tractor propeller effects on a low aspect ratio semi-span wing. In: International Aerospace Congress 1995: Proceedings; Second Pacific International Conference on Aerospace and Technology; Sixth Australian Aeronautical Conference. Institution of Engineers, Australia, 1995, pp. 491–498.
19.
MakeevPVIgnatkinYMShomovAI. Numerical investigation of full scale coaxial main rotor aerodynamics in hover and vertical descent. Chin J Aeronaut2021; 34(5): 666–683. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cja.2020.12.011
20.
HanSSongWHanZ, et al.A high-resolution numerical investigation of unsteady wake vortices for coaxial rotors in hover. Chin J Aeronaut2024; 37(11): 278–299. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cja.2024.06.018
21.
LeeHLeeDJ. Rotor interactional effects on aerodynamic and noise characteristics of a small multirotor unmanned aerial vehicle. Phys Fluids2020; 32(4): 047107. https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0003992
22.
CusatiVCorcioneSNicolosiF, et al.Improvement of take-off performance for an electric commuter aircraft due to distributed electric propulsion. Aerospace2023; 10(3): 276. https://doi.org/10.3390/aerospace10030276
23.
NiJLeeT. Investigation of the surface pressure and thrust generated by a tilt distributed electric propulsion wing. J Fluid Eng2025; 147(8): 081201. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4067960
24.
PlijterJCDuivenvoordenRSinnigeT. Aerodynamic interaction effects between a propeller slipstream and single slotted Flap. In: AIAA SCITECH 2025 forum. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 2025.
25.
ChenZYangF. Propeller slipstream effect on aerodynamic characteristics of micro air vehicle at low reynolds number. Appl Sci2022; 12(8): 4092. https://doi.org/10.3390/app12084092
26.
McCroskeyWJ. A critical assessment of wind tunnel results for the NACA 0012 airfoil. NASA Technical Memorandum100019, 1987.
27.
AlvarezEJNingA. Meshless large-eddy simulation of propeller–wing interactions with reformulated vortex particle method. J Aircraft2024; 61(3): 811–827. https://doi.org/10.2514/1.c037279
28.
ChauhanSSAzevedoJLF. Investigating the influence of an inboard propeller’s vertical offset on a trailing wing’s lift and drag distributions. In: 34th Congress of the International Council of the Aeronautical Sciences, number ICAS2024-0124. ICAS, 2024.
