263 views

Uploaded by marti77

A quasi two-dimensional experimental and
numerical investigation was performed to determine the
effect of a Gurney flap on a two-element wing. A Gurney
flap is a flat plate of the order of 1 to 4% of the airfoil
chord in length, oriented perpendicular to the chord line
and located on the airfoil windward side at the trailing
edge. The effects of various tabs were studied at a
constant Reynolds number on a two-element airfoil with a
slotted flap. The experiments were conducted in a low
speed wind tunnel for the wing with Gurney flap sizes of
1.0%, 2%, and 4.0% of the airfoil chord, located at the
flap trailing edge and also at the main element trailing
edge. The flowfield around the airfoil was numerically
predicted using CFX, with the non-linear RANS
turbulence model.

- Investigation on a Type of Flow Control to Weaken Unsteady Separated Flows by Unsteady Excitation in Axial Flow Compressors
- Homework 4
- Vertical Axis Wind Turbine Testing
- Guided 7 Inviscid Airfoil
- Design of a Low-Cost Easy-to-Fly STOL Ultralight Aircraft in Composite Material
- AERODYNAMICS AND PROPULSION LAB.pdf
- Stanford,Analytical Sensitivity Analysis of an UnsteadyVortex-Lattice Method for Flapping-Wing Optimization
- 219
- Moduel 11a
- 5th Sem Aero Syllabus for VTU
- Report of Fluent Simulation of Aerofoil NACA 4412
- Bernoulli.docx
- Acd Lab Manual
- Cessna 208 675HP 1998 POH Cessna Caravan
- Xfoil Tutorial
- 773711768
- Pressure Coefficient as a Function of Angle of Attack
- 2016 a New Approach for Optimization of Vertical Axis WindTurbines
- A Survey of Methods for Gas-lift Optimization
- Limitations

You are on page 1of 9

ELEMENT WING WITH GURNEY FLAP

F.M. Catalano PhD.( catalano@sc.usp.br ) *, G. L. Brand *

* Aerodynamic Laboratory EESC-USP Brazil

A quasi two-dimensional experimental and flap on multi elements wings. Numerous wind

numerical investigation was performed to determine the tunnel tests on Gurney flaps have been

effect of a Gurney flap on a two-element wing. A Gurney conducted in both single and multi-element

flap is a flat plate of the order of 1 to 4% of the airfoil airfoils of 2-D and 3-D wings. Giguerre et al [2]

chord in length, oriented perpendicular to the chord line presents an extensive list of these works. The

and located on the airfoil windward side at the trailing

edge. The effects of various tabs were studied at a first work concerning Gurney flaps was carried

constant Reynolds number on a two-element airfoil with a out by Liebeck [1] who found that lift is

slotted flap. The experiments were conducted in a low increased with the attachment of a Gurney flap

speed wind tunnel for the wing with Gurney flap sizes of at the trailing edge of airfoils. Liebeck also

1.0%, 2%, and 4.0% of the airfoil chord, located at the

found that drag increases but for Gurney flaps

flap trailing edge and also at the main element trailing

edge. The flowfield around the airfoil was numerically with a height below 2% of the chord a slight

predicted using CFX, with the non-linear RANS decrease in drag can occur. For Gurney flap

turbulence model. Computational results were compared heights beyond 2% drag penalty may be

with the experimental results. The results from both prohibitive even if overall L/D increases. A

numerical and experimental work show that the Gurney

parametric study of the application of Gurney

flaps can increase the airfoil lift coefficient with only a

slight increase in drag coefficient. Although these effects flaps on a single and multi element three-

with a Gurney flap positioned at the main element trailing dimensional wing was carried out by Moyse and

edge are highly dependent on the gap and overlap Heron [3]. Moyse and Heron found that the

adjustments for maximum performance, Use of a Gurney Gurney flap increased lift for the majority of the

flap increases the airfoil lift coefficient decreasing the configurations tested with a drag penalty

angle of attack required to obtain a given lift coefficient.

The numerical solutions show details of the flow structure dependent of the Gurney flap height. They also

at the trailing edge and provide a possible explanation for founded that placing a Gurney flap at the

the increased aerodynamic performance. trailing edge of the main element; in general

there is no significant improvement in the wing

performance mainly due to the change in the

1 Introduction gap of the slotted flap. On the other hand, Ross

There have been quite a number of works et all [4] demonstrated experimentally and

on the Gurney flap since the race driver Dan computationally that placing a Gurney flap on

Gurney used this flap on the inverted wing of both flap and near the trailing edge of the main

his car, increasing down force, in the 60’s. element can achieve an increase in lift of 12%

Despite this fact, the use of Gurney flaps still and 40% on the lift to drag ratio. The range of

almost restricted to race cars with little use in Gurney flap heights tested was from 0.125 to

aircraft design mainly due to the increase in 1.25% of the airfoil reference chord. Ross et al

drag that may occur especially in cruise [4] positioned the Gurney flap at 0.5% chord

conditions. However, the demands for a high lift upstream of the trailing edge of the main

system that could be at same time highly element rather than right at the trailing edge.

efficient and with a minimum complexity, has This allowed the Gurney flap to be retracted

1

F.M. CATALANO, G.L. BRANDT

computation analysis was performed by Jang et

The experiment was conducted in the Wind

al [5] and Carrannanto [6] in order to investigate tunnel of the Aerodynamic Laboratory of Sao

the effect of the Gurney flap on an airfoil by

Carlos Engineering School, University of Sao

using an incompressible Navier-Stokes solver Paulo. The Wind tunnel is closed circuit and

with the one-equation turbulence model of

closed working section, with dimensions of

Baldwin and Barth. The numerical data was

1.75m width, 1.30m high and 4m length.

compared with experimental data available in Turbulence level and maximum velocity are

order to validate the computational flow

0.25% and 50m/s respectively. The wing model

visualization in the Gurney flap region. The has two elements with a flap and main element

general conclusion on the effect of the Gurney

and the experiment is shown in Fig. 1 and Fig 2.

flap on the local flow is the production of a pair

The flap and main element are made of

of counter rotating vortices downstream of the fiberglass with steel spars fixed to circular end

trailing edge. These vortices act like an airfoil

plates to simulate a two-dimensional wing. The

extension, increasing the effective chord and main dimensions of the wing are in Table 1.

camber. In this sense, it is expected that the Using end plates does not assure two-

Gurney flap at the main element trailing edge dimensional flow, especially in high lift wings

region will change the flow inclination in order such as this model. However, at the center of the

to alleviate flap adverse pressure gradient and wing, where chordwise pressure measurements

thus delaying separation. Delaying flap are performed the three-dimensional flow

separation is good news for the high lift system induced by the secondary vortices at the end

in the climb configuration but is not necessarilly plate is minimal. Also, the comparative analysis

welcome for landing when drag is also of this work assumes that any secondary vortex

necessary. Unless the Gurney flap is of the effect at the center of the wing will be present in

retracted type as suggested by Ross et al [4] the both configurations: with and without the

use of this device will not be directly applicable Gurney flap installed at the trailing edges. The

in aircraft design before a trade-off analysis. An flap incidence angle can be changed but within

alternative to solve this problem is to use a a small range due to the subsequent change in

different device at the main element trailing the wing/flap gap and overlap. A total of 90

edge that would delay flap separation in the chordwise pressure taps were used to measure

climb configuration but would be less effective pressure coefficient distribution on both

at high flap angles such as in landing surfaces of the wing main element and flap. The

configuration. Lemes and Catalano [7] proposed pressure coefficient distributions were measured

a serrated trailing edge that promotes mixing by two mechanical D48 scanivalves fitted with

between the higher-pressure flow from the ± 1.0-psia Setra transducer. The wing was

lower surface with the flow on the upper surface positioned in a vertical position attached to the

to produce vortices. These vortices feed high aerodynamic balance below the tunnel floor.

momentum and low turbulent kinetic energy The aerodynamic balance has only two

flow into the flap boundary layer delaying components so that drag and side force (lift)

separation. A serrated main element in were measured for a range of incidence angle of

conjunction with a flap with Gurney flap could –4o to 20o. The two-component balance used is

create a high lift system that would bring of the strain gage type and has a measurement

benefits to both take-off/climb and

accuracy of ± 0.7% for maximum loading.

approach/landing.

In this work, application of the Gurney flap Therefore, accuracy for Lift and Drag are ±1.0N

in a quasi two-dimensional two element wing is and ±0.19N respectively. Incidence angle was

analysed experimentally and numerically in measured with an accuracy of ±0.1 deg.

order to produce more information of its effect

on the wing aerodynamic characteristics.

2

Experimental and Numerical Study of a Two-Element Wing with Gurney Flap

domain length was the shortest for the least

computational cost. The non-structured mesh of

the computational domain and model are shown

in Fig. 3. Details of the wing and end-plate

non-structured mesh can be seen in Fig. 4. One

of the main objectives of the numerical work

was to analyze the region of the Gurney flap and

the effect that this element imposes on the

whole model. In the above mentioned region,

Fig. 1 Experimental set-up flow separation is likely to occur thus, it was

decided to apply the k-ε turbulence model

which is a non-linear Reynolds Averaged

Navier-Stokes model (RANS). The main

advantage of this formulation is that it simulates

with more accuracy the phenomena and has less

computational cost compared with LES (Large

Eddy Simulation) and DNS (Direct Numerical

Simulation).

Main Flap Flap 0º 8º

Elem incidence

ent

Refer 0.399 0.396 Gap 8,80 10,1

ence m2 m2 (mm) 5 Fig. 3 Computational domain and model

area

Span 1.00 1.00 m Overlap 12,0 13,0

m (mm) 0 0

Chord 0.186 0.170

m m

The computer program used was the Ansys

CFX with its auxiliary software for grid

generation the ICEM CFD 5.0, and CFX- Fig 4 Unstructured grid for the two element

Pre/Pos 5.7 for pre-processing and pos- wing with Gurney flap and end-plate.

processing. The computational domain adopted

has exactly the wind tunnel working section

dimensions: 1.3m x 1.75m with a length 3 Results and Discussion

sufficiently long in order to not be affected by Experimental results: Previous results [1,2 and

the presence of the wing model and simulate the 3] suggest that Gurney flap with heights of less

3

F.M. CATALANO, G.L. BRANDT

Alpha = 8o, flap at 0 o

-2

wing was not fitted with a mechanism for

CP

-1.5

changing flap gap and overlap, the Gurney flap

-1

used for the main element trailing edge was the -0.5

1% chord height. The results for pressure 0

coefficient are presented always in comparison 0.5

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1

without Gurney flap. Figures 6 to 9 presents the X/C

Clean 1% Gurney 2% Gurney 4% Gurney

results for incidence angles of: 0o, 8o, 16o and

18owith the Gurney flap installed at the trailing

Fig. 7 Pressure coefficient for alpha=8o and

edge of the flap set at a flap angle of zero

flap at 0o.

degrees. For this wing the flap at zero degree

means that the flap is in the design position, see -9

Fig 5 for reference. For all the experimental -8

results it is clear that the Gurney flap increases -7

effective camber as can be seen in Figs 6 to 10, -6

in which the suction peak becomes bigger as -5

Gurney flap height increases. Also it is clear

CP

-4

that at the bottom surface near the flap trailing -3

edge the pressure increases with the Gurney -2

flaps. These two effects combined can result in -1

an increase in lift of up to 10%. 0

Main 1

Flap at “zero” Element

Deg position 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1

Clean 1% Gurney 2% Gurney 4% Gurney X/C

Flap at 12o

Reference

Line

Fig. 8 Pressure coefficient for alpha=16o and

flap at 0o.

-6

LS

Fig. 5 Wing reference angles. -5 LS= laminar separation

T

T = transition

o

Alpha = 0 , Flap at 0

o

-4

R = reatachment

-2.5 R S = Turbulent separation

-2 -3

CP

-1.5

-2

S

-1

CP

-1

-0.5

0 0

0.5

1

1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 X/C 1

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 X/C 1 Clean 1% Gurney 2% Gurney 4% Gurney

Clean 1% Gurney 2% Gurney 4% Gurney

o

Figure 9 Pressure coefficient for alpha=20o

Fig. 6 Pressure Coeficient for alpha=0 and and flap at 0o.

flap at 0o

4

Experimental and Numerical Study of a Two-Element Wing with Gurney Flap

separation point has been slightly delayed for

the 4% Gurney flap installed. This effect could -4

be related with the higher suction peak at the

-3

flap imposed by the Gurney flap. From Fig. 9 is

CP

clear that even with the flap fully separated the -2

pressure increase at the bottom surface near the

flap trailing edge still to occur, but it does not -1

affect the main element flow. Fig. 10 shows the

curve of CL x α from integration of pressure 0

1

number of points, it can be seen the Gurney flap

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 X/C 1

effect on CL. Clean 1% Gurney 2% Gurney 4% Gurney

3.5

Fig. 11 Pressure coefficient for alpha=8o and

3 flap at 8o.

-11

2.5 -10

-9

-8

2 -7

CL

-6

-5

CP

1.5

-4

-3

1 -2

-1

0

0.5 1

0 Clean 1% Gurney 2% Gurney 4% Gurney

-5 0 5 alpha 10 15 20

Fig. 12 Pressure coefficient for alpha=16o and

clean 1% Gurney 2% Gurney 4% Gurney

flap at 8o.

Fig. 10 Lift coefficient from pressure -3

distribution integration, flap at incidence -2.5

zero.

-2

The Figs 11 and 12 show the pressure -1.5

coefficient distribution for alpha 8o and 16o with SClean

-1 S 2%

the flap at 8o of incidence. Similar effect of the S 1%

CP

S 4%

-0.5

Gurney flaps still occurring, although with less

intensity at the flap. For alpha=16o the Gurney 0

flap as it can be seen in more details in Fig. 13. 1

A combination of two effects: the increase of 1.5

velocity through the slot and the high pressure 0.6 0.65 0.7 0.75 0.8 0.85 0.9 0.95 X/C 1

at the bottom rear end due the Gurney flap may Clean 1% Gurney 2% Gurney 4% Gurney

explain the decrease of the adverse pressure

gradient at the flap upper surface. Fig. 13 Pressure distribution at the flap for

alpha=16o and flap at 8o.

5

F.M. CATALANO, G.L. BRANDT

-3

3.5

-2.5

3 -2

-1.5

2.5

CP

-1

-0.5

2 0

CL

0.5

1.5 1

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 X/C 1

1 GFmain2% flap crean Clean

0.5 flap at zero without Gurney flap. 2%

Gurney flap at the main element trailing

0 edge.

-5 0 5 alpha 10 15 20

-5

clean 1% Gurney 2% Gurney 4% Gurney

-4

Fig. 14 Lift coefficient for flap at 8o.

-3

CP

-2

flap at high angles due to the turbulent

separation at the flap is more intense as it can be -1

seen in Fig.14. Figs. 15 and 16 show the

pressure distribution for the case with a 2% 0

Gurney flap at the main element trailing edge

for the flap set at zero. Fig.14 shows that the 1

rise in pressure at the main element trailing edge 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

is in accordance with previous results [3]. X/C

Gf main2% main clean 5% Gurney Clean

However, the presence of the Gurney flap at the

slot changed the gap between flap and main Fig 16 Pressure distribution for alpha=8o,

element affecting the flap performance. These flap at 8o. 2% Gurney flap at the main

results show that the gap and overlap should be element trailing edge.

changed in order to establish the best

performance for the flap. Fig 16 shows the gap .

change due to the presence of the Gurney flap.

Different positions of positioning the Gurney

flap inside the main element and flap slot

probably as suggested in [4] could bring better

results, although still the need to optimize the

gap and overlap.

6

Experimental and Numerical Study of a Two-Element Wing with Gurney Flap

presented in Figs. 18 to 20 with respect to the 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 X/C1

comparison with experimental pressure -4

distribution. Computational results have failed

to reproduce with accuracy the complex flow -3

exiting in this particularly wing. Although

suction peaks are at same level, the numerical -2

Cp

calculation did not predicted well the large

laminar separation bubble (see Fig. 9) existing -1

at all incidence angle mainly due to the low

Reynolds number of the experiment (1.3x106) 0

and the airfoil leading edge geometry which

would induce laminar separation bubble. At the 1

flap there was another problem with the position Cp - Experimental Cp - Computacional

of the suction peak and the separation point,

probably due to the numerical solution of the Fig. 18 Comparison with numerical results,

confluent boundary layer created by the main alpha = 8o flap at 0o, 1% Gurney flap.

element wake. However, computation results

were used to identify points of interest in the 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

flow around the wing such the Gurney flap area. -4 X/C

Figs 21 to 24 show results by using the -3.5

computational flow visualization. The area of -3

-2.5

interest shown in Fig. 21 is that at the flap

-2

trailing edge with the 4% Gurney flap. The

Cp

-1.5

incidence angle is 8deg with the flap at zero -1

deg. Fig. 22 shows the two counter rotating -0.5

vortices and these results are in agreement with 0

0.5

previous works [4, 5 and 6]. It is clear from Fig

1

22 the different scale of the two vortices making Cp - Experimental Cp - Computacional

a downward movement of the flow that is

leaving the upper surface at the trailing edge. Fig. 19 Comparison with numerical results,

This downward movement in conjunction with alpha = 8o flap at 0o, 2% Gurney flap.

the existence of a vortex wake body displaces

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

the stagnation point (or effective Kutta point) as X/C

-4

it can be seen in Fig. 23 thus increasing -3.5

effective camber and chord. The development of -3

the wake from a wing with the Gurney flaps can -2.5

also be visualized as shown in Figs 24 and 25. -2

Wake studies are an important issue in the -1.5

-1

application of the Gurney flaps in aviation as -0.5

they can create a stronger vortex shedding due 0

to the von Karman structure of the two counter 0.5

rotating vortices. 1

Cp Cp - Experimental Cp - Computacional

alpha = 8o flap at 0o, 4% Gurney flap.

7

F.M. CATALANO, G.L. BRANDT

at the Gurney flap region. Fig. 23 Downstream and downward

displacement of the Kutta point.

Gurney flap installed.

flap

development, 4% Gurney flap installed

8

Experimental and Numerical Study of a Two-Element Wing with Gurney Flap

Tabs on Multi-element Airfoils. Journal of Aircraft

An experimental and numerical analysis of 1995; Vol 32 No3 649-655.

the application of the Gurney flaps in a two [5] Jang C. S., Ross J. C., Cummings R. M. Numerical

element wing was performed. The quasi two- investigation of an airfoil with a Gurney flap, Aircraft

dimensional wing had a non-conventional Design Vol1 (1998) 75-88

configuration as the flap dimensions was of [6] Carrannanto P. G., Storms B. L., Ross J. C.,

Cummings R. M., Navier-Stokes Analysis of Lift-

45% of the total chord. It was used three Gurney Enhancing Tabs on Multi-Element Airfoils, Aircraft

flap heights 1%, 2% and 4% of the reference Design Vol 1 (1998) 145-158

chord. The results showed that the Gurney flap [7] Lemes, R.C., Catalano, F.M. Experimental Analysis

positioned at the flap trailing edge can increase of the Confluent Boundary Layer Between a Flap and

lift for most of the incidence tested. The Gurney a Main Element with Saw-Toothed Trailing Edge,

flap is less effective when large turbulent 24th International Congress of the Aeronautical

Sciences ICAS 2004, Yokohama Japan.

separation occur at the flap and main element.

The use of Gurney flap at the trailing edge of

the main element is highly dependent on the gap

and overlap optimization. The numerical

simulation using k-ε turbulence model which is

a non-linear Reynolds Averaged Navier-Stokes

model (RANS) did not predicted accurately the

pressure distribution when compared with the

experimental results, mainly due to the

difficulties in simulating of the large laminar

separation bubble at the main element.

However, with more grid adjustment and

refinement good results could be achieved.

Numerical simulation of the flow at the region

where the Gurney flap was installed was

qualitatively very important to explain the effect

of the Gurney flaps in the entire flow around the

wing. The low cost and mechanical installation

simplicity allied with its significant impact on

aerodynamic performance make the Gurney flap

a very attractive device to be used in subsonic

aviation.

References

[1] Liebeck, R. H. (1978), Design of Subsonic Airfoils

for High Lift, Journal of Aircraft, Vol 15, No. 9, pp.

547-561.

[2] Giguere P., Lemay, J., and Dumas, G., Gurney Flap

Effect and Scalling for Low Speed Airfoils, AIAA

Paper 95-1881, Jun.1995

[3] Myose R., Papadakis M. and Heron Ismael, A

Parametric Study on the Effect of Gurney Flaps on

Single and Multi-Element Airfoils, Three-

Dimensional Wings, and Reflection Plane Model.

AIAA 97-0034, 35th Aerospace Science Meeting &

Exhibit 1997, Reno Nevada USA

- Investigation on a Type of Flow Control to Weaken Unsteady Separated Flows by Unsteady Excitation in Axial Flow CompressorsUploaded byjswxie
- Homework 4Uploaded byVasanth Kumar
- Vertical Axis Wind Turbine TestingUploaded byLuis Díaz
- Guided 7 Inviscid AirfoilUploaded byAntonio German
- Design of a Low-Cost Easy-to-Fly STOL Ultralight Aircraft in Composite MaterialUploaded bymycrowsobt1
- AERODYNAMICS AND PROPULSION LAB.pdfUploaded byanil
- Stanford,Analytical Sensitivity Analysis of an UnsteadyVortex-Lattice Method for Flapping-Wing OptimizationUploaded byMason925
- 219Uploaded byDave Thompson
- Moduel 11aUploaded byprotein
- 5th Sem Aero Syllabus for VTUUploaded byaeroromeos
- Report of Fluent Simulation of Aerofoil NACA 4412Uploaded byاحمد عبد المحمود
- Bernoulli.docxUploaded byRivan N Madilana
- Acd Lab ManualUploaded bydestro29
- Cessna 208 675HP 1998 POH Cessna CaravanUploaded byRichard Wijaya
- Xfoil TutorialUploaded byeafz111
- 773711768Uploaded byDaniel Sandria
- Pressure Coefficient as a Function of Angle of AttackUploaded byAwais Ahmad Shah
- 2016 a New Approach for Optimization of Vertical Axis WindTurbinesUploaded byDiego Carhuaz Vasquez
- A Survey of Methods for Gas-lift OptimizationUploaded byCehan
- LimitationsUploaded byValeriu Ghihanis
- Bowers SlidesUploaded bymhmod2222
- Benard 4655 RSmUploaded bysubha_aero
- 2_ch03_LQ_e_blankUploaded byCHAN
- AAE556-Lecture 19 FlutterUploaded byMS sch

- B.arch Scheme Syllabus 2016 Ok (1)Uploaded byShikha Aggarwal
- 042117 LetterToCongress ClimateChange April 21Uploaded byD. Manchester
- Tnpsc Study Materials for Group 1 2 4 8Uploaded byjayabalpd001
- UTR - PLN SUAR.pdfUploaded byJaka Sembung Golok
- MisconceptionUploaded bytumpunk727
- Jewish Art - An Illustrated History (Art eBook)Uploaded bySed
- dixie middle data project 2015Uploaded byapi-247355472
- Glossary Terms.docxUploaded byDiwakar_ch_2002
- Yale YDM3109 Digital Lock User ManualUploaded byinspace2036
- APA StylesUploaded bywajania2
- Assessment 1 ReviewerUploaded byKhrisAngelPeñamante
- Baroque and Renaissance PeriodUploaded byAda To
- Horizon Scanning Report0044 POC HbA1c in DiagnosisUploaded byAnnonymous
- Omar Ishrak Media Advisory 4.9.18Uploaded byFluenceMedia
- HIBERNATE - Relational Persistence for Idiomatic JavaUploaded byNishanth Thomas
- IKT-Katalog Rudarske OpremeUploaded bymylesx66
- 7 Habbit FinalUploaded byhitkan2003
- JFET iPod PreamplifierUploaded bykuritaro
- 04_1_G130&G150_PW-BLOCK_CLUploaded byANDRES CISTERNAS
- Evaluation of agave bagasse recalcitrance using AFEX%2c autohydrolisis and ionic liquid pretreatments.pdfUploaded byJorge Aguiar Tirado
- Assignment 1 OrUploaded byPiyush Virmani
- hgtg30n60a4dUploaded byJuan Ledesma Martinez
- DNFM_2009_OverviewUploaded byJohn M. Cavote
- GyroscopesUploaded byMadhan Rajamanickam
- Bas Catalog (Hs 6415d)Uploaded byQHSE Manager
- Ukfpo Rough Guide 2010Uploaded byxtreme_1m
- The Students CompanionUploaded byThaiel Matias
- Reflection 3 ( BFP1100 Unit Expectations and Teamwork – Week 12 Self- Appraisal Reflection)Uploaded byrocko
- Political Speech AnalysisUploaded byraquelyaitana2009
- chap017Uploaded bysakshigoel0304