Laminar vs Turbulent FlowĪs discussed above, laminar is the opposite of turbulent. These wings were proof of the laminar flow theories first developed by German scientist Ludwig Prandtl years before real attempts were made at bringing these wings to flight. Initially designed mathematically, a quarter scale model was tested in a wind tunnel by the California Institute of Technology.Īt first many manufacturers declined to continue developing wings with laminar flow in mind, as obtaining a totally smooth airfoil within exact tolerance proved to be too difficult for the days of the early 1930’s.Įventually, however, engineers were able to solve the smoothness conundrum by painting the entirety of the wings, and produced at least partially laminar flow wings. It is still up for debate upon historical review if the surface quality of wing material was sufficient enough to induce laminar flow in these early models.

The P-51 Mustang was one of if not the first aircraft to intentionally be designed with laminar flow wings, by the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics, the precursor to NASA. Minimizing this drag is important for safe and efficient airplane flight. It means bumpy, discontinuous flow that interrupts in point and ultimately creates drag through friction with the air. Turbulent air, on the other hand, does not just mean faster air. Laminar means smooth, continuous flow over the surface of a wing or airfoil, and it also means predictable. While that may seem obvious, it’s an important distinction. The distinction of what exactly laminar means, is that it is the opposite of turbulent, in simplest terms. In the case of an airplane, this flow occurs over streamlined parts of the airplane like a wing or fuselage. Flow is what happens as a fluid, either gas or liquid, moves in an uninterrupted fashion over an object. First we should define what exactly laminar flow is.

Plane airfoil