Go4Know > Why Don't Airplanes Have Dimples Like Golf Balls If It Reduces Air Drag?

Why Don't Airplanes Have Dimples Like Golf Balls If It Reduces Air Drag?

At first glance, it seems like a simple idea: golf balls have dimples to reduce air resistance and travel farther, so why not apply the same concept to airplanes? If dimples work so well in one area of aerodynamics, wouldn't they be just as effective in another? The truth is more complex, and the reasons why airplanes aren't covered in dimples reveal a lot about the physics of air travel and engineering design.

Golf balls have dimples because these small indentations help reduce drag by manipulating the boundary layer of air that clings to the ball as it flies. A smooth ball would cause the air to separate from its surface early, creating a large turbulent wake behind it, which in turn increases pressure drag. Dimples induce a thin turbulent boundary layer that clings to the surface longer before separating, which reduces the size of the wake and decreases drag.

❤️ Click to support us – even a single dollar helps!

This concept works well for a small, round object like a golf ball, especially one that travels at relatively low speeds and through a constantly changing spin. But airplanes are entirely different beasts. They're much larger, travel at much higher speeds, and have vastly more complex aerodynamic requirements. Covering an airplane in dimples wouldn't have the same effect-and in many cases, it would make things worse.

Airplanes rely on smooth surfaces to maintain laminar flow as long as possible. Laminar flow is when the air moves smoothly in parallel layers, creating minimal drag. Once the flow turns turbulent, drag increases significantly. In the case of golf balls, encouraging turbulence helps because the object is blunt and round, and the turbulent flow helps keep the air attached. Airplanes, however, are designed to be streamlined, and keeping the airflow smooth over their wings and fuselage is essential for fuel efficiency and stability.

Adding dimples would prematurely trigger turbulent flow, which would increase skin friction drag on an airplane. While the dimples might reduce pressure drag slightly in some areas, the overall effect would likely be more negative than positive, especially at cruising speeds of 800-900 km/h (500-560 mph). Additionally, the complexity of manufacturing an aircraft with a dimpled surface would add cost, weight, and maintenance challenges without enough aerodynamic benefit to justify it.

There have been experiments in this area. For example, NASA has tested dimpled surfaces and other textured coatings on aircraft components, but mostly in very specific cases, like engine nacelles or landing gear fairings. Some modern aircraft do use microstructures like riblets or vortex generators in targeted areas to manage airflow and reduce drag, but these are carefully engineered for specific results, not generalized dimpling.

Another factor is scale. The size and placement of dimples on a golf ball are precisely tuned to the ball's size and speed. Scaling that concept up to an aircraft doesn't scale linearly. The physics of airflow changes with size and speed, and what helps at one scale might harm at another. The Reynolds number, a dimensionless quantity used in fluid mechanics, plays a key role in determining how air flows over a body. The values involved for airplanes are dramatically different from those of golf balls, which changes how flow behaves and how effective dimples would be.

Furthermore, aircraft design is governed by strict safety, efficiency, and economic constraints. Every surface must contribute to structural integrity, fuel efficiency, and aerodynamic performance. Engineers use computational fluid dynamics (CFD) simulations and wind tunnel testing to fine-tune surfaces, and the results don't support general dimpling for drag reduction.

Still, the idea is not entirely without merit. Nature uses texture in fascinating ways: shark skin has tiny riblets that reduce drag in water, and some biomimetic surfaces inspired by it are being tested in aerospace and automotive applications. Instead of dimples, future aircraft might use micro-textures, smart materials, or active flow control systems to reduce drag and improve performance.

In the end, the reason airplanes don't look like giant golf balls is a mix of physics, scale, materials science, and advanced engineering. While dimples are perfect for a golf ball's flight, they're not the right fit for the streamlined elegance of modern aircraft.

✉️ Join us for free to get new articles by email and never miss a post!

❤️ We need your support to keep creating and growing. All our content is free and ad-free! If you'd like to help us stay independent, you can click here to do so. Every contribution on Patreon means the world to us. Thank you for being a part of Go4Know!

Read the original version on Patreon: Why Don't Airplanes Have Dimples Like Golf Balls If It Reduces Air Drag?

Why Don't Airplanes Have Dimples Like Golf Balls If It Reduces Air Drag?

50 Latest Blog Articles: