## 1 Introduction
[4] developed the concept of a \"smart\" slat without slot as an alternative to the conventional droop nose utilized on A380 aircraft. The main emphasis of the new device was on realizing a structure/system solution for a smooth leading surface, which can be deflected into a typical high lift application. The approach employed flexible panels on the upper and lower surface of the device in order to provide a continuous curvature distribution over the device chord. The simulation results proved the feasibility of the device and pointed out the need for materials with improved strength for morphing applications. [PERSON] and [PERSON] [5] evaluated the potential of gapless droop nose devices designed for improving the aerodynamics of airfoils with active high lift. Flexible droop nose configurations were obtained by smoothly morphing the baseline LE shape. Increasing the stall angle of attack and reducing the power required by the active high-lift system were the main objectives. The most promising droop nose configurations were compared with a conventional slat device as well as with the clean LE. Another droop nose investigation was carried out by [PERSON] et al. [6], who performed CFD simulations to study the aerodynamic characteristics of the two-element airfoil with droop nose, based on the British NHLP 2-D L1T2 three-element airfoil with slat. Numerical results showed that the three-element airfoil with slat produced a higher \(\rm C_{L}\) at the tail-scrape angle, as well as a much higher \(\rm C_{L,max}\) than the two-element airfoil with droop nose. On the other hand, the two-element airfoil with droop nose had a much higher critical aerodynamic factor at the second-segment climb stage (lift to drag ratio when \(\rm C_{L}=C_{L,max}/1.13^{2}\)). By deflecting the Fowler flap and the spoiler, the aerodynamic characteristics of the two-element airfoil with droop nose were improved; \(\rm C_{L}\) at the tail-scrape angle surpassed that of the three-element airfoil with slat, maintaining at the same time a higher lift-to-drag ratio. However, the three-element airfoil still exhibited a higher \(\rm C_{L,max}\) due to larger stall AoA. [PERSON] et al. [7] introduced the flexible variable camber TE flap to improve flight efficiency during take-off, cruise, and landing. A multi-objective optimization with a numerical simulation method indicated that, compared to the traditional flap, \(\rm C_{L}\) was considerably increased during take-off and landing (8% and 1.3% respectively), whilst under cruise state, the lift to drag ratio reached a maximum increment of about 30% over a wide range of \(\rm C_{L}\). Finally, in their recent research, [PERSON] and [PERSON] [8] performed an aerodynamic optimization of a morphing leading edge based on the class/shape transformation technique, incorporating a procedure to keep the arc length of the curve constant in order to limit the axial stress of the deformed shapes. The main benefit of the morphing leading edge was a substantial drag reduction, whereas the lift was less positively affected. A metamodel-assisted optimization loop through the use of an artificial neural network was proven suitable for reducing the computational effort. In previous investigations, morphing is applied and assessed either on the LE or on the TE region of an airfoil. In the present work, combined morphing of both LE and TE regions is applied and the potential of increasing the \(\rm C_{L,max}\) of a typical aircraft airfoil is investigated. The target of the work is twofold: First, the development of a fast methodology capable of delivering the optimum morphed airfoil designs in terms of the \(\rm C_{L,max}\) increase and second, the physical understanding of the effect of morphing on the \(\rm C_{L,max}\) and the stall AoA through a detailed flow field inspection. As baseline airfoil, the typical in aircraft applications, NACA 64A010, has been selected.