i

- .. ; ..... ~

TECHNIOAL NOTES

=:«:

• .-. --..or.

APR a 1~1)

NATII()NAL ADVISORY COMIHTT.EE FOR AERONAUTICS

, -_-_

No.

755 •

-.l f

I

I to

~IND-TUNNEL INVESTIGATION OF AN R.A.C.A. 23030

AIRFOIL WITH VARIOUS ARRANGEMENTS OF SLOTTED FLAPS

By 1. G. Recant

Langley Memorial Aeronautical Laboratory

-, .~-

,\ 'V

I'

. _".\.-

x-:

I •

- jj.

._-

W"~shington March 1940

.-<:.\

.. -_-Ivl"

-~~~~~'C

~.-~

. __ ~ r- - ~: -_ ;-;:. .. ~-~_ ~:-.p .........

..... ~.. !ZIISti_ • .,

.~

---, ;.--.:;-...::;

----------= - .. -.~~ ... ~

-T-· --~ ___

--- -----

..

NATIONAL'ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS

~.

TECHNIOAL NOTE NO. 755

wnm-TUNN;IDL INVESTIGATION, OF AN N.,A.. O.A. 23030

AIRFOIL WITH VARIOUS ARRANGEMENTS, OF SLOTTED FLAPS

By 1. G. Recant

SUMMARY

..

An investigation was made ~n the N.A.C.A. 7- by 10- foot wind tunnel, of a large-chord' N • .A.O .A. 23030 airfoil with a 40- and a 25.66-percent-chor~ slotted flap to 4et'ermi-ne the section aerodynamic characteristics of the ' airfoil as affected by flap chord, slot shape, flap position, and flap deflection. The flap positions fo~ ~aximum lift, the positions for minimum drag at moderate and high lift coefficients t and the c o mp Le t e section' aerodynaI!lic characteristics of selected optimun arrangenents are given. Envelope polars of various flap arrange~efits are included. The relative merits of slotted flaps of different chords on the N.A.O.A. 23030 airfoil are discussed, and a co~parison is made of each flap size with a corresponding flap size on the N.A.C.A. 23021 and 2~012 airfoils.

The lowest profile drags at moderate lift coeffi-, clents were obtained with an easy 'entrance to t~e slot. The 25.66-percent-chord slotted flap gave,somewhat lower dr~g than the 40-percent-chord flap fo~ l~ft coefjici~nts less than 1.8, but the 40-percent-chord flap gave c6nflderably lower drag for lift coefficients from 1.8 to 2.6 and a larger value of the I!lBxioum lift coefficient. The drag coefficients at moderate end high lift coef~icients were greater with both sizes of flap on the N.A.O.A. 23030 airfoil than on either the N.A.O.A. 23021 or the N.A.O.A. 23012 'airfoil. The m ax Lra um lift coefficient for tho deflections tested with either flap was practically independent of ai rf oil th ickne s 8 •.

..

INTRODUCTION

...

The National AdvisoryOom~ittee for Aeronautics has been conducting an extensive investigation of wing~fla:p

N.A.C.A. Technical Note. No. 755

..

combinations for the purpose of improving safety and performance. For take-off and initial climb, a wing-flap combination capable of producing mod~rately high lift with 10vI drag is d e s Lr-o.b Le', On tho other hand, la.nding requirements probably make a device with high lift o.nd

v a r t ab Le drag desirable.. Furthermoro, such a device should give a ~mall increase in drag when tho flap is rdtractod ~nd should give low oporating forces snd a minimum change in pitching Doment with change in flap deflection.

Of the various types of flap investigatad by the N.A.C.A., the slotted flaps are apparently most nearly capable of .me e t t ng those s p e c Lr t c e t t on e t modium-chord an.d large-chord slotted flaps for the N.A.C.A. 23012 an d .23021 airfoils have bcren deveLopod (referer-ccs 1 to 4). The. present report gives ·the results of tests of the N.A.O.A. 23030 airfoil with· slot~~ flaps of 40-percent and 25.6~-

'~ercent chord. With the completion of the present tests, data are therefore available for the aerodynanic design ··of slot-ted flaps on airf 011 s of- any pr obabl e thick-ne s s •

,

HODELS

Plain Airfoil

The basic airfoil, which wns built of IDDinated pino to the N.A.C.A. 23030 profile, h~s a 3-foot chord and a 7-foot span. The trailing-edgB section w~. gade ~~Gl1y removablo so that it can be readily replacod by difter$ut flap arr~ngonents. ~he ordinatcs for this airfoil ~rc given in table I.

Slottod-Flap Arrnngeoents

['he slot shapes and flaps wore built of In.!:li-na.ted pine. The slot shapes were ool~d to the· main airfoil in place of the plain trailing edge, and the flaps were mounted on the airfoil by means of special. fittings that permitted wide variation in location with respect to the slot lips. The basic airfoil, tho flaps, end the slot shapes were ~air and were made to a tolerance of ±0.015 inch.

'.

•

Flaps.- Two £lapa·ware tested, one with a chord 40

...

U • .A.C.A.··Technical Note Uo. 755

3

.'

'. 'perce'nt of tha' wing chord and the other with a. ch o r d ':25.66 percent of the wing. 'cho r d,', These fla.ps a r e not geome.trically similar~ but both ~ore dosignea ~ith a small n~ae radius to. keep th'e w.i,dth o.f the breaks ill the lower surface of the airfoil narrow 'with' the .flaps re.trected •. Tho upper surface, of the forward portion of each flap is, an arc ~f ~ circle tangent to the lower surface of the slot lip.

(See figs. 1 and 2.) Both flaps are designated 1 because they are comparable with flaps 1 used with the N.A.C.A. 23012 and 23021 airfoils (references 1 to 4). For convenience. the 40-percent-chord flap will hereinafter be roferr,ed to as the IIwid'e-chordl! flap and the 25.66-pel·cent-

-ch o r d flap wi 11 be r eferl'ed to as the "medi um-.c~ord I~ .fl.ap.

•

•

Slot shapes.- Two types of slot shape were used with each size of flap. These types are designated a and b. (See figs. 1 and 2.) Sha:pe s a ·a.nd b for the wide-chord flap are not geometrically similar to shapes a and b

for. the medium-chord flap.··' Shapes a fox·, .b o t h fI:ip a Lz e s , h ow'e v e r , were' d e s i'gned to give a minimum b'r eak in tho .:.1 ower surface of the eirfoil with the flaps retracted and shapes b are' comparable wi th shape h of referen co 1. which

gave the. lowest d,rag for high and intermediate lift. coefficients. The slot lips for each flap size ar.eJ..ongey-than the sl'Cit lips for' c.orresponding flap sizes 'on ,the N.A.C.A. '23012, arrd the N.A',C.A', 23021 airfoils. (See r e f e r eu c e s 1 to 4.)

.. _----

The m'o d e L wa's mounted'vertically in the closed test

section of the N.A.C,A. 7- 'by 10-foot wind t'):Lnnel (refer~ncos'i and 5) so that it c o nrp Le b e Ly spanned 'the ,.jet except 'for small clearances at each end •. The 'main 'air-foil was rigidly attached to the balanc e frame by torque ·tubes t which extended through the upper and the lower boundaries of the tunnel. Tho angle of attack of the modal was set from outside the tunnel by rotating the torque tuoes with a calibrated drive. Approximately two-dimensional flow

is obtained with this type of installation and the section characteristics of the model under test can be determined.

..

All tests. exde~t those to det~rmine lhe effect of scale, were made at a dynamic pressure of 16.37 pounds per s quare fa ot, c o r-r-e s p on d Ln.g t a a vel oc i ty of approxi-

4.

N.A;O.A. Technical No~o No. 755

t.

~ately 80 miles per hour under standard atmospheric conditions and to an average test Reynolds Number of about 2,190,000. Because of the turbulence in the wind ~mnol, the effective Reynolds Number, Re, (reforenc~ 6) wna approximately 3,500,000. For all tosts, the vnlue of Ro is based on the chord·of the airfoil with the fLap rotracted und on a turbulence factor o~ 1.6 f~r the tunnel.

'.

•

Plain Airfoil

The lift, the drag, and th~ pitching moment of the basic airfoil were measured over the complete angle-ofattack range from -so to the stall.

Slotted-Flap Arrangements

Tests were first made with each size of flap and both slot sha-p-es to determino the effect on the drag of the breaks in the wing surface at the slot entranco and the· slot lip when tho flap 'was ret-racted. The of ;feet of the flap hinges with the flaps in the retrnoted position was also investigated. Tests were then made with each flap size and each slot shape at various flap ~efleetiona an~ pOSitions to determine the optimum paths fran consi;iera-

t ions of low drag at--small fla.p de f L eo t i 0118 and h1gA. :j,J .. ft at -La r g e flap deflections. The wide-chord and the gediuochord flaps were daflection f~om 00 to 50° and fran 0° to SOO, respectively, in 100 increments. Iu all casas, lift, drag, and pitching moment were.IDoasured through e~ engleof-attack range from -60 to the stall.

•

Scale-effect tests were also made of the medTum-chord flap in itrs optimum position for ~~xicum lift when dc-flected 400•

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Ooefficie:lts

All the t~st results a.re given in standar~ secition nondimensional coefficient furn corrected for tunnel-wall effect and turbulence as Qxplained in reference 1.

Ct section lift coefficient (t/qe).

.,

N.A.C.A. Technical Note No. 755

6

, .

sec t ion prof ile"'drag c oeff ic ien t' Cdo/ q c ) •

cm(a.c.)o

section pitch1ng~moment coeffioient about aerodynamic center of plain airfoil :

(m(a.c.)o/qc2) •

..

where

. \" section lift.

do section ·profile. ·drag.

se~tion pitching moment.

dynamic pressure. (pv2/a).

c chord of basic airfoil with flap fully retracted.

and

J

1

a.o

angle of attack for infinite.aspec~ ratio,

flap. deflection •

• • t

t

flap chord.

Precision

..

The accuracy. of the various measurements in the tests

is believed to be within the following limits:

a.o ----_ .... _-- ±O.lo cd . :1:0.0006
0(c1 :c 1.0)
C\mo.x ------ ±0.03
cdo( ±o.ooa
C~(a.c·)o -- ±0.003 c1 = ~.5)
8f -------------- ±o.ao
cd ----- ±0.0003
°min Flap position --- ±O.OOlc A correction for the effect of the flap-hinge fittings has been applied to the data for the flap-retracted conditions •. This correction amounted to about 5 pe r c en b of the minimum drag 0;[' tho plain air f,o :l.l. No at tempt was made to deternine the effect of the hinges with the 'flaps

6

N .A .. C .A. T'echnic.al:N.:)t.o No. 755

deflected. The ro~ativo.merits of·the .erious flap arrangements, however, are believed to bo illappruciably nffected because the'-sao,o'fittings w..ero·used throughout, tho t~sts for a givon flap size.

Plain Airfoil

Aerodynamic charactoristics.- The conpleto'section aerodynamic characteristics of the plain N.A.C.A. 23030 airfoil are given in figure 3. As these data have boen discussed in referor.co 7, no further comment is requirod.

Effect on profile drag of breaks in surface of airfoil due to slot.-~he effect of the breaks in the airfoil surface on the drag coefficient with the flap retraced is shown in f'igure 4 for the' 'wide-chord flR.p and in figu~e 5 for the medium-chord flap. The variation of incremont of profile-drag coefficient (6Cdo) was irregular in almost

all cases. With only the slot lip of the wide-chord-flap ar!angqment unsealed, 6~do ~as negligi~la below a lift

coefficient of 0.6 and rose to a value of 0.0018 at ct = 0.8. In the case of the m e d Lum'<c h o r d flap, the 6Cdo .d ue to this break was too small to measure.

When the breaks in the upper and the lower surfaces caused by wide-chord flap 1-0. were unsealed, 6Cdo varied

from 0.0006 to 0.0035, while the breaks caused by medimnch~rd flap l-a, gave values of 6Cdo varying from about

0.0004 at ' Ct = 0 to 0 at Ct = 0.8. The 6Cdo for the wide-chord flap l-b unseal ed was a'Qout 5 times that for wide-ch~rd flap·l-a, and the 6Cdo with the ~ed~u~-chord

flap l-b unsealed was about 10 times that o£ thecorresponding l-a arrangement. Much of the drag increment duo to the breaks in the wing lower surfaco wi th Elith.cr slot shapo with the flap retracted can probably be elimin~ted

by th~ ~se of an auxiliary flap or a d~or to seal the breaks.

Slotted-Flap Arrangements

Detormination·· of optimum arra.ngements for n ax Lmum

. lift.- The data in thi~ ·section are presented ascontour~ (£iga. 6 to 9) pf t~.p-noae position ·rolative tv tho slot li·p. f·or· constant va.l.ue,s, of liftcoet.f.icie~t •. ~he~_e con-

'.

1

\

, 'l

l l-

.. ~

"

N.A.C.A. Technical Note No. 755

7

'.

tours were prepared from the results of tests at numerous positions for each flap deflection. The nose of the flap is defined as the point of tangency of the leading-edge arc and a line perpendioular to the wing chord line when the flap iS'in the neutral position. (See figs. 1 and 2.)

, .

From these contours, it should be possible to select the best flap path from considerations of,maximum lift coefficient for each flap deflection. If, for structural reasons, it is impossible to use the best aerodynamic path, the contour~ permit the evaluation of the effect of any deviation. Complete section aerodynamic characteristics of selected optimum arrangements for each flap deflection are given in a later section.

Contours of maximum lift coeffioient for the widechord flaps I-a and l-b are given in figures 6 ,and 7; figures 8 and 9 give tho contours for the medium-chord flaps I-a and l-b~ A number of these contours, including some for high flap deflections, are unclosed because a ~arge enough area was not covered by the tests. It is believed, however, that the range tested will include any path chosen for mechanical practicability. In any case, the contours would close back of the lip.

The wide-chord flap was deflected fran 100 to 500 and the medium-chord flap was deflected from 100 to 600• These

,ranges, although too narrow to establish definitely the ultimate maximum lift coefficient of each flap, are the same as those investigated for 'the slotted flaps on the N.A.C.A. 23012 and the N.A.C.A. 23021 airfoils. The maximum lift coefficients obtained in the tests for the widechord flaps I-a and l~b are 2.82 and 2.90, respectively. These lift coefficients were obtained with the flaps deflected 500 and located at a point 2.5 percent of the wing chord ahead of and 6 percent below the slot lip. Mediumchord flap I-a gives a maximum lift coefficient of 2.59 when deflected 600 and located 2.5 percent of the wing chord ahead of and 4 percent below the slot lip. Tho maximum lift coefficient given by ned1um-chord flap 1-b is 2.68 when deflected 600 and located 0.5 percent of the wing chord behind and 4 percent below the slot lip.

The contours of maximum lift coefficients at flap deflections of 100 and 200 for all flap arrangements are included to make the data more complete, because the optimum flap positions for these deflections will probably be ' chosen from considerations of low drag and practic,p.bility of mechanical operation.

8

B.A.C.A. Technical Note No. 755

"

Determination of optimum arrangements for profile drag. - Th-e optimum positions f_rom considerat-ions of loW' drag at moderate lift coefficients likely to be used for take-off were chosen from contours of flap-nose position for constant drag a~ Ct = 1.0 and 1.5 for the 10° nnd

the 200 flap deflections. Figures 10 and 11 show tho contours for the wide-chord f-la"ps 1-a and I-b, and f'-igures 12 and 13 give the contours for the medium-chord flaps

l-a and I-b. Most "of these contours do not close, but "it is believed that sufficient positions havo been invostigated :to cover,any probo.ble fln.p path.

" -

"

Insufficient data wore available to give contours nt Ct = 2.0. but the position for minimum cdo nt Ct = 1.5

and o'f - 20° is also the position at'which cd is
0
minimum at C ,t = 2.0 and of - 20° for both the wido-
and the mediuT!l-chord flaps I-b. The minimum prcfile d ro.g
at c t = 2.0 is higher when '8f = 300 than when Bf_ = 200 for both flap_sizes.

The best flap positions, aerodynamically, for the 100 and the 200 flap de~lections are indicated by figures 10 to 13. The figures also permit the evaluation of the detrimental effect due to deviation ~rom these po~itions.

Section,aerodynamic characteristics of selected opVimum arrangements.- The optimum positio~s for eBch flap

'arrangement were selectred from considerations of low drng

at the 100 and the 200 flap deflecti~ns and ot maximu~

lift coeff~cient at the high~r flap-deflections. The complete aerodynamic characteristics of these optimum positions are givan i~ figuro&14 to 17. Those figures al~o include data for positions that arc not on the best aerodynaoic path in order to make possible the estimation of

the characteristics-of a path, t~e repr~~uc~io~ of whtcih would be structurally Simpler. ThB table ~n each f~gure gives the flap position for each-flap deflec~on. The

path for each flap arrangement plotted in the s~tch on

the figures is a structurally feasible one that closely follows the aerodynamic optimum. Thcsa compromiso paths

are hereinafter referred to as the "selected" optimuo

paths. The characteristics given arQ typical and data for positions other thun those shown aro,availablo upon !cqU!st.

COMparison of selected optinum arrnngaments.- Envelopo palars, obtained f~om figures 14 to 17, for both flap sizes, each with slot shapes a e n d b , arc shown in fig"':

.,

N.A.C.A. Technical, Note·No. 755

9

."

ures 18 ,and 19. A comparison of these pol~rs indicate~ that, except a.t .low values of the 'lift c o e f-f Lc Le n t , slotted flap I-b is better from considerations of drag than I-a for both 'fla.p sizes.' On this b ae La , the wide-C?hord flap I-b i's more .s ud be.b Le £or take-off than I-a for lift coefficients above 0.7, and the medium-chord flap I-b is better than I-a at lift coefficients greatsr than 0.4.

It should b~-noted that, below a lift co~fficient of about 0.5, the plain wing has less drag than any of the arrangements with the flap deflected. "A-door to seal the broaks in the lower surface of the wing would thorefore make all the arrangements approximately equivalent to the plain wing at the lower 'values of Ct.

Slotted'flap, I-b is superior to I-a for either the wide- or th,e' me d t ura-ech o r d flaps when they are conpared on :a basis of increnent 'Of m ax Lnrum lift coe:ffic:l.e-nt for .a given flap deflection, the flaps in all enses bei~g ~oved a Lo n g the .s e Le c t e d optiI.:J.UI:1 path's~ (See figs. 20 and 21.)

..

, The diving mooent at the sa~e lift coefficient is g~eater for slotted fLaps I-b than for slotted flaps I-a. the diff,er,ence being more pronounced for th e wide-cho~d flap than for the mediuo-chord flap (figs. ,14 to :1,.7) •

- -

Comparison of slotted flaps of different chot~,-, ,A

c cm p a r La o n of, :l!he wide-chord flap I-b and the n e d Lura-coh o r d flap 1-0 is, made in figure 22. The m e d t um-e c h o r d flap gives, a lower drag than tho w ide-chord flap at lift 'coefficients lower than 1.8 and would thorefore be more dosirable for take-off in this range. The ~ide-chord flap, however, would be more suiteble for ,take-off for a rcnge of lift coefficients from 1.8 to about 2.5. This flap also gives a higher value of oaxioum lift coefficient tor the range o'f ,flap deflections tested. The pitchinF5-moment coefficient given'by the wtde-chord flap is greater, however, than that given by the me~ium-chord.flap at the same lift coefficient.

Th~ variation of increment of maximuD lift coeffi-

,cient with flap chord,for a flap deflection of 500 is shown in figure 23,.' _ The fairing of this curve is, of _ course, arbitrary. but the indications are that a greater gain in increnent of maximun lift ma.y be expected by increasing the flap c~ord frQm 10 percent to-25,66 percent than from 25.66 percent .to ~O percent. This result would be in agreementw1th.the result~ for the slotted flaps of different chord on the »~A.C.A. 23012 airfoil (r~fdrence

10

N .A,. C .A. TecJ;mi_cfl,l Noto ,!fo,. 755

"

2). ' There apparently is no, justificat ion for. using the '·wide-chord flap m e r eLy because it give's a' somewhat hit;hor

Ct " 'Sin,ce the hinge moment, boing p r opo rtri.cn a L to the .,

m ax

s4uare of ~he flap ~hord. would be considerably ~argor wit:l t h ts flap than with the medium-chord flap.

Efr-ect of scale on 'increment of maximum lift oo.;:;fficient.-Tho effect of scale on the incr-ement of tlaxinutl lift coefficient for the medium-chord f-lap I-b is shown

in 'figur.e 24. The Lnc rem en t of Ct increases with

nax

increasing scale from Re = 1 to about 1.5 million. At

higher Reynolds Numbers, no l~creaso in 6c\ occurs.

ma.x

The 'curve indicates that the increment of m ax Lrrun lift coefficient may be considered independent of scale in the range of Reynolds l~uI!lb.crs from 1,500,000 to 3,500,0-00.

Comparison of wide- and medium-chord slotted flnps on airfoils of differont thickness.- Tho rosults of the present testa tog~ther with the results reported in rof-

• erences l.to 4 cake possible an evaluation of the ~ffoct of airfoil thickness on· the characteristics of airfoils e q'u Lp p e d with,slotted_ flaps. Such an evaluation is m a d e in figure 2~, which giv~s the envelope polara for the

. wide-chord flap .l-b on tho N.A.C.A. 23012 (referonco 2), N.A.C.A. 23021 (reference 4), and N.A.C.A. 23030 airfoils. As Day be expe~t~, the drag at a given lift coe~+icient increases as the thLckness of the uirfoil increases. It is of interest to note, however, that the oaxinum lift coe£ficient at 8f = 500 and the drag at that lift coef-

ficient are about the saae for the three airfoils.

A c orapa r Le o n of medium-chord flap 2-J:l on t-he N.A.C.A. 23012 (reference 1), flap 2-b on the N.A.C.A. 23021 (reference 3), and.flap ~-b on the N.A.e.A. 23030 airfoila is made in figure 26. Here agRin the drag~or ~.given lift coefficient increases with wing thickness. Although the m~ximum lift and tho drag nt this lift arc about the same for the l?-percen~ and the 21-percent-thick airfoils, the envelope pol'ar for the 30-percent-thick airfoil lies inside ~he polara for the other airfoils:throughout tho lift range.

- - - - - .- - _._.

The ~c\mai for the plain airfoils Bubatnntially de-

creasesa~ the aitfoil thickness increases (reference 7), and this result might be ex~~cted for airfoils with slot-

.'

N.A.C~A~ Technical Note No. 755

11

ted flaps. Inspection of figure 27, however. shows that the maximum lift coefficient of the slotted-flap airfoils are not greatly affeoted by wing thickness. The c~

10m ax

of the air'f9ils with the' medium-chord" slotted flap. d e c r c as e a about 5 percent with an increase in thickness from 12 to

30 percent. as compared with a decrease of about 30 percont for the plain airfoils over the sa~e rango of thickness.

In the case of airfoils with 0. wide-chord slotted flap, no chaige i~ maxi~um lift.coefficient occurs with increasing wing thickness.. If structural req_uireoonts.·nece·ss·itcte a thick se~t~on, the use" of' slotted flaps will therefore largely eliminate any loss in rnaxioum lift coefficient that is as.sociated with the thick section when used without flap!?". Similar results have been o b b a Ln e d with split flaps

. (r e fe' r e n c e 7).

CONCLUDING REMARKS

...

An easy slot entrance was better than a sharp entrance. with both the 25.66-percent-chord flap and tho 40-porcentchord flap, except for low drag with the fla-p' retracted.

The wide-chord flap was better than the ~odi~m-chord flap from considerations of maximum lift coefficient a.nd low drag a·t lif.t coeffic.ients of 1.8 to 2.5, although ·the gain in maximum lift coefficient was relatively small. Both flap sizes gave progressively lower values of drag coefficient

at moderate and high lift coefficients on the N.A.C.A.

23021 and 23012 airfoils than on the N.A.C.A. 23030 air£oil. The maximum lift coefficient with either flap-was approximately indepe~dent of airfoil thickness.

•

Langley Memorial Aeronautical Labora.tory.

National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics, Langley Field, Va., February 28, 1940.

12

N.A .. C.A. Technioal· H'ote No ... 755

REFERENCES

..

1. Wonzinger, Carl J't and Harris, Thomas A.: Wind-Tunnol Invostigntion of an N.A.O.A. 23012 Airfoil wit"h' Various Arrangeoents of Slotted Flaps. T.R. No. 664,

N.A.O.A~, 1939.' ..

..

2. Harris, Thomas A.; Nind-Tunnel Invostigation of an N.A.O.A. 23012 Airfoil with Two' Arrangencnts of a Wide-Chord Slotted Flap. T.N. No. 715, S.A.C.A.,

1939. .

3. W~nzinger, Carl J., and Harris, ThonaD A.: Wind-Tunnel Investigation of au N.A.O.A. 23021 ALrfoil with Various Arrangenents of Slotted Fl~ps. T.R. No. 677, N.A.C.A., 1939.

4. Duschik, Frank: Wind-Tunnol InvQstigation of an N.A.O.A. 23021 Airfoil with Two Arrangements of a 40-PercontChord Slotted Flap. T.N. No. 728, N.A.O.A., 1939.

·.5. Harris, Thomas A.: The 7 by 10 Foot wind Tunnel of the National Advisory Oommittee for Aeronau;t-ics. T.R. No. 412, N.A.O.A., 193~.

..

6. Jacobs, Eastnan N., and Sherman, Albert: Airfoil Section.Characteristics as Affected by Variations o~-the Reynolds Nuober.· T.R. No.5S6, N.A.O·.A., 1937.'

7. Wenzinger. Oarl J •• and HarJ:'is, Thomas A.: Wind-Tunnel Investigation of N.A.O.A. 23012, 23021, and 23030 Airfoils with Various Sizes of Split Flap. T.R. No. 668, N.A.O.A., 1939.

"

N.A.C.A. Technical Note No. 755

Table I

Ordinates for N.A.C.A. 23030 Airfoil (Stations and ordinatos in percent of wing chord)

! Ordinate
Station UppGr Lower
0 4.82 0
1.25 7.37 -2.63
2.5 8~90 -4.27
5 11. 05 -6.54
7.5 12.57 -8.28
10 I 13.68 -9.65
15 15.20 -11.52
20 ! 16.07 -12.61
I
25 16.46 -13.20
30 16.57 -13.46
40 15.89 -13.13
50 14.38 -12.11
60 12.34 -10.47
70 9.86 -8.42
I
I 80 7.03 -6.09
I
90 I 3.87 -3.40
I 95
L:oo 2.15 -1.86
.315 - .315 ...

L.E. radius: 9.90. Slope of radius through end of chord: 0.305.

13

. .

~----------------c----------------~

~---------------.nsc------~-

(a) nll.p 1".. (b) nap l-b

:F1gare 1.- Seot.ioDe ot i.A.C.A. ~ i.lrloil with ~nt. of O.4Qo .1o~ted flap 1.

'1

L

Ii

. ,

. Ftgnre 3." &eotiCD a~a41Damlo charl.etar\ptioe of M.A.C.l. 3b03O plain airtoll.

(a) Flap 1-11, (b) .'l.J0) l-b

ripe 2.- E.lltt,·M ot I.\.' ... ~. 1!30~O drfoll .lllil l1TUI:.,_t"

'' ~. W60l "?" nip l. ,I '

, I

~

[

a .. ....

.. o .. 11

'" "

:

.

~ .

. 008

.008

/
/
/
_//
_,.,---- I-~"/
./
/ .
Unsealed toor:"
I
) ------- t-o.onseated
// I I I fop and I
bottom.
-- --I-b._unsealed~
V· top and
bottom:


,
,
,
,
,
,
,
I
I
I
,
_- ...... ~ /
/' " ./~
" ~~- -- _,.,V
,
--- '"
/ - ~- -- ...-
'--
t-o, unsealed lop ond ;
bottom. I--
I--- -------I-b unsealed top and
, .- I---
bottom:



/
"
,
I
I
,"" ... - --. .......
... ... ,
,
"' ... _ -_ I
... I
---



-
r- o

~.OO7 <J

D

~.OO7 <!

o

o

.2 .4 ,6 .8 Section lift coeti/c/ent , Cl

1.0

.2 .4 .6 ,8 Section lift coefficient, cl

1.0

rigure .. ,- Effect or slot Open1ngar 1n urlaoe of airfoil OD .ec~ion ~otile-drag coeff1cient. The 0.400 dotted flap; Sf - 0

'1gure 5.- Effect of slot opeu1uge 1n lurface of airfoil on lleotion pto!11e-d:r1g ooet!l.oient. 'l'oe 0.3:386 c elotted .naP, Sf- 0"

.. J

N.A.C.A. Technical Note No. 755

.'

..

'.

~.

Fig. 6

r-~~--+--+--~~~--+-~/6

12 <1 4- 0

P,rcenf wing chord •

(a) Of = 10° •
(b) of = 20°.
(c) of = 30°.
(d) ~ = 40°.
(e) f = 50°. Figure 6.- Contours of flap location for c,. . The 0.40c slotted

flap I-a. lDax

N.A.C.A. Teahniaal Note No. 755

..

..

-.

"_

-.

Fig. ~-

16

12 8 4- 0

I"erc .. nf w/ng chord

(d)

( .. )

12 8 4- 0

Per=nf wing chord

(a) 6f = 10°.
(b) 6f = 20°.
(a) 6f = 30°.
(d) 6f = 40°.
(e) 6f = 50°. Figure 7.- Contours of flap loaation

for clmax' The 0.40a slottedflap i-s.

N.A.C.A. Technical Note No. 755

..

...

..

Fig. 8

8 4 0

P~r~nt w,r,s chard

Figure 8.- Contours of flap location for cl • The O.2566c slotted flap l-a. max

N.A.C.A. Technical Note No. 755

.'

'.

Fig. 9

/2 '---8=---'--4":---'---'0=---'/2 Perav>1 win9 chard

/2 8 4- 0

Percenf wing chard

...

(a) 5f = 10°. (b) of = 20°. (c) of = 30°. (d) of = 40°. (e) of = 50°. (f) of = 600 • Figure 9.- Contours of flap location for c1 • The 0.2566c slotted flap l~b.

max

N.A.C.A. Technical Note No. 755

--Figs. 10, 11

"

_// 0
.: ~
/ /1-"'" ~
Chord L '5 Chord
/ - - - IO.S 1
/ ~
.Ios..;' iqes ''3 rl l
IZIJ
~~ ~ V' .;g~g ~
.I~~ K« K1 Ie. 1 JJ7. F-
~ ~ =~~ - €_
r....: ~
16 12 B 0
(b) Percent wing choro' . (b) .:

..

/

Figure 10.- Contours of flap location for Cd .The 0.40c slotted flap I-a. o

12 8 4

Percent wing chOn:!

(a)6f=10o,c·1.=l.O. (b)6r=10o, c1. = 1.5.

(c) 6f=200, c1.=1.5.

Figure 11.- Contours of flap location for Cd .The 0.40c slotted flap I-b. a

N.A.C.A. Teohnioal Note No. 755

"

_-

",

-,

8 4 a

Percen>' wing chord

Figs. 12,10

1-+'=~=+..-....JI::---h?,;li--l8 ~

~

= 100; 0t = 1.0. (b)6r= 200;ct = 1.0. (a)of=lOO,ct= 1.0. (b)5f=100;ct = 1.5.

(c) of= 200; Ct = 1.5. (c) Of = 200; c1= 1.5.

12.- Contours of flap location for Figure lo.-Contours of flap location for cd

0d .The 0.2566c slotted flap I-a. The 0,2566c slotted flap I-b. o.

o

Figure

•• n.C.A. !echnica.l Ilote 110. 756

,"

/.;_c ~ -
r ~
./ 1 '"r- t--...
.... ~ r-
.2~- -t-

.3·'--~--!- .1 K - a...
_. _-_ r --
, 1 ; • :-<>--
.;-r : l- i- - f-..,
~
.4 -- ~
-..
r-- r- r- r- l- f-" .- ,
.5f i
>-~ to"- l- I--
1 ~Io- I.r-
.6, ~~-. I .... r- "- 19-
:~ -
x ...,~ _ .---.:=? .-1- i-
~I
:- ,--;""""", I I _I, I .! J_ ,L.I I
51-X andy given in percent or wing choi-cI
'-- a <l. c x P- I>. ,s 17 - I-
4l_ c$! 0 /Q 20 20 .:JO 40 4G 50
t.-:r '/7.50 /O..S ,6:5 /0.5 4..:> 4..5 4.:> ~ I" ,- - l-
eI- y '4.85 /2 10 10 8 5 9 6 '\
I
0
I I
8 I ~
I I ,...,
f...r -p J
6
[....f ~ ~ v
4 ~ V Ji.-' )
...... i-== .;1--- I -" .;-
2 l- I-- ...... ~ -1 /
__ v - :..- f-"t J.. /"
t_ 1-1---- :- i..- ~
0 !0-1 {51
- ...-
8 [_...i-- t v:T
~ f->"' --I-- v
6 ~ i..- ..tI-
...., I...- - /
, __. V
4 : ~ ~
e.;:J... L.-o V
T
0 i I
i
I '?' b 1 ,,",
6 J -~jIJ' P fl _!~~
L! r- I- r- _/J I b:
2 ijo- ./ !/ ~ Ir - .
I 7 v ~ V t/ .-"-
I I V V ~ -- v c../" c../" I
8 V /" l:2 ....... V
./ /" t.."..o
r V v _....-: ~ V I.,..o<i""'" V
/' V k;: ? -- V ~ ./
O! ,/ V k::;:P ...... V ~ V
V .,? V b:::'" v"""
~ /' V V '/" _.-::; ~ v .....
7 /" i?" /" L.-::::I? v~
j-o<
8 I '.

.2

.2

.2

•

..

.0

.0

20

"ljQ
-1:"
I u
~
"'"
I)
.. ....
I)
-!!
f
-. 4

-4

~ ~ 0 2 A BAm u u ~ ~ ~ u u u u m Section lin coefficient, ct

FI!Ure 1(.- Seotion aerodynamic chara"teristics oC S.l.C.l. 23030 airfoil with 0.40" siotted flap -l-a.

FI.£ • .1(

---'

---~2

.-

-~

-- -~-------.--:::;;;;;:'"

- .... ~

II.A.C.A. Technical lot .. 110. 7!!O

,.

.20~~-+-+~-r~+-+-+-~~-&-+~-r4-~+-+-~~-4-+-+~~~~~+-~ J.f8~-+-+-r~+-+-~-+-+-r~#-+-~-+-+~~+-~~-+-+~·M-~~~~~

.....

I:: :~.16~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-4~~ ~

QJ 8·f4~~~~~~~~~~~~~-HI~~~~~=1~~~-4~~~74~-M~~-4-4-4~

&'

~.12~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~M-~~~~~~

r

~ /Or-r-r-r-~r-~~r7~~~~hHr~-r-r-r-r-r-r-r~fr~~'_~~~~~~~4-4

-e. ~

Q. I::.08r4~-+-+~-r~~+-+-~hd±±~~-F~4-~++~~~-+-+~~4-4-+-+-~

s

~.08~~-+-+~~~+-+-+-~~~d~+-+-+-~~-+£~~~~~~~+-~~-+-+~~~

.~~~~4~~~~~~~~/~~~-r~-~~~~-+~+-~-}4-~~~4-~

.P'

Or-~~~~-+-+-+-+-r~~~~+-+-+-+-+-r-~~~-+-+-+-+-+~~~~~ 20~~~-+-+-+-+-+-+~~~4-~+-+-+-+-+-+-~~~-+-+-~-+-+~~~~~

-.~

-.4 -:2 a .2 .4 .B .8 /.0 1.2 1.4 L6 L.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0

Section lin coefficIent, c,

k I~

Figure 15.- Section a.erodynamic char .. cbrhties cf II.A.C.A. 2!030 e.1rfell with 0.400 slotted flap I-b.

"

,.

.20~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~1~~~~~~~ !.18~~~-4-4-4-+-+-+~~~4-444-4-+-+-+-+-~~~~1/'~~-+~-+~~~4-~

t" :~.16~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~hH~~~~~~~~

~ I

8·14~-+~4-+-~~-+~4-+-~~~4-+-~~~~~~~f4-+-~-+~4-~

~ t ~

-6./2 "\ I, .r IJ

~.Iotj=~=~=t=tjtj=~=~=t=tjtj=!=~=~:tj~~--:~-c~!~~~:~~~~~~-~~~~~t=~j=~=~=t=tj

e :.- .0-- l-: ~ -1'

~ ~= ?~

t·08~~-t-t-r-r'_i-t-t-~:_~~~~~~~9T~~-i~~~~~~~i-+-t-r-~~-t-t-r~

.0

..::: .... 'l ...... :-- ..... -y '-::~ /"

~.06f~~~~~~~~~~~~~~A~!~~~~~~~~~IJ~~~~fl

.~ -

I--~

.02

0~~~-4-4-+-+-+-+~~~~~4-~+-+-+-+-~~~~-4-4-+-+-+-+~~~ 20~~~-4~-4-+-+-+~~~~~H-4-+-+-+-+-~~~~-4-4-+-+-+-+~~~

...:

t

o .2 .4 .6 .8 LO 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.5 2.8 .3.0

SecfiOn tiff coefficient, c,

Figure 16.- Seetbn SJlrodyn!l1lllc chuo.ct.ari.tic. Dr If. 4.~.A. 2<lO3O .. irfail with 0.25000 .lotted. fio.p I-I.,

JI.~.C.A. Teabnlco.l !fate 110. 765

Fi&. 17

I

010.:. .. -
......
t-- r..... r"I
.I r--...
:--.
.... I-
.2 ;--...
.3 ....... ;--...
-- _
" :-<: is::: e-;
.4 ""'" .- :::::: -
-.. 5..
.5
~
.6 mllI
a f- r-- '--!.....!.._ 1t
f- ---_ -..;;'--.. -oj s: ;
8f- :::", I
~
f- ~~
6f-
f- __.J
'"LA '.~ ----- T
~ ~-;

21-( t1 1.1 I II I J I I I Q ,
~ .rand'J9IVen tnpercenfofwlngchord
a 0 IJ.[JVO~"1 1><1 : I
;-10) 0 10 20.30130 40 40 50 60 ;
81- 3:111.66 I/O. iSS as \5.5 2.5 1-0.5 - J1
1-11l as ro ra 810 7 7 ~ "
•
6 II
4
!:fWI
f- f.-- 11 VI
2
I:::::: ./
~ 1::$ p- If
a
~ :- '- .- f-'" 'J
8 - i-!=' po '- V r
~ f--" L...- :.-- _.., I
L.-. L...- ...0 - I
'C> ~ f-: .I v/
/' ,.- .-
.»:
20:: -e-e
a

a 1I
6
1 !i .II
1 JirV f{1/
It iJ/ ,
I,..,.. :",.. "P'_, ,P :_:::;;
8 v- 1/ ~ ;::::::;;;,.: ~/
:.--:
V , _/ t> .,.,.. ~ ;::;.- 6 "'" .>
v -~ ~ c:- ..... ~ p- I-'""""'
V f.-- ...... ~ p ~!""" ....... 1/
a ~ ~ I-::::"~ ~ Ii"" __......./
;....-
,P. V f-:: t::;:: e> l..::::'~ v
..J:. ~ r- ~ p:--: ~ _.. v
8 .'

.'

"

.2

t

-.

.04

.0.

"

-4

--.4 -;2 a .2 .4 .6 .8 1.0 /2 L4 LG _ 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 Z6 2.8 3.0

Section lift coefficient, c,

F'1gure 17.- Section urodJIl8lllia charaateri.tice of II.A.C.A. 23030 drfoil with 0.2566a slotted nap lob.

U.C.~. T~~

.24
.'
0.22
.... e
~.20
.~
o
... Ii: 18
Q)'
0
u
g..16
{)
,4-J4
'.::
0
ls..I2
c
s ./0
(.)
III
Uj .08
.06
.04
.02 "

".

",

1eal Note No.7!!!! ._ f!{·· .



·
·
·
·
·
·
I
7:
II .
Slotted nop .
:
/-0
----- /-6
6,rl"/· "
,
v
/,
40 ~ r
·
,
30g ,
,
·
·
./ ·
r
./ .
.
./
20 V r
V ,
,-
V ::;: --
10,.,. --
_1-- ~- _-
~ - -- --
-
,-"" - -- -- -- _- _;. ;::.-F'-
.28

.26

f4 -.2 0 .2 .4 .6 .8 LO 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 22 2.4 25 Z8 3.0 Section liff eoeHi"cient, c,

Figure 18., Co:oparieon of O.40e Blotted flap. on II.A.C.,!.. 230~ airfoil.

0
8

5

4

2
------ -- NA..CA. 230.30
NA.cA. 23021 (i-ef'erence 4}
0
NA.CA. 23012 (ref'erence 2 4- • ~ '0'
.-
18 - - /
40 r rJ
16 _/
14 PI
: I
12 I~
I U
:
10 , 7
8 }V
.- i'/
[;.0 -- V [_.-
6 _L- :... V [7
10. ,- _ - I-- P
_ ~
, 1-- -_ ~_ - Le- I.-- V ~-~
1-- 1-- -- ~ ~ I--'" ~- ~ F
21-- - - -- --- ~
- I- I-
0 .3

.2

.2

.2

.2

o

iJ

~-.2 .f!!

~.

tl

8

()"

e

'ti

r.

,!!! <;:: o 1...

Cl

.§ .

"'" \)

"i.o

.0

.04

.0

-.4 -:2 0 .2 .4 .6 .8 1.0 /,2 1.4 /.6 /.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 .3.0

Section lif't coeffic:ii!!i7f, c,

Figure 25.- Comparison of 0.400 Blotted flap lob on If.A.C.A. 23030, 23021, and 23012 airfoil ••

li •.•• ~ • .4.. Technical 1I0te 10. 71515

.'

..

.44

-,

._ .

,
,
. I
,
f-, ,
I
,
I
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
I
Slotteo' flap :
-------~-/-a i
I·b 1
I
I
,
,
,
,
,
I
I



, I
,
·
·
· II
,
4, -sO'lf
7
'II
//
• 50 ~9"
fJ
4g'
-' J
13J ,I:)
20 " - V
__ " - ~.,_
10 _, .,' - ~ ~
,-= - .42

.40

.38

.36

.34

.32

.30

l.28 126

Ii::

~

8.24

g{j.22

~ ~.20

~

r:: .18

:g

u

Jl.l6

.14

.12

.10

.08

.06

.04

.02

.6

.8 LO L2 104 /.6 1.8 2..0 2..2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0

Section liff coefficient. c •

o

.2 .4

. •

Fie;ure 19., Comparison of O.2566c Blottod flap. on X.l.C.A. 23030 airfoil.

K.A.O.A. Teohnical Iote .0. 755

I'ig •• 80,21

2.0

L
__... -:
.:
~ ~ ,
--- --- -'
,-
I ,
" ,
/
/
/ /
/'
II /
/
,
/ / Slotted flap
"
V/ , ------- I-a
I-b
I /
/
if" .'

..

..

o

10

20 .30 40

Flap deflecfionJ BE J deq

50

60

.•

Figure 20.- Oomparison o~ inorement. o~ seotion maximum li~t ooe~fioient for ~laps 1-& and l-b when mOTed and defleoted along the seleoted OptilllUlll paths. The •• A.O.A. 23030 airfoil with 0.400 .lotted flaps •

2.0


......
~ --- -_
~ ,
....
....
........- -
/ ,-- I--
-
/ /' " ..
.... "
VI' / ,
/. /
, Siotfed flap
V, ------- I-a
/ / j-b
/
WI'
/' . ..

o

10

50

60

cO 30 40 Flap def/ectionJ BE J deq

Figure 21.- Oomparison of inorementa of seotion maximum lift ooef~ioient for flaps 1-& and I-b when moved and defleoted along the selected optimum paths. The H.A.O.A. 23030 airfoil with 0.2586 c slotted flapa.

N.A.C.A. Technioal Noh 10. 750

.'

.44

t















Sloffed flot:. 1-6
. 566c
------.40c

,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,

,-
,
,
4-·6Oi j

If 50
,
,
40 ../ ,
,
7 :
.37P .
.
7 ,
,
_
j,....- ~
.... 1- :;.... ~'Z
_ - _. -- ~f-
I.... -- -- - [.- 1.-1- 10
.42

.40

.38

. .36

.34

..32

• .JO

. .

.14

.12

.10

. 08

.06

. 04

.02

.2 .4

.6 . .8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 /.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0

Secfion liff coefficiemi, c,

o

\

Figure 22.- Comparison at slotted tlaps I-b at different ohords on I.A.C.A. 23030 airfoil.

F1t;. 22

+,

H.4.C.4. Technical lote 10. 755

..

2.0

,J,
___. ~
./ ./"
, ~ _- - .. \
,
,
/' _ --- .'"
" " ft---
.~ /"
.~/ ./ V
,,? / /
// -
1/ /
l-
~-
,II",
1-
;-
/
V .'

•

o

10 20 30 40

Flap chord, percent c

50

Figure 23.- Variation of increment of section makimum lift coefficient with flag chord. Slotted flaps l-b on !I.A.O.A. 23030 a..i.rfoil.~f- 50

. .

.3.

I r3

"i-." ~ !::: c: •

. ~

.ll 'i:::

~

Q I. II

~
:::::
§ I.
.~
~
E:
c::
.Q
1-.:
l>
\ ~
'. 0 .25fj6~ slotted f!a~ (a.,.. ~ 40,
)-

«
8
Ii c; "..a.r
,
2
I "

plain airroil
6
0 .5 .7 I 2 3 4 5xl06

Erfective Reynolds NumberJ Be

figure 24.- Scale effeot on seotion ~~ • Et coefficient for N.A.O.A. 23030 airfoil with and T.ithout 0.25660 Blotted flap l-b •

11g •• 23,24

r.J..c.J.. Teohniaal 1I0h 10. 760

F!.s. 26

,.

y.

.44

.4


r
2 I
I
I
0
I
0'
8 I
,
I
6 I
I
I
4-
,
,
2 r
I
I


8

6 --.,- NACA. 23030 with sloffed flap I-b
NACA. 23021· " • 2-b (ret'erence 3)
---- NA.CA. 23012'. • "2-h (re(erence I)
4
2

0

8

6 I
~'6mt
4 dJ
r I.
2 I I;
i40 ./ if
, , V_
0 30p P / ._ :._ -
, d'
8 ; v.:
6 ~
20 _ f..-- V
-- -- ":::::' r:
10 _- --- - I- e: ~.
- - -- -- - - _. .--
-- -- -- t-:-
'" .- l- i- '-,
!!4 -.2 0 .2 .4 .6 .8 10 1.2 /,4- 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 Z6 28 3.'1 Section liff coefl'lcient, c,

.4

.3

.3

.3

.3

t

.30 J.2

.... -

c::

·~.2 ~

III

8.2

R' ,,?2

~.2

~

c::.1

:g

o

Jl.l

.I

.I

.I

.0

.0

.0

.0

\

J' "

F1gar. 26.- Camparioon of 0.25660 Blotted flape on II.A.C.!. 23012, 23021, a.nd ~ Lirlolls.

..

N.A.C.A. Technical ilTote ilo. 7:55

Fig. 27

..

.....
CI)
+> 2.4
C,)
CI)
r-I
~
<I>
..-l
.,.;
~
c;j
rd 2.0
CI)
::-
0
S ~
<Il I!!
. .-{ ~.
,.._,
Pic')
III
r-I
..... ..; 1.6
~~
, <I> • .-{
,Qr-I
~
~ ~
CI) • .-{
0.-1 ~ 1.2
o
. .-{
.....
..... I-!
<I> 0
O~
C,)
~
+> 0
'+-<0.-1
• .-{ +>
r-I • .-{
UI
~ 0 .8
0 Pi
. .-{
+> 0
C,)+>
co
-n
.4 •

2.8

, _-- b.
cf = .40 - __ -A-- 1---- - - -I.~
--- i- --- ---
,... ,...
I I ---
I , , ~
cf : .25fif c·
r---

-



0- ---
t- ___ r--
";- .... R.....__
I
Pla :1 air oils "- .......
-......___ <,
f---._ 1-. 'I:

r---

i- _.-1-

1---- _.'_ . ._

-.-
L o 5

10

20

26

30

15

j

•

Airfoil thickness, percent wing chord

Figure 27.- Effect of airfoil thicbess cnmaximun: lift coefficient of N .A.C.A. 230 airfoils' wi th ani without slotted flaps.