d16011 Ghoddoussi

A MORE COMPREHENSIVE DATABASE FOR PROPELLER PERFORMANCE
VALIDATIONS AT LOW REYNOLDS NUMBERS
A Dissertation by
Armin Ghoddoussi
Master of Science, Wichita State University, 2011
Bachelor of Science, Sojo University, 1998
Submitted to the Department of Aerospace Engineering

and the faculty of the Graduate School of
Wichita State University
in partial fulfillment of
the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
May 2016
© Copyright 2016 by Armin Ghoddoussi
All Rights Reserved

A MORE COMPREHENSIVE DATABASE FOR PROPELLER PERFORMANCE
VALIDATIONS AT LOW REYNOLDS NUMBERS
The following faculty members have examined the final copy of this dissertation for form and
content, and recommend that it be accepted in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the degree
of Doctor of Philosophy with a major in Aerospace Engineering.
L. Scott Miller, Committee Chair
Klaus Hoffmann, Committee Member
Kamran Rokhsaz, Committee Member
Charles Yang, Committee Member
Hamid Lankarani, Committee Member
Accepted for the College of Engineering
Royce Bowden, Dean
Accepted for the Graduate School
Dennis Livesay, Dean
iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to express my deepest gratitude to my advisor and mentor, Professor L. Scott
Miller for his guidance throughout this project. Also, I am sincerely grateful for the opportunity
and help that the department of Aerospace Engineering, NIAR W. H. Beech Wind Tunnel, NIAR
Research Machine Shop, NIAR CAD/CAM Lab, Cessna Manufacturing Lab and their generous
staff provided.
Above all, none of this would be possible without the love and care of my parents, brother
and friends. This is dedicated to my family members, Akhtar, Ali and Elcid Ghoddoussi. Thank
you for your constant support and patience.
iv
ABSTRACT
Validation is the essential process of evaluating the precision and reliability of analytical
or computational solutions. In this dissertation, a series of comprehensive propeller wind tunnel
tests were designed for validation of propeller design and analysis techniques. This work focused
primarily on small propellers operating at lower Reynolds numbers in the range of 90,000 to
120,000, which is particularly helpful for unmanned aerial vehicle applications. Extensive
propeller and experimental apparatus geometries along with test section spatial dimensionality are
described. An open-source computer-aided design (CAD) method was used to create the propeller
blades, nacelle, and spinner surface outlines, aiming for easy reproduction. Two different propeller
designs were tested: a simple propeller with a constant pitch-to-diameter ratio, chord length, and
thickness; and a complex propeller with a pitch-to-diameter ratio and chord length as a function of
blade radius. Both propellers with a variable pitch of five degrees increment were tested at several
angle settings. Critical test section flow field and geometry information that can be used as
boundary conditions are also presented in this study. In addition to classical propeller performance
plots of thrust and torque coefficients and efficiency against the advance ratio, nacelle surface
pressure distribution in terms of coefficients and propeller wake survey results are provided. Two
different wind tunnels were utilized to evaluate the experimental and facility bias. Known errors,
uncertainties, and instrumental accuracies are quantified and presented here.
v
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter Page
1. INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................1
1.1 Propulsive Efficiency in Propeller Design ..................................................................1

1.2 Challenges in Propeller Design and Analysis .............................................................3
1.3 Development in Analysis and Design Methods ..........................................................4
2. MODERN PROPELLER ANALYSIS AND DESIGN ..........................................................9
2.1 Momentum-Blade Element Theory ............................................................................9

2.2 JavaProp ....................................................................................................................15
2.3 Vortex Theory ...........................................................................................................21
2.4 Computational Fluid Dynamics ................................................................................26
2.4.1 CFD Example 1.............................................................................................26
2.4.2 CFD Example 2.............................................................................................29
3. PROBLEMS AND GOALS ..................................................................................................31
3.1 Problems in Propeller Validation ..............................................................................31

3.2 Statement of Objective ..............................................................................................35
3.3 Methods of Approach ................................................................................................35
4. EXPERIMENTAL APPARATUS .........................................................................................37
4.1 Geometry Descriptions .............................................................................................37

4.1.1 Wind Tunnels and Model Installations .........................................................37
4.1.2 Model Propellers ...........................................................................................42
4.1.3 Model Nacelle-Spinner .................................................................................48
4.1.4 Model Setup Assessment ..............................................................................50
4.1.5 System Performance Prediction ....................................................................52
4.2 Data Measurement and Process ................................................................................57
4.2.1 System Calibration ........................................................................................60
4.2.2 Data Corrections and Tares ...........................................................................63
4.2.3 Test Procedure ...............................................................................................64
4.3 System Evaluations ...................................................................................................66
5. RESULTS..............................................................................................................................74
5.1 Propeller Performance ..............................................................................................74

5.1.1 PD1 Results of Propeller Performance .........................................................74
5.1.2 COMP Results of Propeller Performance .....................................................82
5.2 Nacelle Pressure Distribution ...................................................................................88
5.2.1 PD1 Results of Nacelle Pressure Distribution ..............................................89
vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)
Chapter Page
5.2.2 COMP Results of Nacelle Pressure Distribution ........................................103

5.3 Wake Survey ........................................................................................................... 119
5.4 Nacelle-Spinner Effect ............................................................................................131
5.5 Dynamic Tare ..........................................................................................................137
6. CONCLUSIONS.................................................................................................................144
REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................146
APPENDIXES .............................................................................................................................152
Appendix A……………………………………………………………………………….153
Appendix B……………………………………………………………………………….157
vii
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
1. Summary of System Accuracy, Precision, and Errors…………………………….……. 67
viii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Page
1. Rotating propeller: (a) front view, (b) velocities and forces on blade element looking
toward hub. ....................................................................................................................... 10
2. BART data vs. M-BE analysis of APC Thin-E propellers [24]. ....................................... 14
3. Synthetic drag polar of Clark Y airfoil at different Reynolds numbers [22]. ................... 18
4. JavaProp validation results compared with NACA TR-594, designated blade angle at
0.75R [22]. ........................................................................................................................ 21
5. Vortex theory, JavaProp, and propeller 5868-9 experimental results [39] comparison,
with designated blade angle at 0.75R. ............................................................................... 25
6. Combined propeller/nacelle/wing grid domain [28]. ........................................................ 27
7. Propeller/nacelle pressure distribution at Mach 0.15, 6650 rpm: (a) α = 0°, (b) α =
10°, data digitized from [26]. ............................................................................................ 28
8. Propeller/nacelle/wing slipstream dynamic pressure survey behind the propeller [28] ... 29
9. Propeller wind tunnel model and grid domain [30]. ......................................................... 30
10. Sensitivity analysis of pitch angle using JavaProp. .......................................................... 32
11. Sensitivity analysis of chord length using JavaProp. ........................................................ 32
12. Sensitivity analysis of propeller section airfoil using JavaProp. ...................................... 33
13. Sensitivity analysis of airfoil aerodynamics for ClarkY using JavaProp. ......................... 33
14. Photo (top) and description (bottom) of 3×4 LSWT at Wichita State University. ........... 38
15. Model installation (top) and side view (bottom) in 3×4 LSWT. ....................................... 39
16. Description of Beech wind tunnel and C-mount assembly in 7×10 NIAR...................... 41
17. Model installation and side view in 7×10 NIAR. ............................................................. 42
18. PD1 propeller in OpenSCAD interface............................................................................. 43
19. PD1 Propeller blade assembly. ......................................................................................... 44
20. 3D scan of PD1 propeller blade, within ±0.002 inch accuracy. ........................................ 45
ix
LIST OF FIGURES (continued)
Figure Page
21. COMP propeller blade design and assembly without nacelle and spinner. ...................... 47
22. 3D scan results of COMP blade within -0.007 inch accuracy. ........................................ 47
23. Nacelle assembly CAD design (dimensions in inches). ................................................... 49
24. Nacelle bottom side modification for 7×10 NIAR setup. ................................................. 49
25. Top and bottom of PD1 blade 3D scan set at β0.75 = 23°, within +0.015 inch accuracy. .. 50
26. Top and bottom of COMP blade 3D scan at β0.75 = 15°, within ±0.020 inch accuracy. .... 51
27. Both sides 3D scan of the nacelle-spinner assembly, within +0.070 inch accuracy. ........ 51
28. PD1 propeller performance analysis. ................................................................................ 54
29. COMP propeller performance analysis. ............................................................................ 55
30. PD1 blade radial distribution of angle of attack, lift and drag coefficients at J = 0.2
and β0.75 = 23°.................................................................................................................... 56
31. COMP blade radial distribution of angle of attack, lift and drag coefficients at J = 0.2
and β0.75 = 20°.................................................................................................................... 56
32. PD1 and COMP blades local Reynolds number distributions at J = 0.2. ......................... 57
33. Data measurement and processing block diagram. ........................................................... 58
34. Load cell calibration for thrust. ......................................................................................... 60
35. Test section velocity and temperature variations of 7×10 NIAR (courtesy of NIAR). .... 62
36. Five-hole probe wake survey at 7×10 NIAR wind tunnel. ............................................... 64
37. Inside the nacelle in each tunnel: 7×10 NIAR (left) and 3×4 LSWT (right). ................... 66
38. Thrust coefficient repeatability test of 12×12 APC Thin-E propeller in 3×4 LSWT. ....... 68
39. Power coefficient repeatability test and efficiency of 12×12 APC Thin-E tests in 3×4
LSWT. ............................................................................................................................... 69
40. Reynolds number (Re0.75) repeatability test of 12×12 APC Thin-E in 3×4 LSWT. ......... 70
41. Tunnel data comparison of 3×4 LSWT and 7×10 NIAR for 12×12 APC Thin-E. ........... 71
x
Figure Page
42. Tunnel data comparison from WSU, BART [24], and UIUC [58] for 10×7 APC Thin-
E propeller. ........................................................................................................................ 72
43. Tunnel data comparison from WSU, BART [24] and UIUC [58] for 12×12 and 8×8
APC Thin-E. ..................................................................................................................... 73
44. Coefficients CT, CP, and η against J for PD1 at 5,000 rpm, where β0.75 = 23°. ................ 77
47. Coefficients CT, CP, and η against J for PD1 at 4,000 ~ 6,000 rpm, where β0.75 = 23°. ... 80
48. Eppler 387 airfoil wind tunnel results comparison at two Reynolds numbers, data
digitized from [47]. ........................................................................................................... 81
49. Coefficients CT, CP, and η against J for COMP at 6,000 rpm, where β0.75 = 15°. ............ 83
53. Coefficients CT, CP, and η against J for COMP at 4,000 ~ 6,000 rpm, where β0.75 =
20°. .................................................................................................................................... 87
54. Nacelle coordinate system. ............................................................................................... 88
55. Nacelle surface pressure distribution for PD1 at 3×4 LSWT for different Φ, where
β0.75 = 23° (continued). ..................................................................................................... 90
56. Nacelle surface pressure distribution at 7×10 NIAR for different Φ, where β0.75 = 23°
(continued). ....................................................................................................................... 92
57. Test section side wall pressure distribution at 7×10 NIAR, where β0.75 = 23°. ................ 93
58. Nacelle surface pressure distribution at 3×4 LSWT for different Φ, where β0.75 = 28°
(continued). ....................................................................................................................... 94
(continued). ....................................................................................................................... 96
xi
Figure Page
60. Test section side wall pressure distribution at 7×10 NIAR, where β0.75 = 28°. ................ 97
(continued). ....................................................................................................................... 98
62. Nacelle surface pressure distribution at 7×10 NIAR for different Φ, where β0.75 =
33°. .................................................................................................................................. 100
63. Test section side wall pressure distribution at 7×10 NIAR, where β0.75 = 33°. .............. 101
64. Nacelle surface pressure distribution at 7×10 NIAR for different Φ without propeller
(continued). ..................................................................................................................... 101
65. Test section side wall pressure distribution at 7×10 NIAR without propeller. ............... 102
(continued). ..................................................................................................................... 103
(continued). ..................................................................................................................... 105
68. Test section side wall pressure distribution at 7×10 NIAR, where β0.75 = 15°. .............. 106
(continued). ..................................................................................................................... 107
20°. .................................................................................................................................. 109
71. Test section side wall pressure distribution at 7×10 NIAR, where β0.75 = 20°. ...............110
(continued). ......................................................................................................................110
(continued). ......................................................................................................................112
74. Test section side wall pressure distribution at 7×10 NIAR, where β0.75 = 25°.................113
(continued). ......................................................................................................................114
30°. ...................................................................................................................................116
xii
Figure Page
77. Test section side wall pressure distribution at 7×10 NIAR, where β0.75 = 30°. ...............117
78. Nacelle surface pressure distribution at 7×10 NIAR without propeller (continued). ......117
79. Test section side wall pressure distribution at 7×10 NIAR without propeller. ................118
80. Slipstream velocity components for PD1 at Φ = 0°, x/L = 0.02, where β0.75 = 23°,
U = 67 ft/s, 5,000 rpm (7×10 NIAR). ............................................................................. 120
U = 67 ft/s, 5,000 rpm (7×10 NIAR). ............................................................................. 121
U = 67 ft/s, 5,000 rpm (7×10 NIAR). ............................................................................. 121
83. Slipstream velocity components for PD1 at Φ = 0°, x/L = 0.49 where β0.75 = 23°,
U = 67 ft/s, 5,000 rpm (7×10 NIAR). ............................................................................. 122
U = 67 ft/s, 5,000 rpm (7×10 NIAR). ............................................................................. 122
U = 67 ft/s, 5,000 rpm (7×10 NIAR). ............................................................................. 123
U = 67 ft/s, 5,000 rpm (7×10 NIAR). ............................................................................. 123
U = 67 ft/s, 5,000 rpm (7×10 NIAR). ............................................................................. 124
U = 67 ft/s, 5,000 rpm (7×10 NIAR). ............................................................................. 124
89. Swirl angle at different longitudinal locations and azimuth angles for PD1, where
β0.75 = 23°, U = 67 ft/s, 5,000 rpm (7×10 NIAR). ........................................................... 125
90. Slipstream velocity components for COMP at Φ = 0°, x/L = 0.02, where β0.75 = 20°,
U = 67 ft/s, 6,000 rpm (7×10 NIAR). ............................................................................. 126
U = 67 ft/s, 6,000 rpm (7×10 NIAR). ............................................................................. 126
xiii
Figure Page
92. Slipstream velocity components for COMP at Φ = 270°, x/L = 0.02, where β0.75 =
20°, U = 67 ft/s, 6,000 rpm (7×10 NIAR).................................................................... 127
U = 67 ft/s, 6,000 rpm (7×10 NIAR). ............................................................................. 127
U = 67 ft/s, 6,000 rpm (7×10 NIAR). ............................................................................. 128
20°, U = 67 ft/s, 6,000 rpm (7×10 NIAR).................................................................... 128
U = 67 ft/s, 6,000 rpm (7×10 NIAR). ............................................................................. 129
20°, U = 67 ft/s, 6,000 rpm (7×10 NIAR).................................................................... 129
20°, U = 67 ft/s, 6,000 rpm (7×10 NIAR).................................................................... 130
99. Swirl angle at different longitudinal locations and azimuth angles for COMP, where
β0.75 = 20°, U = 67 ft/s, 6,000 rpm (7×10 NIAR). ........................................................... 131
100. Nacelle-spinner effect on PD1 β0.75 = 23° performance tested at 3×4 LSWT. ............... 132
101. Nacelle-spinner effect on PD1 β0.75 = 28° performance tested at 3×4 LSWT. ............... 132
102. Nacelle-spinner effect on PD1 β0.75 = 33° performance tested at 3×4 LSWT................ 133
103. Nacelle-spinner effect on PD1 β0.75 = 23° performance tested at 7×10 NIAR. .............. 133
104. Nacelle-spinner effect on PD1 β0.75 = 28° performance tested at 7×10 NIAR. .............. 134
105. Nacelle-spinner effect on PD1 β0.75 = 33° performance tested at 7×10 LSWT............... 134
106. Nacelle-spinner effect on COMP β0.75 = 15° performance tested at 7×10 NIAR. .......... 135
xiv
Figure Page
110. Dynamic tare for spinner-nacelle configurations in loads and coefficient forms and
corresponding trend line equations. ................................................................................ 138
111. Dynamic tare for no-spinner no-nacelle (nsnn) configurations in loads and coefficient
forms, and corresponding trend line equations. .............................................................. 139
112. Dynamic tare results (“D”) for configurations with and without spinner-nacelle for
PD1 β0.75 = 23° at 3×4 LSWT compared with vortex theory analysis results. ................ 140
COMP β0.75 = 15° at 7×10 NIAR compared with vortex theory analysis results............ 141
116. Dynamic tared results (“D”) for configurations with and without spinner-nacelle for
117. Dynamic tared results (“D”) for configurations with and without spinner nacelle for
118. Dynamic tared results (“D”) for configurations with and without spinner-nacelle for
xv
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
2D Two-Dimensional
3D Three-Dimensional
AGARD Advisory Group for Aerospace Research and Development
BART Basic Aerodynamics Research Tunnel
CAD Computer-Aided Design
CFD Computational Fluid Dynamics
CMM Coordinate Measuring Machine
CNC Computer Numerical Control
COMP Complex Propeller
CPU Central Processing Unit
FFA Flygtekniska Försöksanstalten (Aeronautical Research Institute of Sweden)
FS Full Scale
LSWT Low-Speed Wind Tunnel
LTPT Low-Turbulence Pressure Tunnel (at Langley Research Center)
mV Millivolts
NACA National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics
nsnn No-Spinner No-Nacelle (Configurations)
NIAR National Institute for Aviation Research
PLA PolyLactic Acid
psf Pounds per Square Foot
psid Pounds per Square Inch Differential
RD Readings
xvi
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS (continued)
RO Rated Output
rpm Revolutions per Minute
UAVs Unmanned Aerial Vehicles
UTRC United Technologies Research Center
VWT Vertical Wind Tunnel (at Air Force Research Laboratory)
WSU Wichita State University
WOZ Wind-Off-Zero
xvii
LIST OF SYMBOLS
° Degree
α Angle of attack
αi Induced angle of attack
α0l Zero-lift line angle of attack relative to the chord line
β Geometric pitch angle
β0.75 Pitch angle at 75% of radius

u 
ε Swirl angle,   tan 1  t 
 ux 
ϕ Angle of resultant flow
CT J
η Efficiency,  
CP
U
λ Tip speed ratio,  
VT
μ Viscosity
ρ Density
Bc
σ Propeller solidity for rectangular blades,  
R
ω Angular velocity
Γ Bound circulation around any blade station
Φ Azimuth angle
a Lift-curve slope
c Local chord length

p  p
cpr Pressure coefficient, c pr 
q
d 2D drag or differential
dL, dD Differential lift and drag, respectively
xviii
LIST OF SYMBOLS (continued)
l 2D lift
l’ Non-dimensional axial location of wall pressure port to 7×10 test section
length where l’ = 0 at entrance and l’ = 1 at exit
n Revolutions per second
p Pitch, distance
p Local pressure
p∞ Freestream static pressure
q Dynamic pressure
1
q∞ Freestream dynamic pressure, q  U 2
2
r Radial location
t Blade thickness
ux, ut, ur Flow velocity components (axial, radial, and tangential, respectively)
v Velocity vector and/or magnitude
v’ Vortex displacement velocity
w Induced velocity
wa Axial component of induced velocity
wt Tangential component of induced velocity

r
x Non-dimensional radial location, x 
R
x, y, z Nacelle/tunnel fixed coordinate system or distances
xix
A Disk area
B Number of blades
CL 3D lift coefficient (lower case subscript: 2D design lift coefficient)
CD 3D drag coefficient (lower case subscript: 2D design drag coefficient)

P
CP Power coefficient, CP 
 n3 D 5
Q
CQ Torque coefficient, CQ 
 n 2 D5
T
CT Thrust coefficient, CT 
 n2 D 4
D Propeller diameter
Dhub Propeller hub diameter
DC Direct Current
F Prandtl’s tip loss factor
HP Horsepower
U
J Advance ratio, J 
nD
L Nacelle length
M Mach number
P Shaft power
Q Propeller shaft torque
R Propeller radius
Uc
Re Reynolds number, Re 

VR0.75 c0.75
Re0.75 Reynolds number at 75% of radius, Re0.75  , where VR  U 2   R0.75 2
 0.75
xx
T Thrust
U Freestream velocity
V Voltage (mV = millivolts)
VE Effective freestream velocity
VR Resultant freestream velocity
VT Tip velocity, VT = ωR
xxi
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Propulsive Efficiency in Propeller Design
A propeller is a device that generates thrust or force in a fluid medium such as water or air.
A mass of fluid medium driven by the propeller causes a reaction in the opposite direction, that is,
the craft’s forward thrust. An airscrew propeller, commonly used on aircraft, screws or twists its
way through the air, pushing or pulling the aircraft forward as it turns. The rotational kinetic energy
increment added by the shaft power in the air moving backward, also called the slipstream, cannot
be regained and is considered a power loss [1, 2]. Another type of energy loss may be the friction
between the air and propeller blades. Therefore, the thrust available or power produced by the
propeller is less than the power provided by the engine. A propeller designer aims to increase the
ratio of useful power to engine power in order to obtain greater propulsive efficiency.
During World War II, propeller propulsion achieved a standard that was quite high. With
the debut of jet engines, the progress in propeller propulsion struggled for a period of a time. But
with the increase in the price of oil, there has been great demand for optimally improving the
efficiency of propeller propulsion, hence making it the most economical means of propulsion [3].
Most aircraft propellers are run by internal combustion engines, and the best propeller performance
is at a certain speed of revolutions whereby the engine is designed to operate at its highest
efficiency. With recent improvement in lithium-ion battery technology, the use of electrical motors
with innovative propeller designs has increased rapidly, especially in small unmanned aerial
vehicles (UAVs). This requires a large shift in design from traditional propellers to a new propeller
design and analysis method for different environments. In addition to its aerodynamic efficiency,
1
a propeller must also show its structural trustworthiness with sufficient strength, that is, longer
fatigue life [4].
A variety of elements are considered in propeller selection. Interestingly, propeller
performance is not always the only priority in choosing propellers. For instance, it may be
necessary to have wide blades with a low tip speed to lower the noise level of a propeller. Also,
the propeller diameter can be limited based on of ground clearance or the distance from the nacelle
to the fuselage. Propeller and motor dynamics also need to be in compliance. Furthermore, the
impulse response of the engine should not match the natural frequency of the first bending mode
or harmonics of the blade. This will lead to excessive vibration and ultimately fatigue failure [5].
From an aircraft performance and designer point of view, it might be important to choose
a propeller with a high static thrust for takeoff and a high efficiency at cruise. With an appropriate
propeller mechanism, these are relatively easy to achieve if the propeller pitch is variable. A fixed-
pitch propeller requires settling for something between these two extremes. The pitch of the
propeller defines the distance it translates through the air in one revolution without slipping. The
rotation of the whole blade about its long axis determines if the blade has a fixed or variable pitch.
A constant-pitch propeller has the same twist throughout the radius of the entire blade and refers
to the propeller geometry.
The design procedure of a propeller is not well defined [5]. Generally, one must first decide
on the number of blades, which may be based on experience or could be an arbitrary number, for
starting its design and the analysis iteration process. Similarly, pitch distribution contributes
essentially to the efficiency and performance of the propeller. The results of stress calculations
determine whether the thickness distribution needs to be changed or not. Finally, a radial
distribution of pitch and blade thickness may be prescribed.
2
The propeller analysis and design process and its historical development will be discussed
in detail in sections to follow. As explained, each method has its advantages and disadvantages.
An attempt has been made to provide additional detailed information, especially for low Reynolds
numbers that will eventually improve the methods of both analysis and design.
1.2 Challenges in Propeller Design and Analysis
As discussed briefly in this section, three main concerns are involved in the propeller
design process. These issues, in order of their importance and difficulty level, are introduced here.
The first issue in this process is to design a propeller according to the rotational speed
desired by the engine or motor. A rotating propeller causes resistance as it turns around the shaft
axis. This resistance, also known as torque, Q, increases as the rotational speed increases.
Therefore, the speed of revolution is decided by the power available to spin the propeller. In
contrast, engines and motors operate most efficiently at their designated rate of revolution.
Designing a propeller for a certain rate of revolutions that are suitable for a motor is a relatively
easier task, but the speed of the aircraft for which it is designed to perform must also be considered,
and this has considerable impact on the torque or power settings. Consequently, it is difficult to
design a propeller based only on its engine performance without knowing the aircraft operating
speed. In other words, an individual propeller must be designed for each combination of aircraft
and engine, which makes the effort challenging. Therefore, it is essential to develop a reliable
theory on which to base the design.
The second issue in the design process is to create an efficient propeller. Only a portion of
power, P, generated by the engine is converted into thrust, T, and the remainder primarily disperses
into the slipstream. Efficiency (η) is the ratio of the useful power delivered by the propeller and
power provided by the motor (shaft power):
3
TU
 (1.1)
P
where U is the velocity of the aircraft. Typically, the efficiency of the propeller is shown by a
percentage, and a designer aims to maximize this value by applying a reliable and accurate analysis
method.
The final issue in the design process is to develop a dependable and safe propeller. A series
of forces and bending moments act on a rotating propeller due to centrifugal forces and thrust.
Also, vibration and torque of the engine or motor cause severe wear and tear on the blades, shifting
the blade into thicker and heavier designs. In the meantime, it may be challenging to increase the
efficiency and reliability of a propeller because they are mutually opposing matters, but achievable.
However, the toughest obstacle for a designer is the first problem—to design a propeller for a
particular engine and aircraft operating speed combination [4].
1.3 Development in Analysis and Design Methods
Early propeller studies conducted by Rankine [6] and Froude [7] in the 19th century
established the fundamentals of momentum theory for a propeller in a fluid medium, such as air
or water. In this theory, an actuator disk replaces the propeller geometry, thus neglecting the
geometric features and the slipstream rotation. In 1900, Drzewiecki [8] introduced the blade
element method, including section lifting surfaces set to an optimum angle of attack. Although
Drzewiecki was the first to introduce the blade element theory, this work failed to account for the
induced velocity at each element. It seems that Wilbur and Orville Wright were the first who
combined the momentum and blade element theories and successfully introduced highly efficient
propellers [9].
In 1925, Weick [10] published the empirical method, “a simple system” for small airplane
designers and builders derived from wind tunnel models and in-flight full-scale tests. Here, design
4
steps are made through easy calculations and charts for a baseline propeller with an average
fuselage. To increase accuracy, it is necessary to provide precise horsepower, revolutions per
minute (rpm), and velocity of the operating condition, otherwise performance diminishes. This
method is sufficient only for low-power engines, that is, engines that have a little less than one
horsepower to about fifty horsepower.
With the application of Prandtl’s lifting line theory [11] to propellers, a new era of propeller
development began. Circulation over a finite wing was shown, which is applicable to the propeller
blade as a lifting surface incorporated by the bound vorticity and a vortex sheet shed from the
trailing edge of the blade. Betz [12] showed that a propeller with optimum-induced velocity
distribution causes undeformed or rigid helical vortex sheets to move downstream of the propeller.
This occurs where each point of the radius in a helical wake has the same velocity in axial distance
from the propeller, that is, parallel to the rotation axis, so that the induced loss is minimal. Betz
assumed that the propeller would be lightly loaded, or the slipstream would roll up as wake
contraction occurred. The helicoidal vortex sheet is assumed to move as a rigid body, but that is
not the case in reality. The averaged axial and swirl velocity components between the vortex sheets
of the slipstream are less than the sheet velocities by a factor F. Also, the swirl component of the
velocity varies throughout slipstream radius. Prandtl provided an approximation method, also
called Prandtl’s tip loss factor F, using a series of semi-infinite plates. This factor becomes more
exact as the number of blades increases or the advance ratio becomes smaller.
Goldstein [13] found the exact solution to the ideal Betz wake problem. His vortex theory
resulted in the geometry of a propeller rather than predicting its performance. Lock et al. [8]
applied Goldstein solutions to a design and conducted high-speed aircraft propeller performance
analyses from 1941 to 1945; this work is published in an Aeronautical Research Council report
5
[14]. Throughout a series of National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics (NACA) reports [15-
18], Theodorsen showed that the same light-loading assumption made by Betz, Prandtl, and
Goldstein was not necessary and could be removed. Due to contraction, instead of Goldstein’s
solution concentrating right behind the propeller, Theodorsen proved that this solution was
effective even far downstream. Theodorsen’s theory, like Goldstein’s solution, resulted in the
geometry of the propeller but with an ideal wake far downstream.
In 1949, Crigler [19] applied Theodorsen’s theory to propeller design. The optimum
propeller efficiency can be described from a number of graphs for any design condition. In a more
recent work in 1994, Adkins and Liebeck [20] modified Larrabee’s [21] method by removing the
light-loading assumption and small-angle approximation. They presented an iterative design
procedure to calculate the axial velocity of the vortex filament and flow-angle distribution.
Parameters required for analysis and design are the number of blade elements, number of blades,
propeller diameter, hub diameter, revolution speed, freestream velocity, and particularly lift and
drag coefficients of the section design. Accurate airfoil geometry specifications and its
aerodynamic characteristics lead to better propeller performance predictions. In addition, for
design, thrust or power inputs must be provided in order to obtain chord length and pitch
distribution along the radial direction for an optimum wake or inverting the process for propeller
performance analysis. An open-source program called JavaProp [22], written by Hepperle using a
Java application, is available using Adkins, Liebeck, and Larrabee’s blade element methods, which
is discussed in Chapter 2.
Despite the evolution of the lifting line theory and its robustness, the limitations of this
theory must be considered. First, it is only applied to conventional blades with a large aspect ratio,
not wide-chord propfan blades, for instance. Next, and importantly, high Mach numbers and low
6
Reynolds number effects are not incorporated into basic theories that require corrections to section
airfoil data [23, 24]. Furthermore, the theory does not account for three-dimensional effects, such
as sweep angle or cross flow, since the bound vorticity is assumed to be straight.
Progress in computational capabilities makes complex numerical analyses, such as solving
Euler or Navier-Stokes equations, more affordable and accurate. Although still computationally
more expensive than traditional momentum-blade element theory, these methods can implement
viscous phenomena like turbulence and flow separation. Unprecedented details of the propeller
flow field and its interaction with a wing or fuselage are some of the greatest advantages of
computational fluid dynamics (CFD) [23, 25-33]. It appears that the future of CFD methods is
promising; however, some issues need to be addressed. As mentioned above, computational costs
are significant. But with advancement in computer technologies, this problem should be solved
eventually. Another important concern is the lack of validated code to prove that the method is
authentic with a certain level of confidence. When accuracy and limitations of experimental
measurements and CFD codes, grid-density effects, and physical basics are equally known, they
can be compared over a range of specified parameters. A detailed surface and flow-field
comparison with experimental data justifies the code’s ability to accurately model the critical
physics of the flow. Precision in geometric measurements of the actual model is imperative,
especially when operating at low Reynolds numbers. This is because any small defect in
fabrication or change in geometry affects aerodynamic characteristics at lower Reynolds numbers,
thus making the propeller performance even more unpredictable.
Previous discussions have suggested procedures for assessing the accuracy and credibility
of CFD techniques [34-36]. The scope of this study is to provide comprehensive propeller
experimental data designed for validating analysis and design tools at low Reynolds numbers.
7
Without a doubt, this is the first step in improving tools and processes of modern propeller analysis
and design, in hopes of ultimately enhancing propeller efficiency. The goal here is to provide
extensive measurements of the performance, geometries, flow field, and boundary conditions
required for validation and development of analysis and design tools, particularly for UAV
applications operating at lower Reynolds numbers. Prediction and eventually agreement in
analysis results with experimental data capturing Reynolds number effects potentially lead to
establishment of the code’s ability. In Chapter 2, we will further discuss the recent analysis
methods and design process with corresponding problems and inquiries.
8
CHAPTER 2
MODERN PROPELLER ANALYSIS AND DESIGN
Aerodynamically, a designer struggles to deliver a propeller with maximum efficiency in
order to satisfy all performance expectations. Hence, an accurate analytical method is required to
achieve this goal. Modern analysis and design processes have evolved over the years, as previously
reviewed in the historical development section of Chapter 1. The different propeller analysis and
design tools that are dominantly used in the field will be examined in this chapter. Any prediction
method must be validated, typically using existing experimental results, in order to endorse its
credibility. The detailed experimental data can verify the tool’s ability and accuracy.
2.1 Momentum-Blade Element Theory
The momentum-blade element theory is a relatively simple means to approximate the
induced angle of attack αi by combining two different methods. This approach allows the
prediction of propeller performance more accurately by examining the aerodynamics of the blade
section. This theory does not particularly account for the flow rotation and tip loss factor, unless it
has been imposed. Approximation of the induced effects gives only a rough estimate for the
analysis. Although this is one of the original blade element methods that accounts for the induced
velocity, with the improvement in computers, the use of this method has diminished [5]. Yet, it is
useful to be familiar with this theory because of its applications to other models, which can be
found in numerous literature reviews.
In general, if the propeller with radius r screws itself through the air without slipping, then
the distance it would travel in one revolution is the pitch, p:
p  2 r tan  (2.1)
9
assuming the pitch is constant throughout the blade radius, where the pitch angle β is the angle
between the plane of rotation and the section chord line. However, for the following analysis, it is
more convenient to define it relative to the zero-lift line instead of the chord line. Figure 1(a) shows
the front view of a rotating propeller with two blades and an angular velocity ω rad/s with incoming
freestream velocity U. The notation on this figure is similar to that of McCormick [5]. Note that
the induced velocity w, shown in Figure 1(b), is much smaller in scale than indicated here.
(a) (b)
Figure 1. Rotating propeller: (a) front view, (b) velocities and forces on blade element looking
toward hub.
Each blade is divided into several radial elements, dr, which contribute to thrust T and
torque Q resulting from section lift and drag. From Figure 1, these values can be calculated as
dT  dL cos   i   dD sin(  i ) (2.2)
dQ  r  dL sin    i   dD cos(   i )  (2.3)
where the differential lift dL and the section lift coefficient Cl will be, respectively,
1
dL  VE2 cCl dr (2.4)
2
Cl  a(     i ) (2.5)
10
Similarly the differential drag dD can be found as
1
dD  VE2cCd dr (2.6)
2
To find the induced angle of attack αi in equations (2.2) and (2.3) for the following analysis,
assume that αi and the drag-to-lift ratio are small. This assumption is not valid at high disc loadings
or when flow separation occurs, thus causing a deviation in results. Now, the resultant velocity VR
and the effective velocity VE in Figure 1(b) are almost equal, that is, VR ≈ VE. As a result, for B
blades, equation (2.2) can be rewritten as
B 2
dT  VR ca(      i ) cos  dr (2.7)
2
Note that blade section lift-curve slope a, has a direct impact on the thrust obtained in this equation.
At this point, linear lift with angle of attack (i.e.,     i ) is assumed. From the momentum
principle, thrust is
T  2 A U  w w (2.8)
For small αi, the induced velocity can be approximated as w ≈ VR αi, and equation (2.8) can be
written for dT as
dT    2 rdr U  VRi cos   2VRi cos  (2.9)
By equating equations (2.7) and (2.9), the induced angle of attack can be determined as
 1/2

    aVR   aVR 
2
1     aVR 
 i     2
2   x 8 x VT
 
   2   2        (2.10)
  x 8 x VT  8 x VT 
 
 
where
U
 VR  VT x 2   2
R
Bc 
   tan 1
R x
11
r
VT   R x
R
The dimensionless characteristics of propellers are defined by thrust coefficient CT and
power coefficient CP obtained from experiment results as
T
CT  (2.11)
 n2 D 4
P
CP  (2.12)
 n3 D 5
In momentum-blade element theory, these are functions of the advance ratio J and expressed as

J   2 x 2   [Cl cos    i   Cd sin(   i )]dx
1
8
2
CT  (2.13)
xh

 x  J 2   2 x 2   [Cl sin    i   Cd cos(   i )]dx
1
8
CP  (2.14)
xh
where
U
J (2.15)
nD
Hence, the propeller efficiency in equation (1.1) can be written in terms of CT, CP, and J as
CT J
 (2.16)
CP
Inevitably, the efficiency increases as the advance ratio increases until the windmill condition
approaches. This is because of how the term is defined in equation (2.16). Note that section lift
and drag coefficients directly affect CT and CP, as shown in equations (2.13) and (2.14). Hence, it
is critical to provide precise section airfoil aerodynamic characteristics in order to obtain accurate
thrust and power predictions. Torque coefficient CQ and power coefficient CP result in a
relationship of
CP  2 CQ (2.17)
12
Assumptions made in this theory of a small induced angle of attack and drag-to-lift ratio
are not necessarily true but convenient for the sake of simple calculations. Ol et al. [24] presented
an analytical-experimental comparison for a range of small propellers using the momentum-blade
element theory for the analysis. The XFOIL interactive program was applied to predict the section
airfoil characteristics and low Reynolds number effects. Sectional coefficient analysis results for
Re ≤ 60,000 vary significantly and hence are unpredictable. High sensitivity to twist, chord length
distribution, and Reynolds number effects is predicted. Especially, low Reynolds numbers highly
affect the results when the propeller rpm varies throughout advance ratio sweeps. The variation in
rpm causes scattered thrust and torque measurements in the wind tunnel test data. However,
Reynolds number effects cannot be demonstrated well in traditional coefficient plots [24]. Analysis
results for uniform compared to non-uniform induced velocity for the entire blade show a small
difference in thrust coefficients, except at low advance ratios. Uniform induced velocity is
preferred for the analytical method to avoid calculation complexity. Thrust and torque coefficients
as well as efficiency against a series of advance ratio are shown in Figure 2. Wind tunnel tests were
performed in the Basic Aerodynamics Research Tunnel at the NASA Langley Aerospace Research
Center in Virginia and the Vertical Wind Tunnel at the U.S. Air Force Research Laboratory in Ohio.
Six “Thin-Electric” propellers, APC series, were considered by Ol et al. [24] for wide-
range selections of the pitch-to-diameter ratio including square propellers (pitch = diameter). Some
wind tunnel results were compared with the experimental data of Brandt and Selig [37], showing
significantly higher efficiency due to “discrepancies” in twist measurements. In Ol’s study, each
blade segment was sliced with a band saw or digitally scanned to render the airfoil, and then input
to the XFOIL program to analyze the section’s aerodynamic performance. A significant uncertainty
in twist angle was observed with an estimate of +/–1 degree. As a result, an inconsistency in twist
13
distribution was detected in comparison with Brandt’s [37] cross section measurements for the
same propeller. An offset of ±2° in analytical predictions shows a substantial shift in thrust and
torque coefficients and efficiency in Ol’s report. Lack of information on propeller geometry is a
common issue when approaching analytical predictions, since the manufacturer does not provide
any information on geometric characteristics [26, 36].
The momentum-blade element analysis results mostly under-predict the experimental data,
as shown in Figure 2.
Figure 2. BART data vs. M-BE analysis of APC Thin-E propellers [24].
Uncertainty remains on the selection of the correct twist angle for blade sections in the analytical
attempts. Nevertheless, it can be argued that the other reason for such a discrepancy is possibly the
14
“Reynolds number effects” as the result of not choosing the appropriate rpm used in the analytical
method. Small propellers operating at such low Reynolds numbers may produce a massive
separation bubble, thus altering entire section aerodyanmic characteristics, hence occasionally
unpredictable.
2.2 JavaProp
JavaProp is a new version of the SimProp program written by Hepperle in Java on an open
source domain [22]. It is a simple, user-friendly code incorporating blade element theory
introduced by Adkins and Liebeck in designing an optimum propeller [20]. Ignoring the three-
dimensional effects of the blade, it has the additional ability of finding circumferential and axial
velocities added to the incoming flow of each blade element. This simplified method agrees
relatively well with experimental data when disk loading is small but is not accurate under static
conditions, as mentioned in Chapter 1.
The blade element theory with additional Prandtl’s tip loss factor is integrated into
JavaProp to account for the effect of number of blades and tip loss. Yet, this approximation loses
accuracy with fewer blade numbers or at high advance ratios. A series of off-design analyses for a
full range of propeller operating conditions and a detailed analysis for a specific advance ratio can
be executed by the program. These analysis modes predict the propeller performance, if the local
twist and chord distribution as well as the number of blades, propeller diameter, and rpm are
known. Furthermore, the design lift-to-drag ratios of four radial segments must be specified.
The “Multi Analysis” mode in JavaProp computes a full range of thrust and power
coefficients against the advance ratio from static to windmill conditions. Here, the only detailed
description shown is the stalled percentage of the airfoil. For a fixed-pitch propeller operating at
lower freestream velocities, the blade section is mostly stalled since it performs at high angles of
15
attack or beyond the maximum lift. As the advance ratio increases, which is a function of the
freestream velocity, efficiency also increases. However, it is not very clear if the designer
intentionally reached the target efficiency or it may be only because of how the term is defined, as
shown in equation (1.1). The “Single Analysis” mode in JavaProp performs an analysis based on
a given advance ratio or velocity in addition to previous given values. This mode allows for
studying aerodynamic characteristics along the radius. In addition to lift and drag coefficient radial
distributions, the locally induced velocity by the propeller wake is presented as an interference
factor. This factor, in terms of axial and swirl components, is coupled to the incoming flow velocity.
Force and bending moment coefficients are also included for structural stress calculations. The
“Flow-Field Card” in JavaProp offers a convenient study of the slipstream for a specific advance
ratio. The color spectrum describes the axial acceleration of the flow field before and after the
propeller in the form of the axial velocity-to-freestream velocity ratio [22].
On the other hand, the propeller design process results in the chord length distribution and
geometric pitch angle β along the radius r. The design lift coefficient Cl or lift-to-drag ratio L/D,
which affects the local chord length c, needs to be specified in advance. It is important to emphasize
that the aerodynamic characteristics of an airfoil depend on its chord and thickness. The geometry
of a blade section or an airfoil consists of the airfoil profile, thickness, and chord length, and all
contribute to its performance, although the contribution of each may vary. It is critical that all
necessary geometry details are provided in advance.
The “Airfoil Card” in JavaProp offers a limited airfoil selection along with synthetic airfoil
data which are reproduced considering parameters such as zero lift, maximum lift and minimum
drag coefficients. Randomly choosing the highest L/D airfoil consequently means sacrificing the
off-design performance as well as overall accuracy of the prediction. Smaller design lift coefficient
16
values result in wider blades. Decreasing the L/D at the tip widens only the tip chord length. For
off-design performance at a lower speed or high disk loadings, it is necessary to reduce the lift
coefficient for inboard sections to delay the stall when the blade sections are wider and set at lower
angles. The engine/motor and propeller combination may influence system performance, which
can be derived from the power coefficient and rpm curve. To satisfy the optimum propeller theory
originally presented by Betz and Prandtl, the following design parameters [22] need to be
prescribed:
Number of Blades
A propeller with more blades increases the uniform distribution of thrust and power in the
wake of the propeller but with a small improvement in efficiency. For a constant power or thrust,
an increase in the number of blades causes shortening of the chord length. Reducing the propeller
diameter is the tradeoff for maintaining the chord length, although this will usually decrease
efficiency if the tip speed is less than Mach one. The number of blades B also contributes to the
propeller solidity σ, which represents the ratio of blade area to disk area as defined, and directly
contributes to the thrust and power coefficients—see equations (2.13) and (2.14).
Velocity
Freestream velocity along with rotational speed defines the pitch distribution of the
propeller. The desired efficiency might be obtained by increasing the pitch of the propeller but
causes the blade to stall at certain incoming flow speeds or rotational speeds.
Diameter
The diameter of the hub determines the effective propeller diameter. The effect of the
propeller diameter on performance is significant: the larger the propeller diameter, or consequently
the propeller area, from the continuity equation, the more thrust that can be obtained for a constant
17
velocity along the control volume. On the other hand, the same effect can be observed on high-
aspect-ratio wings on sailplanes that produce more lift with less drag or L/D. In general, the best
performance is attained when the pitch-to-diameter ratio is one.
Lift and Drag Distributions
The prescription of drag polar and design angle of attack at each radial location is more
convenient than section design lift and drag coefficients. Figure 3 shows an example of a canned
or artificial airfoil drag polar used in JavaProp, which characterizes essentially zero lift, maximum
lift coefficient, and minimum drag coefficient. Usually, a propeller maximum efficiency can be
obtained when the section lift-to- drag ratio is at its peak. Lower angle of attack settings work
better for the overall design aspects that include off-design conditions since the stall occurs gently.
Regardless of how one delays stall by controlling the lift-to-drag ratio, analysis results are
unreliable at very low advance ratios.
Figure 3. Synthetic drag polar of Clark Y airfoil at different Reynolds numbers [22].
Desired Thrust or Power Available
Based on the total drag or the available motor, either the desired thrust of the propeller or
a given useful shaft power can be specified.
Density
18
Fluid density does not have any influence on the power or thrust coefficients as well as
efficiency, but it greatly impacts the propeller size and shape. For example, hydro-propellers have
smaller dimensions compared to airscrews. Moreover, the air density determines whether the tip
has reached supersonic speed. Values for power and thrust are calculated directly from the fluid
density.
The Adkins and Liebeck design method used in JavaProp is intended to correct Larrabee’s
difficulties and find the exact solution. With specifications of the previous terms, the following
iterative design procedure is used to find the pitch and chord-length distribution.
a. Select an initial estimate for the ratio of vortex displacement velocity to the freestream
velocity v’/U, or select v’/U = 0 to start.
b. Find Prandtl’s momentum loss factor and flow angle at each element.
c. Calculate the product of the local total velocity and blade section chord along with the local
Reynolds number.
d. Determine the airfoil section drag-to-lift ratio and angle of attack from the airfoil data.
e. For the minimum drag-to-lift ratio, revise Cl, and repeat step c.
f. Calculate the axial and rotational interference factors as well as local total velocity.
g. Determine the blade chord length using step c results, and twist β.
h. Find the four derivatives as defined, and integrate them over the blade region.
i. Find v’/U and either the non-dimensional power or thrust coefficients.
j. If the new value for v’/U is different from the old value (e.g., 0.1%), then return to step b.
k. Determine the propeller efficiency and other parameters, such as propeller solidity.
These steps usually take more than a few iteration cycles to converge. Also, the viscous loss term
can be added for more accurate results.
19
Although JavaProp is a fast and user-friendly code, it has its limitations, as discussed
previously. Predictions where flow separation occurs are poor, e.g., at high disk loadings or low
advance ratios. Furthermore, restrictions limit the section blade aerodynamic characteristics that
can be implemented. Finally, boundary layer interactions with complex phenomena in cases such
as three-dimensional effects, Mach number effects, etc., are ignored in JavaProp. Users must agree
on whether to sacrifice accuracy in order to obtain a quick and fairly reasonable estimate.
Hepperle presented validation results of his code in comparison with Theodorsen’s
experimental data [38]. The geometry was imported by the JavaProp “Geometry Card” feature
using a three-bladed propeller and Clark Y section airfoil at Re = 500,000. However, it is not clear
if the airfoil data used appropriately represented the exact tested propeller blade characteristics.
Figure 4 shows all validation results obtained in coefficient forms and efficiency against advance
ratio J.
Angles settings show the pitch angle at 75% radius, or 0.75R. The thrust coefficient (shown
in the upper left portion of Figure 4) only agrees with the trend of the linear region of the curve
with a systematic shift, but not as much where the flow is mostly separated. Here, a similar trend
is apparent, as the analysis results underpredict the experimental data, as was shown in momentum-
blade element theory validations. The power coefficient curves (right side of Figure 4) show an
identical trend to the thrust coefficient graph, with large deviations at the lower advance ratios.
Note that the experimental data has some discontinuities as well, depending on each test condition.
Generally, a propeller operates at the linear region of this regime, except for takeoff and
landing. The efficiency curve may cancel out practical errors since it depends on both the thrust
and power coefficients. It may not be wise to validate a method with the efficiency plot.
20
Nonetheless, the more accurate it becomes, the better its assessment on overall aircraft
performance.
Figure 4. JavaProp validation results compared with NACA TR-594, designated

blade angle at 0.75R [22].
2.3 Vortex Theory
Unlike the previous momentum-blade element theory, vortex theory incorporates the
induced effect. A complex iterative process and, therefore, an increase in calculation time is
inevitable for obtaining considerably more accurate results. The vortex theory starts with
consideration of the ultimate wake of the optimum propeller, or Betz’s condition, as discussed
previously in Chapter 1.
21
Studies have been conducted to justify the assumption that the normality condition holds
between the effective velocity VE and the induced velocity w (see Figure 1). Prandtl’s tip loss
factor F is an approximation for Goldstein’s kappa factor, which becomes more exact as J
decreases or the number of blades increases, and can be expressed as
2  B (1  x) 
F cos 1 exp    (2.18)
  2 sin T 
where ϕT is the tip helix angle of the blade. For a lightly loaded propeller,
T  tan 1  (2.19)
With Prandtl’s tip-loss approximation of Goldstein’s vortex theory, the bound circulation Γ and
the tangential velocity component wt of the induced velocity can be related in
BГ ≈ 4π rFwt (2.20)
From the Kutta-Joukowski theorem,
1
  cClVE (2.21)
2
Substituting equation (2.21) into equation (2.20) yields
VE w
 Cl  8 xF t (2.22)
VT VT
Now VE /VT can be shown in terms of wt /VT as

1
VE  wt   
2
 2  wt   wt  
  x    x      4  x    
2
(2.23)
VT   VT  2 VT  VT   
  
Solving for wt /VT will determine the induced angle of attack αi as
 U  wa 
 i  tan 1    (2.24)
  r  wt 
22
The axial component of induced velocity wa can also be found as a function of wt. From the
geometry above,
VE2  VR2 cos2 i (2.25)
Hence, it is possible to derive
2
V 
  E   ( J   2 x 2 ) cos 2  i
2
(2.26)
 VT 
which shows the vortex theory and momentum-blade theory differences in CP and CT equations
(2.13) and (2.14). The left-hand side of equation (2.26) is used in vortex theory, and the right-hand
side of the equation is used in the momentum-blade element, where cos2αi ≈ 1, since αi is assumed
to be a small angle. Other refinements to the angle of attack and the lift coefficient in vortex theory
may increase the accuracy.
Validation of vortex theory was attempted by Moffitt et al. [36] for UAV-scale propellers
using similar method to measure blade-section geometry, as described in section 2.1. A given full-
scale propeller was also designated by McCormick [5] to exercise vortex theory applications and
compare with wind tunnel data for validations. This three-blade 5868-9 propeller has a Clark Y
section with chord, twist, and thickness distribution, as provided by previous researchers [38-40].
Although details on other geometric features and test conditions are not specified, results are used
in different validation examples, such as JavaProp. McCormick’s vortex theory approach is
relatively easy to utilize since the computer programming procedure is provided to predict the
performance of this specific propeller. Software Maple 16 was used for developing this program.
Results for thrust and torque coefficients in addition to efficiency are shown in Figure 5.
Most airfoil characteristics, except post-stall lift coefficient behavior, are estimated with a
no-detail description of the approximation process. The Cl range is limited between –0.8 and 1.2
23
for this calculation. As discussed, a major portion of the propeller blade stalls at a lower advance
ratio. Evidently results for the thrust coefficient in this region are poor; however, it becomes
astonishingly accurate in the linear region (see Figure 5). As discussed previously, the blade twist
angle β needs to be adjusted to the zero-lift line instead of the chord line. McCormick estimates
the zero-lift line angle α0l to the chord line for this particular airfoil as
t
 0l  46 (2.27)
c
The slope of the section lift coefficient a for the Clark Y airfoil is taken to be
 t
a  0.11.0   (2.28)
 c
Cl can be determined from equation (2.5), and Cd is also expected to be
Cd  Cdmin  0.010  Cl  0.15 

2
(2.29)
where
t
Cdmin  0.004  0.017 (2.30)
c
Note that parameters α0l, a, and Cdmin are a function of the thickness-to-chord length ratio t/c. It is
convenient to use t/c in these equations, since the blade’s radial distribution is presented in the
report. To find both Cl and Cd as a function of angle of attack, an iterative process needs to be
implanted to simultaneously calculate all the unknown parameters, primarily wt /VT and the
induced angle of attack αi in equations (2.22) and (2.24).
24
0.2 JP-15 0.25
JP-25
JP-35
VT-15
0.16 VT-25 0.2
VT-35
Exp-15
0.12 Exp-25 0.15
Exp-35
CT
CP
0.08 0.1
0.04 0.05
0 0
0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2 0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2
J J
0.8
0.6
η
0.4
0.2
0
0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2
J
Figure 5. Vortex theory, JavaProp, and propeller 5868-9 experimental results [39] comparison,
with designated blade angle at 0.75R.
Close agreement of vortex theory predictions is clear when the blade is at lower angles or
not stalled. This is because the airfoil characteristics are fairly known in this region. As the advance
ratio decreases, the section angle of attack increases, and the blade starts to stall from the inboard
section of the blade. The results of vortex theory prediction show linear behavior for the thrust
coefficient throughout the advance ratio (shown in left top of Figure 5). No post-stall treatment is
25
applied for the airfoil lift coefficient. The power coefficient and efficiency curves coincide rather
well with the test data. However, JavaProp analysis has a systematic under-prediction for most
regions. This deviation possibly indicates that the zero-lift line of the airfoil might be off and not
well prescribed in JavaProp validations, according to Hepperle [22]. Despite the offset of the
results, it appears that the overall outcome of JavaProp is acceptable for the initial design for such
a simple and fast tool. One can argue whether the time and effort used in the programming of
vortex theory is worth the sacrifice of obtaining a more reasonable overall result.
2.4 Computational Fluid Dynamics
Without a doubt, the most sophisticated and potentially accurate analysis and design tool
is computational fluid dynamics. Solving Euler and Navier-Stokes equations also requires
extensive calculation and central processing unit (CPU) time when compared with previous
analytical methods. This is not the only concern; CFD codes also need to be verified. CFD
validation is a principle that must be coordinated between computational and experimental
constraints. Lack of knowledge in physical modeling, limited computer resources, and
mathematical approximation increase the uncertainties in the CFD application [34]. As a result,
the extension of CFD into the design process depends on the credibility of how the code is
validated through experiments, that is, how the code is an essential part of its evolutionary
progress. Two examples are introduced here to show the extent of CFD applications in propeller
analysis and in the existing validation problems.
2.4.1 CFD Example 1
An analysis of propeller wake interference effect was conducted by Strash et al. [26]. Their
results are compared with wind tunnel test data obtained by the Flygtekniska Försöksanstalten
(FFA) or Aeronautical Research Institute of Sweden [41, 42] in the late 1980s. The extensive
26
experimental data consist of four nacelle/wing combinations where axisymmetric nacelle and
axisymmetric nacelle/wing combinations were used for validations (see Figure 6). Time-averaged
pressure distribution over the nacelle and wing, a velocity components survey on the propeller
slipstream, and typical thrust and torque measurements for a single advance ratio of 0.70 were
investigated. The propeller used was a one-fifth scale model of a Dowty Rotol R243 propeller on
a SAAB 340 powered nacelle.
Figure 6. Combined propeller/nacelle/wing grid domain [28].
It seems that the vast amount of experimental data is best suited for CFD validations as
used in other studies [28, 33]. Nonetheless, despite specifications of nacelle/wing geometry and
wind tunnel model installation, no information on the propeller geometry is available except for
the diameter of 0.64 m. Reluctantly, Strash et al. [26] compromised the R243 propeller to a similar
one but with a different section chord and twist distribution than the Dowty Rotol R212 propeller
that was apparently available. Therefore, credibility of the validation of this study is questionable
since the exact propeller geometry is unknown. It seems like this is a common issue in most
27
validation processes, as explained in previous examples, before examining the credibility of the
code.
The calculated thrust coefficient was 12% off from the test data. The surface pressure
coefficient distribution along the x-axis of nacelle is presented in Figure 7 at an advance ratio of
0.7. Figure 7 (a) represents the propeller/nacelle combination with no wing interaction at a
0-degree angle of attack, and Figure 7 (b) shows this for a 10-degree angle of attack. Strash et al.
concluded that with the “qualitatively quite good” comparison results, the numerical simulation is
“feasible” for preliminary design applications.
0.8 0.8
Test Data Test Data
Upper Surface
Upper Surface
Lower Surface
0.4 0.4
0 0
cpr
cpr
-0.4 -0.4
-0.8 -0.8
-15 0 15 30 45 -15 0 15 30 45
x x
(a) (b)
Figure 7. Propeller/nacelle pressure distribution at Mach 0.15, 6650 rpm:

(a) α = 0°, (b) α = 10°, data digitized from [26].
The same FFA wind tunnel data was applied for validation purposes in numerical
simulations [28], although there was no indication of whether the exact propeller geometry was
used or not. A wake survey in terms of non-dimensionalized dynamic pressure immediately behind
the propeller where x/R = 0.14 is shown in Figure 8. Time-averaged data match well in comparison
with two other time-accurate pressure profiles.
28
Figure 8. Propeller/nacelle/wing slipstream dynamic pressure survey behind the propeller [28]
2.4.2 CFD Example 2
Another dilemma in CFD validation is when the code developer only holds details of the
propeller model geometry and tunnel boundary conditions, which have not been disclosed to the
public. Moffitt et al. [30] compared the experimental data of a sub-scale six-bladed propeller
designed by Aero Composites Inc. to the solution of a Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes CFD flow
solver. Geometry descriptions of this investigation exclusively belong to the United Technologies
Research Center (UTRC). Generally, readers are not able to verify and compare a code’s ability to
any other published test data for this reason. Eventually, analysts must run a series of wind tunnel
tests for the purpose of individual validation. In addition to feasibility of the facility and cost of
the wind tunnel testing, the experiment needs to be designed and scaled for a validation goal.
The results of propeller testing and CFD analysis were compared by Moffitt using the
prescribed traditional vortex theory [36]. Figure 9 shows the UTRC wind tunnel settings and
computational domain for the tunnel boundaries and propeller geometry. To assess the fabricated
blade geometry, a white light scan was used on three of the six propeller blades made with
29
maximum variations of a few thousandths of an inch. Moffitt et al. concluded that the CFD codes
agreed better than the classical vortex theory, especially in predicting thrust and torque as a
function of blade pitch angle. Also, they argued that the code has the ability to overcome the effects
of a low Reynolds number, wall blockage, and other measurement difficulties in the predictions.
Figure 9. Propeller wind tunnel model and grid domain [30].
Another CFD propeller analysis problem is using an inadequate validation method. The
experiment chosen by Westmoreland et al. [29] for code validations consisted of two untwisted
symmetric rotor blades at hover [43]. Although this test was comprised of a pair of rotating blades
set at a five-degree angle of attack, the helicopter rotor model did not fully replicate the complex
propeller geometry. Moreover, the pressure coefficients of the rotor blade surfaces were compared,
not the expected propeller thrust and torque coefficients. Recognizing the existing problems in
CFD propeller analysis, especially in its validation methods, the urgency to solve these issues and
build confidence in CFD results is high. Chapter 3 presents a summary of the problems and goals,
including the approach taken to obtain these objectives.
30
CHAPTER 3
PROBLEMS AND GOAL
Validation is the primary means to examine the precision and reliability in analytical and
computational solutions [35]. The basic method of validation is to quantify error and uncertainty
of prediction in simulation and compare this with experimental data. As the examples in Chapter
2 describe, propeller analysis and prediction methods suffer from lack of extensive experimental
data designed specifically for validation purposes. This chapter provides a summary of the
problems and difficulties in existing propeller analysis. Furthermore, the objectives of this project
and considerations made to approach the challenge are explained.
3.1 Problems in Propeller Validation
Geometry Details
For most validation experiments, few details on propeller, spinner, nacelle, and tunnel test
section geometry are available. The absence of any of these geometric features or even accurate
confirmation of the constructed model dimensions causes a severe failure in the essential physics
of modeling. Especially, the complex geometry of the propeller blade requires a comprehensive
instruction of reproduction or modeling procedure. Accessibility of wind tunnel data for section
aerodynamic characteristics at various Reynolds numbers is also very important.
A series of analysis was executed to evaluate the influence of each critical factor in design,
fabrication, and testing environment. JavaProp was utilized for its convenience and its broad setup
flexibility in model selections to compare results. 17×12 APC Thin-Electric propeller twist and
chord distribution was used as the baseline. Factors found to have the most impact on the propeller
performance are, in order, the following: pitch angle, chord length, section airfoil, and airfoil
aerodynamics characteristics used based on its operating Reynolds number. Figure 10 to Figure 13
31
show sensitivity comparisons of individual variable as indicated for a generic propeller. An
additional measurement of the blade deformation or calculated load of deformed components can
also be helpful. Spatial dimensionality of the wind tunnel test section, as well as geometric
specifications of the nacelle, spinner, and model mount, etc., must be fully documented.
0.2 0.2
Δβ = 0° Δβ = 0°
Δβ = 10° Δβ = 10°
0.16 0.16
Δβ = 20° Δβ = 20°
0.12 0.12
CT
CP
0.08 0.08
0.04 0.04
0 0
0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2 0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2
J J
Figure 10. Sensitivity analysis of pitch angle using JavaProp.
0.2 0.2
c/R = 0.10 @ .75R c/R = 0.10 @ .75R

0.16 c/R = 0.13 @ .75R 0.16 c/R = 0.13 @ .75R
c/R = 0.15 @ .75R c/R = 0.15 @ .75R
0.12 0.12
CT
CP
0.08 0.08
0.04 0.04
0 0
0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2 0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2
J J
Figure 11. Sensitivity analysis of chord length using JavaProp.
32
0.2 0.2
Clark Y Clark Y
0.16 0.16
Flat Plate Flat Plate
Eppler 193 Eppler 193
0.12 0.12
CT
CP
0.08 0.08
0.04 0.04
0 0
0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2 0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2
J J
Figure 12. Sensitivity analysis of propeller section airfoil using JavaProp.
0.2 0.2
Re=25,000 Re=25,000
Re=100,000 Re=100,000
0.16 0.16
Re=500,000 Re=500,000
0.12 0.12
CT
CP
0.08 0.08
0.04 0.04
0 0
0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2 0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2
J J
Figure 13. Sensitivity analysis of airfoil aerodynamics for ClarkY using JavaProp.
33
Test Conditions
Boundary conditions of the experiment are also critical parameters for computational
simulations that are frequently missed in validation reports. Typically, these consist of average
quantities of test section freestream velocity, dynamic pressure or total pressure with static
pressure, and total temperature. Essentially, all measurements are required to be calibrated for
wind tunnel testing. Turbulence intensity, boundary layer thickness, and boundary layer transition
are also supplemental quantities. Although it is important for CFD turbulence codes to reference
these data as accurately as possible, some wind tunnel facilities are reluctant to measure or disclose
detailed flow quality. Furthermore, the position of all instrumentation needs to be specified for
CFD boundary condition settings.
Results
Lack of collective global and local measurements is evident in previous work. These are
fundamental requirements in CFD validation experiments. Global quantities may be classical
propeller thrust and torque coefficients, and efficiency as a function of the advance ratio. Local
measurements may include nacelle surface pressure coefficients, slipstream local velocity
distribution and its components, and wing surface pressure distribution. Also valuable are
revolution speed, local Reynolds numbers, and freestream velocity, since they can identify the
effects of coupled parameters against each other. Similarly, accuracy and limitations of individual
instruments are recommended to be introduced. In addition, methods of dynamic and/or static tare
and blockage corrections applied in the results must be recognized.
Measurement Repeatability and Error
Experimental errors, such as random and bias uncertainties in measurements, are suggested
to be evaluated. An Advisory Group for Aerospace Research and Development (AGARD)
34
document [44] on standard wind tunnel testing has procedures for error estimation; however, they
are not widely used in validation experiments. Finally, repeatability tests on the model and facility
are advised, for example, duplicating the test on a different day with the same test conditions. Also,
repeatability on a reconstructed model can be beneficial if cost and time allow. Exercising another
wind tunnel facility with the equivalent test conditions proves that the results are independent from
instrumentation bias.
3.2 Statement of Objective
The objectives of this dissertation are as follows:
 To provide a universal geometric description as well as comprehensive experimental data
on two propellers, primarily for low Reynolds number propeller performance validations.
 To capture critical elements of the experiment in the results.
3.3 Methods of Approach
The primary purpose of this effort is to provide a database for analysts to assess the validity
and accuracy of a computational analysis by providing crucial information. Considering the
existing problems discussed above, the following steps were taken to achieve the objectives above:
Geometry
Primarily, a simple blade propeller with a constant pitch-to-diameter ratio, chord length,
and thickness was tested. Then, a practical blade propeller with a varying pitch-to-diameter ratio
and chord length as functions of the propeller radius was evaluated. The applied blade section
airfoil profile and experimental data is well documented for a range of Reynolds numbers,
particularly lower Reynolds numbers by different sources. All critical geometries are reproducible
via simple programming or an accessible computer-aided design (CAD) file. The test section
35
geometry, nacelle, spinner, and model mount geometries are presented. The coordinate measuring
machine (CMM) or 3D scan (point cloud) measured accuracy of the blades’ actual fabrication.
Test Conditions
The freestream flow was calibrated at the test section by measuring the average freestream
velocity, total and static pressures, and tunnel temperature. The experimental procedure and
apparatus descriptions were provided from the work of Merchant and Miller [45]. The test section
inlet and outlet pressures, test section pressure gradient, and instrumentation positions were
determined. Known wind tunnel flow quality, such as turbulence intensity and flow angularity, are
provided.
Collective Results
Thrust coefficient, power or torque coefficients, and revolutions per minute for an
adjustable pitch propeller with five degrees increment were obtained as global quantities. In
addition, nacelle surface pressure distribution and propeller wake velocity components were
measured as local quantities. Some crucial low Reynolds number effects on results were captured
using a variety of rpm and freestream velocity tests. Corrected and uncorrected wind tunnel
blockage data and the method of dynamic and static tares are provided.
Experimental Errors
Repeatability tests on the propeller model, test condition, test facility (wind tunnel), and
testing procedure were implemented. Known instrumentation bias and error as well as
uncertainties in measurements are quantified and documented in the report.
36
CHAPTER 4
EXPERIMENTAL APPARATUS
As previously explained, the initial objectives and considerations were implemented in
model selections and wind tunnel testing methods. Accordingly, apparatus geometries and
specifications are described in detail in this chapter. The measurement system and experimental
procedures are also documented in detail by Merchant and Miller [45].
4.1 Geometry Descriptions
This section provides all the geometry details necessary for modeling and reproduction
purposes. This includes the wind tunnel, model installation apparatus, and all critical components
such as nacelle, spinner, and propeller blade specifications.
4.1.1 Wind Tunnels and Model Installations
3×4 LSWT at Wichita State University
Tests were carried out in two separate low-speed wind tunnel facilities with different test
section geometries. Initially, all tests were conducted in the 3-foot by 4-foot low-speed wind tunnel
(3×4 LSWT) at Wichita State University (WSU). This open-return tunnel has a rectangular eight-
foot-long test section that can reach a maximum dynamic pressure of 38 pounds per square foot
(psf). However, results are obtained at a dynamic pressure of no higher than 20 psf. The total
pressure ring is located at the tunnel pre-section inlet, which is 20 feet long and has a cross section
of 7 feet by 10 feet. The static pressure ring is at the test section entrance, and the difference of the
two pressure measurements gives the tunnel dynamic pressure reading that is calibrated to the
center of the test section. However, the indicated dynamic pressure is neither compensated nor
corrected for the presence of the C-strut mount (also referred to as C-mount) since its blockage is
37
estimated to be less than 0.4% increase in the tunnel dynamic pressure readings. A picture of the
tunnel and its geometry details including the C-mount are presented in Figure 14.
Figure 14. Photo (top) and description (bottom) of 3×4 LSWT at Wichita State University.
38
The model was mounted on a sensor/motor platform attached to the C-mount and described
in Figure 15 along with a full-model assembly photograph. The model nacelle front edge was set
at 18.29 ± 0.03 inches from the tunnel C-mount tip, the geometry of which is shown in Figure 14.
The rotation axis coincides with the nacelle center line, and the distances to the plane of rotation
presented here. All tests were conducted at a zero-degree angle of attack and yaw angle within
accuracy of ±0.2 degree.
Figure 15. Model installation (top) and side view (bottom) in 3×4 LSWT.
39
7×10 Wind Tunnel at the National Institute for Aviation Research
To minimize the tunnel blockage effect and assess facility bias error in results, more tests
were performed in the Walter Beech Memorial 7-foot by 10-foot low-speed wind tunnel at the
National Institute for Aviation Research (7×10 NIAR). This unique facility has a rectangular test
section that is 7 feet high, 10 feet wide, and 12 feet long, with a contraction area ratio of 6 to 1
from a circular pre-section. A 2,500 horsepower (HP) fan can generate a test speed up to 240 mph
and a maximum dynamic pressure of 125 psf. The closed-loop tunnel has an active heat exchanger
temperature control that allows continuous full-speed operation all day long. Flow conditioning
tools were implemented to reduce the turbulence intensity of the tunnel as low as 0.07% at 3.8 psf
tunnel q in core flow regions, that is, at least a foot from any wall. The tunnel total pressure ring
is located at the pre-section where the static pressure ring is at the inlet of the test section. The
tunnel dynamic pressure was calibrated to the center of the test section and corrected for the
presence of the C-mount. In addition to uncorrected and corrected tunnel q for blockage, two pitot-
static tubes located at the entrance and exit of the test section provide the total and static pressures
for boundary condition settings. Moreover, pressure gradients along the test section are measured
via pressure transducers connected to both test-section side walls. All pressure ports measured the
pressure differential to the tunnel barometric pressure.
The geometry details of the 7×10 NIAR wind tunnel and the model installation on the C-
mount are provided in Figure 16. The model was installed far ahead of the mount so that the flow
affected by its existence was minimal, as shown in Figure 17.
For easy reproduction and modeling purposes, considerations were made not to expose any
wiring or tubing at the vicinity of the model or the test section in both wind tunnels.
40
Figure 16. Description of Beech wind tunnel and C-mount assembly
in 7×10 NIAR.
41
Figure 17. Model installation and side view in 7×10 NIAR.
4.1.2 Model Propellers
PD1 Propeller
Two different propeller blade geometries were designed and tested. Initially, a basic
propeller geometry was considered for wind tunnel testing, which was expected to simplify the
modeling and analysis effort for validations. Propeller blade PD1 was selected to have a constant
pitch-to-diameter ratio (p = 12 inches, D = 12 inches, or p/D = 1), chord length, and thickness.
Hence, the geometric twist angle β at 75% blade radius, β0.75, was 23° calculated from
equation (2.1). For the blade profile, an Eppler 387 (E387) airfoil was utilized for its high lift-to-
drag aerodynamic characteristics in addition to the extensive experimental data available,
especially at low Reynolds numbers [46-51]. This airfoil is designed for model gliders operating
at Re = 2.0 × 105 where theoretical predictions and empirical drag polar agree surprisingly well
[51]. The maximum thickness of this airfoil is 9.06% of the chord length and the maximum camber
of 3.2%. The XFOIL program was used to extrapolate 200 profile coordinates from the original 61
42
points, as presented by Somers and Maughmer [46], which are tabulated in Appendix A. For its
manufacturing feasibility, 5% of an inch chord length trailing edge was omitted, as presented in
the coordinates. This was necessary to ensure a reasonable trailing-edge thickness.
An open source CAD software written in C++ language, OpenSCAD, was used for the
initial design and outline drawings [52]. Figure 18 shows the software interface. The left-hand side
describes the script file that generates an object, or in this case, the propeller. Initial designs of
critical geometries were rendered by OpenSCAD, the program files of which are provided in
Appendix A. The advantage of this program is that it is capable of producing complex-defined
shapes. The profile coordinates were imported into OpenSCAD’s propeller file, and then
Figure 18. PD1 propeller in OpenSCAD interface.
43
extruded and twisted to build the blade shape using simple scripted functions. Note that the blade
was twisted at its profile’s centroid, that is, x/c = 40.04% and y/c = 2.95% of an inch chord length
NOT 0.95 inch.
A detailed design was performed using SolidWorks software. The blade file exported in
STL format by OpenSCAD in a metric unit system was imported into SolidWorks. Sixteen profile
segments were extracted, and loft function was used to recreate the geometry for the fabrication
purposes. Figure 19 shows the CAD design of the propeller blade assembly and final computer
numerical control (CNC) machined products. The assembly consisted of the blade, blade root,
pitch angle control plate, and pin for blade pitch angle adjustments with five degrees increment at
three different β0.75 settings: 23°, 28°, and 33°. The blade was connected to the root through two
stainless pins perpendicular to the longitudinal blade axis. The blade was machined from an
aluminum alloy 7075-T6 block. Stress analysis results show that the blade deflection under
maximum loads at β0.75 = 33° is 0.05 inch at the tip in the thrust direction. For the analysis,
centrifugal force, thrust, and torque were simultaneously applied.
Figure 19. PD1 Propeller blade assembly.
44
A 3D scan on both sides of each blade was performed to verify the accuracy of the
constructed models. Figure 20 shows a very good match when comparing the final fabricated blade
to the design CAD geometry, indicating that the variation is within ±0.002 inch, where the accuracy
of the scan system is ±0.001 ~ 0.002 inch.
Figure 20. 3D scan of PD1 propeller blade, within ±0.002 inch accuracy.
COMP Propeller
Likewise, for practical and advanced analysis efforts in validations, a complex propeller
geometry “COMP” was considered. This propeller blade has a twist and chord length as functions
of the blade radius with a constant thickness. Similar to the previous PD1 blade, the E387 airfoil
was utilized. However, contrary to the 5% reduction in the PD1’s trailing edge, 10% was omitted.
The coordinates of this propeller blade are presented in Appendix A. This reduction was necessary
45
to ensure a reasonable trailing-edge thickness of the blade since it has shorter chord length at the
tip of the blade. Since OpenSCAD operates in a metric system, equations are written accordingly.
However, the U.S. unit system is adopted in this document. The blade design was inspired by
Hartman’s 5868-R6 blade form curves, though simplified to fit equivalent polynomial functions
[39]. The twist distribution β is a function of the local blade radius r as
β = 1714.5/r (4.1)
where the propeller radius R = 6.0 inches—or 152.4 mm for equation (4.1)—and β is calculated in
degrees, where the reference β0.75 = 15°. The chord length c (mm) is also described as
c = - 0.0033r2 + 0.6r - 4.5 (4.2)
where the blade thickness remains constant relative to the chord length of 9.06% to avoid
unnecessary complexity.
Figure 21 shows the OpenSCAD blade design, detailed design, and fully assembled COMP
aluminum blades. Twenty-four profile sections were exported as an STL file and used for the
detailed design in SolidWorks. This propeller also has a variable five-degree increment pitch with
four angle settings that can be manually set at the hub. The blade pitch angles can be adjusted at
β0.75 = 15°, 20°, 25°, and 30°. Structural analysis shows each blade can withstand a maximum
centrifugal force of 77.1 lbf, 1.5 lbf thrust, and 3.1 in-lbf torque loads applied simultaneously with
less than 0.1 inch of deflection at the tip in the thrust direction (at β0.75 = 30°). Figure 22 shows
the 3D scan results for one of the blades. The CNC machining accuracy is satisfactory for such a
small and thin blade and kept mostly under -0.007 inches variation showed in dark purple color.
46
Figure 21. COMP propeller blade design and assembly without nacelle and spinner.
Figure 22. 3D scan results of COMP blade within -0.007 inch accuracy.
47
4.1.3 Model Nacelle-Spinner
Similar steps were taken for the nacelle and spinner designs using OpenSCAD. The
geometry script files are available in Appendix A. These components were constructed using a 3D
printer using polylactic acid (PLA) filaments. The nacelle was divided into halves for easy
accessibility and strapped to the sensor/motor platform. The nacelle surface had a total of 62
orifices—eight around the perimeter and eight in the longitudinal direction—which were
connected to a pressure transducer to measure static pressure. Figure 23 shows the full CAD model
assembly including important dimensions. Two pressure ports are omitted as a slot was made on
the rear bottom of the nacelle for 3×4 LSWT C-mount, as shown in Figure 23. This slot was sealed
for the 7×10 NIAR testing with the original design curvature part shown in Figure 24.
Hub components were also constructed using the 3D printer enclosing the blade root and
the angle control plate, which was installed on the motor shaft. The hub consisted of two parts—
top and bottom—and a U-hold to tighten the propeller blades and hold the hub parts together on
the motor shaft. A magnetic pickup tab was located between the hub and the nacelle. The spinner
enclosed the hub assembly. The spinner was aligned carefully with the nacelle to replicate the
design geometry. The gap between the spinner and the nacelle was 0.05 inch. Two screws were
used to attach the spinner to the hub, and screw caps were designed to fill the holes and render the
geometry. Considerations were made to increase the stiffness of the spinner, in order for it to
withstand high rpm centrifugal forces without deflection. The blades were balanced where the
center of gravity deviated within ±1.0% of the blade length in order to decrease system vibration.
The motor shaft and nacelle alignment were also important to reduce vibration. The gap between
the motor shaft, magnetic pickup, and nacelle were sealed with brushes and tapes. The nacelle and
spinner surfaces were painted and polished several times to achieve a smooth finish.
48
Figure 23. Nacelle assembly CAD design (dimensions in inches).
Figure 24. Nacelle bottom side modification for 7×10 NIAR setup.
49
4.1.4 Model Setup Assessment
Sensitivity analysis in the previous chapter showed that the pitch angle setting significantly
influences performance. Here, a 3D scan was performed to evaluate the hub setup accuracy for a
pitch that is true to the design criteria. The PD1 pitch angle set to β0.75 = 23° is shown in Figure 25
for one blade’s top and bottom sides. Both sides have nominal differences of less than a fifteen
thousandth of an inch when compared to the CAD models. The same results are shown for the
COMP blade in Figure 26. Note that the spinner and nacelle are excluded from the picture to focus
on the pitch setting accuracy. In addition, Figure 27 shows the 3D scan image of the nacelle-spinner
assembly when compared with the CAD design. The overall setup and manufacturing accuracy
were satisfactory for such a large-scale and complex model. Maximum offset appeared in the
nacelle mid-section at approximately +0.07 inch that is less than 1.0% of the nacelle diameter. It
also shows that alignment of the spinner/hub with the nacelle was excellent, which requires an
extensive setting effort.
Figure 25. Top and bottom of PD1 blade 3D scan set at β0.75 = 23°, within +0.015 inch accuracy.
50
Figure 26. Top and bottom of COMP blade 3D scan at β0.75 = 15°, within ±0.020 inch accuracy.
Figure 27. Both sides 3D scan of the nacelle-spinner assembly, within +0.070 inch accuracy.
51
4.1.5 System Performance Prediction
Numerical analyses were performed for the designed propellers to predict the
performances, integrating JavaProp and vortex theory, as discussed in previous chapters. This also
helped to set an appropriate test matrix. The results are shown in Figure 28 and Figure 29 for the
two models PD1 and COMP, respectively. Since JavaProp does not have the E387 airfoil in its
database, the drag polar of the E193 profile was selected with section L/D set at 30. E193 was
slightly thicker with 10.2% thickness and the maximum camber of 3.0% compared to the E387
9.06% and 3.2% respectively. However, XFOIL aerodynamics analysis showed identical results
for both airfoils. Geometry descriptions of the chord length and blade twist distribution as a
function of the radius were imported into JavaProp for both propellers. The spinner area covered
30% of the propeller diameter. In addition, vortex theory was utilized based on self-written
program with E387 aerodynamics data obtained from the low-turbulence pressure tunnel (LTPT)
at the Langley Aerospace Research Center [47].
A linear curve estimated the Cl as a function of angle of attack α and a fourth-order
polynomial curve for Cd as a function of Cl obtained from a range of α = -3° ~ 8°. Hence, post-
stall treatment on the Cl curve was not implemented. The Cl -α and Cl -Cd relations are,
respectively,
Cl  0.09752  0.39195 (4.3)
Cd  0.16994Cl 4  0.48677Cl 3  0.46685Cl 2  0.16239Cl  0.03413 (4.4)
However, JavaProp airfoil database had a drag polar with several key parameters implemented,
such as maximum lift, minimum drag coefficients in addition to post stall trend which is similar to
Figure 3.
52
As shown, performance analysis results between the two methods vary for the PD1 model
as opposed to the COMP propeller. Both thrust and torque predictions have large differences
between the two analysis methods for the PD1 model. This may suggest a large flow separation,
especially when the propeller is highly loaded or at lower advance ratios. On the other hand,
surprisingly, both methods match very well for the COMP model for a range of advance ratios for
thrust and power coefficients as well as efficiency curves. Regardless of the conclusion, analysis
results provide a good estimation of the expected values.
A detailed analysis at a certain test condition was also performed using same methods to
study the aerodynamics characteristics along the radius for both propellers as shown in Figure 30
to Figure 31. The angle of attack, lift and drag coefficients at local radius locations were presented
for one advance ratio where J = 0.20, and the PD1 was set to β0.75 = 23°, and β0.75 = 20° for the
COMP. Although the angle of attack curves had a similar trend for both propellers, the difference
between the two methods was significant for the PD1 propeller. A substantial portion of the blade
was at stall where α > 12° for the PD1, according to the E387 wind tunnel results showed in
Chapter 5. Thus, the difference in post-stall treatment between the two methods was clear in lift
and drag coefficient plots which also explains the PD1 performance plots disagreements.
Finally, Figure 32 shows the local Reynolds number along the radius for the same advance
ratio calculated by JavaProp. The Reynolds number of a significant portion of the blade was under
100,000 (i.e., r/R ≤ 0.75) which can be considered as low Reynolds number. Furthermore, this was
less than 60,000 where r/R was 0.45 or less. Hence, low Reynolds number effect could cause
discrepancy in the wind tunnel results as shown in Chapter 5.
53
0.32
0.28
JavaP
Vortex
33°
0.24
28°
0.2 0.2
JavaP 23°
33° Vortex
0.16 28° 0.16
CP
23°
0.12 0.12
CT
0.08 0.08
33° 33°
0.04 28° 0.04 28°
β = 23° β = 23°
0 0
0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2 0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2
J J
0.8
33°
0.6
28°
η
β = 23°
0.4
JavaP
Vortex
0.2
0
0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2
J
Figure 28. PD1 propeller performance analysis.
54
0.2 0.2
JavaP JavaP
Vortex Vortex
0.16 0.16
0.12 0.12
CP
CT
0.08 0.08 30°

30°
25° 25°
20°
0.04 0.04
β = 15° 20°
β = 15°
0 0
0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2 0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2
J J
1
JavaP
Vortex
0.8
0.6 30°
25°
η
20°
0.4
β = 15°
0.2
0
0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2
J
Figure 29. COMP propeller performance analysis.
55
32 3.2
JavaP Cl JavaP
Cl Vortex
Vortex
Cd JavaP
24 2.4 Cd Vortex
α (deg)
Cl ,Cd
16 1.6
8 0.8
0 0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
r/R r/R
Figure 30. PD1 blade radial distribution of angle of attack, lift and drag coefficients at J = 0.2
and β0.75 = 23°.
32 3.2
JavaP Cl JavaP
Cl Vortex
Vortex
Cd JavaP
24 2.4 Cd Vortex
α (deg)
Cl ,C d
16 1.6
8 0.8
0 0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
r/R r/R
Figure 31. COMP blade radial distribution of angle of attack, lift and drag coefficients at J = 0.2
and β0.75 = 20°.
56
2
PD1
1.6 COMP
Re (×105)
1.2
0.8
0.4
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
r/R
Figure 32. PD1 and COMP blades local Reynolds number distributions at J = 0.2.
4.2 Data Measurement and Process
As documented by Merchant and Miller [45], the measurement system consisted of three
divisions: the sensor/motor platform, instrument and power unit, and data processing devices as
shown in Figure 33. The sensor/motor platform was mounted directly on the C-mount in the 3×4
LSWT and fixed at the nacelle’s center line, concentric with the motor shaft. In the 7×10 NIAR, it
was connected to the C-mount via an adaptor steel pipe, as shown previously in Figure 16.
The sensor or balance measured two components—tension/compression and torque—and
had a combined nonlinearity and hysteresis of ±0.5% for a rated output of 2 mV/V. The capacity
of the balance was 500 lb for thrust and 500 in-lb for torque directions. Two 1,200-watt DC brushed
electric motors with identical specifications were randomly switched between tests to include
motor performance bias in results. The motor was set on a rigid adaptor specifically designed to
connect the motor to the load cell. The motor holder also encased a 10-VDC magnetic-pickup to
measure and record the propeller rpms in proximity of a spinning metallic
57
Figure 33. Data measurement and processing block diagram.
tab measuring a maximum of 20,000 targets/s. The motor temperature was monitored by a
thermocouple attached to the surface of the motor. An insulated adaptor isolated the balance from
the motor’s thermal effects. However, minor heat transfer to the balance may have been picked up
as loads when a high shaft power was required. Although these thermal effects on measurements
are insignificant, they are quantified as thermal error in the following section.
Signals from the balance were sent to a conditioner/amplifier located outside the test
section and then to an array of optical isolators. Finally, the signal processing and reduction was
implemented in the computer and Microsoft Excel® software sheet via a 16-bit analog-to-digital
card. The data acquisition and reduction system, or DAQ, established by Merchant and Miller [45]
in 2006, was written in Visual Basic language. The reduction process incorporated the tunnel
blockage correction for a given propeller diameter and tunnel cross section as described by Glauert
58
[53]. In addition to the load calculations, the DAQ generated non-dimensionalized propeller
performance properties, such as propeller efficiency, coefficients of thrust and torque, etc. Based
on sensitivity studies performed by Merchant, the sample rate was set to 5,000 Hz per channel
with a sample period of 8 seconds. Details of the DAQ are discussed in Merchant’s master’s thesis
[54].
The tunnel dynamic pressures were measured and recorded differently for the two tunnels.
At the 3×4 LSWT, the tunnel dynamic pressure recording was integrated into the DAQ and
readouts were obtained directly from a high precision ±1 psid pressure transducer into the data
reduction system. The tunnel dynamic pressure from the DAQ was compared with the test section
pitot-static probe for a range of dynamic pressure and found to be within ±5.0% of the readings.
For the nacelle pressure port measurements, a 16-channel Scanivalve with a full scale of ±10 in
H2O differential was used. The Scanivalve was set to a different DAQ with a sample rate of 40 Hz
and sample period of 5 seconds, which measured the differential of the local pressure and tunnel
static ring pressure. Data were synchronized with tunnel dynamic pressure measurements after the
test was completed to obtain the pressure coefficients.
In the case of the 7×10 NIAR, the tunnel dynamic pressure was recorded through the tunnel
system separately but collected simultaneously with the load measurements. Data were added into
the DAQ once the testing ended. All pressure transducers read the differential to the tunnel
barometric pressure including tunnel dynamic pressure, nacelle pressure, test section wall pressure,
test section inlet, and outlet pitot tubes. The nacelle pressure ports were connected to a 32-channel
electronic pressure scanner embedded inside the nacelle with a full scale of ±2.5 psid at a 15 Hz
sample rate. The same rate was used for the wall measurements. Entrance and exit probes as well
as a five-hole probe used for the wake survey were sampled at 50 Hz via a ±1.0 psid Scanivalve.
59
The sample period for all tests was 5 seconds, except for the wake survey five-hole probe, which
was 1 second. The cone head five-hole probe had a 60° flow angle receptivity.
4.2.1 System Calibration
The load cell was calibrated for thrust and torque using known weights, as shown in Figure
34 for the thrust direction. The balance had a linear trend when loads were applied or removed
from the apparatus. Interactions between the load readings were accounted for in the final balance
behavior matrix. The calibration procedure frequently was performed to ensure the accuracy of the
load cell and DAQ. When a 5 lb load was applied in the thrust direction, the accuracy of the system
was +1.5% of thrust readings, and for a 1 lb load, this was +1.0% of thrust readings. Based on
balance specifications, the total error for hysterisis, nonlinearity, and nonrepeatability was +0.55%
of rated output. Similar results were observed in the torque measurements. The rpm sensor
measurements were also cross-checked with a calibrated strobe light. The DAQ rpm readouts had
an accuracy of ±0.3%.
Figure 34. Load cell calibration for thrust.
60
The two tunnel dynamic pressures are also calibrated to the one measured at the center of
the test sections. For the tunnel total pressure and temperature in the 3×4 LSWT, the ambient
readouts were input into the DAQ to calculate air density where the deviation was ±1.0% of
readings in a standard day similar test conditions. The indicated dynamic pressure was not
corrected for the blockage of the C-mount, which is estimated to be less than 0.4% increase in the
tunnel dynamic pressure readings. The angle of attack offset was within ±0.2° from zero.
At the 7×10 NIAR wind tunnel, an instant tunnel barometric pressure and ambient
temperature was measured internally for each tunnel dynamic pressure. All pressure measurements
are the differential to the barometric pressure, and system transducers and gauges were calibrated
frequently. The accuracy of the 7×10 tunnel dynamic pressure was 0.1 psf or better when q > 2.5
psf. The tunnel dynamic pressure can be cross-checked with the readouts of two pitot-static probes
located at the entrance and the exit of the test section, especially for q < 2.5 psf. Flow uniformity
and temperature variation across the 7×10 test section is plotted in Figure 35. The highest
investigated tunnel dynamic pressure at 100 psf is where the temperature variation is at peak
because of the wall friction.
The tunnel cross section velocity distribution varies the most at the lowest tunnel dynamic
pressure. However, results show an excellent flow quality at q = 3.8 psf with variation less than
±1.0% of the velocity readings. Corrected tunnel dynamic pressure due to existence of the C-mount
is used for the 7×10 tunnel data comparisons. Although the difference between uncorrected and
corrected data for the presence of the C-mount was very small, both data are available in Appendix
B. The angle of attack α was measured by a calibrated inclinometer prior to each test and a zero-
degree offset was expected to be within ±0.02°. The five-hole probe was also calibrated at two
flow speeds of 16 ft/s and 3280 ft/s or Mach = 3.0 by the Aeroprobe Corporation. The measurement
61
accuracy for the flow angles was up to 0.4°, and 0.8% of the total flow velocity readings. The five-
hole probe calibration details and manual were accessible through the Aeroprobe website [55].
Measurement errors and accuracy are also summarized and tabulated in the following data analysis
section.
Figure 35. Test section velocity and temperature variations of 7×10 NIAR (courtesy of NIAR).
62
4.2.2 Data Corrections and Tares
As explained, corrections due to the propeller blockage were incorporated into the results
for the presented global quantities and tunnel data comparisons. Although an increase in the
velocity increment due to propeller blockage of the tunnel test section should be less than a few
percent except for the static runs, corrections due to the effect are considered. Nevertheless,
uncorrected data for the blockage are provided for the reader’s discretion for validation purposes.
Since the propeller diameter was the same for both propellers, the only variable for the blockage
correction in DAQ was the tunnel cross section. According to the study by Merchant [54], other
tunnel corrections such as solid blockage are negligible, since the total uncertainty is less than
0.3%.
The effect of instruments or support or even parts of a wind tunnel model on measurements
is called tare or interference. Two different types of tare were considered here: static tare and
dynamic tare. Static tare, which was integrated into the DAQ Wind-Off-Zero (WOZ) module, was
considered for the weight of the system attached to the sensor and also for the minor temperature
effects. The average of two WOZ readings, the beginning and the end of each run with ten
measurements, was subtracted from each collected data. The difference of these two readings in
terms of load was treated as thermal effect error since weight distribution variation before and after
runs is zero.
On the other hand, dynamic tare was investigated to mainly exclude the drag effect of the
spinner and study the actual loads generated by the propeller, mainly thrust. A similar method as
that of Ol et al. [24] was used here. Sweeps of tunnel dynamic pressure with all models except the
propeller were tested at certain rpms. Drag was measured and curve-fitted as a function of the
tunnel dynamic pressure, and then added to the specified propeller’s thrust data. This approach
63
makes it applicable to a wide range of tunnel speeds. The results were also calculated and presented
in coefficient forms. Dynamic tare for torque measurements, which is caused by spinner/hub and
shaft power only, was neglected, since it was less than 1% of the readings at maximum with the
propeller on. The same method was taken for the no-spinner no-nacelle models for comparison.
Note that dynamic tare is only applied to the data in the “Dynamic Tare” section in Chapter 5. The
intrusive effect of the five-hole probe on the flow was not considered here (see Figure 36). These
effects are believed to be most severe in the vicinity of the slipstream boundaries and “quite
difficult to estimate,” according to Samuelsson [42]. Nonetheless, pressure values in other regions,
that is, between the blade tip and the root, are considered true.
Figure 36. Five-hole probe wake survey at 7×10 NIAR wind tunnel.
4.2.3 Test Procedure
A sweep of tunnel dynamic pressure at each run, which consists of ten data collections, was
set to cover the propeller performance curves for a range of advance ratio. The rpm was pre-set by
a fixed voltage on the power supply to the motor, and variation of the amperage was logged in
order to monitor the shaft power delivered for the operator’s reference. Shaft power varied,
64
depending on the individual system wiring setup and motor electrical efficiency. The maximum
voltage and amperage delivered were set to the motor specifications in order to avoid extreme
motor heat or damage. Note that the rpm increases slightly as the tunnel q increases for the constant
voltage delivered, although the effect was nominal for the non-dimensionalized propeller
performance parameters. The tunnel q step size was predetermined by Merchant; nonetheless,
supplementary data may comply to fill the voids in the performance curves. In those cases,
repeated runs were performed with a shift in the tunnel q set. For the static thrust measurements,
the initial tunnel dynamic pressure was set to 0 < q ≤ 0.1 psf, in order to create a gentle airflow so
the propeller was not rotating in its own wake.
The spinner and nacelle must be disassembled in order to obtain access to the hub and
propeller pitch angle setting. The spinner has two screw caps to maintain the designated curvature.
All exposed small gaps such as ones between the blade and spinner or nacelle screw holes were
covered with Scotch tape to avoid any flow disturbances. Scotch tape is a convenient and
inexpensive tool and found to be almost as effective as clay for small hole treatments in laminar
regions [56]. Model gaps must be re-taped prior to the next run. Meanwhile, an air tube was ducted
into the nacelle; this tube can inject compressed air towards the motor, in order for it to cool down
as the following test preparations are made. Note that the cooling system was shut off and did not
operate while testing was in progress.
For pressure measurements in the 3×4 LSWT, a total of 62 nacelle pressure ports were
divided into four test runs for each pitch angle setting since the Scanivalve has only 16 channels.
The Scanivalve is located right outside and underneath the test section to increase the system
sensitivity in pressure perturbation measurements. In the 7×10 NIAR, a smaller 32-channel
pressure scanner was enclosed inside the nacelle, thus allowing twice as much data acquired per
65
run. For test time constraints, only half of the nacelle pressure survey was performed. In both
tunnels, the reference pressure port was connected to the tunnel static ring to measure freestream
static pressure, p∞, and each channel to the local nacelle pressure ports, p, to obtain the differential
pressures. The final results are presented in the form of pressure coefficients. All wiring and tubing
were run internally through the C-mount to maintain the overall simplicity in geometry (see Figure
37).
Figure 37. Inside the nacelle in each tunnel: 7×10 NIAR (left) and 3×4 LSWT (right).
4.3 System Evaluations
System evaluations were performed prior to the model experimentation in order to quantify
and qualify the reliability of the data presented in the following chapter. It was critical to analyze
the total amount of experimental error in the system especially for this study. The aim of this
section is to identify all the known errors and reveal them to the readers. By using the 3D-scanning
method, the model fabrication quality was also demonstrated and compared to the design
geometry. Additionally, predictions for the designated propellers performance were made utilizing
JavaProp and vortex theory analysis.
Instrument accuracy is addressed in the system calibration section. Other uncertainties in
measurements can also affect results, thus increasing the overall experimental error. Bias in the
66
facility or system measurement or test procedure can cause systematic or fixed error, which is
typically proportional to the true value and can be eliminated by identifying the accuracy of the
system. On the other hand, random error is usually unpredictable and depends on repeatability of
the system measurement. Typically, a large number of repeated tests may quantify random error,
providing a normal distribution and standard deviation. Table 1 provides a summary of the
accuracy and error that is known. The statistical measurements shown are the maximum value in
each data set. Therefore, typically the system is more accurate than listed here.
A commonsense analysis of the data suggests that error in the final results equal the
combined maximum error of all parameters in the most detrimental way [57]. Accuracy, standard
deviation, and thermal errors for thrust and torque measurements are based on observed readouts
or readings (RD). Other parameters refer to the model specifications from the manufacturer based
on the rated output (RO) or the full scale (FS).
TABLE 1
SUMMARY OF SYSTEM ACCURACY, PRECISION, AND ERROR
Instrument
Unit Accuracy RD STDV RD Thermal Error
Errors
Thrust lb +1.5% ±0.15% ±1.5% RD ±0.55% RO
Torque in-lb +1.0% ±0.10% ±1.0% RD ±0.55% RO
rpm rpm ±0.3% ±1.0% - ±0.05%
3×4 LSWT ±5.0% ±1°C ±0.10% FS
lb/ft2 ±9.0%
Tunnel q where q > 5.0 psf (at sensing element) (1.0 psid)
3×4 LSWT ±0.2% FS
lb/ft2 - ±5.0% ±0.001% FS
Scanivalve (±10 in H2O)
7×10 NIAR ±4.0%
lb/ft2 N/A - -
Tunnel q where q > 2.5 psf
7×10 NIAR ±0.06% FS
lb/ft2 - N/A ±0.004% FS/°C
Scanner (±2.5 psid)
< 0.4° angles,
Five-Hole ±0.12% FS
ft/s < 0.8% total N/A ±0.001% FS/°C
Probe (±1.0 psid)
velocity
67
Note that the standard deviation of the 3×4 LSWT Scanivalve is high. This is due to the
rapid pressure fluctuations of the nacelle surface that is located behind the propeller caused by the
presence of the propeller wake. The 7×10 wind tunnel DAQ is not set to output standard deviation
for the pressure systems.
Initial tests demonstrate the quality and repeatability of data obtained at the 3×4 LSWT to
assess the random error in the system. Tests were executed by different operators on separate days.
Figure 38 to Figure 40 show four test performances of the same off-the-shelf 12×12 APC Thin-
Electric propeller. The first number in the APC propeller specification indicates its diameter in
inches and the second number is its pitch in inches. The efficiency η, along with CT and CP, are
plotted against J at approximately 7,500 ~ 8,500 rpm, and each compares well, showing system
repeatability. The Reynolds number at 75% of the radius (Re0.75) is also plotted as a function of J
to show the test conditions of each run. By default, all data shown are corrected only for tunnel
blockage.
0.2
WSU Run 324
WSU Run 368
0.16 WSU Run 371
WSU Run 418
0.12
CT
0.08
0.04
0
0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2
J
Figure 38. Thrust coefficient repeatability test of 12×12 APC Thin-E propeller in 3×4 LSWT.
68
0.2
WSU Run 324
WSU Run 368
WSU Run 371
0.16 WSU Run 418
0.12
CP
0.08
0.04
0
0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2
J
1
WSU Run 324
WSU Run 368
0.8 WSU Run 371

WSU Run 418
0.6
η
0.4
0.2
0
0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2
J
Figure 39. Power coefficient repeatability test and efficiency of 12×12 APC Thin-E tests in 3×4
LSWT.
69
2
WSU Run 324
WSU Run 368
1.6 WSU Run 371

WSU Run 418
Re0.75 (×105) 1.2
0.8
0.4
0
0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2
J
Figure 40. Reynolds number (Re0.75) repeatability test of 12×12 APC Thin-E in 3×4 LSWT.
The WSU 3×4 LSWT and 7×10 NIAR data are compared for the same 12×12 APC Thin-
E propeller in Figure 41. Results show a good comparison indicating nominal bias error from the
two facilities and partially different DAQ systems, as explained previously. Figure 42 compares
the 3×4 LSWT results with two other wind tunnel test data for a 10×7 APC thin-E propeller at
6,500 rpm. Data from the Basic Aerodynamics Research Tunnel (BART) at Langley Aerospace
Research Center, which is digitized from the Ol et al. study [24], did not specify the rpm. Although
the results seem scattered, the authors state that no drastic variation resulted between 6,000 and
8,000 rpm. WSU’s data agrees with BART data and also data from the University of Illinois at
Urbana-Champaign (UIUC), which are plotted in Figure 42 and Figure 43 for APCs 10×7, 8×8,
and 12×12 Thin-E. It is shown that the integrated DAQ is repeatable and comparable with other
wind tunnel measurements throughout a series of testing.
70
0.2
3x4 LSWT Run 368
0.16 7x10 NIAR Run 659
0.12
CT
0.08
0.04
0
0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2
J
3x4 LSWT Run 368
0.8 7x10 NIAR Run 659
0.6
η
0.4
0.2
0
0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2
J
Figure 41. Tunnel data comparison of 3×4 LSWT and 7×10 NIAR for 12×12 APC Thin-E.
71
0.2
WSU 6,500 rpm
0.16 UIUC 6,500 rpm

BART
0.12
CT
0.08
0.04
0
0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2
J
WSU 6,500 rpm

UIUC 6,500 rpm
0.8
BART
0.6
η
0.4
0.2
0
0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2
J
Figure 42. Tunnel data comparison from WSU, BART [24], and UIUC [58]
for 10×7 APC Thin-E propeller.
72
0.2
12x12 WSU
12x12 BART
0.16 8x8 BART

8x8 UIUC
0.12
CT
0.08
0.04
0
0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2
J
1
12x12 WSU
12x12 BART
8x8 BART
0.8
8x8 UIUC
0.6
η
0.4
0.2
0
0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2
J
Figure 43. Tunnel data comparison from WSU, BART [24] and UIUC [58]
for 12×12 and 8×8 APC Thin-E.
73
CHAPTER 5
RESULTS
Test results for the model propellers are presented in this chapter. The plotted results are
reduced data, which account for the blockage corrections and thermal-static tares, as discussed in
the previous chapter for tunnel comparisons. Load measurements, nacelle pressure distributions,
and a wake survey were performed on two propeller blades in two different wind tunnels.
Application of the dynamic tare (spinner drag effect) and nacelle-spinner effects on performance
will be discussed later in this chapter. Finally, the performance results are compared with the
predicted values.
5.1 Propeller Performance
This section shows traditional performance plots such as thrust and torque coefficients with
efficiency curves against a range of advance ratios. Two different propeller blades were examined
and results are separated into subsections. However, results for the two wind tunnels are compared
in the same corresponding graphs.
5.1.1 PD1 Results of Propeller Performance
As discussed earlier, a PD1 propeller blade has a constant twist, p/D = 1, as well as constant
chord length and thickness throughout its six-inch radius. Hence, the design twist angle at 75%
radius, β0.75 is 23°. Additional tests were conducted at 28° and 33° pitch angles at approximately
5,000 rpm (i.e., 4,800 to 5,600 rpm), which is equivalent to Re0.75 = 90,000 to 120,000 for a range
of advance ratios. Thrust and power coefficients as well as efficiency results are shown for the 3×4
LSWT and 7×10 NIAR wind tunnels in Figure 44 to Figure 46. Figure 47 shows PD1 performance
at three different revolution speeds, i.e., 4,000, 5,000 and 6,000 rpms, in order to evaluate the
Reynolds number (Re0.75 = 75,000 ~ 130,000) dependency, where β0.75 = 23°. Runs were repeated
74
on two or three different days for both tunnels, with test apparatus disassembled and reassembled,
to check the system repeatability. For such a low Reynolds number range, data repeatability can
be confirmed for each tunnel. Thrust coefficients for higher pitch angles agree well for both wind
tunnels, that is, except for β0.75 = 23°, where the 7×10 NIAR results are about 4% on average higher
than 3×4 LSWT (Figure 44 to Figure 47). Also, power coefficients results in the 7×10 NIAR for
all pitch settings are 5 ~ 6% higher than the 3×4 LSWT on average. Several reasons may be causing
this outcome.
First, the total uncertainty of the system at its worst is estimated to be about 5%, which
includes the accuracy, thermal error, and other instrument and random errors. However, this is
unlikely the case, since COMP blade results shown in the next section are consistent for both
tunnels.
Next, and most likely, the tunnel systematic bias was caused by the difference in tunnel
flow characteristics at certain test conditions. As presented previously, the flow quality of the 7×10
NIAR tunnel is well known, reducing the tunnel turbulence intensity. On the other hand, the 3×4
LSWT is expected to have higher turbulence intensity than the 7×10 NIAR tunnel. Blade’s local
Reynolds number depends on the advance ratio and the section location and chord length,
nonetheless, the higher flow turbulence intensity increases the overall effective Reynolds number.
Higher turbulence intensity causes earlier transition by tripping the flow, and as a result, the
effective Reynolds number is higher than lower turbulence flow. Figure 48 shows E-387 airfoil
data among three different wind tunnels at two Reynolds numbers [47]. The airfoil aerodynamic
characteristics vary between tunnels at Re = 60,000 with a possible separation bubble at α ≈ 6° for
LTPT and Delft results. This demonstrates the effect of the tunnel flow characteristics on the
aerodynamics performance, especially at lower Reynolds numbers. Moreover, post stall behavior
75
varies at higher angles of attack for each tunnel (i.e., α ≥ 12°) which is also possibly caused by the
reason explained above. The vast majority of the blade section operates at Re ≤ 100,000 at lower
advance ratios as explained in previously. For example, Re0.45 ≈ 60,000 at J = 0.20, that is the local
Reynolds number at 45% of the blade radius. In addition, both JavaProp and vortex theory analysis
results indicated that blade section angles of attack were higher than 12° at lower advance ratios
(i.e., J ≤ 1.0) especially for r/R = 0.7 or less regions. This implies that separation or stall, at least
for a portion of the blade. Also shown in Figure 28 and Figure 29, vortex theory and JavaProp
predictions did not match well for the PD1 as opposed to the COMP results. The reason can be
explained by the post stall treatment, that is, the difference in the drag polar of the two methods
which may cause a similar outcome by operating at different effective Reynolds numbers produced
at individual wind tunnels.
As will be discussed in the following sections, the wake survey results show a possible
flow separation region in the vicinity of the root for β0.75 = 23°. This region can be smaller or rather
different in the 3×4 LSWT based on the tunnel flow characteristics or at the higher Reynolds
numbers causing a change in performance curves. Higher pitch settings thrust coefficients are more
consistent between the two tunnels because the section angles of attack are dominantly at post
stall. Therefore, tunnel flow characteristics have minimal impact on the results. The gap between
the tunnels data diminishes at higher advance ratios also supports this argument, resulting lower
section angles of attack for the same pitch settings. Nonetheless, it is fair to say that the efficiency
curves are consistent for both tunnels. In contrast, propeller performances are consistent for the
COMP blade in both tunnels. This is caused by significantly lower pitch setting throughout the
blade sections and relatively low section angles of attack. The COMP results are shown in the
following section.
76
0.32
3x4 Run 1
3x4 Run 2
0.28 3x4 Run 3
7x10 Run 1
7x10 Run 2
0.24
7x10 Run 3
0.2 0.2
3x4 Run 1
3x4 Run 2
0.16 0.16
CP
3x4 Run 3
7x10 Run 1
7x10 Run 2
0.12 7x10 Run 3 0.12
CT
0.08 0.08
0.04 0.04
0 0
0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2 0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2
J J
1
3x4 Run 1
3x4 Run 2
0.8 3x4 Run 3
7x10 Run 1
7x10 Run 2
0.6
7x10 Run 3
η
0.4
0.2
0
0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2
J
Figure 44. Coefficients CT, CP, and η against J for PD1 at 5,000 rpm, where β0.75 = 23°.
77
0.32
3x4 Run 1
3x4 Run 2
0.28
3x4 Run 3
7x10 Run 1
0.24 7x10 Run 2
0.2 0.2
3x4 Run 1
3x4 Run 2
0.16 3x4 Run 3 0.16
CP
7x10 Run 1
7x10 Run 2
0.12 0.12
CT
0.08 0.08
0.04 0.04
0 0
0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2 0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2
J J
0.8
0.6
η
3x4 Run 1
0.4
3x4 Run 2
3x4 Run 3
0.2 7x10 Run 1

7x10 Run 2
0
0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2
J
78
0.32
3x4 Run 1
3x4 Run 2
0.28 3x4 Run 3
7x10 Run 1
7x10 Run 2
0.24
0.2 0.2
3x4 Run 1
3x4 Run 2
3x4 Run 3
0.16 0.16
CP
7x10 Run 1
7x10 Run 2
0.12 0.12
CT
0.08 0.08
0.04 0.04
0 0
0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2 0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2
J J
0.8
0.6
3x4 Run 1
3x4 Run 2
η
3x4 Run 3
0.4
7x10 Run 1
7x10 Run 2
0.2
0
0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2
J
79
0.32
3x4 4000 rpm
3x4 5000 rpm

0.28
7x10 4000 rpm
7x10 5000 rpm

0.24 7x10 6000 rpm
0.2 0.2
3x4 4000 rpm
3x4 5000 rpm
0.16 0.16
CP
7x10 4000 rpm
7x10 5000 rpm
7x10 6000 rpm
0.12 0.12
CT
0.08 0.08
0.04 0.04
0 0
0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2 0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2
J J
1 3x4 4000 rpm

3x4 5000 rpm
7x10 4000 rpm
0.8
7x10 5000 rpm
7x10 6000 rpm
0.6
η
0.4
0.2
0
0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2
J
Figure 47. Coefficients CT, CP, and η against J for PD1 at 4,000 ~ 6,000 rpm, where β0.75 = 23°.
80
Re = 60,000 Re = 100,000
1.2 1.2
0.8 0.8
0.4 0.4
Cl
Cl
0 0
Stuttgard Stuttgard
Delft Delft
LTPT LTPT
-0.4 -0.4
-4 0 4 8 12 16 -4 0 4 8 12 16
α (deg) α (deg)
Figure 48. Eppler 387 airfoil wind tunnel results comparison at two Reynolds numbers, data
digitized from [47].
81
5.1.2 COMP Results of Propeller Performance
This propeller blade has a varying twist distribution and chord length as a function of radius
with a constant thickness ratio, which was specified previously. The design blade twist angle at
75% radius, β0.75 is 15°. The blade’s variable pitch was set at additional three different angles: 20°,
25°, and 30° at 0.75R. Figure 49 to Figure 52 show CT, CP, and η as a function of J at approximately
6,000 rpm (i.e., between 5,800 and 6,400 rpm), which is also equivalent to Re0.75 = 90,000 to
120,000. All tests are repeated at the two facilities on different days. Results shown in Figure 53
verify the Reynolds number (Re0.75 = 65,000 ~ 120,000) independency for β0.75 = 20° for a range
of advance ratio.
In contrast to the PD1 results, the COMP performance curves agree well for both wind
tunnels. This is an ideal outcome for validations purposes. In general, the COMP propeller
consumes significantly less power relative to the PD1. Also, a higher efficiency of 85% is obtained
for β0.75 = 25° and 30°. Note that a few percent shift in the power coefficient is detected between
the tunnel results for a blade pitch at β0.75 = 30°. It appears that a systematic gap between two
tunnels increases as the pitch angle increases. Consequently, the torque measured has increased,
as shown in Figure 52. Overall, the COMP performance curves are consistent and repeatable
throughout all pitch settings.
82
0.2 0.2
3x4 Run 1 3x4 Run 1
3x4 Run 2 3x4 Run 2
0.16 3x4 Run 3 0.16 3x4 Run 3
7x10 Run 2 7x10 Run 1
7x10 Run 2 7x10 Run 2
0.12 0.12
CP
CT
0.08 0.08
0.04 0.04
0 0
0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2 0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2
J J
1
3x4 Run 1
3x4 Run 2
0.8 3x4 Run 3
7x10 Run 1
7x10 Run 2
0.6
η
0.4
0.2
0
0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2
J
Figure 49. Coefficients CT, CP, and η against J for COMP at 6,000 rpm, where β0.75 = 15°.
83
0.2 0.2
3x4 Run 1 3x4 Run 1
3x4 Run 2 3x4 Run 2
0.16 3x4 Run 3 0.16 3x4 Run 3
7x10 Run 1 7x10 Run 1
7x10 Run 2 7x10 Run 2
0.12 0.12
CP
CT
0.08 0.08
0.04 0.04
0 0
0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2 0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2
J J
1
3x4 Run 1
3x4 Run 2
0.8 3x4 Run 3
7x10 Run 1
7x10 Run 2
0.6
η
0.4
0.2
0
0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2
J
84
0.2 0.2
3x4 Run 1 3x4 Run 1
3x4 Run 2 3x4 Run 2
0.16 0.16
3x4 Run 3 3x4 Run 3
7x10 Run 1 7x10 Run 1
7x10 Run 2 7x10 Run 2
0.12 0.12
CT
CP
0.08 0.08
0.04 0.04
0 0
0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2 0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2
J J
1
3x4 Run 1
3x4 Run 2
0.8
3x4 Run 3
7x10 Run 1
0.6 7x10 Run 2
η
0.4
0.2
0
0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2
J
85
0.2 0.2
3x4 Run 1
3x4 Run 1
3x4 Run 2
3x4 Run 2
0.16 0.16 3x4 Run 3
3x4 Run 3
7x10 Run 1
7x10 Run 1
7x10 Run 2
0.12 7x10 Run 2 0.12
CT
CP
0.08 0.08
0.04 0.04
0 0
0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2 0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2
J J
1
3x4 Run 1
3x4 Run 2
0.8 3x4 Run 3
7x10 Run 1
7x10 Run 2
0.6
η
0.4
0.2
0
0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2
J
86
0.2 0.2
3x4 4000rpm 3x4 4000rpm
3x4 5000rpm 3x4 5000rpm
0.16 3x4 6000rpm 0.16 3x4 6000rpm
7x10 4000rpm 7x10 4000rpm
7x10 5000rpm 7x10 5000rpm
0.12 7x10 6000rpm
0.12
7x10 6000rpm
CP
CT
0.08 0.08
0.04 0.04
0 0
0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2 0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2
J J
1
3x4 4000rpm
3x4 5000rpm
0.8 3x4 6000rpm
7x10 4000rpm
7x10 5000rpm
0.6
7x10 6000rpm
η
0.4
0.2
0
0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2
J
Figure 53. Coefficients CT, CP, and η against J for COMP at 4,000 ~ 6,000 rpm,
where β0.75 = 20°.
87
5.2 Nacelle Pressure Distribution
This section presents the nacelle surface pressure distribution along the longitudinal axis
in non-dimensional forms, i.e., pressure coefficient cpr , and x/L. The origin of the coordinate
system is the nacelle upstream leading edge at x/L = 0, as shown in Figure 54. This coordinate
system is applied to all the following results. Longitudinal stations were divided into eight
segments with x/L = 0.118 increments, where x is the local distance from the nacelle upstream
leading edge, and L is the length of the nacelle. Both side walls of the 7×10 NIAR entire test
section pressure coefficients are also plotted against non-dimensional distance l’ from the entrance
of the test section showing the test section pressure gradient at different advance ratios. The
azimuth angle Φ represents the nacelle pressure port angle, where 12 o’clock is at Φ = 0°, and has
an increment of 45° in the clockwise direction about the longitudinal axis or the axis of rotation
when looking downstream. Note that both propellers also rotate clockwise when looking
downstream. All static pressure ports are perpendicular to the nacelle surface.
Figure 54. Nacelle coordinate system.
88
5.2.1 PD1 Results of Nacelle Pressure Distribution
Nacelle surface pressure coefficients are plotted against the longitudinal position for the
three pitch angles—23°, 28°, and 33°—for several advance ratios. Results of the 3×4 LSWT and
7×10 NIAR wind tunnels are shown in Figure 55 to Figure 65. 7×10 NIAR side wall pressure
gradients are also plotted for boundary condition applications. Pressure measurements in the 3×4
LSWT are limited to 16 channels at each run; hence, only two rows of azimuth angles are measured
at the same condition (e.g., Φ = 0° and 45°, etc.). On the other hand, 7×10 NIAR results are
obtained at a single test run but only for half of the nacelle at four azimuth angles—0°, 45°, 90°,
135°—except at β0.75 = 23° and 28°, with an additional 180° and 225°, as shown in Figure 56.
Only first and last plot’s legend are displayed for the same 7×10 NIAR runs to avoid redundancy.
Each pressure port was checked prior to the test, but a few did not work properly because of clogs,
tube disconnections, or leakages. These are omitted from the presented data.
The 3×4 LSWT nacelle setup has a two-inch gap in front of the C-mount. This nacelle
surface discontinuity creates flow separation on the lower half towards the end of the nacelle, as
shown for Φ = 135° and 225°. The last two measurements downstream at Φ = 180° are omitted
for the existence of the C-mount. However, this section was sealed with a part that replicated the
original surface curvature for the 7×10 NIAR runs, although no pressure ports were added.
Pressure distribution curves appear smooth in most cases, that is, at peaks behind the
propeller due to the induced pressure by the propeller and lowest at the nacelle maximum diameter,
and they tend to increase at the pressure recovery regions. Also the pressure coefficients seem to
be axis-symmetrical on both sides of the nacelle. The pressure distribution of the nacelle surface
without a propeller is shown in Figure 64 with the spinner rotating at the same 5,000 rpm in order
to study the spinner effect. Although the 3×4 and 7×10 results are not precisely comparable, since
89
the test conditions and tunnel cross section sizes are different, they show identical behavior.
However, the 7×10 NIAR results show less separated regions, mainly because of the C-mount
location. Wall pressure gradient slopes are mostly consistent despite of the advance ratio.
Φ = 0°, β0.75 = 23° Φ = 45°, β0.75 = 23°

0.5 0.5
J=0.44 J=0.44
J=0.55 J=0.55
J=0.64 J=0.64
0.25 J=0.72 0.25 J=0.72
J=0.88 J=0.88
J=1.03 J=1.03
J=1.15 J=1.15
0 0
cpr
cpr
-0.25 -0.25
-0.5 -0.5
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
x/L x/L
Φ = 90°, β0.75 = 23° Φ = 135°, β0.75 = 23°

0.5 0.5
J=0.40 J=0.40
J=0.53 J=0.53
J=0.58 J=0.58
0.25 J=0.70 0.25 J=0.70
J=0.89 J=0.89
J=0.99 J=0.99
J=1.10 J=1.10
0 0
cpr
cpr
-0.25 -0.25
-0.5 -0.5
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
x/L x/L
Figure 55. Nacelle surface pressure distribution for PD1 at 3×4 LSWT for different Φ,
where β0.75 = 23° (continued).
90
Φ = 180°, β0.75 = 23° Φ = 225°, β0.75 = 23°
0.5 0.5
J=0.43 J=0.43
J=0.50 J=0.50
J=0.61 J=0.61
0.25 J=0.70 0.25 J=0.70
J=0.86 J=0.86
J=1.02 J=1.02
J=1.12 J=1.12
0 0
cpr
cpr
-0.25 -0.25
-0.5 -0.5
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
x/L x/L
Φ = 270°, β0.75 = 23° Φ = 315°, β0.75 = 23°

0.5 0.5
J=0.44 J=0.44
J=0.49 J=0.49
J=0.58 J=0.58
0.25 J=0.72 0.25 J=0.72
J=0.88 J=0.88
J=1.01 J=1.01
J=1.11 J=1.11
0 0
cpr
cpr
-0.25 -0.25
-0.5 -0.5
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
x/L x/L
Figure 55 (continued). Nacelle surface pressure distribution for PD1 at 3×4 LSWT
for different Φ , where β0.75 = 23°.
91
Φ = 0°, β = 23° Φ = 45°, β = 23°
0.5 0.5
J=0.45
J=0.58
J=0.68
0.25 J=0.81 0.25
J=0.98
J=1.13
J=1.32
0 0
cpr
cpr
-0.25 -0.25
-0.5 -0.5
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
x/L x/L
Φ = 90°, β = 23° Φ = 180°, β = 23°

0.5 0.5
0.25 0.25
0 0
cpr
cpr
-0.25 -0.25
-0.5 -0.5
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
x/L x/L
Figure 56. Nacelle surface pressure distribution at 7×10 NIAR for different Φ, where β0.75 = 23°
(continued).
92
Φ = 225°, β = 23° Φ = 270°, β = 23°
0.5 0.5
0.25 0.25
0 0
cpr
cpr
-0.25 -0.25
-0.5 -0.5
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
x/L x/L
Figure 56 (continued). Nacelle surface pressure distribution at 7×10 NIAR for different Φ,
where β0.75 = 23°.
North Side Wall Pressure Coeff, β = 23° South Side Wall Pressure Coeff, β = 23°
0.5 0.5
J=0.45
J=0.58
J=0.68
0.25 0.25 J=0.81
J=0.98
J=1.13
J=1.32
0 0
cpr
cpr
-0.25 -0.25
-0.5 -0.5
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
l' l'
Figure 57. Test section side wall pressure distribution at 7×10 NIAR, where β0.75 = 23°.
93
Φ = 0°, β = 28° Φ = 45°, β = 28°
0.5 0.5
J=0.39 J=0.39
J=0.49 J=0.49
J=0.61 J=0.61
0.25 J=0.72 0.25 J=0.72
J=0.89 J=0.89
J=1.03 J=1.03
J=1.13 J=1.13
0 0
cpr
cpr
-0.25 -0.25
-0.5 -0.5
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
x/L x/L
Φ = 90°, β = 28° Φ = 135°, β = 28°

0.5 0.5
J=0.38 J=0.38
J=0.54 J=0.54
J=0.61 J=0.61
0.25 J=0.70 0.25 J=0.70
J=0.88 J=0.88
J=0.99 J=0.99
J=1.14 J=1.14
0 0
cpr
cpr
-0.25 -0.25
-0.5 -0.5
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
x/L x/L
Figure 58. Nacelle surface pressure distribution at 3×4 LSWT for different Φ, where β0.75 = 28°
(continued).
94
Φ = 180°, β = 28° Φ = 225°, β = 28°
0.5 0.5
J=0.41 J=0.41
J=0.56 J=0.56
J=0.64 J=0.64
0.25 J=0.72 0.25 J=0.72
J=0.88 J=0.88
J=1.02 J=1.02
J=1.14 J=1.14
0 0
cpr
cpr
-0.25 -0.25
-0.5 -0.5
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
x/L x/L
Φ = 270°, β = 28° Φ = 315°, β = 28°

0.5 0.5
J=0.43 J=0.43
J=0.56 J=0.56
J=0.62 J=0.62
0.25 J=0.72 0.25 J=0.72
J=0.90 J=0.90
J=1.03 J=1.03
J=1.12 J=1.12
0 0
cpr
cpr
-0.25 -0.25
-0.5 -0.5
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
x/L x/L
Figure 58 (continued). Nacelle surface pressure distribution at 3×4 LSWT for different Φ,
where β0.75 = 28°.
95
Φ = 0°, β = 28° Φ = 45°, β = 28°
0.5 0.5
J=0.43
J=0.55
J=0.66
0.25 J=0.79 0.25
J=0.97
J=1.10
J=1.34
0 0
cpr
cpr
-0.25 -0.25
-0.5 -0.5
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
x/L x/L
Φ = 90°, β = 28° Φ = 135°, β = 28°

0.5 0.5
0.25 0.25
0 0
cpr
cpr
-0.25 -0.25
-0.5 -0.5
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
x/L x/L
(continued).
96
Φ = 180°, β = 28° Φ = 225°, β = 28°
0.5 0.5
0.25 0.25
0 0
cpr
cpr
-0.25 -0.25
-0.5 -0.5
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
x/L x/L
where β0.75 = 28°.
0.5 0.5
J=0.43
J=0.55
J=0.66
J=0.79
0.25 0.25
J=0.97
J=1.10
J=1.34
0 0
cpr
cpr
-0.25 -0.25
-0.5 -0.5
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
l' l'
97
Φ = 0°, β = 33° Φ = 45°, β = 33°
0.5 0.5
J=0.46 J=0.46
J=0.51 J=0.51
J=0.59 J=0.59
0.25 J=0.73 0.25 J=0.73
J=0.90 J=0.90
J=1.03 J=1.03
J=1.15 J=1.15
0 0
cpr
cpr
-0.25 -0.25
-0.5 -0.5
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
x/L x/L
Φ = 90°, β = 33° Φ = 135°, β = 33°

0.5 0.5
J=0.41 J=0.41
J=0.56 J=0.56
J=0.65 J=0.65
0.25 J=0.74 0.25 J=0.74
J=0.88 J=0.88
J=1.04 J=1.04
J=1.16 J=1.16
0 0
cpr
cpr
-0.25 -0.25
-0.5 -0.5
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
x/L x/L
(continued).
98
Φ = 180°, β = 33° Φ = 225°, β = 33°
0.5 0.5
J=0.47 J=0.47
J=0.63 J=0.63
J=0.74 J=0.74
0.25 0.25
J=0.89 J=0.89
J=1.03 J=1.03
J=1.15 J=1.15
0 0
cpr
cpr
-0.25 -0.25
-0.5 -0.5
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
x/L x/L
Φ = 270°, β = 33° Φ = 315°, β = 33°

0.5 0.5
J=0.45 J=0.45
J=0.52 J=0.52
J=0.64 J=0.64
0.25 J=0.77 0.25 J=0.77
J=0.91 J=0.91
J=1.06 J=1.06
J=1.17 J=1.17
0 0
cpr
cpr
-0.25 -0.25
-0.5 -0.5
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
x/L x/L
where β0.75 = 33°.
99
Φ = 0°, β = 33° Φ = 45°, β = 33°
0.5 0.5
J=0.46
J=0.58
J=0.67
0.25 J=0.80 0.25
J=0.97
J=1.11
J=1.35
0 0
cpr
cpr
-0.25 -0.25
-0.5 -0.5
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
x/L x/L
Φ = 90°, β = 33° Φ = 135°, β = 33°

0.5 0.5
0.25 0.25
0 0
cpr
cpr
-0.25 -0.25
-0.5 -0.5
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
x/L x/L
Figure 62. Nacelle surface pressure distribution at 7×10 NIAR for different Φ, where β0.75 = 33°.
100
0.5 0.5
J=0.46
J=0.58
J=0.67
0.25 0.25 J=0.80
J=0.97
J=1.11
J=1.35
0 0
cpr
cpr
-0.25 -0.25
-0.5 -0.5
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
l' l'
Φ = 0°, Tare (5000 rpm) Φ = 45°, Tare (5000 rpm)

0.5 0.5
J=0.46
J=0.59
J=0.69
0.25 J=0.83 0.25
J=1.02
J=1.17
J=1.43
0 0
cpr
cpr
-0.25 -0.25
-0.5 -0.5
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
x/L x/L
Figure 64. Nacelle surface pressure distribution at 7×10 NIAR for different Φ without propeller
(continued).
101
0.5 0.5
0.25 0.25
0 0
cpr
cpr
-0.25 -0.25
-0.5 -0.5
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
x/L x/L
Figure 64 (continued). Nacelle surface pressure distribution at 7×10 NIAR for different Φ
without propeller.
North Test Section Wall Pressure Coeff, Tare South Test Section Wall Pressure Coeff, Tare
0.5 0.5
J=0.46
J=0.59
J=0.69
0.25 0.25 J=0.83
J=1.02
J=1.17
J=1.43
0 0
cpr
cpr
-0.25 -0.25
-0.5 -0.5
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
l' l'
Figure 65. Test section side wall pressure distribution at 7×10 NIAR without propeller.
102
5.2.2 COMP Results of Nacelle Pressure Distribution
A similar method was used to measure the pressure distribution for the COMP blade at four
pitch angles of 15°, 20°, 25°, and 30° at 0.75R. The results are presented in Figure 66 to Figure 79.
The pressure distribution for this propeller somewhat differs from the PD1 results, mostly at the
vicinity of the maximum nacelle diameter at lower pitch angles in the 3×4 LSWT. It appears the
minimum pressure coefficients are not sensitive to the advance ratios at lower pitch angle settings
for the 3×4 LSWT results. The pressure gradient of the 7×10 NIAR test section side walls are also
plotted for boundary condition references. The pressure distribution of the nacelle surface and wall
pressure without a propeller and with the spinner rotating at the same 6,000 rpm in order to study
the spinner effect is shown in Figure 78 and Figure 79.
Φ = 0°, β = 15° Φ = 45°, β = 15°

0.5 0.5
J=0.34 J=0.34
J=0.46 J=0.46
J=0.51 J=0.51
0.25 J=0.60 0.25 J=0.60
J=0.72 J=0.72
J=0.81 J=0.81
J=0.89 J=0.89
0 0
cpr
cpr
-0.25 -0.25
-0.5 -0.5
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
x/L x/L
(continued).
103
Φ = 90°, β = 15° Φ = 135°, β = 15°
0.5 0.5
J=0.34 J=0.34
J=0.44 J=0.44
J=0.49 J=0.49
0.25 J=0.61 0.25 J=0.61
J=0.71 J=0.71
J=0.85 J=0.85
J=0.90 J=0.90
0 0
cpr
cpr
-0.25 -0.25
-0.5 -0.5
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
x/L x/L
Φ = 180°, β = 15° Φ = 225°, β = 15°

0.5 0.5
J=0.37 J=0.37
J=0.43 J=0.43
J=0.50 J=0.50
0.25 J=0.61 0.25 J=0.61
J=0.72 J=0.72
J=0.81 J=0.81
J=0.88 J=0.88
0 0
cpr
cpr
-0.25 -0.25
-0.5 -0.5
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
x/L x/L
104
Φ = 270°, β = 15° Φ = 315°, β = 15°
0.5 0.5
J=0.36 J=0.36
J=0.46 J=0.46
J=0.54 J=0.54
0.25 J=0.62 0.25 J=0.62
J=0.73 J=0.73
J=0.83 J=0.83
J=0.90 J=0.90
0 0
cpr
cpr
-0.25 -0.25
-0.5 -0.5
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
x/L x/L
where β0.75 = 15°.
Φ = 0°, β = 15° Φ = 45°, β = 15°

0.5 0.5
J=0.38
J=0.48
J=0.56
0.25 J=0.66 0.25
J=0.78
J=0.87
J=0.93
0 0
cpr
cpr
-0.25 -0.25
-0.5 -0.5
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
x/L x/L
(continued).
105
Φ = 90°, β = 15° Φ = 135°, β = 15°
0.5 0.5
0.25 0.25
cpr
0
cpr
-0.25 -0.25
-0.5 -0.5
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
x/L x/L
where β0.75 = 15°.
0.5 0.5
J=0.38
J=0.48
J=0.56
0.25 0.25 J=0.66
J=0.78
J=0.87
J=0.93
0
cpr
0
cpr
-0.25 -0.25
-0.5 -0.5
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
l' l'
106
Φ = 0°, β = 20° Φ = 45°, β = 20°
0.5 0.5
J=0.35 J=0.35
J=0.43 J=0.43
J=0.51 J=0.51
0.25 J=0.59 0.25 J=0.59
J=0.73 J=0.73
J=0.84 J=0.84
J=0.92 J=0.92
0 0
cpr
cpr
-0.25 -0.25
-0.5 -0.5
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
x/L x/L
Φ = 90°, β = 20° Φ = 135°, β = 20°

0.5 0.5
J=0.31 J=0.31
J=0.43 J=0.43
J=0.51 J=0.51
0.25 J=0.61 0.25 J=0.61
J=0.74 J=0.74
J=0.84 J=0.84
J=0.91 J=0.91
0 0
cpr
cpr
-0.25 -0.25
-0.5 -0.5
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
x/L x/L
(continued).
107
Φ = 180°, β = 20° Φ = 225°, β = 20°
0.5 0.5
J=0.35 J=0.35
J=0.44 J=0.44
J=0.50 J=0.50
0.25 J=0.60 0.25 J=0.60
J=0.73 J=0.73
J=0.85 J=0.85
J=0.92 J=0.92
0 0
cpr
cpr
-0.25 -0.25
-0.5 -0.5
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
x/L x/L
Φ = 270°, β = 20° Φ = 315°, β = 20°

0.5 0.5
J=0.38 J=0.38
J=0.46 J=0.46
J=0.51 J=0.51
0.25 J=0.63 0.25 J=0.63
J=0.75 J=0.75
J=0.85 J=0.85
J=0.93 J=0.93
0 0
cpr
cpr
-0.25 -0.25
-0.5 -0.5
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
x/L x/L
where β0.75 = 20°.
108
Φ = 0°, β = 20° Φ = 45°, β = 20°
0.5 0.5
J=0.37
J=0.48
J=0.56
0.25 J=0.67 0.25
J=0.80
J=0.89
J=1.08
0 0
cpr
cpr
-0.25 -0.25
-0.5 -0.5
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
x/L x/L
Φ = 90°, β = 20° Φ = 135°, β = 20°

0.5 0.5
0.25 0.25
0 0
cpr
cpr
-0.25 -0.25
-0.5 -0.5
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
x/L x/L
109
0.5 0.5
J=0.37
J=0.48
J=0.56
0.25 0.25 J=0.67
J=0.80
J=0.89
J=1.08
0 0
cpr
cpr
-0.25 -0.25
-0.5 -0.5
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
l' l'
Φ = 0°, β = 25° Φ = 45°, β = 25°

0.5 0.5
J=0.36 J=0.36
J=0.43 J=0.43
J=0.51 J=0.51
0.25 J=0.61 0.25 J=0.61
J=0.73 J=0.73
J=0.83 J=0.83
J=0.93 J=0.93
0 0
cpr
cpr
-0.25 -0.25
-0.5 -0.5
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
x/L x/L
(continued).
110
Φ = 90°, β = 25° Φ = 135°, β = 25°
0.5 0.5
J=0.36 J=0.36
J=0.44 J=0.44
J=0.51 J=0.51
0.25 J=0.61 0.25 J=0.61
J=0.74 J=0.74
J=0.83 J=0.83
J=0.94 J=0.94
0 0
cpr
cpr
-0.25 -0.25
-0.5 -0.5
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
x/L x/L
Φ = 180°, β = 25° Φ = 225°, β = 25°

0.5 0.5
J=0.36 J=0.36
J=0.44 J=0.44
J=0.52 J=0.52
0.25 J=0.60 0.25 J=0.60
J=0.76 J=0.76
J=0.84 J=0.84
J=0.95 J=0.95
0 0
cpr
cpr
-0.25 -0.25
-0.5 -0.5
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
x/L x/L
111
Φ = 270°, β = 25° Φ = 315°, β = 25°
0.5 0.5
J=0.35 J=0.35
J=0.46 J=0.46
J=0.54 J=0.54
0.25 J=0.61 0.25 J=0.61
J=0.76 J=0.76
J=0.86 J=0.86
J=0.95 J=0.95
0 0
cpr
cpr
-0.25 -0.25
-0.5 -0.5
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
x/L x/L
where β0.75 = 25°.
Φ = 0°, β = 25° Φ = 45°, β = 25°

0.5 0.5
J=0.37
J=0.47
J=0.55
0.25 J=0.66 0.25
J=0.80
J=0.91
J=1.07
0 0
cpr
cpr
-0.25 -0.25
-0.5 -0.5
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
x/L x/L
(continued).
112
Φ = 90°, β = 25° Φ = 135°, β = 25°
0.5 0.5
0.25 0.25
0 0
cpr
cpr
-0.25 -0.25
-0.5 -0.5
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
x/L x/L
where β0.75 = 25°.
0.5 0.5
J=0.37
J=0.47
J=0.55
0.25 0.25 J=0.66
J=0.80
J=0.91
J=1.07
0 0
cpr
cpr
-0.25 -0.25
-0.5 -0.5
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
l' l'
113
Φ = 0°, β = 30° Φ = 45°, β = 30°
0.5 0.5
J=0.36 J=0.36
J=0.43 J=0.43
J=0.51 J=0.51
0.25 J=0.61 0.25 J=0.61
J=0.75 J=0.75
J=0.86 J=0.86
J=0.96 J=0.96
0 0
cpr
cpr
-0.25 -0.25
-0.5 -0.5
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
x/L x/L
Φ = 90°, β = 30° Φ = 135°, β = 30°

0.5 0.5
J=0.36 J=0.36
J=0.45 J=0.45
J=0.52 J=0.52
0.25 J=0.61 0.25 J=0.61
J=0.74 J=0.74
J=0.86 J=0.86
J=0.95 J=0.95
0 0
cpr
cpr
-0.25 -0.25
-0.5 -0.5
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
x/L x/L
(continued).
114
Φ = 180°, β = 30° Φ = 225°, β = 30°
0.5 0.5
J=0.35 J=0.35
J=0.46 J=0.46
J=0.52 J=0.52
0.25 J=0.60 0.25 J=0.60
J=0.73 J=0.73
J=0.86 J=0.86
J=0.96 J=0.96
0 0
cpr
cpr
-0.25 -0.25
-0.5 -0.5
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
x/L x/L
Φ = 270°, β = 30° Φ = 315°, β = 30°

0.5 0.5
J=0.35 J=0.35
J=0.46 J=0.46
J=0.53 J=0.53
0.25 J=0.62 0.25 J=0.62
J=0.76 J=0.76
J=0.86 J=0.86
J=0.97 J=0.97
0 0
cpr
cpr
-0.25 -0.25
-0.5 -0.5
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
x/L x/L
where β0.75 = 30°.
115
Φ = 0°, β = 30° Φ = 45°, β = 30°
0.5 0.5
J=0.38
J=0.48
J=0.56
0.25 J=0.67 0.25
J=0.81
J=0.94
J=1.11
0
cpr
0
cpr
-0.25 -0.25
-0.5 -0.5
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
x/L x/L
Φ = 90°, β = 30° Φ = 135°, β = 30°

0.5 0.5
0.25 0.25
0 0
cpr
cpr
-0.25 -0.25
-0.5 -0.5
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
x/L x/L
116
0.5 0.5
J=0.38
J=0.48
J=0.56
0.25 0.25 J=0.67
J=0.81
J=0.94
J=1.11
0 0
cpr
cpr
-0.25 -0.25
-0.5 -0.5
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
l' l'

0.5 0.5
J=0.44
J=0.62
J=0.75
0.25 J=0.89 0.25
J=1.02
J=1.15
J=1.46
0 0
cpr
cpr
-0.25 -0.25
-0.5 -0.5
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
x/L x/L
Figure 78. Nacelle surface pressure distribution at 7×10 NIAR without propeller (continued).
117
0.5 0.5
0.25 0.25
0
cpr
cpr
-0.25 -0.25
-0.5 -0.5
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
x/L x/L
Figure 78 (continued). Nacelle surface pressure distribution at 7×10 NIAR without propeller.
North Side Wall Pressure Coeff, Tare South Side Wall Pressure Coeff, Tare
0.5 0.5
J=0.44
J=0.62
J=0.75
0.25 0.25 J=0.89
J=1.02
J=1.15
J=1.46
0
cpr
0
cpr
-0.25 -0.25
-0.5 -0.5
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
l' l'
Figure 79. Test section side wall pressure distribution at 7×10 NIAR without propeller.
118
5.3 Wake Survey
A five-hole probe traverse system, as described in the Chapter 4, was utilized to perform
the propeller wake survey in the 7×10 NIAR wind tunnel. Slipstream velocities of both propellers
were examined at a certain test condition for each propeller at three azimuth angles of 0°, 90°, and
270° and three nacelle longitudinal locations of x/L = 0.02, 0.49, and 0.843. The PD1 blade pitch
angle was set at β0.75 = 23° and the freestream velocity at 67 ft/s and 5,000 rpm, i.e., an advance
ratio of 0.804. Results are shown in Figure 80 to Figure 88. Swirl angle plots for PD1 at three
different nacelle longitudinal locations and three azimuth angles are shown in Figure 89. The
COMP pitch angle was set to β0.75 = 20°, U = 67 ft/s, and 6,000 rpm, i.e., J = 0.670. Results for the
COMP are shown in Figure 90 to Figure 98. Slipstream velocities were obtained on x-y-z
components of the tunnel Cartesian coordinate system and transferred into the polar coordinate
system, as shown previously in Figure 54. Results are plotted in non-dimensional form by dividing
the velocity components into the freestream velocity magnitude. Also, projections of the two
velocity vectors are plotted; one being the superimposed axial and radial components and the other
being the tangential and radial velocity components. The PD1 first run was repeated to assess
system repeatability. Swirl angles plots for the COMP at three different nacelle longitudinal
locations and three azimuth angles are shown in Figure 99.
Vortex theory analysis results show that blade elements from the root to 0.7R are at high
angles of attack for the PD1 propeller for the same test condition. Axial velocity component results
show a drop in magnitude immediately behind the propeller that may suggest a partial stall in this
region. The velocity magnitude gradually transfers into a uniform distribution at the end of the
nacelle. The maximum axial velocity component of 1.3 times larger than the freestream velocity
was detected at the nacelle mid-section. The COMP was at lower angles of attack for the entire
119
blade sections, according to results of the vortex theory analysis. A relatively uniform velocity for
this blade was measured with the maximum axial velocity component a little less than 1.3 times
larger than the freestream. Different azimuth angle results show, on average, a symmetrical flow
distribution around the nacelle over a period of time.
Φ = 0°, x/L = 0.02, PD1

(ux-U)/U
ut/U
1.5 ur/U
r/R
0.5
0
-0.2 0 0.2 0.4
v/ U
Figure 80. Slipstream velocity components for PD1 at Φ = 0°, x/L = 0.02, where β0.75 = 23°,
U = 67 ft/s, 5,000 rpm (7×10 NIAR).
120
Φ = 90°, x/L = 0.02, PD1
(ux-U)/U
ut/U
1.5 ur/U
r/R
0.5
0
-0.2 0 0.2 0.4
v/ U
U = 67 ft/s, 5,000 rpm (7×10 NIAR).
Φ = 270°, x/L = 0.02, PD1

(ux-U)/U
ut/U
1.5 ur/U
1
r/R
0.5
0
-0.2 0 0.2 0.4
v/ U
U = 67 ft/s, 5,000 rpm (7×10 NIAR).
121
Φ = 0°, x/L = 0.49, PD1
(ux-U)/U
ut/U
1.5 ur/U
r/R
0.5
0
-0.2 0 0.2 0.4
v/ U
Figure 83. Slipstream velocity components for PD1 at Φ = 0°, x/L = 0.49 where β0.75 = 23°,
U = 67 ft/s, 5,000 rpm (7×10 NIAR).
Φ = 90°, x/L = 0.49, PD1

(ux-U)/U
ut/U
1.5 ur/U
1
r/R
0.5
0
-0.2 0 0.2 0.4
v/ U
U = 67 ft/s, 5,000 rpm (7×10 NIAR).
122
Φ = 270°, x/L = 0.49, PD1
(ux-U)/U
ut/U
1.5 ur/U
r/R
0.5
0
-0.2 0 0.2 0.4
v/ U
U = 67 ft/s, 5,000 rpm (7×10 NIAR).
Φ = 0°, x/L = 0.843, PD1

(ux-U)/U
ut/U
1.5 ur/U
1
r/R
0.5
0
-0.2 0 0.2 0.4
v/ U
U = 67 ft/s, 5,000 rpm (7×10 NIAR).
123
Φ = 90°, x/L = 0.843, PD1
(ux-U)/U
ut/U
1.5 ur/U
r/R
0.5
0
-0.2 0 0.2 0.4
v/ U
U = 67 ft/s, 5,000 rpm (7×10 NIAR).
Φ = 270°, x/L = 0.843, PD1

(ux-U)/U
ut/U
1.5 ur/U
1
r/R
0.5
0
-0.2 0 0.2 0.4
v/ U
U = 67 ft/s, 5,000 rpm (7×10 NIAR).
124
x/L = 0.02, PD1 x/L = 0.49, PD1 x/L = 0.843, PD1
Φ = 0° Φ = 0° Φ = 0°
Φ = 90° Φ = 90° Φ = 90°
1.5 Φ = 270° 1.5 Φ = 270° 1.5 Φ = 270°
1 1 1
r/R
r/R
r/R
0.5 0.5 0.5
0 0 0
-4 0 4 8 12 -4 0 4 8 12 -4 0 4 8 12
Swirl Angle ε (deg) Swirl Angle ε (deg) Swirl Angle ε (deg)
Figure 89. Swirl angle at different longitudinal locations and azimuth angles for PD1,
where β0.75 = 23°, U = 67 ft/s, 5,000 rpm (7×10 NIAR).
125
Φ = 0°, x/L = 0.02, COMP
(ux-U)/U
ut/U
1.5 ur/U
r/R
0.5
0
-0.2 0 0.2 0.4
v/ U
Figure 90. Slipstream velocity components for COMP at Φ = 0°, x/L = 0.02, where β0.75 = 20°,
U = 67 ft/s, 6,000 rpm (7×10 NIAR).
Φ = 90°, x/L = 0.02, COMP
(ux-U)/U
1.5 ut/U
ur/U
1
r/R
0.5
0
-0.2 0 0.2 0.4
v/ U
U = 67 ft/s, 6,000 rpm (7×10 NIAR).
126
Φ = 270°, x/L = 0.02, COMP
(ux-U)/U
ut/U
1.5 ur/U
r/R
0.5
0
-0.2 0 0.2 0.4
v/ U
U = 67 ft/s, 6,000 rpm (7×10 NIAR).
Φ = 0°, x/L = 0.49, COMP
(ux-U)/U
ut/U
1.5 ur/U
1
r/R
0.5
0
-0.2 0 0.2 0.4
v/ U
U = 67 ft/s, 6,000 rpm (7×10 NIAR).
127
Φ = 90°, x/L = 0.49, COMP
(ux-U)/U
ut/U
1.5
ur/U
r/R
0.5
0
-0.2 0 0.2 0.4
v/ U
U = 67 ft/s, 6,000 rpm (7×10 NIAR).
Φ = 270°, x/L = 0.49, COMP
(ux-U)/U
ut/U
1.5
ur/U
1
r/R
0.5
0
-0.2 0 0.2 0.4
v/ U
U = 67 ft/s, 6,000 rpm (7×10 NIAR).
128
Φ = 0°, x/L = 0.843, COMP
(ux-U)/U
ut/U
1.5
ur/U
r/R
0.5
0
-0.2 0 0.2 0.4
v/ U
U = 67 ft/s, 6,000 rpm (7×10 NIAR).
Φ = 90°, x/L = 0.843, COMP

(ux-U)/U
ut/U
1.5 ur/U
1
r/R
0.5
0
-0.2 0 0.2 0.4
v/ U
U = 67 ft/s, 6,000 rpm (7×10 NIAR).
129
Φ = 270°, x/L = 0.843, COMP
(ux-U)/U
ut/U
1.5 ur/U
r/R
0.5
0
-0.2 0 0.2 0.4
v/ U
Figure 98. Slipstream velocity components for COMP at Φ = 270°, x/L = 0.843, where β0.75 =
20°, U = 67 ft/s, 6,000 rpm (7×10 NIAR).
130
x/L = 0.02, COMP x/L = 0.49, COMP x/L = 0.843, COMP
Φ = 0° Φ = 0° Φ = 0°
Φ = 90° Φ = 90° Φ = 90°
1.5 Φ = 270° 1.5 Φ = 270° 1.5 Φ = 270°
1 1 1
r/R
r/R
r/R
0.5 0.5 0.5
0 0 0
-4 0 4 8 12 -4 0 4 8 12 -4 0 4 8 12
Swirl Angle ε (deg) Swirl Angle ε (deg) Swirl Angle ε (deg)
Figure 99. Swirl angle at different longitudinal locations and azimuth angles for COMP,
where β0.75 = 20°, U = 67 ft/s, 6,000 rpm (7×10 NIAR).
5.4 Nacelle-Spinner Effect
Effects of the nacelle and spinner on the propeller performance are studied in this section.
Thrust and power coefficients plus efficiency curves, configurations with and without nacelle-
spinner are compared for different pitch angles on PD1 propeller at the 3×4 LSWT in Figure 100
to Figure 102. Similar comparisons are made for PD1 propeller results obtained at the 7×10 NIAR
wind tunnel in Figure 103 to Figure 105. This study shows that propeller performance drops
significantly at higher advance ratios due to drag from the hub and other exposed parts. The
maximum efficiency decreases 10 ~ 15% on average for all pitch angle settings. Likewise, the
COMP propeller data are compared in Figure 106 to Figure 109 for the 7×10 NIAR tunnel only,
since the data was similar for both tunnels. No-spinner no-nacelle configurations are presented as
nsnn in these figures.
131
0.3 1
CT
CT nsnn
CP
0.24 0.8
CP nsnn
eta
eta nsnn
0.18 0.6
CT ,CP
η
0.12 0.4
23°@0.75R
0.06 0.2
0 0
0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2
J
Figure 100. Nacelle-spinner effect on PD1 β0.75 = 23° performance tested at 3×4 LSWT.
0.3 1
CT
CT nsnn
CP
0.24 CP nsnn 0.8
eta
eta nsnn
0.18 0.6
CT ,CP
0.12 0.4
28°@0.75R
0.06 0.2
0 0
0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2
J
132
0.3 1
CT
CT nsnn
CP
0.24 CP nsnn 0.8
eta
eta nsnn
0.18 0.6
CT ,CP
η
0.12 0.4
33°@0.75R
0.06 0.2
0 0
0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2
J
0.3 1
CT
CT nsnn
CP
0.24 CP nsnn 0.8
eta
eta nsnn
0.18 0.6
CT ,CP
0.12 0.4
23°@0.75R
0.06 0.2
0 0
0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2
Figure 103. Nacelle-spinner effect on PD1 β0.75 = 23° performance tested at 7×10 NIAR.
133
0.3 1
0.24 0.8
CT
CT nsnn
0.18 CP 0.6
CP nsnn
CT ,CP
eta
η
eta nsnn
0.12 0.4
28°@0.75R
0.06 0.2
0 0
0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2
Figure 104. Nacelle-spinner effect on PD1 β0.75 = 28° performance tested at 7×10 NIAR.
0.3 1
0.24 0.8
0.18 0.6
CT ,CP
0.12 0.4
33°@0.75R CT
CT nsnn
CP
0.06 0.2
CP nsnn
Series6
Series7
0 0
0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2
134
0.3 1
CT
CT nsnn
CP
0.24 0.8
CP nsnn
eta
eta nsnn
0.18 0.6
CT ,CP
η
0.12 0.4
15°@0.75R
0.06 0.2
0 0
0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2
J
Figure 106. Nacelle-spinner effect on COMP β0.75 = 15° performance tested at 7×10 NIAR.
0.3 1
CT
CT nsnn
CP
0.24 CP nsnn 0.8
eta
eta nsnn
0.18 0.6
CT ,CP
0.12 0.4
20°@0.75R
0.06 0.2
0 0
0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2
J
135
0.3 1
CT
CT nsnn
CP
0.24 CP nsnn 0.8
eta
eta nsnn
0.18 0.6
CT ,CP
η
0.12 0.4
25°@0.75R
0.06 0.2
0 0
0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2
J
0.3 1
CT
CT nsnn
CP
0.24 CP nsnn 0.8
eta
eta nsnn
0.18 0.6
CT ,CP
30°@0.75R
0.12 0.4
0.06 0.2
0 0
0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2
J
136
5.5 Dynamic Tare
While the propeller generates thrust, the presence of the spinner by itself causes drag,
which is also measured by the load cell. These two forces act against each other, unless the spinner
is designed to have a positive effect on the propeller performance. Here, to separate the propeller
thrust value, the individual spinner/hub drag was measured and added to the thrust value acquired
with the combination of the propeller and with/without nacelle as the dynamic tare. Results for the
dynamic tare are shown in Figure 110 for configurations with spinner and nacelle in both tunnels
at 5,000 and 6,000 rpms. Similar tare results are presented in Figure 111 for no-spinner no-nacelle
configurations. The data is shown as drag coefficient against advance ratio, based on propeller
diameter and revolution speed, as well as drag versus tunnel dynamic pressure. Finally, the trends
are estimated and given in equations that can be interpolated to the corresponding test condition.
Results show slightly different drag between the two tunnels, which may explain the thrust and
power coefficient discrepancies, especially in the PD1 performance plots shown previously in
Figure 44. Note that dynamic tare for torque caused by spinner and motor shaft power is not
presented, since it is less than 1% of the readings and therefore considered negligible. Figure 112
to Figure 114 show PD1 results in which the dynamic tare is applied to the thrust measurement
and as a result to the efficiency curves for the 3×4 LSWT. The same method is used for the two
configurations, with and without the spinner-nacelle. Interestingly, results for both configurations
are identical to each other, which may refer to actual propeller performance. In another words, the
results exclude the effect of spinner/hub and nacelle. The same comparisons are made for COMP
results, as shown in Figure 115 to Figure 118. Unlike the PD1 results, it seems that the presence
of the spinner-nacelle has positive effect on the COMP thrust and as a result on the efficiency. In
137
addition, vortex theory analysis results are added and compared, showing a reasonable match with
efficiency curves, and thrust and power coefficients when the propeller is lightly loaded.
0.024
3x4 5000 rpm
7x10 5000 rpm
7x10 6000 rpm
0.018
y = 2.94E-03x2 + 8.43E-04x + 3.80E-03

R² = 9.96E-01 (7x10 6000rpm)
0.012
CD
y = 2.58E-03x2 + 2.33E-03x + 3.76E-03

R² = 9.98E-01 (7x10 5000rpm)
0.006
y = 2.19E-03x2 + 9.02E-05x + 3.93E-03

R² = 9.98E-01 (3x4 5000rpm)
0
0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2
J
0.5
3x4 5000 rpm
7x10 5000 rpm
0.4 7x10 6000 rpm
0.3
D (lbf)
y = -6.58E-05x2 + 8.40E-03x + 8.35E-02

R² = 9.99E-01 (7x10 6000rpm)
0.2
y = -1.91E-04x2 + 1.09E-02x + 6.11E-02
R² = 9.99E-01 (7x10 5000rpm)
0.1
y = -2.48E-05x2 + 4.77E-03x + 6.07E-02
R² = 9.99E-01 (3x4 5000rpm)
0
0 5 10 15 20 25
q (psf)
Figure 110. Dynamic tare for spinner-nacelle configurations in loads and coefficient forms
and corresponding trend line equations.
138
0.024
y = 1.57E-02x2 + 3.34E-03x - 1.31E-03

R² = 1.00E+00 (3x4 nsnn 5000rpm) 3x4 nsnn 5000 rpm
0.018 7x10 nsnn 6000 rpm
0.012
CD
y = 1.97E-02x2 - 3.40E-03x - 2.91E-04

R² = 9.99E-01 (7x10 nsnn 6000rpm)
0.006
0
0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2
J
0.5
y = -3.96E-04x2 + 4.07E-02x - 1.36E-02
R² = 1.00E+00 (3x4 nsnn 5000rpm)
3x4 nsnn 5000 rpm
0.4
7x10 nsnn 6000 rpm
0.3
D (lbf)
0.2 y = 1.84E-04x2 + 3.15E-02x - 2.05E-02

R² = 9.98E-01 (7x10 nsnn 6000rpm)
0.1
0
0 5 10 15 20 25
q (psf)
Figure 111. Dynamic tare for no-spinner no-nacelle (nsnn) configurations in loads and coefficient
forms, and corresponding trend line equations.
139
0.3 1
0.24 0.8
CT Vortex
0.18 CP Vortex 0.6
CT D
CT ,CP
CT D nsnn
η
CP
CP nsnn
0.12 eta D 0.4
eta D nsnn
eta Vortex
23°@0.75R
0.06 0.2
0 0
0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2
J
Figure 112. Dynamic tare results (“D”) for configurations with and without spinner-nacelle for
PD1 β0.75 = 23° at 3×4 LSWT compared with vortex theory analysis results.
0.3 1
0.24 0.8
CT Vortex
CP Vortex
CT D
0.18 CT D nsnn 0.6
CP
CT ,CP
CP nsnn
η
eta D
eta D nsnn
0.12 eta Vortex 0.4
28°@0.75R
0.06 0.2
0 0
0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2
J
140
0.3 1
0.24 0.8
0.18 0.6
CT ,CP
η
0.12 0.4
CT Vortex
CP Vortex
CT D
33°@0.75R CT D nsnn
0.06 CP 0.2
CP nsnn
eta D
eta D nsnn
eta Vortex
0 0
0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2
J
0.3 1
CT Vortex
CP Vortex
CT D
0.24 CT D nsnn
0.8
CP
CP nsnn
eta D
0.18 eta D nsnn 0.6
eta Vortex
CT ,CP
0.12 0.4
15°@0.75R
0.06 0.2
0 0
0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2
J
COMP β0.75 = 15° at 7×10 NIAR compared with vortex theory analysis results.
141
0.3 1
CT Vortex
CP Vortex
CT D
0.24 CT D nsnn 0.8
CP
CP nsnn
eta D
eta D nsnn
0.18 eta Vortex 0.6
CT ,CP
η
0.12 0.4
20°@0.75R
0.06 0.2
0 0
0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2
J
Figure 116. Dynamic tared results (“D”) for configurations with and without spinner-nacelle for
0.3 1
CT Vortex
CP Vortex
CT D
0.24 CT D nsnn 0.8
CP
CP nsnn
eta D
eta D nsnn
0.18 eta Vortex 0.6
CT ,CP
0.12 0.4
25°@0.75R
0.06 0.2
0 0
0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2
J
Figure 117. Dynamic tared results (“D”) for configurations with and without spinner nacelle for
142
0.3 1
0.24 0.8
CT Vortex
0.18 CP Vortex 0.6
CT D
CT ,CP
CT D nsnn
η
CP
CP nsnn
0.12 eta D 0.4
eta D nsnn
eta Vortex
0.06 0.2
30°@0.75R
0 0
0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2
J
Figure 118. Dynamic tared results (“D”) for configurations with and without spinner-nacelle for
143
CHAPTER 6
CONCLUSIONS
This study provides details of propeller and all other geometric descriptions, corresponding
experimental data and boundary conditions that are necessary for the validation of small propeller
analysis. Errors and uncertainties in instrumentation and model fabrications have been identified
and introduced. Traditional test results, such as thrust and power coefficients along with efficiency
curves as a function of advance ratio for two different propellers, at different pitch angles are
presented. Two separate wind tunnel results were compared in order to study any bias in facility
or individual data acquisition system. Sensitivity study of the performance to a range of rpm at
certain pitch settings for both propellers was presented. Nacelle surface pressures at eight azimuth
angles and eight axial locations were measured. A propeller wake survey at a certain test conditions
for both propellers were conducted at three different azimuth angles and three axial locations. The
nacelle-spinner effect was also demonstrated. Finally, spinner/hub drag effect was excluded from
the data by applying the dynamic tare, to measure the propeller isolated performance, and plotted
against the vortex theory predictions.
Comparison results between the two tunnels showed about 5% discrepancy in PD1 data
with higher thrust and power coefficients at the 7×10 NIAR. Overall, data for the COMP matched
well for both tunnels. Overall nacelle surface pressure distribution was consistent and coherent
between tunnels. Wake survey results for PD1 at the vicinity of the propeller indicated a possible
flow separation at the root to mid-section of the blade. The propeller with both spinner and nacelle
performed 10 ~ 15% better than without covering configurations, mainly because of the hub drag.
Finally, dynamic tared results are compared to show the propeller performance excluding the
spinner/hub and nacelle effect. These results matched well and also with the vortex theory analysis
144
for the PD1 propeller. However, dynamic tared results for the COMP had better efficiency when
with spinner-nacelle configurations than no-spinner no-nacelle ones. Possibly, the spinner and the
nacelle had positive interactions on the COMP propeller performance. Remarkably, vortex theory
results agreed especially well for efficiency curves with no-spinner no-nacelle dynamic tared
results which also supports this argument.
Propeller profile coordinates along with blade, spinner, and nacelle geometry information
are available in Appendix A. Complete data tables of the 7×10 NIAR results are also presented
numerically in Appendix B. Additional data or supplemental geometry descriptions (CAD file,
etc.) are also available upon request via email at axghoddoussi@wichita.edu or
scott.miller@wichita.edu.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Additional tests would be advantageous for a sweep of yaw and nose pitch or system angles
of attack. However, system structural and aeroelastic analyses need to be performed to assure the
safety of the test. Also, flow visualization would be a plus but not necessary for validation
purposes. Although particle image velocimetry can be a great addition to the database, extensive
time and tunnel capabilities are required which was not the priority of this project.
145
REFERENCES
146
REFERENCES
[1] F. E. Weick, Aircraft Propeller Design, 1st ed., McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1930.
[2] E. Torenbeek and H. Wittenberg, Flight Physics: Essentials of Aeronautical Disciplines

and Technology, with Historical Notes, Springer, 2009.
[3] H. Zimmer, R. Hoffmann, and K. H. Horstmann, "Investigation of Modern General

Aviation Propellers," AGARD Conference Proceedings of Aerodynamics and Acoustics of
Propellers, vol. 366(16), pp. 1-14, 1984.
[4] H. C. Watts, The Design of Screw Propellers for Aircraft, Longmans Green and Co., 1920.
[5] B. W. McCormick, Aerodynamics, Aeronautics, and Flight Mechanics, 2nd ed., John Wiley
& Sons, Inc., 1995.
[6] W. J. M. Rankine, "On the Mechanical Principles of the Action of Propellers," Trans. Inst.
Naval Architects vol. 6(13), pp. 13-39, 1865.
[7] R. E. Froude, "On the Part Played in Propulsion by Differences of Fluid Pressure," Trans.
Inst. Naval Architects, vol. 30, p. 390, 1889.
[8] S. Drzewiecki, "Du Choix des Elements Determinant les Helices Propulsives Permettant
leur Facile Comparaison Entre Elles," Bulletin de L’Association Technique Maritime, vol.
12, 1901.
[9] Q. R. Wald, "The Aerodynamics of Propellers," Progress in Aerospace Sciences, vol. 42(2),
pp. 85-128, 2006.
[10] F. E. Weick, "Simplified Propeller Design for Low-Powered Airplanes," NACA TN-212,
1925.
[11] L. Prandtl, "Applications of Modern Hydrodynamics to Aeronautics," NACA Report No.

116, 1923.
[12] A. Betz, "The Theory of the Screw Propellers," NACA TN-83, 1921.
[13] S. Goldstein, "On the Vortex Theory of Screw Propellers," Proceedings of the Royal
Society, vol. 123(792), pp. 440-65, 1929.
[14] C. N. H. Lock, R. C. Pankhurst, and J. F. C. Conn, "Strip Theory Method of Calculation

for Airscrews on High-Speed Aeroplanes," ARC Report No. 2035, 1945.
[15] T. Theodorsen, "The Theory of Propellers I-Determination of the Circulation Function and
the Mass Coefficient for Dual-Rotating Propellers," NACA Report No. 775, 1944.
147
REFERENCES (continued)
[16] T. Theodorsen, "The Theory of Propellers II-Method for Calculating the Axial Interference
Velocity," NACA Report No. 776, 1944.
[17] T. Theodorsen, "The Theory of Propellers III—The Slipstream Contraction with Numerical
Values for Two-Blade and Four-Blade Propellers," NACA Report No. 777, 1944.
[18] T. Theodorsen, "The Theory of Propeller IV-Thrust, Energy, and Efficiency Formulas for
Single- and Dual-Rotating Propellers with Ideal Circulation Distribution," NACA Report
No. 778, 1944.
[19] J. L. Crigler, "Application of Theodorsen's Theory of Propeller Design," NACA TR-924,

1949.
[20] C. N. Adkins and R. H. Liebeck, "Design of Optimum Propellers," Journal of Propulsion

and Power, vol. 10(5), pp. 676-82, 1994.
[21] E. E. Larrabee, "Practical Design of Minimum Induced Loss Propellers," 790585,

presented at Society of Automotive Engineers, Business Aircraft Meeting and Exposition,
Wichita, KS, April, 1979.
[22] M. Hepperle. (2003). JavaProp. Available: http://www.mh-

aerotools.de/airfoils/javaprop.htm [cited on 3/14/2014].
[23] J. M. Bousquet and P. Gardarein, "Recent Improvements in Propeller Aerodynamic

Computations," AIAA 2000-4124, 18th Applied Aerodynamics Conference, Denver, CO,
August 14-17, 2000.
[24] M. Ol, C. Zeune, and M. Logan, "Analytical-Experimental Comparison for Small Electric
Unmanned Air Vehicle Propellers," AIAA 2008-7345, presented at 26th AIAA Applied
Aerodynamics Conference, Honolulu, HI, August 18-21, 2008.
[25] T. Mautner and M. Gillcrist, "Obtaining the Velocity Field Required for the Calculation of
Propeller Unsteady Forces Using 'Traditional' Approximate Methods and CFD," AIAA 92-
0520, presented at 30th Aerospace Science Meeting & Exhibit, Reno, NV, January 6-9
1992.
[26] D. J. Strash, D. A. Lednicer, and T. D. Rubin, "Analysis of Propeller-Induced Aerodynamic

Effects," AIAA 98-2414, presented at 16th AIAA Applied Aerodynamics Conference,
Albuquerque, NM, June 15-18, 1998.
[27] F. J. Boyle, M. P. O. Flaherty, and J. A. Eaton, "Comparison of PIV Measurements with

CFD Predictions for a High Speed Propeller," AIAA-99-2387, presented at 35th
AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference and Exhibit, Los Angeles, CA,
June 20-24, 1999.
148
[28] A. W. Stuermer, "Unsteady CFD Simulation of Propeller Installation Effects," AIAA 2006-
4969, presented at 42nd AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference & Exhibit,
Sacramento, CA, July 9-12, 2006.
[29] W. S. Westmoreland, R. W. Tramel, and J. Barber, "Modeling Propeller Flow-Fields Using

CFD," AIAA 2008-402, presented at 46th AIAA Aerospace Science Meeting and Exhibit,
Reno, NV, January 7-10, 2008.
[30] B. A. Moffitt, J. Joo, P. Bowles, B. Y. Min, and B. Wake, "Subscale Modeling and Wind
Tunnel Testing of Propellers," AIAA 2013-499, presented at 51st AIAA Aerospace
Sciences Meeting including the New Horizons Forum and Aerospace Exposition,
Grapevine, TX, January 7-10, 2013.
[31] L. P. Ruiz-Calavera and D. Perdones-Diaz, "CFD Computation of In-plane Propeller Shaft

Loads," AIAA 2013-3798, presented at 49th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint
PropulsionConference, San Jose, CA, July 14-17, 2013.
[32] E. W. M. Roosenboom, A. Stürmer, and A. Schröder, "Advanced Experimental and

Numerical Validation and Analysis of Propeller Slipstream Flows," Journal of Aircraft, vol.
47(1), pp. 284-291, 2010.
[33] A. Thom and K. Duraisamy, "Computational Investigation of Unsteadiness in Propeller

Wake-Wing Interactions," Journal of Aircraft, vol. 50(3), pp. 985-988, 2013.
[34] J. G. Marvin, "Accuracy Requirements and Benchmark Experiments for CFD Validation,"
ARC Report No. 100087, 1988.
[35] W. L. Oberkampf and T. G. Trucano, "Verification and Validation in Computational Fluid

Dynamics," Progress in Aerospace Sciences, vol. 38, pp. 209-272, 2002.
[36] B. A. Moffitt, T. H. Bradley, D. E. Parekh, and D. Mavris, "Validation of Vortex Propeller

Theory for UAV Design with Uncertainty Analysis," AIAA-2008-406, presented at 46th
AIAA Aerospace Science Meeting and Exhibit, Reno, NV, January 7-10, 2008.
[37] J. B. Brandt and M. S. Selig, "Propeller Performance Data at Low Reynolds Numbers,"
AIAA 2011-1255, presented at 49th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting, Orlando, FL,
January 4-7, 2011.
[38] T. Theodorsen, G. W. Stickle, and M. J. Brevoort, "Characteristics of Six Propeller

including the High-Speed Range," NACA Report No. 594, 1937.
[39] E. P. Hartman and D. Biermann, "The Aerodynamic Characteristics of Full-Scale

Propellers Having 2, 3, and 4 Blades of Clark Y and R.A.F. 6 Airfoil Sections," NACA TR-
640, 1938.
149
[40] D. Biermann and E. Hartman, "Test of Five Full-Scale Propellers in the Presence of a
Radial and a Liquid-Cooled Engine Nacelle, Including Tests of Two Spinners," NACA TR-
642, 1938.
[41] I. Samuelsson, "Low Speed Wind Tunnel Investigation of Propeller Slipstream

Aerodynamic Effects on Different Nacelle/Wing Combinations Part 1," FFA TN 1987-22,
Stockholm, 1987.
[42] I. Samuelsson, "Low Speed Wind Tunnel Investigation of Propeller Slipstream

Aerodynamic Effects on Different Nacelle/Wing Combinations Part 2," FFA TN 1990-24,
Stockholm, 1990.
[43] F. X. Caradonna and C. Tung, "Experimental and Analytical Studies of a Model Helicopter
Rotor in Hover," NASA TM-81232, 1981.
[44] K. Kushman, "Quality Assessment for Wind Tunnel Testings," AGARD AR-304, 1994.
[45] M. P. Merchant and L. S. Miller, "Propeller Performance Measurement for Low Reynolds
Number UAV Applications," AIAA 2006-1127, presented at 44th Aerospace Science
Meeting and Exhibit, Reno, NV, January 9-12, 2006.
[46] D. M. Somers and M. D. Maughmer, "Theoretical Aerodynamic Analyses of Six Airfoils

for Use on Small Wind Turbines," NREL/SR-500-33295, National Renewable Energy
Laboratory, 2002.
[47] R. J. McGhee, B. S. Walker, and B. F. Millard, "Experimental Results for the Eppler 387
Airfoil at Low Reynolds Numbers in the Langley Low-Turbulence Pressure Tunnel,"
NASA TM-4062, Langley Research Center, Hampton VA, 1988.
[48] C. A. Lyon, A. P. Broeren, P. Giguère, A. Gopalarathnam, and S. M. Selig, Summary of

Low-Speed Airfoil Data, vol. 3, SoarTech Publications, Virginia Beach, VA, 1998.
[49] M. S. Selig and B. D. McGranahan, "Wind Tunnel Aerodynamic Tests of Six Airfoils for
Use on Small Wind Turbines," NREL/SR-500-34515, National Renewable Energy
Laboratory, 2004.
[50] G. A. Williamson, B. D. McGranahan, B. A. Broughton, R. W. Deters, J. B. Brandt, and M.

S. Selig, Summary of Low-Speed Airfoil Data, vol. 5, University of Illinois at Urbana-
Champaign, 2012.
[51] R. Eppler, Airfoil Design and Data, Springer-Verlag, 1990.
[52] M. Kintel, OpenSCAD, The Programmers Solid 3D CAD Modeller, 2004. Available:
http://www.openscad.org/
150
[53] H. Glauert, "Wind Tunnel Interference on Wings, Bodies, and Airscrews," R&M No. 1566,
1933.
[54] M. P. Merchant, "Propeller performance measurement for low Reynolds number unmanned
aerial vehicle applications," M.S. Thesis, Wichita State University, 2005.
[55] Aeroprobe (Version 3.1 June, 2010), Five-Hole Pitch+Yaw Probe Manual. Available:
https://recuv-
ops.colorado.edu/attachments/download/2/PitchYaw%20Probe%20Manual%20v3.1.pdf
[cited on 11/1/2015]
[56] A. Holup, N. Templon, and B. Buerge, "Effects of Low Subsonic Wind Tunnel Model
Hardware Surface Treatments on Drag," AIAA 2015-1565, presented at 53rd AIAA
Aerospace Sciences Meeting, Kissimmee, FL, January 5-9, 2015.
[57] J. P. Holman, Experimental Methods for Engineers, 6th ed., McGraw Hill, 1994.
[58] G. Ananda. (Version 3, 2015). UIUC Propeller Database. Available: http://m-

selig.ae.illinois.edu/props/propDB.html [cited on 8/1/2015]
151
APPENDIXES
152
APPENDIX A
E387 Profile Coordinates for PD1 (.scad file copy)
polygon([ [ 95.0000 , 0.7842 ],

[ 94.5693 , 0.8547 ], [ 38.9610 , 8.2060 ],
[ 93.4048 , 1.0452 ], [ 37.8352 , 8.2297 ], [ 0.0473 , -0.1812 ],
[ 92.2342 , 1.2361 ], [ 36.7106 , 8.2434 ], [ 0.0948 , -0.2926 ], [ 46.1675 , -0.3590 ],
[ 91.0609 , 1.4271 ], [ 35.5873 , 8.2471 ], [ 0.1690 , -0.3909 ], [ 47.3528 , -0.3193 ],
[ 89.8871 , 1.6178 ], [ 34.4658 , 8.2405 ], [ 0.2722 , -0.4783 ], [ 48.5380 , -0.2805 ],
[ 88.7134 , 1.8082 ], [ 33.3463 , 8.2235 ], [ 0.4085 , -0.5579 ], [ 49.7231 , -0.2425 ],
[ 87.5394 , 1.9984 ], [ 32.2286 , 8.1958 ], [ 0.5850 , -0.6340 ], [ 50.9081 , -0.2054 ],
[ 86.3648 , 2.1886 ], [ 31.1120 , 8.1573 ], [ 0.8096 , -0.7141 ], [ 52.0928 , -0.1691 ],
[ 85.1898 , 2.3789 ], [ 29.9955 , 8.1078 ], [ 1.0906 , -0.8060 ], [ 53.2773 , -0.1339 ],
[ 84.0147 , 2.5693 ], [ 28.8781 , 8.0474 ], [ 1.4368 , -0.9069 ], [ 54.4616 , -0.0996 ],
[ 82.8398 , 2.7597 ], [ 27.7594 , 7.9763 ], [ 1.8345 , -1.0048 ], [ 55.6456 , -0.0663 ],
[ 81.6652 , 2.9498 ], [ 26.6402 , 7.8947 ], [ 2.2781 , -1.0926 ], [ 56.8296 , -0.0341 ],
[ 80.4911 , 3.1396 ], [ 25.5215 , 7.8029 ], [ 2.7998 , -1.1731 ], [ 58.0135 , -0.0030 ],
[ 79.3175 , 3.3290 ], [ 24.4047 , 7.7008 ], [ 3.4615 , -1.2513 ], [ 59.1973 , 0.0270 ],
[ 78.1443 , 3.5179 ], [ 23.2906 , 7.5884 ], [ 4.3372 , -1.3314 ], [ 60.3812 , 0.0559 ],
[ 76.9717 , 3.7062 ], [ 22.1795 , 7.4654 ], [ 5.3511 , -1.4003 ], [ 61.5649 , 0.0837 ],
[ 75.7996 , 3.8938 ], [ 21.0713 , 7.3316 ], [ 6.3653 , -1.4480 ], [ 62.7483 , 0.1103 ],
[ 74.6281 , 4.0806 ], [ 19.9662 , 7.1869 ], [ 7.3940 , -1.4796 ], [ 63.9313 , 0.1357 ],
[ 73.4573 , 4.2664 ], [ 18.8651 , 7.0310 ], [ 8.4742 , -1.4988 ], [ 65.1139 , 0.1599 ],
[ 72.2875 , 4.4510 ], [ 17.7690 , 6.8639 ], [ 9.6045 , -1.5082 ], [ 66.2963 , 0.1827 ],
[ 71.1187 , 4.6343 ], [ 16.6792 , 6.6851 ], [ 10.7544 , -1.5085 ], [ 67.4784 , 0.2042 ],
[ 69.9509 , 4.8161 ], [ 15.5964 , 6.4943 ], [ 11.9034 , -1.5010 ], [ 68.6605 , 0.2242 ],
[ 68.7838 , 4.9962 ], [ 14.5211 , 6.2909 ], [ 13.0513 , -1.4872 ], [ 69.8427 , 0.2429 ],
[ 67.6172 , 5.1746 ], [ 13.4541 , 6.0743 ], [ 14.2049 , -1.4678 ], [ 71.0247 , 0.2601 ],
[ 66.4506 , 5.3512 ], [ 12.3971 , 5.8441 ], [ 15.3672 , -1.4438 ], [ 72.2066 , 0.2759 ],
[ 65.2841 , 5.5259 ], [ 11.3529 , 5.6001 ], [ 16.5372 , -1.4159 ], [ 73.3880 , 0.2902 ],
[ 64.1181 , 5.6986 ], [ 10.3244 , 5.3420 ], [ 17.7113 , -1.3847 ], [ 74.5687 , 0.3029 ],
[ 62.9532 , 5.8691 ], [ 9.3121 , 5.0688 ], [ 18.8872 , -1.3507 ], [ 75.7490 , 0.3140 ],
[ 61.7900 , 6.0369 ], [ 8.3147 , 4.7788 ], [ 20.0640 , -1.3144 ], [ 76.9289 , 0.3234 ],
[ 60.6291 , 6.2016 ], [ 7.3362 , 4.4714 ], [ 21.2422 , -1.2759 ], [ 78.1088 , 0.3310 ],
[ 59.4705 , 6.3627 ], [ 6.3923 , 4.1501 ], [ 22.4224 , -1.2358 ], [ 79.2887 , 0.3368 ],
[ 58.3144 , 6.5199 ], [ 5.5013 , 3.8202 ], [ 23.6049 , -1.1941 ], [ 80.4685 , 0.3407 ],
[ 57.1606 , 6.6728 ], [ 4.6622 , 3.4805 ], [ 24.7894 , -1.1514 ], [ 81.6478 , 0.3429 ],
[ 56.0092 , 6.8208 ], [ 3.8577 , 3.1222 ], [ 25.9755 , -1.1078 ], [ 82.8260 , 0.3431 ],
[ 54.8601 , 6.9636 ], [ 3.1065 , 2.7525 ], [ 27.1628 , -1.0634 ], [ 84.0029 , 0.3413 ],
[ 53.7134 , 7.1007 ], [ 2.4773 , 2.4111 ], [ 28.3509 , -1.0185 ], [ 85.1787 , 0.3371 ],
[ 52.5691 , 7.2317 ], [ 1.9828 , 2.1137 ], [ 29.5395 , -0.9733 ], [ 86.3541 , 0.3305 ],
[ 51.4272 , 7.3561 ], [ 1.5811 , 1.8426 ], [ 30.7284 , -0.9279 ], [ 87.5294 , 0.3214 ],
[ 50.2875 , 7.4736 ], [ 1.2376 , 1.5807 ], [ 31.9176 , -0.8824 ], [ 88.7044 , 0.3097 ],
[ 49.1496 , 7.5838 ], [ 0.9376 , 1.3256 ], [ 33.1068 , -0.8369 ], [ 89.8776 , 0.2954 ],
[ 48.0130 , 7.6864 ], [ 0.6884 , 1.0958 ], [ 34.2959 , -0.7915 ], [ 91.0477 , 0.2783 ],
[ 46.8775 , 7.7812 ], [ 0.4907 , 0.9029 ], [ 35.4849 , -0.7463 ], [ 92.2151 , 0.2578 ],
[ 45.7429 , 7.8679 ], [ 0.3368 , 0.7413 ], [ 36.6735 , -0.7013 ], [ 93.3812 , 0.2337 ],
[ 44.6093 , 7.9464 ], [ 0.2205 , 0.5979 ], [ 37.8618 , -0.6567 ], [ 94.5451 , 0.2062 ],
[ 43.4768 , 8.0164 ], [ 0.1347 , 0.4635 ], [ 39.0497 , -0.6125 ], [ 95.0000 , 0.1941 ]]);
[ 42.3458 , 8.0776 ], [ 0.0744 , 0.3326 ], [ 40.2370 , -0.5687 ],
[ 41.2162 , 8.1297 ], [ 0.0367 , 0.2014 ], [ 41.4239 , -0.5255 ],
[ 40.0880 , 8.1726 ], [ 0.0198 , 0.0695 ], [ 42.6103 , -0.4828 ],
[ 0.0232 , -0.0593 ], [ 43.7963 , -0.4408 ],
[ 44.9820 , -0.3995 ],
153
E387 Profile Coordinates for COMP (.scad file copy)
polygon([ [ 90.0000 , 1.5997 ],

[ 89.8871 , 1.6178 ], [ 36.7106 , 8.2434 ],
[ 88.7134 , 1.8082 ], [ 35.5873 , 8.2471 ], [ 0.0473 , -0.1812 ],
[ 87.5394 , 1.9984 ], [ 34.4658 , 8.2405 ], [ 0.0948 , -0.2926 ], [ 43.7963 , -0.4408 ],
[ 86.3648 , 2.1886 ], [ 33.3463 , 8.2235 ], [ 0.1690 , -0.3909 ], [ 44.9820 , -0.3995 ],
[ 85.1898 , 2.3789 ], [ 32.2286 , 8.1958 ], [ 0.2722 , -0.4783 ], [ 46.1675 , -0.3590 ],
[ 84.0147 , 2.5693 ], [ 31.1120 , 8.1573 ], [ 0.4085 , -0.5579 ], [ 47.3528 , -0.3193 ],
[ 82.8398 , 2.7597 ], [ 29.9955 , 8.1078 ], [ 0.5850 , -0.6340 ], [ 48.5380 , -0.2805 ],
[ 81.6652 , 2.9498 ], [ 28.8781 , 8.0474 ], [ 0.8096 , -0.7141 ], [ 49.7231 , -0.2425 ],
[ 80.4911 , 3.1396 ], [ 27.7594 , 7.9763 ], [ 1.0906 , -0.8060 ], [ 50.9081 , -0.2054 ],
[ 79.3175 , 3.3290 ], [ 26.6402 , 7.8947 ], [ 1.4368 , -0.9069 ], [ 52.0928 , -0.1691 ],
[ 78.1443 , 3.5179 ], [ 25.5215 , 7.8029 ], [ 1.8345 , -1.0048 ], [ 53.2773 , -0.1339 ],
[ 76.9717 , 3.7062 ], [ 24.4047 , 7.7008 ], [ 2.2781 , -1.0926 ], [ 54.4616 , -0.0996 ],
[ 75.7996 , 3.8938 ], [ 23.2906 , 7.5884 ], [ 2.7998 , -1.1731 ], [ 55.6456 , -0.0663 ],
[ 74.6281 , 4.0806 ], [ 22.1795 , 7.4654 ], [ 3.4615 , -1.2513 ], [ 56.8296 , -0.0341 ],
[ 73.4573 , 4.2664 ], [ 21.0713 , 7.3316 ], [ 4.3372 , -1.3314 ], [ 58.0135 , -0.0030 ],
[ 72.2875 , 4.4510 ], [ 19.9662 , 7.1869 ], [ 5.3511 , -1.4003 ], [ 59.1973 , 0.0270 ],
[ 71.1187 , 4.6343 ], [ 18.8651 , 7.0310 ], [ 6.3653 , -1.4480 ], [ 60.3812 , 0.0559 ],
[ 69.9509 , 4.8161 ], [ 17.7690 , 6.8639 ], [ 7.3940 , -1.4796 ], [ 61.5649 , 0.0837 ],
[ 68.7838 , 4.9962 ], [ 16.6792 , 6.6851 ], [ 8.4742 , -1.4988 ], [ 62.7483 , 0.1103 ],
[ 67.6172 , 5.1746 ], [ 15.5964 , 6.4943 ], [ 9.6045 , -1.5082 ], [ 63.9313 , 0.1357 ],
[ 66.4506 , 5.3512 ], [ 14.5211 , 6.2909 ], [ 10.7544 , -1.5085 ], [ 65.1139 , 0.1599 ],
[ 65.2841 , 5.5259 ], [ 13.4541 , 6.0743 ], [ 11.9034 , -1.5010 ], [ 66.2963 , 0.1827 ],
[ 64.1181 , 5.6986 ], [ 12.3971 , 5.8441 ], [ 13.0513 , -1.4872 ], [ 67.4784 , 0.2042 ],
[ 62.9532 , 5.8691 ], [ 11.3529 , 5.6001 ], [ 14.2049 , -1.4678 ], [ 68.6605 , 0.2242 ],
[ 61.7900 , 6.0369 ], [ 10.3244 , 5.3420 ], [ 15.3672 , -1.4438 ], [ 69.8427 , 0.2429 ],
[ 60.6291 , 6.2016 ], [ 9.3121 , 5.0688 ], [ 16.5372 , -1.4159 ], [ 71.0247 , 0.2601 ],
[ 59.4705 , 6.3627 ], [ 8.3147 , 4.7788 ], [ 17.7113 , -1.3847 ], [ 72.2066 , 0.2759 ],
[ 58.3144 , 6.5199 ], [ 7.3362 , 4.4714 ], [ 18.8872 , -1.3507 ], [ 73.3880 , 0.2902 ],
[ 57.1606 , 6.6728 ], [ 6.3923 , 4.1501 ], [ 20.0640 , -1.3144 ], [ 74.5687 , 0.3029 ],
[ 56.0092 , 6.8208 ], [ 5.5013 , 3.8202 ], [ 21.2422 , -1.2759 ], [ 75.7490 , 0.3140 ],
[ 54.8601 , 6.9636 ], [ 4.6622 , 3.4805 ], [ 22.4224 , -1.2358 ], [ 76.9289 , 0.3234 ],
[ 53.7134 , 7.1007 ], [ 3.8577 , 3.1222 ], [ 23.6049 , -1.1941 ], [ 78.1088 , 0.3310 ],
[ 52.5691 , 7.2317 ], [ 3.1065 , 2.7525 ], [ 24.7894 , -1.1514 ], [ 79.2887 , 0.3368 ],
[ 51.4272 , 7.3561 ], [ 2.4773 , 2.4111 ], [ 25.9755 , -1.1078 ], [ 80.4685 , 0.3407 ],
[ 50.2875 , 7.4736 ], [ 1.9828 , 2.1137 ], [ 27.1628 , -1.0634 ], [ 81.6478 , 0.3429 ],
[ 49.1496 , 7.5838 ], [ 1.5811 , 1.8426 ], [ 28.3509 , -1.0185 ], [ 82.8260 , 0.3431 ],
[ 48.0130 , 7.6864 ], [ 1.2376 , 1.5807 ], [ 29.5395 , -0.9733 ], [ 84.0029 , 0.3413 ],
[ 46.8775 , 7.7812 ], [ 0.9376 , 1.3256 ], [ 30.7284 , -0.9279 ], [ 85.1787 , 0.3371 ],
[ 45.7429 , 7.8679 ], [ 0.6884 , 1.0958 ], [ 31.9176 , -0.8824 ], [ 86.3541 , 0.3305 ],
[ 44.6093 , 7.9464 ], [ 0.4907 , 0.9029 ], [ 33.1068 , -0.8369 ], [ 87.5294 , 0.3214 ],
[ 43.4768 , 8.0164 ], [ 0.3368 , 0.7413 ], [ 34.2959 , -0.7915 ], [ 88.7044 , 0.3097 ],
[ 42.3458 , 8.0776 ], [ 0.2205 , 0.5979 ], [ 35.4849 , -0.7463 ], [ 89.8776 , 0.2954 ],
[ 41.2162 , 8.1297 ], [ 0.1347 , 0.4635 ], [ 36.6735 , -0.7013 ], [ 90.0000 , 0.2933 ]]);
[ 40.0880 , 8.1726 ], [ 0.0744 , 0.3326 ], [ 37.8618 , -0.6567 ],
[ 38.9610 , 8.2060 ], [ 0.0367 , 0.2014 ], [ 39.0497 , -0.6125 ],
[ 37.8352 , 8.2297 ], [ 0.0198 , 0.0695 ], [ 40.2370 , -0.5687 ],
[ 0.0232 , -0.0593 ], [ 41.4239 , -0.5255 ],
[ 42.6103 , -0.4828 ],
154
PD1 Blade Geometry (.scad file copy)
union(){
translate([0,0,25.4])
rotate ([0,0,-62.364])
linear_extrude(height=127, twist=-44.707, $fn=150)
translate([-10.17,-0.75,0])
scale(0.254) include<e387profile.scad>;
translate([0,0,-25.4])
rotate ([0,180,62.364])
linear_extrude(height=127, twist=-44.707, $fn=150)
translate([-10.17,-0.75,0])
scale(0.254) include<e387profile.scad>;
translate([0,0,34.925]) sphere(5.08, $fn=36);

translate([0,0,-34.925]) sphere(5.08, $fn=36);
cylinder(h=69.85,r=5.08,center=true,$fn=36);
}
COMP Blade Geometry (.scad file copy)
R=152.4; //propeller radius (mm)

d=R/30; //step size
module p(t){
translate([0,0,t])
rotate([0,0,-1714.5/t])
resize([-0.0033*pow(t,2)+0.6*t-4.5,0,0],auto=true)
translate([-40.0569,-2.9581,0])
linear_extrude(height=0.1)
include<e387profile.scad>;
}
for(t=[7*d:d:R])
translate(){p(t);p(t+d);}
Spinner Geometry (.scad file copy)
$fn=100;
translate([0,0,-3.755])
parabo (100);
module parabo (y) {
rotate_extrude(convexity=10)
difference(){
projection(cut=true, center=true)
translate([0,-97.5,0.24*y])
155
rotate([81,0,0])
cylinder(h=2*y, r1=0.445*y, r2=0, center=true);
mirror([0,1,0]) square([2*y,2*y]);
}
}
translate([0,0,-3.81])
cylinder(h = 2.54, r1=43.69, r2=44.27, center=false);
Nacelle Geometry (.scad file copy)
$fn=100; // Number of fragments
L=647.7; // Nacelle length (mm)

D=88.9; // Diameter at Z=0 (mm)
d=1; // Step size (mm) d=0.1 for max accuracy
module p(t){
translate([0,0,t])
resize([-0.000848*pow(t,2)+0.549*t+88.9,-0.000848*pow(t,2)+0.549*t+88.9,1])
linear_extrude(height=d)
circle (d = D);
}
for(t=[1:d:L])
translate(){p(t-1);p(t+d-1);}
Assembly Geometry (.scad file copy)
translate([0,0,-16.51])
rotate([90,180,0])
include<pD_1.scad>;
include <nacelle.scad>;
include<spinner.scad>;
$fn=100;
156
APPENDIX B
This appendix contains numerical data obtained at the 7x10 NIAR wind tunnel which
includes boundary conditions, propeller performance results, pressure coefficients and wall
pressure gradients. Tunnel total and static pressure readings presented here are the differential to
the tunnel absolute barometric pressure gauge. Corrected tunnel dynamic pressure, qcor, was
implemented to obtain the propeller performance coefficients. Tared dynamic pressure, qtare, was
used for nacelle pressure coefficients and wall pressure gradients. Additional nomenclature and
subscriptions are:
Pt Total pressure
Ps Static pressure
en Test section entrance
ex Test section exit
abs Absolute (i.e., tunnel absolute barometric pressure)
ind Indicated (i.e., raw measured tunnel dynamic pressure)
tare Tared dynamic pressure accounted for the C-mount
cor Corrected tunnel values for both the C-mount and propeller tunnel blockage
157
PD1 Propeller
Run β0.75 (deg) Ptabs (inHg) Temp (F) qind (psf) qtare (psf) Pten (psfd) Psen (psfd) qen (psf) Ptex (psfd) Psex (psfd) qex (psf)
18 23 28.5832 75.67 0.0496 0.0492 0.4277 0.3865 0.0412 0.4290 0.3960 0.0330
18 23 28.5820 76.19 1.0150 1.0067 1.4270 0.4126 1.0145 1.4236 0.4051 1.0185
18 23 28.5850 76.30 1.6130 1.5998 2.0362 0.4177 1.6184 2.0320 0.3912 1.6407
18 23 28.5835 76.30 2.6172 2.5958 3.0406 0.4235 2.6171 3.0374 0.3673 2.6700
18 23 28.5831 76.30 3.6028 3.5734 4.0304 0.4209 3.6095 4.0202 0.3322 3.6880
18 23 28.5840 76.26 5.1826 5.1403 5.6236 0.4065 5.2171 5.6136 0.2703 5.3433
18 23 28.5818 76.20 7.8136 7.7498 8.2243 0.3684 7.8559 8.2100 0.1469 8.0631
18 23 28.5830 76.10 10.3969 10.3120 10.8405 0.3577 10.4828 10.8084 0.0442 10.7641
18 23 28.5835 76.06 13.0008 12.8946 13.3698 0.2635 13.1063 13.3443 -0.1436 13.4879
18 23 28.5790 76.00 15.5884 15.4610 15.8783 0.1365 15.7418 15.8462 -0.3660 16.2122
26 23 28.8230 70.80 0.0350 0.0347 0.4690 0.4441 0.0249 0.4700 0.4454 0.0246
26 23 28.8236 71.60 1.0186 1.0103 1.5008 0.4846 1.0162 1.4988 0.4697 1.0290
26 23 28.8240 71.80 1.6202 1.6070 2.0982 0.4802 1.6180 2.0929 0.4478 1.6451
26 23 28.8239 71.90 2.6080 2.5867 3.1067 0.4910 2.6156 3.0986 0.4268 2.6718
26 23 28.8222 72.00 3.5944 3.5650 4.1047 0.4869 3.6179 4.0981 0.3927 3.7054
26 23 28.8224 72.04 5.2050 5.1625 5.6942 0.4726 5.2216 5.6784 0.3318 5.3466
26 23 28.8226 72.10 7.7924 7.7287 8.2656 0.4242 7.8414 8.2427 0.2025 8.0402
26 23 28.8189 72.10 10.3948 10.3099 10.8786 0.4085 10.4701 10.8605 0.0972 10.7633
26 23 28.8232 72.20 12.9860 12.8799 13.4140 0.3207 13.0933 13.3838 -0.0832 13.4670
26 23 28.8231 72.30 15.6002 15.4728 15.9185 0.1715 15.7470 15.8769 -0.3226 16.1994
23 28 28.8010 70.30 0.0419 0.0416 0.4412 0.4042 0.0370 0.4352 0.4146 0.0206
23 28 28.8020 70.50 0.9830 0.9750 1.4397 0.4416 0.9981 1.4371 0.4147 1.0224
23 28 28.8060 70.60 2.1165 2.0992 2.5834 0.4490 2.1344 2.5753 0.4130 2.1623
23 28 28.8032 70.60 4.2067 4.1723 4.6894 0.4589 4.2304 4.6732 0.3620 4.3112
23 28 28.8060 70.60 6.1858 6.1353 6.6521 0.4232 6.2289 6.6368 0.2642 6.3726
23 28 28.8060 70.70 8.8014 8.7295 9.2377 0.3662 8.8716 9.2189 0.1223 9.0966
23 28 28.8056 70.77 11.3907 11.2976 11.8107 0.3273 11.4834 11.7903 -0.0062 11.7965
23 28 28.8039 70.90 14.5894 14.4702 14.9190 0.1914 14.7276 14.8794 -0.2511 15.1305
23 28 28.8087 71.00 18.1919 18.0433 18.3810 -0.0085 18.3895 18.3272 -0.5828 18.9099
23 28 28.8078 71.32 23.3866 23.1955 23.3325 -0.3142 23.6467 23.2697 -1.0728 24.3425
157
cpr @ x/L where Φ = 0°
Run qcor (fps) T (lbs) Q (in.lbs) rpm Ucor (fps) J η CT CP Re0.75 0.020 0.137 0.255 0.373 0.490 0.608 0.725 0.843
18 0.049 1.461 3.317 3956.3 6.572 0.100 0.084 0.153 0.182 74,416 10.897 -7.6319 -9.5930 -9.8565 -8.2173 -7.3977 -7.7782 -7.1050
18 1.007 2.133 4.771 5025.0 30.127 0.360 0.307 0.138 0.162 95,535 1.1468 0.0440 -0.4109 -0.6241 -0.5969 -0.5182 -0.5726 -0.5053
18 1.600 2.051 4.587 5017.5 38.022 0.450 0.388 0.133 0.156 96,040 0.7195 0.0687 -0.2526 -0.4120 -0.4021 -0.3454 -0.3544 -0.2949
18 2.596 1.972 4.413 5025.0 48.475 0.580 0.494 0.128 0.150 97,250 0.4396 0.0546 -0.1751 -0.3093 -0.3132 -0.2533 -0.2322 -0.1596
18 3.573 1.907 4.244 5051.3 56.901 0.680 0.580 0.122 0.142 98,765 0.3200 0.0444 -0.1374 -0.2538 -0.2599 -0.2099 -0.1881 -0.1148
18 5.140 1.849 4.071 5085.0 68.274 0.810 0.699 0.117 0.135 101,002 0.2251 0.0335 -0.1088 -0.2105 -0.2141 -0.1721 -0.1371 -0.0665
18 7.750 1.694 3.888 5111.3 83.863 0.980 0.819 0.106 0.127 104,110 0.1565 0.0044 -0.1053 -0.1948 -0.1967 -0.1541 -0.1142 -0.0456
18 10.312 1.400 3.624 5156.3 96.761 1.130 0.831 0.086 0.117 107,403 0.1233 -0.0126 -0.1024 -0.1877 -0.1873 -0.1471 -0.1068 -0.0392
18 12.895 1.138 3.289 5242.5 108.218 1.240 0.818 0.068 0.102 111,308 0.0924 -0.0283 -0.1037 -0.1800 -0.1783 -0.1395 -0.0989 -0.0343
18 15.461 0.889 2.917 5370.0 118.511 1.320 0.771 0.050 0.087 115,765 0.1029 -0.0288 -0.1055 -0.1820 -0.1757 -0.1389 -0.0999 -0.0344
26 0.035 2.166 4.861 4803.8 5.430 0.068 0.058 0.151 0.177 92,565 24.922 -15.979 -17.472 -17.804 -15.066 -11.997 -13.822 -10.835
26 1.010 2.049 4.586 4916.3 29.923 0.365 0.312 0.136 0.160 95,831 1.0756 0.0180 -0.3683 -0.5693 -0.5408 -0.4353 -0.5094 -0.3826
26 1.607 2.016 4.503 4946.3 37.778 0.458 0.392 0.132 0.155 97,064 0.6990 0.0260 -0.2509 -0.4014 -0.3915 -0.3100 -0.3306 -0.2168
26 2.587 1.950 4.378 5006.3 47.972 0.575 0.489 0.125 0.147 99,265 0.4302 0.0338 -0.1705 -0.3002 -0.2991 -0.2384 -0.2284 -0.1232
26 3.565 1.903 4.247 5051.3 56.343 0.669 0.573 0.120 0.140 101,151 0.3132 0.0293 -0.1339 -0.2511 -0.2495 -0.1990 -0.1852 -0.0883
26 5.162 1.851 4.078 5092.5 67.829 0.799 0.693 0.115 0.132 103,586 0.2111 0.0147 -0.1136 -0.2098 -0.2135 -0.1663 -0.1420 -0.0506
26 7.729 1.709 3.941 5118.8 83.023 0.973 0.806 0.105 0.127 106,681 0.1483 -0.0061 -0.1106 -0.1952 -0.1937 -0.1475 -0.1179 -0.0316
26 10.310 1.444 3.742 5205.0 95.912 1.106 0.815 0.086 0.116 110,751 0.1127 -0.0232 -0.1089 -0.1918 -0.1887 -0.1446 -0.1144 -0.0341
26 12.880 1.164 3.392 5298.8 107.219 1.214 0.796 0.067 0.102 114,818 0.0915 -0.0325 -0.1081 -0.1844 -0.1805 -0.1407 -0.1098 -0.0302
26 15.473 0.924 3.046 5418.8 117.528 1.301 0.754 0.051 0.087 119,237 0.0798 -0.0387 -0.1082 -0.1837 -0.1757 -0.1380 -0.1072 -0.0302
23 0.042 2.303 6.382 4878.8 5.953 0.073 0.050 0.156 0.226 93,919 16.825 -20.737 -21.153 -18.138 -14.188 -11.346 -14.188 -11.035
23 0.975 2.224 6.221 4950.0 29.402 0.356 0.243 0.146 0.214 96,335 -0.0297 -0.1095 -0.1302 -0.1730 -0.2040 -0.1302 -0.1184 -0.0327
23 2.099 2.130 5.994 5006.3 43.218 0.518 0.352 0.137 0.202 98,636 0.5874 0.0462 -0.2172 -0.3517 -0.3496 -0.2756 -0.2913 -0.2042
23 4.172 2.029 5.746 5092.5 60.992 0.719 0.484 0.126 0.187 102,452 0.3153 0.0302 -0.1351 -0.2411 -0.2459 -0.1934 -0.1762 -0.0961
23 6.135 1.970 5.560 5152.5 73.990 0.862 0.583 0.119 0.176 105,571 0.2224 0.0218 -0.1104 -0.2040 -0.2090 -0.1634 -0.1339 -0.0595
23 8.729 1.972 5.335 5216.3 88.279 1.015 0.717 0.117 0.165 109,301 0.1643 0.0121 -0.0991 -0.1833 -0.1861 -0.1427 -0.1103 -0.0371
23 11.298 1.891 5.313 5235.0 100.446 1.151 0.782 0.111 0.163 112,118 0.1369 -0.0014 -0.0990 -0.1780 -0.1787 -0.1399 -0.1009 -0.0307
23 14.470 1.657 5.166 5280.0 113.696 1.292 0.792 0.096 0.156 115,873 0.1153 -0.0137 -0.1017 -0.1761 -0.1769 -0.1373 -0.0975 -0.0306
23 18.043 1.389 4.851 5388.8 126.975 1.414 0.773 0.077 0.141 120,925 0.0974 -0.0224 -0.1059 -0.1749 -0.1729 -0.1353 -0.0953 -0.0293
23 23.196 1.071 4.368 5606.3 143.981 1.541 0.721 0.055 0.117 128,895 0.0847 -0.0288 -0.1078 -0.1727 -0.1712 -0.1324 -0.0928 -0.0289
158
cpr @ x/L where Φ = 45° cpr @ x/L where Φ = 90°
Run 0.020 0.137 0.255 0.373 0.490 0.608 0.725 0.843 0.020 0.137 0.255 0.373 0.490 0.608 0.725 0.843
18 10.136 -8.5100 -9.8858 -8.2173 -8.7734 -6.8708 -6.8708 -6.3439 9.4334 -8.2466 -9.8858 -9.3296 -7.6904 -7.4270 -7.1342 -6.7830
18 1.1110 -0.0390 -0.4238 -0.4910 -0.5940 -0.4910 -0.5311 -0.4510 1.1182 0.0111 -0.4381 -0.5225 -0.4782 -0.5296 -0.5168 -0.4381
18 0.6970 0.0219 -0.2607 -0.3273 -0.4003 -0.3273 -0.3445 -0.2445 0.7105 0.0453 -0.2688 -0.3481 -0.3282 -0.3526 -0.3273 -0.2517
18 0.4207 0.0246 -0.1751 -0.2466 -0.3066 -0.2466 -0.2261 -0.1290 0.4340 0.0440 -0.1856 -0.2566 -0.2577 -0.2616 -0.2211 -0.1324
18 0.3031 0.0226 -0.1378 -0.2002 -0.2546 -0.2043 -0.1857 -0.0926 0.3200 0.0440 -0.1450 -0.2131 -0.2127 -0.2224 -0.1857 -0.0951
18 0.2114 0.0187 -0.1119 -0.1674 -0.2099 -0.1651 -0.1419 -0.0514 0.2276 0.0335 -0.1167 -0.1758 -0.1763 -0.1775 -0.1394 -0.0528
18 0.1439 -0.0057 -0.1110 -0.1603 -0.1930 -0.1506 -0.1214 -0.0356 0.1530 0.0077 -0.1177 -0.1657 -0.1653 -0.1636 -0.1198 -0.0367
18 0.1124 -0.0214 -0.1124 -0.1560 -0.1815 -0.1451 -0.1141 -0.0327 0.1232 -0.0088 -0.1197 -0.1610 -0.1589 -0.1546 -0.1130 -0.0339
18 0.0779 -0.0357 -0.1132 -0.1510 -0.1762 -0.1384 -0.1085 -0.0278 0.0866 -0.0266 -0.1219 -0.1561 -0.1538 -0.1489 -0.1076 -0.0315
18 0.0967 -0.0349 -0.1154 -0.1512 -0.1761 -0.1400 -0.1081 -0.0262 0.0881 -0.0265 -0.1242 -0.1566 -0.1539 -0.1511 -0.1049 -0.0289
26 22.018 -16.103 -19.090 -15.813 -15.025 -11.997 -12.412 -11.997 24.009 -15.357 -19.049 -17.265 -12.785 - -13.158 -11.582
26 1.0186 0.0123 -0.3940 -0.4225 -0.5265 -0.4496 -0.4353 -0.3697 1.1026 0.0507 -0.3683 -0.4766 -0.4496 - -0.4624 -0.3669
26 0.6694 0.0296 -0.2500 -0.3091 -0.3826 -0.3181 -0.2930 -0.2025 0.7232 0.0619 -0.2419 -0.3369 -0.3181 - -0.3091 -0.1980
26 0.4168 0.0344 -0.1755 -0.2323 -0.2924 -0.2373 -0.2067 -0.1093 0.4608 0.0594 -0.1649 -0.2518 -0.2484 - -0.2167 -0.1109
26 0.3072 0.0333 -0.1380 -0.1933 -0.2442 -0.2014 -0.1675 -0.0782 0.3354 0.0551 -0.1303 -0.2014 -0.2054 - -0.1788 -0.0834
26 0.2050 0.0181 -0.1139 -0.1644 -0.2068 -0.1674 -0.1312 -0.0464 0.2317 0.0356 -0.1111 -0.1747 -0.1730 - -0.1390 -0.0525
26 0.1394 -0.0057 -0.1149 -0.1572 -0.1902 -0.1492 -0.1131 -0.0287 0.1621 0.0094 -0.1125 -0.1641 -0.1621 - -0.1183 -0.0331
26 0.1011 -0.0242 -0.1163 -0.1574 -0.1817 -0.1465 -0.1091 -0.0289 0.1268 -0.0103 -0.1172 -0.1624 -0.1589 - -0.1144 -0.0339
26 0.0818 -0.0337 -0.1153 -0.1522 -0.1775 -0.1407 -0.1055 -0.0258 0.1082 -0.0198 -0.1188 -0.1584 -0.1550 - -0.1109 -0.0315
26 0.0704 -0.0410 -0.1180 -0.1529 -0.1762 -0.1401 -0.1047 -0.0263 0.0938 -0.0276 -0.1217 -0.1584 -0.1557 - -0.1101 -0.0316
23 14.156 -21.257 -20.598 -17.376 -15.401 -12.629 -11.000 -11.000 14.364 -21.534 -22.816 -18.866 -14.257 -11.312 -12.629 -11.728
23 -0.0740 -0.0903 -0.1553 -0.1641 -0.1922 -0.1479 -0.1080 -0.0416 -0.0297 -0.0903 -0.1435 -0.1907 -0.1878 -0.1641 -0.1479 -0.0504
23 0.5449 0.0180 -0.2172 -0.2920 -0.3352 -0.2804 -0.2611 -0.1850 0.5737 0.0427 -0.2303 -0.3057 -0.2810 -0.2989 -0.2611 -0.1713
23 0.2980 0.0185 -0.1386 -0.2007 -0.2407 -0.1952 -0.1696 -0.0868 0.3174 0.0340 -0.1482 -0.2107 -0.2055 -0.2104 -0.1727 -0.0827
23 0.2046 0.0121 -0.1132 -0.1695 -0.2005 -0.1616 -0.1334 -0.0510 0.2215 0.0227 -0.1172 -0.1721 -0.1754 -0.1738 -0.1379 -0.0505
23 0.1458 0.0045 -0.1029 -0.1554 -0.1796 -0.1424 -0.1133 -0.0295 0.1605 0.0149 -0.1070 -0.1565 -0.1554 -0.1537 -0.1120 -0.0307
23 0.1178 -0.0075 -0.1047 -0.1523 -0.1755 -0.1390 -0.1060 -0.0246 0.1339 0.0017 -0.1101 -0.1556 -0.1529 -0.1487 -0.1061 -0.0260
23 0.0961 -0.0197 -0.1074 -0.1517 -0.1749 -0.1378 -0.1057 -0.0255 0.1112 -0.0117 -0.1151 -0.1559 -0.1518 -0.1480 -0.1058 -0.0282
23 0.0804 -0.0299 -0.1093 -0.1504 -0.1729 -0.1350 -0.1034 -0.0249 0.0964 -0.0199 -0.1176 -0.1547 -0.1501 -0.1451 -0.1042 -0.0263
23 0.0676 -0.0369 -0.1109 -0.1489 -0.1721 -0.1350 -0.1022 -0.0245 0.0825 -0.0279 -0.1205 -0.1540 -0.1499 -0.1442 -0.1031 -0.0266
159
Run 0.020 0.137 0.255 0.373 0.490 0.608 0.725 0.843 0.020 0.137 0.255 0.373 0.490 0.608
18 10.224 -7.7197 -9.0369 -8.5100 -7.9246 -6.7830 -7.1635 -7.6904 9.5797 -7.6904 -10.149 -9.3589 -9.0662 -7.0757
18 1.2026 0.0554 -0.3437 -0.4510 -0.5211 -0.4524 -0.4910 -0.4638 1.1497 0.1083 -0.3694 -0.5225 -0.5883 -0.4925
18 0.7807 0.0723 -0.2103 -0.3111 -0.3390 -0.2949 -0.3192 -0.2778 0.7564 0.0912 -0.2265 -0.3580 -0.3985 -0.3472
18 0.4717 0.0701 -0.1385 -0.2367 -0.2616 -0.2289 -0.2211 -0.1496 0.4889 0.0884 -0.1485 -0.2633 -0.3027 -0.2605
18 0.3474 0.0629 -0.1072 -0.1894 -0.2208 -0.1926 -0.1781 -0.1112 0.3833 0.0766 -0.1184 -0.2103 -0.2458 -0.2119
18 0.2573 0.0467 -0.0875 -0.1573 -0.1811 -0.1559 -0.1363 -0.0668 0.2663 0.0587 -0.0931 -0.1718 -0.2004 -0.1662
18 0.1831 0.0183 -0.0874 -0.1521 -0.1709 -0.1447 -0.1192 -0.0475 0.1965 0.0322 -0.0951 -0.1657 -0.1826 -0.1514
18 0.1406 0.0007 -0.0902 -0.1500 -0.1635 -0.1395 -0.1123 -0.0416 0.1574 0.0155 -0.0990 -0.1617 -0.1743 -0.1444
18 0.1023 -0.0176 -0.0938 -0.1474 -0.1580 -0.1354 -0.1079 -0.0381 0.1151 -0.0029 -0.1024 -0.1584 -0.1660 -0.1381
18 0.0899 -0.0222 -0.0954 -0.1484 -0.1600 -0.1362 -0.1041 -0.0400 0.1177 -0.0038 -0.1047 -0.1608 -0.1649 -0.1402
26 25.047 -13.490 -15.896 -18.509 -12.785 -10.379 -12.412 -12.412
26 1.1867 0.1434 -0.2885 -0.5009 -0.4353 -0.3797 -0.4496 -0.4097
26 0.7689 0.1192 -0.1836 -0.3423 -0.3109 -0.2670 -0.2930 -0.2428
26 0.4942 0.0945 -0.1182 -0.2373 -0.2512 -0.2134 -0.2117 -0.1399
26 0.3710 0.0842 -0.0887 -0.1860 -0.2095 -0.1812 -0.1784 -0.1040
26 0.2616 0.0582 -0.0743 -0.1465 -0.1747 -0.1524 -0.1387 -0.0667
26 0.1944 0.0298 -0.0806 -0.1283 -0.1637 -0.1412 -0.1213 -0.0475
26 0.1511 0.0066 -0.0851 -0.1230 -0.1622 -0.1395 -0.1176 -0.0469
26 0.1317 -0.0039 -0.0866 -0.1167 -0.1582 -0.1365 -0.1142 -0.0435
26 0.1195 -0.0133 -0.0910 -0.1157 -0.1581 -0.1371 -0.1119 -0.0427
23 15.023 -20.737 -20.425 -17.410 -13.460 -11.069 -11.624 -12.282
23 -0.0194 -0.0563 -0.1169 -0.1760 -0.1627 -0.1065 -0.1361 -0.0534
23 0.6272 0.0812 -0.1596 -0.2673 -0.2920 -0.2509 -0.2605 -0.1980
23 0.3450 0.0561 -0.0992 -0.1852 -0.2104 -0.1796 -0.1693 -0.0961
23 0.2494 0.0422 -0.0815 -0.1592 -0.1787 -0.1526 -0.1350 -0.0639
23 0.1894 0.0286 -0.0757 -0.1452 -0.1595 -0.1361 -0.1113 -0.0416
23 0.1586 0.0148 -0.0783 -0.1435 -0.1565 -0.1345 -0.1078 -0.0376
23 0.1331 -0.0002 -0.0854 -0.1458 -0.1556 -0.1333 -0.1069 -0.0384
23 0.1192 -0.0097 -0.0882 -0.1472 -0.1559 -0.1322 -0.1048 -0.0361
23 0.1059 -0.0185 -0.0914 -0.1472 -0.1541 -0.1318 -0.1037 -0.0344
160
Run 0.020 0.137 0.255 0.373 0.490 0.608 0.725 0.843 0.020 0.137 0.255 0.373 0.490 0.608 0.725 0.843
18 8.1162 -7.3391 -10.179 -9.5930 -8.4807 -8.1880 -6.2268 -7.0464 10.663 -9.0369 -10.1785 -6.5195 - -9.5930 -7.6319 -7.1050
18 1.1039 0.0640 -0.4095 -0.5454 -0.5497 -0.6040 -0.5211 -0.4796 1.2140 -0.0347 -0.3408 -0.3423 - -0.6827 -0.5783 -0.4782
18 0.7006 0.0912 -0.2427 -0.3454 -0.3742 -0.3913 -0.3210 -0.2778 0.7708 0.0183 -0.2166 -0.2436 - -0.4831 -0.3661 -0.3120
18 0.4335 0.0740 -0.1640 -0.2638 -0.2833 -0.2982 -0.2233 -0.1535 0.4762 0.0329 -0.1374 -0.1912 - -0.3493 -0.2616 -0.1801
18 0.3232 0.0702 -0.1225 -0.2099 -0.2325 -0.2510 -0.1849 -0.1265 0.3547 0.0327 -0.1031 -0.1571 - -0.2873 -0.2051 -0.1301
18 0.2248 0.0593 -0.0962 -0.1724 -0.1917 -0.2018 -0.1422 -0.0744 0.2545 0.0279 -0.0772 -0.1360 - -0.2346 -0.1564 -0.0772
18 0.1474 0.0287 -0.0926 -0.1581 -0.1779 -0.1805 -0.1250 -0.0529 0.1779 0.0118 -0.0780 -0.1382 - -0.2013 -0.1328 -0.0546
18 0.1205 0.0095 -0.0965 -0.1567 -0.1716 -0.1679 -0.1193 -0.0462 0.1434 -0.0025 -0.0757 -0.1369 - -0.1896 -0.1254 -0.0486
18 0.0889 -0.0076 -0.0977 -0.1515 -0.1645 -0.1612 -0.1127 -0.0425 0.1093 -0.0176 -0.0778 -0.1372 - -0.1770 -0.1156 -0.0430
18 0.0824 -0.0100 -0.0987 -0.1525 -0.1653 -0.1587 -0.1174 -0.0417 0.1290 -0.0134 -0.0765 -0.1391 - -0.1758 -0.1156 -0.0411
161
Run 0.020 0.137 0.255 0.373 0.490 0.608 0.725 0.843
18 9.3163 -7.9246 -11.6128 -8.4807 -8.2173 -7.1342 -7.6611 -7.9246
18 1.0638 -0.0090 -0.5354 -0.5640 -0.6040 -0.5583 -0.5583 -0.5468
18 0.6763 0.0264 -0.3472 -0.3661 -0.4174 -0.3877 -0.3706 -0.3544
18 0.4185 0.0396 -0.2289 -0.2833 -0.3199 -0.2944 -0.2527 -0.2012
18 0.3047 0.0412 -0.1732 -0.2289 -0.2591 -0.2506 -0.2051 -0.1531
18 0.2198 0.0313 -0.1368 -0.1892 -0.2153 -0.2057 -0.1584 -0.0903
18 0.1530 0.0099 -0.1320 -0.1800 -0.1986 -0.1850 -0.1291 -0.0633
18 0.1208 -0.0057 -0.1261 -0.1719 -0.1881 -0.1753 -0.1228 -0.0539
18 0.0899 -0.0218 -0.1247 -0.1681 -0.1774 -0.1660 -0.1135 -0.0472
18 0.0933 -0.0198 -0.1274 -0.1656 -0.1776 -0.1669 -0.1135 -0.0462
23 14.399 -20.771 -24.514 -17.514 -16.752 -13.287 -13.945 -13.668

23 -0.1169 -0.1080 -0.3074 -0.2055 -0.3074 -0.2011 -0.2705 -0.2675
23 0.5353 0.0270 -0.3243 -0.3455 -0.3970 -0.3647 -0.3517 -0.3147
23 0.2932 0.0240 -0.1862 -0.2307 -0.2763 -0.2542 -0.2121 -0.1582
23 0.1891 -0.0005 -0.1505 -0.1947 -0.2275 -0.2090 -0.1648 -0.1017
23 0.0794 -0.0483 -0.1186 -0.1724 -0.1966 -0.1729 -0.1263 -0.0714
23 0.0278 -0.0517 -0.1024 -0.1603 -0.1762 -0.1416 -0.1103 -0.0597
23 0.0242 -0.0465 -0.0948 -0.1566 -0.1716 -0.1384 -0.1029 -0.0533
23 0.0225 -0.0433 -0.0899 -0.1552 -0.1653 -0.1285 -0.0984 -0.0492
23 0.0319 -0.0385 -0.0868 -0.1500 -0.1550 -0.1100 -0.0970 -0.0439
162
South Side Wall cpr @ l'
Run 0.051 0.139 0.228 0.316 0.360 0.404 0.448 0.492 0.536 0.580 0.624 0.668 0.714 0.809 0.905 1.000
18 -1.6898 -0.9872 -1.3970 -2.2166 -1.9532 -1.0165 -1.6898 -2.2752 - -1.3678 -0.8409 -1.8947 -1.4556 -1.6605 -1.6898 -1.4849
18 -0.1048 -0.0576 -0.0776 -0.1177 -0.1048 -0.0719 -0.0648 -0.1062 - -0.0633 -0.0505 -0.0762 -0.1077 -0.0776 -0.1191 -0.1077
18 -0.0600 -0.0303 -0.0429 -0.0681 -0.0681 -0.0474 -0.0429 -0.0609 - -0.0591 -0.0339 -0.0411 -0.0699 -0.0510 -0.0852 -0.0951
18 -0.0353 -0.0120 -0.0253 -0.0508 -0.0564 -0.0331 -0.0458 -0.0464 - -0.0403 -0.0297 -0.0292 -0.0569 -0.0558 -0.0614 -0.0880
18 -0.0249 -0.0076 -0.0137 -0.0362 -0.0362 -0.0270 -0.0362 -0.0403 - -0.0318 -0.0209 -0.0278 -0.0443 -0.0471 -0.0548 -0.0741
18 -0.0119 0.0052 -0.0066 -0.0251 -0.0276 -0.0189 -0.0276 -0.0253 - -0.0248 -0.0169 -0.0166 -0.0382 -0.0379 -0.0433 -0.0668
18 -0.0077 0.0036 -0.0059 -0.0198 -0.0232 -0.0211 -0.0284 -0.0250 - -0.0248 -0.0179 -0.0178 -0.0337 -0.0423 -0.0458 -0.0646
18 -0.0053 0.0084 -0.0014 -0.0144 -0.0197 -0.0182 -0.0275 -0.0211 - -0.0210 -0.0170 -0.0169 -0.0314 -0.0418 -0.0430 -0.0610
18 -0.0050 0.0079 -0.0019 -0.0176 -0.0217 -0.0196 -0.0290 -0.0206 - -0.0248 -0.0186 -0.0174 -0.0341 -0.0425 -0.0435 -0.0628
18 -0.0056 0.0068 -0.0030 -0.0177 -0.0211 -0.0222 -0.0290 -0.0211 - -0.0248 -0.0186 -0.0186 -0.0331 -0.0455 -0.0454 -0.0623
26 -1.2115 -1.3774 -0.4233 -1.2115 -0.0500 0.1574 -0.4648 -0.1329 - -0.0085 -0.0085 -0.3403 -0.5063 0.3648 -0.8381 0.5723
26 -0.0519 -0.0177 0.0023 -0.0248 -0.0120 0.0222 -0.0248 -0.0148 - 0.0037 -0.0106 -0.0091 -0.0148 0.0151 -0.0391 -0.0163
26 -0.0259 -0.0044 -0.0098 -0.0259 -0.0179 0.0036 -0.0179 -0.0197 - -0.0080 -0.0170 -0.0161 -0.0277 -0.0179 -0.0349 -0.0456
26 -0.0202 -0.0124 -0.0102 -0.0258 -0.0202 -0.0180 -0.0308 -0.0263 - -0.0247 -0.0202 -0.0191 -0.0469 -0.0308 -0.0414 -0.0525
26 -0.0099 -0.0043 -0.0063 -0.0140 -0.0212 -0.0043 -0.0212 -0.0144 - -0.0208 -0.0172 -0.0132 -0.0334 -0.0326 -0.0439 -0.0483
26 -0.0095 -0.0003 -0.0017 -0.0121 -0.0174 -0.0109 -0.0277 -0.0204 - -0.0249 -0.0171 -0.0115 -0.0358 -0.0327 -0.0433 -0.0539
26 -0.0059 0.0002 -0.0024 -0.0147 -0.0180 -0.0123 -0.0249 -0.0166 - -0.0231 -0.0162 -0.0143 -0.0356 -0.0370 -0.0423 -0.0579
26 -0.0120 -0.0036 -0.0108 -0.0237 -0.0263 -0.0247 -0.0341 -0.0237 - -0.0353 -0.0250 -0.0223 -0.0483 -0.0497 -0.0510 -0.0662
26 -0.0082 0.0005 -0.0051 -0.0186 -0.0207 -0.0218 -0.0321 -0.0218 - -0.0280 -0.0228 -0.0185 -0.0403 -0.0467 -0.0466 -0.0649
26 -0.0065 0.0023 -0.0057 -0.0178 -0.0212 -0.0224 -0.0325 -0.0229 - -0.0274 -0.0230 -0.0197 -0.0384 -0.0473 -0.0464 -0.0640
23 -0.3968 -1.1938 -0.3968 -1.9907 -0.7087 -0.8819 -0.7087 -1.7135 - -0.6740 -0.3622 -1.2977 -1.0898 -1.0205 -1.3670 -1.1245
23 0.0456 0.0264 0.0737 0.0042 0.0308 0.0397 0.0308 0.0013 - 0.0471 0.0323 0.0205 0.0279 0.0175 -0.0105 -0.0135
23 0.0194 0.0228 0.0448 0.0126 0.0064 0.0290 0.0126 0.0050 - 0.0139 0.0263 0.0139 0.0112 0.0002 -0.0067 -0.0211
23 0.0129 0.0150 0.0226 0.0002 -0.0064 0.0050 0.0002 -0.0005 - 0.0005 0.0036 0.0040 -0.0071 -0.0157 -0.0223 -0.0357
23 0.0126 0.0161 0.0168 -0.0029 -0.0029 -0.0020 -0.0029 -0.0031 - -0.0027 -0.0005 -0.0024 -0.0139 -0.0224 -0.0289 -0.0423
23 0.0074 0.0129 0.0121 -0.0064 -0.0094 -0.0091 -0.0155 -0.0096 - -0.0109 -0.0063 -0.0061 -0.0233 -0.0294 -0.0340 -0.0491
23 0.0003 0.0068 0.0039 -0.0140 -0.0164 -0.0163 -0.0247 -0.0164 - -0.0234 -0.0151 -0.0127 -0.0340 -0.0401 -0.0435 -0.0610
23 0.0031 0.0090 0.0040 -0.0118 -0.0154 -0.0155 -0.0238 -0.0163 - -0.0192 -0.0155 -0.0127 -0.0320 -0.0414 -0.0413 -0.0566
23 0.0015 0.0090 0.0038 -0.0111 -0.0156 -0.0174 -0.0259 -0.0162 - -0.0194 -0.0164 -0.0135 -0.0295 -0.0409 -0.0415 -0.0580
23 0.0011 0.0107 0.0034 -0.0122 -0.0163 -0.0197 -0.0272 -0.0166 - -0.0193 -0.0158 -0.0148 -0.0304 -0.0429 -0.0422 -0.0577
163
22 28 28.5289 75.96 0.0387 0.0384 0.3793 0.3603 0.0190 0.3777 0.3727 0.0050
22 28 28.5296 76.10 1.0150 1.0067 1.4076 0.4062 1.0014 1.4072 0.4010 1.0061
22 28 28.5278 76.20 2.1169 2.0996 2.5554 0.4307 2.1247 2.5530 0.3972 2.1558
22 28 28.5287 76.30 4.1930 4.1587 4.6466 0.4296 4.2170 4.6365 0.3285 4.3080
22 28 28.5270 76.35 6.2043 6.1536 6.6351 0.3987 6.2364 6.6244 0.2324 6.3920
22 28 28.5279 76.50 8.8072 8.7352 9.2311 0.3617 8.8694 9.2076 0.1133 9.0943
22 28 28.5276 76.65 11.4054 11.3122 11.8162 0.3303 11.4859 11.7837 -0.0068 11.7904
22 28 28.5298 76.80 14.6245 14.5050 14.9102 0.1708 14.7394 14.8684 -0.2853 15.1537
22 28 28.5288 77.00 18.2092 18.0604 18.3632 -0.0207 18.3839 18.3247 -0.6021 18.9268
22 28 28.5283 77.20 23.3993 23.2081 23.3626 -0.2968 23.6593 23.3169 -1.0699 24.3868
24 33 28.8093 70.55 0.0233 0.0231 0.3974 0.4386 -0.0412 0.3934 0.4391 -0.0456
24 33 28.8098 70.80 1.0210 1.0127 1.4669 0.5089 0.9580 1.4635 0.4984 0.9651
24 33 28.8117 70.90 1.6104 1.5972 2.0356 0.4987 1.5369 2.0333 0.4706 1.5627
24 33 28.8091 71.06 2.6113 2.5900 3.0509 0.5073 2.5436 3.0442 0.4506 2.5936
24 33 28.8089 71.10 3.5873 3.5580 4.0471 0.5100 3.5371 4.0386 0.4236 3.6150
24 33 28.8103 71.20 5.2007 5.1582 5.6480 0.4920 5.1559 5.6254 0.3557 5.2697
24 33 28.8073 71.30 7.8175 7.7536 8.2361 0.4445 7.7916 8.2129 0.2267 7.9862
24 33 28.8046 71.34 10.3980 10.3131 10.8350 0.4215 10.4135 10.8140 0.1152 10.6988
24 33 28.8042 71.40 13.0077 12.9014 13.3891 0.3298 13.0594 13.3584 -0.0654 13.4238
24 33 28.8039 71.50 15.6048 15.4773 15.8672 0.1778 15.6894 15.8416 -0.3096 16.1512
25 33 28.8172 71.10 0.0500 0.0496 0.4118 0.4465 -0.0347 0.4069 0.4490 -0.0420
25 33 28.8178 71.40 2.1371 2.1196 2.5752 0.5031 2.0720 2.5720 0.4625 2.1095
25 33 28.8150 71.50 6.2141 6.1633 6.6541 0.4725 6.1816 6.6398 0.3028 6.3370
25 33 28.8185 71.58 12.4966 12.3945 12.8781 0.3456 12.5325 12.8405 -0.0262 12.8667
25 33 28.8187 71.73 17.7013 17.5567 17.8739 0.0638 17.8101 17.8455 -0.4825 18.3280
25 33 28.8164 71.80 19.7867 19.6250 19.8724 -0.0665 19.9390 19.8425 -0.6886 20.5311
25 33 28.8182 72.00 21.7840 21.6060 21.7816 -0.1803 21.9619 21.7378 -0.8721 22.6099
25 33 28.8190 72.16 23.3922 23.2011 23.3137 -0.2860 23.5997 23.2524 -1.0387 24.2911
25 33 28.8178 72.30 25.9802 25.7679 25.7957 -0.4431 26.2388 25.7514 -1.2758 27.0272
25 33 28.8152 72.50 28.6056 28.3719 28.3117 -0.5816 28.8933 28.2721 -1.5048 29.7769
164
22 0.038 2.310 6.468 4878.8 5.770 0.071 0.048 0.159 0.233 91,471 20.734 -19.671 -16.107 -12.843 -8.9414 -4.8147 -9.4666 -3.7642
22 1.007 2.211 6.247 4920.0 30.167 0.368 0.249 0.150 0.222 93,326 1.2412 0.0940 -0.2064 -0.3938 -0.4038 -0.2479 -0.4467 -0.2064
22 2.100 2.108 5.972 5025.0 43.638 0.521 0.351 0.137 0.203 96,454 0.6662 0.1106 -0.0807 -0.2344 -0.2515 -0.1582 -0.2392 -0.0999
22 4.159 1.996 5.670 5107.5 61.479 0.722 0.486 0.126 0.187 100,121 0.3695 0.0699 -0.0630 -0.1756 -0.1839 -0.1184 -0.1254 -0.0204
22 6.154 1.923 5.485 5175.0 74.815 0.867 0.581 0.118 0.176 103,353 0.2595 0.0456 -0.0637 -0.1594 -0.1685 -0.1144 -0.1034 -0.0087
22 8.735 1.910 5.266 5216.3 89.160 1.026 0.710 0.115 0.166 106,622 0.1894 0.0277 -0.0663 -0.1533 -0.1594 -0.1113 -0.0890 -0.0041
22 11.312 1.811 5.230 5261.3 101.480 1.157 0.765 0.107 0.162 109,857 0.1573 0.0130 -0.0724 -0.1538 -0.1567 -0.1120 -0.0834 -0.0029
22 14.505 1.579 5.090 5283.8 114.930 1.305 0.773 0.093 0.157 113,201 0.1291 -0.0045 -0.0808 -0.1569 -0.1597 -0.1164 -0.0845 -0.0108
22 18.060 1.298 4.749 5430.0 128.259 1.417 0.740 0.072 0.138 118,754 0.1086 -0.0173 -0.0886 -0.1613 -0.1615 -0.1209 -0.0865 -0.0150
22 23.208 0.946 4.210 5606.3 145.409 1.556 0.668 0.049 0.115 125,913 0.0942 -0.0253 -0.0960 -0.1621 -0.1612 -0.1200 -0.0855 -0.0160
24 0.023 2.297 8.090 4860.0 4.403 0.054 0.029 0.157 0.289 93,537 -1.4821 -64.666 -59.120 -47.780 -37.748 -33.261 -31.454 -31.516
24 1.013 2.320 8.171 4871.3 29.964 0.369 0.200 0.157 0.290 94,879 0.6691 -0.3079 -0.8240 -0.9819 -0.9378 -0.8368 -0.8184 -0.7572
24 1.597 2.286 8.037 4886.3 37.673 0.463 0.251 0.154 0.284 95,821 0.4899 -0.1457 -0.5162 -0.6415 -0.6136 -0.5505 -0.5352 -0.4901
24 2.590 2.217 7.796 4965.0 48.018 0.580 0.315 0.145 0.266 98,397 0.3512 -0.0514 -0.3066 -0.4356 -0.4128 -0.3744 -0.3527 -0.2855
24 3.558 2.140 7.548 5010.0 56.308 0.674 0.365 0.137 0.253 100,279 0.2718 -0.0321 -0.2333 -0.3462 -0.3328 -0.2944 -0.2660 -0.2029
24 5.158 2.064 7.306 5062.5 67.829 0.804 0.434 0.130 0.240 102,933 0.1979 -0.0251 -0.1848 -0.2806 -0.2736 -0.2323 -0.1980 -0.1245
24 7.754 1.997 7.070 5137.5 83.192 0.972 0.524 0.122 0.226 106,937 0.1460 -0.0256 -0.1508 -0.2349 -0.2297 -0.1927 -0.1530 -0.0772
24 10.313 1.998 6.922 5175.0 95.962 1.113 0.613 0.120 0.218 110,127 0.1167 -0.0217 -0.1300 -0.2127 -0.2083 -0.1683 -0.1335 -0.0564
24 12.901 2.073 6.838 5208.8 107.341 1.236 0.716 0.123 0.212 113,195 0.0955 -0.0227 -0.1196 -0.2001 -0.1962 -0.1596 -0.1242 -0.0502
24 15.477 2.116 6.819 5208.8 117.578 1.354 0.803 0.125 0.212 115,611 0.0877 -0.0261 -0.1178 -0.1951 -0.1897 -0.1529 -0.1167 -0.0416
25 0.050 2.326 8.091 4867.5 6.515 0.080 0.044 0.158 0.288 93,712 5.3213 -24.645 -22.351 -18.141 -13.204 -10.591 -10.765 -8.6746
25 2.120 2.255 7.883 4946.3 43.424 0.527 0.288 0.148 0.272 97,531 0.5113 -0.0064 -0.2598 -0.3862 -0.3773 -0.3176 -0.3237 -0.2408
25 6.163 2.045 7.252 5088.8 74.157 0.874 0.471 0.127 0.236 104,449 0.2149 0.0013 -0.1321 -0.2206 -0.2146 -0.1674 -0.1433 -0.0573
25 12.395 1.986 6.863 5223.8 105.211 1.209 0.668 0.117 0.212 112,970 0.1148 -0.0105 -0.1026 -0.1864 -0.1823 -0.1420 -0.1118 -0.0314
25 17.557 1.951 6.835 5216.3 125.237 1.441 0.785 0.115 0.212 117,649 0.0906 -0.0216 -0.1060 -0.1801 -0.1757 -0.1369 -0.1060 -0.0272
25 19.625 1.846 6.790 5253.8 132.416 1.512 0.785 0.108 0.207 120,127 0.0860 -0.0250 -0.1065 -0.1787 -0.1738 -0.1348 -0.1041 -0.0256
25 21.606 1.733 6.684 5283.8 138.945 1.578 0.782 0.100 0.202 122,363 0.0791 -0.0296 -0.1101 -0.1793 -0.1741 -0.1353 -0.1047 -0.0266
25 23.201 1.645 6.574 5310.0 143.987 1.627 0.778 0.094 0.196 124,169 0.0748 -0.0318 -0.1108 -0.1780 -0.1735 -0.1330 -0.1034 -0.0254
25 25.768 1.516 6.397 5388.8 151.749 1.690 0.765 0.084 0.186 127,596 0.0711 -0.0351 -0.1138 -0.1778 -0.1730 -0.1333 -0.1035 -0.0259
25 28.372 1.392 6.209 5452.5 159.237 1.752 0.751 0.075 0.176 130,750 0.0680 -0.0363 -0.1143 -0.1774 -0.1729 -0.1325 -0.1022 -0.0258
165
Run 0.020 0.137 0.255 0.373 0.490 0.608 0.725 0.843 0.020 0.137 0.255 0.373 0.490 0.608 0.725 0.843
22 16.607 -17.533 -17.307 -9.2415 -8.1536 -5.8276 -4.1019 -3.7267 20.621 -15.844 -15.807 -12.580 -7.9285 -7.1782 -6.5404 -3.0514
22 1.0824 0.1298 -0.2750 -0.2579 -0.4009 -0.2994 -0.2722 -0.2321 1.2469 0.2070 -0.2479 -0.3909 -0.2994 -0.3508 -0.3523 -0.1663
22 0.5839 0.1230 -0.1198 -0.1562 -0.2371 -0.1884 -0.1507 -0.0807 0.6593 0.1655 -0.1068 -0.2083 -0.1829 -0.2131 -0.2014 -0.0608
22 0.3321 0.0755 -0.0796 -0.1226 -0.1756 -0.1295 -0.0977 -0.0114 0.3750 0.1001 -0.0727 -0.1486 -0.1368 -0.1482 -0.1170 -0.0069
22 0.2300 0.0501 -0.0754 -0.1184 -0.1580 -0.1212 -0.0866 -0.0023 0.2609 0.0688 -0.0725 -0.1364 -0.1285 -0.1357 -0.1020 0.0052
22 0.1597 0.0298 -0.0762 -0.1179 -0.1528 -0.1171 -0.0820 0.0003 0.1902 0.0460 -0.0773 -0.1331 -0.1271 -0.1284 -0.0914 0.0054
22 0.1306 0.0132 -0.0829 -0.1234 -0.1524 -0.1171 -0.0806 0.0006 0.1590 0.0270 -0.0858 -0.1350 -0.1299 -0.1281 -0.0903 0.0020
22 0.1051 -0.0054 -0.0913 -0.1290 -0.1566 -0.1207 -0.0857 -0.0066 0.1324 0.0071 -0.0961 -0.1397 -0.1327 -0.1307 -0.0924 -0.0055
22 0.0869 -0.0193 -0.0988 -0.1352 -0.1606 -0.1244 -0.0898 -0.0113 0.1150 -0.0064 -0.1047 -0.1434 -0.1380 -0.1344 -0.0958 -0.0112
22 0.0743 -0.0291 -0.1020 -0.1365 -0.1616 -0.1249 -0.0910 -0.0127 0.0993 -0.0174 -0.1098 -0.1451 -0.1393 -0.1353 -0.0959 -0.0141
24 -2.2299 -64.292 -56.503 -45.723 -38.121 -33.137 -33.137 -29.086 -1.7314 -65.352 -59.183 -47.655 -38.433 - -29.086 -29.896
24 0.6804 -0.4060 -0.7984 -0.8582 -0.9207 -0.7814 -0.8070 -0.7273 0.7032 -0.3420 -0.8112 -0.8596 -0.8212 - -0.7416 -0.7473
24 0.5242 -0.1862 -0.4919 -0.5541 -0.5856 -0.5225 -0.5469 -0.4549 0.5350 -0.1619 -0.4910 -0.5388 -0.5234 - -0.4973 -0.4675
24 0.3779 -0.0786 -0.2966 -0.3716 -0.4055 -0.3516 -0.3466 -0.2693 0.3867 -0.0486 -0.2960 -0.3527 -0.3472 - -0.3260 -0.2816
24 0.2941 -0.0487 -0.2300 -0.2952 -0.3308 -0.2810 -0.2584 -0.1835 0.3050 -0.0268 -0.2296 -0.2871 -0.2855 - -0.2474 -0.1920
24 0.2124 -0.0388 -0.1804 -0.2373 -0.2641 -0.2200 -0.1940 -0.1114 0.2205 -0.0238 -0.1798 -0.2340 -0.2312 - -0.1890 -0.1220
24 0.1518 -0.0336 -0.1480 -0.1983 -0.2224 -0.1836 -0.1528 -0.0703 0.1642 -0.0185 -0.1491 -0.1957 -0.1948 - -0.1511 -0.0739
24 0.1173 -0.0285 -0.1308 -0.1796 -0.2025 -0.1662 -0.1325 -0.0511 0.1340 -0.0159 -0.1342 -0.1783 -0.1761 - -0.1314 -0.0567
24 0.0953 -0.0284 -0.1226 -0.1689 -0.1930 -0.1563 -0.1233 -0.0437 0.1106 -0.0164 -0.1262 -0.1678 -0.1676 - -0.1214 -0.0485
24 0.0836 -0.0321 -0.1207 -0.1651 -0.1883 -0.1496 -0.1162 -0.0360 0.0994 -0.0180 -0.1252 -0.1645 -0.1628 - -0.1154 -0.0414
25 3.6081 -24.790 -22.496 -16.370 -12.595 -9.4586 -9.4586 -8.9069 4.3921 -24.239 -22.380 -18.112 -11.898 - -9.1973 -8.4423
25 0.4922 -0.0125 -0.2605 -0.3142 -0.3631 -0.3087 -0.2904 -0.2204 0.5561 0.0242 -0.2476 -0.3291 -0.2972 - -0.2843 -0.2224
25 0.2060 0.0016 -0.1284 -0.1776 -0.2062 -0.1653 -0.1307 -0.0508 0.2354 0.0205 -0.1255 -0.1830 -0.1769 - -0.1375 -0.0527
25 0.1085 -0.0142 -0.1090 -0.1529 -0.1781 -0.1408 -0.1064 -0.0248 0.1305 0.0004 -0.1105 -0.1558 -0.1515 - -0.1110 -0.0295
25 0.0823 -0.0251 -0.1103 -0.1510 -0.1742 -0.1368 -0.1011 -0.0220 0.1004 -0.0111 -0.1140 -0.1536 -0.1500 - -0.1044 -0.0273
25 0.0769 -0.0286 -0.1098 -0.1496 -0.1728 -0.1349 -0.0997 -0.0214 0.0969 -0.0134 -0.1144 -0.1526 -0.1490 - -0.1033 -0.0252
25 0.0693 -0.0338 -0.1127 -0.1508 -0.1741 -0.1364 -0.1013 -0.0227 0.0897 -0.0194 -0.1174 -0.1541 -0.1499 - -0.1045 -0.0258
25 0.0676 -0.0352 -0.1127 -0.1500 -0.1733 -0.1350 -0.1006 -0.0222 0.0870 -0.0212 -0.1176 -0.1541 -0.1493 - -0.1037 -0.0272
25 0.0614 -0.0389 -0.1132 -0.1503 -0.1736 -0.1353 -0.1001 -0.0233 0.0822 -0.0238 -0.1195 -0.1535 -0.1504 - -0.1040 -0.0272
25 0.0598 -0.0404 -0.1133 -0.1493 -0.1726 -0.1353 -0.1006 -0.0228 0.0781 -0.0267 -0.1204 -0.1539 -0.1502 - -0.1032 -0.0272
166
Run 0.020 0.137 0.255 0.373 0.490 0.608 0.725 0.843 0.020 0.137 0.255 0.373 0.490 0.608
22 20.959 -12.318 -12.881 -9.6167 -5.2273 -3.0514 -5.4524 -3.7267 19.045 -17.383 -18.395 -12.355 -15.619 -13.894
22 1.2998 0.3400 -0.1134 -0.2450 -0.2922 -0.1391 -0.2979 -0.2321 1.1997 0.1269 -0.3437 -0.4095 -0.6183 -0.6083
22 0.6998 0.2409 -0.0355 -0.1438 -0.1740 -0.1075 -0.1623 -0.0931 0.6806 0.1367 -0.1329 -0.2104 -0.3564 -0.3256
22 0.3930 0.1440 -0.0239 -0.1101 -0.1350 -0.0904 -0.1035 -0.0270 0.4110 0.0925 -0.0796 -0.1472 -0.2223 -0.2040
22 0.2930 0.0985 -0.0304 -0.1081 -0.1271 -0.0922 -0.0948 -0.0152 0.3009 0.0676 -0.0730 -0.1339 -0.1874 -0.1664
22 0.2222 0.0686 -0.0412 -0.1108 -0.1263 -0.0950 -0.0861 -0.0102 0.2346 0.0527 -0.0699 -0.1284 -0.1713 -0.1519
22 0.1827 0.0467 -0.0506 -0.1169 -0.1310 -0.1016 -0.0837 -0.0111 0.2060 0.0351 -0.0744 -0.1295 -0.1637 -0.1417
22 0.1536 0.0247 -0.0627 -0.1249 -0.1355 -0.1075 -0.0897 -0.0177 0.1651 0.0190 -0.0845 -0.1372 -0.1630 -0.1395
22 0.1402 0.0081 -0.0731 -0.1315 -0.1399 -0.1148 -0.0934 -0.0217 0.1488 0.0076 -0.0911 -0.1404 -0.1620 -0.1373
22 0.1270 -0.0047 -0.0791 -0.1349 -0.1423 -0.1182 -0.0943 -0.0244 0.1387 -0.0017 -0.0955 -0.1423 -0.1591 -0.1349
24 1.3219 -65.289 -55.382 -51.518 -38.433 -31.703 -29.647 -29.647
24 0.7672 -0.3207 -0.7288 -0.9250 -0.8311 -0.7600 -0.7401 -0.7800
24 0.5611 -0.1421 -0.4396 -0.5802 -0.5469 -0.5198 -0.4964 -0.4883
24 0.4201 -0.0419 -0.2543 -0.3616 -0.3577 -0.3411 -0.3305 -0.2999
24 0.3415 -0.0151 -0.1912 -0.2806 -0.2907 -0.2741 -0.2543 -0.2061
24 0.2563 -0.0081 -0.1480 -0.2172 -0.2393 -0.2167 -0.1935 -0.1371
24 0.1917 -0.0046 -0.1171 -0.1714 -0.2007 -0.1799 -0.1539 -0.0891
24 0.1576 -0.0041 -0.1035 -0.1516 -0.1835 -0.1648 -0.1359 -0.0718
24 0.1324 -0.0037 -0.0962 -0.1406 -0.1718 -0.1555 -0.1267 -0.0602
24 0.1220 -0.0056 -0.0938 -0.1348 -0.1670 -0.1486 -0.1198 -0.0541
25 5.2632 -23.716 -21.451 -19.360 -11.578 -8.9940 -7.8325 -8.1229
25 0.5772 0.0629 -0.1960 -0.3277 -0.3087 -0.2686 -0.2829 -0.2523
25 0.2593 0.0420 -0.0879 -0.1543 -0.1805 -0.1522 -0.1368 -0.0702
25 0.1543 0.0176 -0.0782 -0.1256 -0.1556 -0.1354 -0.1134 -0.0451
25 0.1263 0.0051 -0.0808 -0.1213 -0.1533 -0.1329 -0.1080 -0.0396
25 0.1235 0.0019 -0.0817 -0.1198 -0.1515 -0.1318 -0.1064 -0.0392
25 0.1156 -0.0042 -0.0857 -0.1213 -0.1543 -0.1337 -0.1079 -0.0401
25 0.1129 -0.0063 -0.0857 -0.1215 -0.1531 -0.1331 -0.1072 -0.0395
25 0.1097 -0.0107 -0.0874 -0.1220 -0.1537 -0.1339 -0.1081 -0.0406
25 0.1049 -0.0134 -0.0888 -0.1214 -0.1540 -0.1340 -0.1073 -0.0395
167
Run 0.051 0.139 0.228 0.316 0.360 0.404 0.448 0.492 0.536 0.580 0.624 0.668 0.714 0.809 0.905 1.000
22 3.5889 6.5526 4.3017 3.5889 3.5889 4.4142 4.3017 4.2642 - - 6.0649 4.7143 4.6018 5.3521 3.9265 4.5643
22 0.1527 0.2814 0.1798 0.1398 0.1527 0.1984 0.1927 0.1641 - - 0.2342 0.1827 0.1770 0.1798 0.1398 0.1369
22 0.0729 0.1470 0.0983 0.0537 0.0729 0.0948 0.0852 0.0784 - - 0.1182 0.0928 0.0715 0.0729 0.0537 0.0393
22 0.0440 0.0783 0.0537 0.0374 0.0343 0.0450 0.0343 0.0370 - - 0.0506 0.0412 0.0274 0.0246 0.0149 -0.0017
22 0.0328 0.0604 0.0393 0.0218 0.0197 0.0269 0.0176 0.0239 - - 0.0351 0.0288 0.0129 0.0066 0.0045 -0.0152
22 0.0219 0.0443 0.0265 0.0112 0.0081 0.0130 0.0034 0.0110 - - 0.0189 0.0160 -0.0012 -0.0102 -0.0149 -0.0315
22 0.0184 0.0393 0.0220 0.0078 0.0042 0.0067 -0.0017 0.0042 - - 0.0114 0.0090 -0.0064 -0.0148 -0.0171 -0.0334
22 0.0135 0.0314 0.0172 0.0033 -0.0013 0.0004 -0.0096 -0.0012 - - 0.0033 0.0015 -0.0131 -0.0235 -0.0244 -0.0414
22 0.0091 0.0263 0.0121 0.0002 -0.0065 -0.0061 -0.0154 -0.0048 - - -0.0028 -0.0029 -0.0189 -0.0311 -0.0295 -0.0460
22 0.0070 0.0231 0.0093 -0.0046 -0.0103 -0.0109 -0.0207 -0.0096 - - -0.0070 -0.0060 -0.0222 -0.0347 -0.0334 -0.0512
24 -10.019 -9.7073 -8.8349 -10.580 -8.8349 -7.9626 -9.4580 -8.9595 - -10.517 -8.8349 -8.7103 -10.704 -8.8349 -9.4580 -9.5827
24 -0.1728 -0.1927 -0.1728 -0.1600 -0.1472 -0.1386 -0.1742 -0.1756 - -0.1443 -0.1585 -0.1571 -0.1500 -0.1728 -0.1870 -0.1785
24 -0.1123 -0.0988 -0.0871 -0.1123 -0.1042 -0.0907 -0.1123 -0.1222 - -0.1024 -0.1033 -0.1015 -0.1222 -0.1033 -0.1295 -0.1313
24 -0.0625 -0.0542 -0.0575 -0.0681 -0.0631 -0.0597 -0.0731 -0.0692 - -0.0669 -0.0625 -0.0614 -0.0792 -0.0781 -0.0886 -0.1003
24 -0.0556 -0.0422 -0.0483 -0.0596 -0.0596 -0.0463 -0.0596 -0.0564 - -0.0588 -0.0556 -0.0511 -0.0714 -0.0706 -0.0782 -0.0867
24 -0.0335 -0.0240 -0.0257 -0.0360 -0.0413 -0.0349 -0.0492 -0.0444 - -0.0436 -0.0439 -0.0433 -0.0522 -0.0595 -0.0648 -0.0779
24 -0.0202 -0.0141 -0.0185 -0.0306 -0.0339 -0.0299 -0.0427 -0.0343 - -0.0356 -0.0356 -0.0302 -0.0481 -0.0512 -0.0547 -0.0720
24 -0.0148 -0.0063 -0.0109 -0.0239 -0.0278 -0.0261 -0.0356 -0.0279 - -0.0328 -0.0264 -0.0263 -0.0447 -0.0486 -0.0538 -0.0679
24 -0.0127 -0.0038 -0.0085 -0.0230 -0.0272 -0.0261 -0.0376 -0.0262 - -0.0313 -0.0272 -0.0251 -0.0427 -0.0501 -0.0499 -0.0674
24 -0.0154 -0.0066 -0.0146 -0.0258 -0.0309 -0.0312 -0.0404 -0.0300 - -0.0371 -0.0301 -0.0276 -0.0515 -0.0561 -0.0551 -0.0736
25 0.7915 0.6754 0.7915 1.0529 1.3432 1.4594 1.0529 0.7334 -1.8799 1.1109 1.0819 0.8496 0.9948 1.8949 0.7915 1.7788
25 0.0065 0.0228 0.0255 0.0065 0.0065 0.0289 0.0126 0.0174 -0.0567 0.0072 0.0133 0.0079 -0.0078 0.0126 -0.0132 -0.0146
25 0.0037 0.0135 0.0102 -0.0008 -0.0050 -0.0043 -0.0160 -0.0055 -0.0267 -0.0113 -0.0071 -0.0024 -0.0227 -0.0225 -0.0291 -0.0466
25 -0.0043 0.0070 -0.0011 -0.0162 -0.0184 -0.0162 -0.0259 -0.0151 -0.0237 -0.0259 -0.0184 -0.0172 -0.0408 -0.0421 -0.0421 -0.0622
25 -0.0025 0.0083 -0.0009 -0.0139 -0.0169 -0.0196 -0.0276 -0.0176 -0.0178 -0.0239 -0.0178 -0.0148 -0.0357 -0.0422 -0.0429 -0.0590
25 -0.0006 0.0096 0.0015 -0.0109 -0.0156 -0.0167 -0.0265 -0.0148 -0.0137 -0.0206 -0.0164 -0.0131 -0.0324 -0.0409 -0.0408 -0.0572
25 -0.0014 0.0090 -0.0002 -0.0126 -0.0163 -0.0187 -0.0286 -0.0167 -0.0133 -0.0214 -0.0170 -0.0152 -0.0333 -0.0430 -0.0429 -0.0583
25 -0.0013 0.0101 0.0004 -0.0117 -0.0157 -0.0180 -0.0284 -0.0166 -0.0112 -0.0217 -0.0163 -0.0142 -0.0315 -0.0417 -0.0410 -0.0582
25 -0.0020 0.0097 -0.0004 -0.0134 -0.0181 -0.0209 -0.0306 -0.0184 -0.0115 -0.0214 -0.0182 -0.0152 -0.0333 -0.0431 -0.0435 -0.0599
25 -0.0017 0.0108 0.0007 -0.0130 -0.0167 -0.0203 -0.0295 -0.0174 -0.0098 -0.0198 -0.0164 -0.0147 -0.0305 -0.0432 -0.0417 -0.0579
168
COMP Propeller
27 15 28.8198 70.90 0.0148 0.0147 0.4853 0.4608 0.0245 0.4791 0.4591 0.0200
27 15 28.8209 71.51 1.0283 1.0199 1.5271 0.5080 1.0191 1.5225 0.4872 1.0354
27 15 28.8254 71.90 1.6072 1.5941 2.0928 0.4908 1.6020 2.0871 0.4509 1.6363
27 15 28.8210 72.20 2.6009 2.5797 3.1003 0.5007 2.5996 3.0923 0.4290 2.6633
27 15 28.8218 72.40 3.5999 3.5705 4.1147 0.5033 3.6114 4.1027 0.3992 3.7035
27 15 28.8212 72.50 5.1953 5.1529 5.7108 0.4762 5.2345 5.6956 0.3184 5.3772
27 15 28.8178 72.60 7.7927 7.7290 8.2675 0.4340 7.8335 8.2400 0.1853 8.0546
27 15 28.8250 72.70 10.4003 10.3153 10.8874 0.4121 10.4753 10.8657 0.0744 10.7912
27 15 28.8209 72.70 12.9947 12.8885 13.4362 0.3270 13.1092 13.4050 -0.1045 13.5095
27 15 28.8208 72.80 13.0036 12.8974 13.4464 0.3312 13.1152 13.4166 -0.0985 13.5151
28 15 28.8259 72.60 0.0272 0.0270 0.4336 0.4209 0.0127 0.4291 0.4179 0.0112
28 15 28.8231 72.70 0.4629 0.4591 0.8891 0.4391 0.4500 0.8770 0.4340 0.4429
28 15 28.8250 72.70 1.0256 1.0172 1.4728 0.4562 1.0166 1.4675 0.4359 1.0316
28 15 28.8246 72.70 2.1197 2.1024 2.5885 0.4679 2.1207 2.5808 0.4126 2.1682
28 15 28.8243 72.70 3.1050 3.0796 3.6042 0.4918 3.1124 3.5987 0.4056 3.1931
28 15 28.8233 72.80 3.6031 3.5737 4.1030 0.4860 3.6170 4.0864 0.3776 3.7089
28 15 28.8255 72.80 4.2111 4.1767 4.7091 0.4886 4.2205 4.7000 0.3640 4.3360
28 15 28.8274 72.80 4.7073 4.6688 5.2104 0.4841 4.7262 5.1952 0.3421 4.8531
28 15 28.8243 72.80 5.7153 5.6686 6.2178 0.4765 5.7413 6.2073 0.3007 5.9066
28 15 28.8257 72.81 6.8005 6.7449 7.2852 0.4532 6.8321 7.2681 0.2428 7.0253
31 20 28.7930 73.50 0.0245 0.0243 0.4526 0.4267 0.0259 0.4494 0.4258 0.0236
31 20 28.7917 73.60 1.0314 1.0230 1.4832 0.4722 1.0110 1.4751 0.4565 1.0187
31 20 28.7909 73.70 1.6070 1.5939 2.0776 0.4676 1.6101 2.0710 0.4349 1.6361
31 20 28.7907 73.80 2.5953 2.5741 3.0773 0.4815 2.5957 3.0671 0.4176 2.6495
31 20 28.7880 73.80 3.5892 3.5599 4.0929 0.4860 3.6069 4.0810 0.3895 3.6914
31 20 28.7859 73.90 5.2031 5.1606 5.7040 0.4703 5.2337 5.6892 0.3217 5.3675
31 20 28.7905 73.90 7.8060 7.7422 8.2760 0.4291 7.8468 8.2558 0.1902 8.0656
31 20 28.7902 73.99 10.3948 10.3099 10.8727 0.4013 10.4714 10.8469 0.0768 10.7702
31 20 28.7888 74.00 12.9775 12.8715 13.4074 0.3120 13.0954 13.3786 -0.1070 13.4856
31 20 28.7876 74.10 15.5670 15.4398 15.8888 0.1704 15.7185 15.8617 -0.3407 16.2024
169
27 0.015 2.083 1.759 5925.0 3.489 0.035 0.080 0.096 0.042 93,872 71.957 5.8387 -14.566 -23.885 -24.964 -23.787 -25.945 -41.347
27 1.020 1.662 1.734 5898.8 30.114 0.306 0.561 0.077 0.042 94,236 0.7967 0.1401 -0.2609 -0.4613 -0.4628 -0.3809 -0.3639 -0.5277
27 1.594 1.481 1.679 5906.3 37.689 0.383 0.645 0.068 0.041 94,796 0.4657 0.0538 -0.2109 -0.3473 -0.3636 -0.3130 -0.2949 -0.3554
27 2.580 1.198 1.550 5958.8 47.989 0.483 0.713 0.054 0.037 96,365 0.2467 0.0078 -0.1708 -0.2702 -0.2802 -0.2339 -0.1999 -0.2233
27 3.570 0.940 1.388 6000.0 56.486 0.565 0.731 0.042 0.033 97,746 0.1525 -0.0209 -0.1491 -0.2322 -0.2387 -0.1911 -0.1572 -0.1608
27 5.153 0.573 1.081 6168.8 67.888 0.660 0.669 0.024 0.024 101,489 0.0844 -0.0441 -0.1377 -0.2104 -0.2093 -0.1693 -0.1324 -0.1165
27 7.729 0.009 0.547 6435.0 83.175 0.776 0.024 0.000 0.011 107,319 0.0284 -0.0650 -0.1352 -0.1973 -0.1908 -0.1529 -0.1181 -0.0914
27 10.315 -0.371 -0.026 6633.8 96.102 0.869 23.271 -0.014 -0.001 112,009 0.0004 -0.0728 -0.1300 -0.1867 -0.1773 -0.1406 -0.1071 -0.0761
27 12.889 -0.378 -0.505 6907.5 107.419 0.933 1.335 -0.013 -0.009 117,690 -0.0196 -0.0775 -0.1269 -0.1793 -0.1694 -0.1333 -0.1001 -0.0638
27 12.897 -0.378 -0.505 6907.5 107.456 0.933 1.336 -0.013 -0.009 117,696 -0.0197 -0.0796 -0.1290 -0.1824 -0.1724 -0.1354 -0.1032 -0.0669
28 0.027 2.144 1.785 5943.8 4.781 0.048 0.111 0.098 0.043 93,865 39.130 3.1532 -9.4438 -14.515 -14.621 -14.461 -15.048 -23.535
28 0.459 1.901 1.781 5928.8 20.171 0.204 0.416 0.087 0.043 93,962 1.9524 0.3152 -0.5474 -0.8453 -0.7920 -0.7230 -0.7450 -1.2844
28 1.017 1.693 1.753 5928.8 30.101 0.305 0.562 0.078 0.042 94,392 0.7989 0.1421 -0.3010 -0.4879 -0.4893 -0.4214 -0.3874 -0.5672
28 2.102 1.366 1.643 5970.0 43.346 0.436 0.692 0.062 0.039 95,862 0.3275 0.0282 -0.1848 -0.3074 -0.3197 -0.2691 -0.2465 -0.2821
28 3.080 1.100 1.503 5988.8 52.496 0.526 0.735 0.050 0.035 96,887 0.1893 -0.0113 -0.1651 -0.2567 -0.2605 -0.2221 -0.1838 -0.1960
28 3.574 0.967 1.415 6052.5 56.563 0.561 0.732 0.043 0.033 98,235 0.1447 -0.0245 -0.1607 -0.2433 -0.2462 -0.2063 -0.1684 -0.1720
28 4.177 0.816 1.299 6086.3 61.162 0.603 0.724 0.036 0.030 99,195 0.1194 -0.0319 -0.1481 -0.2254 -0.2243 -0.1871 -0.1471 -0.1447
28 4.669 0.697 1.194 6135.0 64.674 0.633 0.705 0.030 0.027 100,297 0.1013 -0.0371 -0.1466 -0.2213 -0.2200 -0.1756 -0.1392 -0.1321
28 5.669 0.474 0.994 6240.0 71.278 0.685 0.625 0.020 0.022 102,607 0.0672 -0.0474 -0.1396 -0.2079 -0.2067 -0.1658 -0.1292 -0.1109
28 6.745 0.234 0.765 6333.8 77.764 0.737 0.430 0.009 0.016 104,777 0.0441 -0.0566 -0.1376 -0.1986 -0.1954 -0.1576 -0.1213 -0.0972
31 0.024 2.459 2.913 5992.5 4.526 0.045 0.073 0.111 0.069 94,253 43.447 -3.9010 -19.427 -23.338 -20.612 -19.427 -20.375 -22.746
31 1.023 2.283 2.733 6041.3 30.204 0.300 0.479 0.101 0.063 95,775 1.0081 0.2226 -0.2996 -0.5389 -0.5389 -0.4855 -0.4714 -0.4052
31 1.594 2.164 2.685 6041.3 37.744 0.375 0.577 0.096 0.062 96,203 0.6112 0.1414 -0.2109 -0.3979 -0.3979 -0.3555 -0.3356 -0.2534
31 2.574 1.976 2.630 6037.5 48.013 0.477 0.685 0.088 0.061 96,877 0.3637 0.0723 -0.1610 -0.2919 -0.2964 -0.2505 -0.2153 -0.1398
31 3.560 1.772 2.569 6052.5 56.495 0.560 0.738 0.078 0.059 97,837 0.2563 0.0298 -0.1458 -0.2518 -0.2582 -0.2146 -0.1721 -0.0964
31 5.161 1.455 2.388 6116.3 68.057 0.668 0.777 0.063 0.054 99,974 0.1607 -0.0065 -0.1401 -0.2258 -0.2272 -0.1848 -0.1496 -0.0718
31 7.742 1.002 2.000 6273.8 83.396 0.798 0.763 0.041 0.043 104,161 0.0987 -0.0347 -0.1317 -0.2039 -0.2024 -0.1632 -0.1291 -0.0546
31 10.310 0.591 1.536 6472.5 96.258 0.892 0.656 0.023 0.031 108,840 0.0690 -0.0446 -0.1261 -0.1919 -0.1877 -0.1499 -0.1190 -0.0447
31 12.871 0.218 1.078 6675.0 107.569 0.967 0.374 0.008 0.021 113,463 0.0429 -0.0527 -0.1239 -0.1868 -0.1798 -0.1419 -0.1136 -0.0407
31 15.440 -0.384 0.109 6543.8 117.831 1.080 -7.243 -0.015 0.002 113,204 0.0104 -0.0637 -0.1224 -0.1823 -0.1719 -0.1365 -0.1081 -0.0371
170
Run 0.020 0.137 0.255 0.373 0.490 0.608 0.725 0.843 0.020 0.137 0.255 0.373 0.490 0.608 0.725 0.843
27 67.641 4.6615 -17.116 -20.550 -26.043 -23.983 -25.847 -23.199 67.347 4.6615 -16.332 -21.237 -23.002 -25.945 -25.847 -25.259
27 0.7868 0.1302 -0.2707 -0.3992 -0.4642 -0.3837 -0.3456 -0.1917 0.7882 0.1543 -0.2594 -0.4006 -0.4091 -0.4119 -0.3442 -0.2114
27 0.4639 0.0502 -0.2172 -0.2976 -0.3554 -0.3058 -0.2714 -0.1477 0.4621 0.0737 -0.2100 -0.3012 -0.3220 -0.3220 -0.2714 -0.1712
27 0.2389 -0.0028 -0.1703 -0.2339 -0.2747 -0.2339 -0.1926 -0.0899 0.2462 0.0123 -0.1708 -0.2339 -0.2495 -0.2440 -0.1976 -0.1044
27 0.1493 -0.0265 -0.1491 -0.2052 -0.2342 -0.1943 -0.1568 -0.0644 0.1602 -0.0156 -0.1532 -0.2040 -0.2096 -0.2088 -0.1608 -0.0749
27 0.0769 -0.0508 -0.1433 -0.1805 -0.2079 -0.1654 -0.1344 -0.0469 0.0909 -0.0383 -0.1431 -0.1852 -0.1841 -0.1805 -0.1347 -0.0575
27 0.0175 -0.0721 -0.1378 -0.1714 -0.1908 -0.1548 -0.1203 -0.0413 0.0285 -0.0620 -0.1408 -0.1744 -0.1729 -0.1663 -0.1222 -0.0488
27 -0.0108 -0.0799 -0.1349 -0.1628 -0.1783 -0.1441 -0.1106 -0.0344 0.0038 -0.0686 -0.1382 -0.1660 -0.1631 -0.1564 -0.1132 -0.0418
27 -0.0303 -0.0835 -0.1312 -0.1587 -0.1717 -0.1378 -0.1036 -0.0302 -0.0139 -0.0734 -0.1368 -0.1613 -0.1572 -0.1494 -0.1079 -0.0378
27 -0.0324 -0.0856 -0.1332 -0.1597 -0.1738 -0.1398 -0.1057 -0.0334 -0.0180 -0.0765 -0.1398 -0.1634 -0.1593 -0.1514 -0.1110 -0.0399
28 37.688 1.5519 -10.351 -13.127 -14.675 -14.568 -15.048 -14.141 36.621 2.0323 -10.405 -13.714 -14.034 -15.102 -15.048 -14.301
28 1.9210 0.2681 -0.5976 -0.7356 -0.7983 -0.7042 -0.7606 -0.5913 1.8708 0.2932 -0.5442 -0.7011 -0.6979 -0.7638 -0.7324 -0.6477
28 0.7904 0.1067 -0.3110 -0.4242 -0.4907 -0.4242 -0.3846 -0.2288 0.7791 0.1180 -0.2996 -0.4143 -0.4355 -0.4511 -0.3577 -0.2529
28 0.3282 0.0138 -0.1971 -0.2691 -0.3129 -0.2691 -0.2375 -0.1245 0.3193 0.0262 -0.1910 -0.2684 -0.2821 -0.2821 -0.2307 -0.1362
28 0.1921 -0.0234 -0.1646 -0.2259 -0.2638 -0.2175 -0.1829 -0.0842 0.1936 -0.0108 -0.1693 -0.2231 -0.2348 -0.2301 -0.1829 -0.0964
28 0.1447 -0.0342 -0.1607 -0.2163 -0.2454 -0.2018 -0.1684 -0.0757 0.1524 -0.0197 -0.1607 -0.2115 -0.2172 -0.2163 -0.1684 -0.0866
28 0.1204 -0.0392 -0.1481 -0.1985 -0.2264 -0.1830 -0.1478 -0.0592 0.1267 -0.0299 -0.1481 -0.1957 -0.2026 -0.1954 -0.1512 -0.0716
28 0.0946 -0.0486 -0.1469 -0.1914 -0.2188 -0.1775 -0.1405 -0.0581 0.0995 -0.0375 -0.1466 -0.1929 -0.1923 -0.1914 -0.1432 -0.0637
28 0.0631 -0.0578 -0.1424 -0.1830 -0.2028 -0.1670 -0.1317 -0.0474 0.0730 -0.0464 -0.1444 -0.1807 -0.1840 -0.1782 -0.1317 -0.0570
28 0.0364 -0.0639 -0.1380 -0.1753 -0.1920 -0.1583 -0.1245 -0.0419 0.0478 -0.0543 -0.1416 -0.1753 -0.1766 -0.1694 -0.1248 -0.0524
31 42.796 -5.7973 -18.775 -20.079 -22.272 -18.953 -21.679 -19.546 40.603 -5.7973 -19.960 -20.968 -19.486 -20.612 -20.020 -21.027
31 1.0419 0.1804 -0.2968 -0.4615 -0.5404 -0.4615 -0.4615 -0.3193 1.0179 0.2043 -0.2982 -0.4390 -0.4601 -0.5009 -0.4221 -0.3461
31 0.6356 0.1143 -0.2173 -0.3311 -0.3979 -0.3392 -0.3311 -0.2064 0.6185 0.1378 -0.2191 -0.3184 -0.3473 -0.3564 -0.3058 -0.2145
31 0.3660 0.0572 -0.1599 -0.2500 -0.2958 -0.2449 -0.2136 -0.1062 0.3637 0.0717 -0.1605 -0.2399 -0.2556 -0.2606 -0.2035 -0.1213
31 0.2514 0.0168 -0.1454 -0.2170 -0.2534 -0.2097 -0.1725 -0.0722 0.2567 0.0346 -0.1458 -0.2121 -0.2214 -0.2206 -0.1725 -0.0867
31 0.1543 -0.0185 -0.1404 -0.1959 -0.2255 -0.1837 -0.1474 -0.0575 0.1643 -0.0009 -0.1401 -0.1931 -0.1970 -0.1959 -0.1474 -0.0681
31 0.0840 -0.0419 -0.1323 -0.1781 -0.2024 -0.1632 -0.1271 -0.0414 0.0913 -0.0285 -0.1353 -0.1795 -0.1812 -0.1728 -0.1290 -0.0507
31 0.0467 -0.0522 -0.1296 -0.1680 -0.1873 -0.1507 -0.1158 -0.0345 0.0588 -0.0411 -0.1344 -0.1689 -0.1683 -0.1616 -0.1172 -0.0419
31 0.0235 -0.0593 -0.1280 -0.1629 -0.1811 -0.1450 -0.1109 -0.0323 0.0353 -0.0483 -0.1326 -0.1647 -0.1636 -0.1557 -0.1132 -0.0388
31 -0.0049 -0.0707 -0.1288 -0.1594 -0.1759 -0.1413 -0.1068 -0.0307 0.0051 -0.0598 -0.1350 -0.1629 -0.1595 -0.1525 -0.1095 -0.0377
171
Run 0.020 0.137 0.255 0.373 0.490 0.608 0.725 0.843
27 70.290 6.5254 -14.664 -20.452 -23.199 -20.550 -24.082 -26.730
27 0.8673 0.1924 -0.2227 -0.3724 -0.4006 -0.3611 -0.3470 -0.2538
27 0.5109 0.0989 -0.1775 -0.2805 -0.3193 -0.2850 -0.2642 -0.1974
27 0.2908 0.0329 -0.1396 -0.2183 -0.2451 -0.2177 -0.1976 -0.1256
27 0.2034 0.0033 -0.1229 -0.1903 -0.2117 -0.1842 -0.1608 -0.0935
27 0.1227 -0.0220 -0.1112 -0.1732 -0.1878 -0.1629 -0.1369 -0.0723
27 0.0557 -0.0505 -0.1175 -0.1667 -0.1758 -0.1516 -0.1252 -0.0635
27 0.0250 -0.0584 -0.1125 -0.1607 -0.1671 -0.1431 -0.1153 -0.0575
27 0.0087 -0.0648 -0.1118 -0.1561 -0.1599 -0.1383 -0.1093 -0.0518
27 0.0044 -0.0669 -0.1139 -0.1581 -0.1619 -0.1404 -0.1125 -0.0551
28 37.208 1.6587 -9.0168 -13.607 -13.714 -13.234 -15.102 -15.582
28 2.0183 0.3810 -0.5191 -0.7042 -0.7356 -0.6477 -0.7073 -0.6760
28 0.8442 0.1576 -0.2628 -0.3973 -0.4426 -0.3888 -0.3591 -0.2925
28 0.3686 0.0515 -0.1601 -0.2567 -0.2821 -0.2554 -0.2314 -0.1615
28 0.2310 0.0070 -0.1389 -0.2128 -0.2324 -0.2095 -0.1871 -0.1179
28 0.1918 -0.0080 -0.1341 -0.2055 -0.2232 -0.1954 -0.1684 -0.1051
28 0.1566 -0.0133 -0.1188 -0.1861 -0.2023 -0.1816 -0.1543 -0.0906
28 0.1260 -0.0226 -0.1176 -0.1830 -0.1988 -0.1741 -0.1460 -0.0834
28 0.1066 -0.0337 -0.1132 -0.1739 -0.1856 -0.1652 -0.1337 -0.0730
28 0.0774 -0.0434 -0.1171 -0.1679 -0.1792 -0.1578 -0.1262 -0.0654
31 42.973 -5.0862 -17.768 -20.612 -20.375 -19.249 -21.146 -22.272
31 1.1291 0.2296 -0.2490 -0.4221 -0.4812 -0.4404 -0.4362 -0.3700
31 0.6898 0.1532 -0.1775 -0.3058 -0.3546 -0.3284 -0.3067 -0.2308
31 0.4174 0.0868 -0.1297 -0.2293 -0.2567 -0.2399 -0.2142 -0.1414
31 0.2992 0.0496 -0.1154 -0.2061 -0.2279 -0.2040 -0.1798 -0.0977
31 0.2037 0.0120 -0.1164 -0.1834 -0.2037 -0.1814 -0.1549 -0.0804
31 0.1326 -0.0177 -0.1070 -0.1717 -0.1829 -0.1622 -0.1319 -0.0635
31 0.0867 -0.0300 -0.1061 -0.1633 -0.1728 -0.1514 -0.1230 -0.0538
31 0.0614 -0.0391 -0.1055 -0.1604 -0.1677 -0.1482 -0.1176 -0.0488
31 0.0382 -0.0508 -0.1096 -0.1591 -0.1635 -0.1434 -0.1139 -0.0489
172
Run 0.051 0.139 0.228 0.316 0.360 0.404 0.448 0.492 0.536 0.580 0.624 0.668 0.714 0.809 0.905 1.000
27 -11.231 -12.506 -10.250 -12.113 -9.3666 -8.8761 -10.348 -10.446 - -9.2685 -9.2685 -10.053 -11.427 -8.3857 -10.3476 -8.7781
27 -0.1606 -0.1394 -0.1338 -0.1479 -0.1479 -0.1126 -0.1606 -0.1493 - -0.1324 -0.1324 -0.1310 -0.1507 -0.1338 -0.1479 -0.1253
27 -0.1115 -0.0989 -0.1034 -0.1034 -0.1034 -0.0908 -0.1124 -0.1133 - -0.1025 -0.1025 -0.1097 -0.1386 -0.1115 -0.1287 -0.1395
27 -0.0676 -0.0597 -0.0575 -0.0676 -0.0731 -0.0597 -0.0782 -0.0737 - -0.0720 -0.0726 -0.0664 -0.0944 -0.0832 -0.0888 -0.1055
27 -0.0443 -0.0346 -0.0370 -0.0483 -0.0519 -0.0499 -0.0556 -0.0527 - -0.0552 -0.0515 -0.0511 -0.0749 -0.0705 -0.0709 -0.0862
27 -0.0282 -0.0215 -0.0254 -0.0360 -0.0385 -0.0321 -0.0489 -0.0388 - -0.0433 -0.0436 -0.0405 -0.0595 -0.0617 -0.0670 -0.0805
27 -0.0322 -0.0262 -0.0288 -0.0443 -0.0462 -0.0423 -0.0514 -0.0445 - -0.0564 -0.0460 -0.0425 -0.0704 -0.0704 -0.0704 -0.0892
27 -0.0200 -0.0129 -0.0187 -0.0342 -0.0342 -0.0341 -0.0447 -0.0356 - -0.0420 -0.0355 -0.0316 -0.0563 -0.0602 -0.0602 -0.0755
27 -0.0135 -0.0079 -0.0125 -0.0270 -0.0292 -0.0313 -0.0406 -0.0323 - -0.0385 -0.0323 -0.0302 -0.0508 -0.0552 -0.0561 -0.0734
27 -0.0157 -0.0080 -0.0157 -0.0292 -0.0323 -0.0323 -0.0427 -0.0334 - -0.0386 -0.0334 -0.0313 -0.0498 -0.0573 -0.0572 -0.0745
28 -7.5756 -7.8425 -7.0952 -8.1094 -7.6290 -6.3479 -7.6290 -7.6824 - -8.0560 -7.0952 -8.0026 -8.6965 -6.6148 -8.1094 -6.7749
28 -0.5850 -0.6007 -0.5254 -0.5850 -0.4972 -0.5129 -0.5254 -0.5003 - -0.5505 -0.4940 -0.4909 -0.6760 -0.5536 -0.5254 -0.5317
28 -0.2515 -0.2586 -0.2515 -0.2515 -0.2260 -0.2189 -0.2515 -0.2274 - -0.2628 -0.2246 -0.2232 -0.3067 -0.2642 -0.2784 -0.2812
28 -0.1095 -0.1067 -0.1095 -0.1163 -0.1101 -0.0937 -0.1225 -0.1047 - -0.1218 -0.1095 -0.1019 -0.1492 -0.1225 -0.1417 -0.1492
28 -0.0697 -0.0716 -0.0655 -0.0739 -0.0786 -0.0674 -0.0870 -0.0749 - -0.0865 -0.0739 -0.0688 -0.1052 -0.0912 -0.1001 -0.1141
28 -0.0560 -0.0576 -0.0560 -0.0709 -0.0673 -0.0576 -0.0745 -0.0713 - -0.0777 -0.0745 -0.0664 -0.0975 -0.0930 -0.0971 -0.1124
28 -0.0388 -0.0437 -0.0388 -0.0485 -0.0519 -0.0437 -0.0616 -0.0554 - -0.0578 -0.0582 -0.0478 -0.0747 -0.0740 -0.0775 -0.0875
28 -0.0257 -0.0328 -0.0288 -0.0344 -0.0375 -0.0359 -0.0489 -0.0436 - -0.0427 -0.0399 -0.0396 -0.0523 -0.0630 -0.0661 -0.0779
28 -0.0210 -0.0265 -0.0184 -0.0352 -0.0352 -0.0316 -0.0423 -0.0425 - -0.0372 -0.0372 -0.0347 -0.0497 -0.0586 -0.0588 -0.0756
28 -0.0137 -0.0206 -0.0157 -0.0236 -0.0315 -0.0268 -0.0396 -0.0319 - -0.0334 -0.0334 -0.0312 -0.0458 -0.0534 -0.0573 -0.0695
31 -10.657 -11.546 -10.657 -10.123 -8.9973 -9.2936 -10.123 -10.183 - -9.4714 -8.9973 -9.4714 -11.309 -9.5307 -9.5899 -9.7084
31 -0.1730 -0.1786 -0.1462 -0.1730 -0.1730 -0.1392 -0.1730 -0.1884 - -0.1448 -0.1448 -0.1701 -0.1490 -0.1462 -0.1856 -0.1504
31 -0.1206 -0.1161 -0.1034 -0.1206 -0.1287 -0.0989 -0.1377 -0.1224 - -0.1197 -0.1197 -0.1269 -0.1396 -0.1115 -0.1459 -0.1396
31 -0.0682 -0.0754 -0.0631 -0.0732 -0.0788 -0.0654 -0.0838 -0.0793 - -0.0726 -0.0732 -0.0721 -0.0900 -0.0782 -0.0945 -0.1056
31 -0.0560 -0.0386 -0.0447 -0.0483 -0.0560 -0.0503 -0.0633 -0.0564 - -0.0592 -0.0556 -0.0511 -0.0714 -0.0633 -0.0786 -0.0867
31 -0.0282 -0.0319 -0.0307 -0.0413 -0.0439 -0.0374 -0.0542 -0.0441 - -0.0486 -0.0411 -0.0408 -0.0598 -0.0592 -0.0673 -0.0857
31 -0.0218 -0.0157 -0.0185 -0.0322 -0.0358 -0.0335 -0.0443 -0.0360 - -0.0391 -0.0374 -0.0337 -0.0549 -0.0564 -0.0616 -0.0754
31 -0.0239 -0.0155 -0.0226 -0.0369 -0.0381 -0.0353 -0.0459 -0.0370 - -0.0473 -0.0381 -0.0342 -0.0641 -0.0616 -0.0628 -0.0807
31 -0.0177 -0.0090 -0.0177 -0.0301 -0.0333 -0.0323 -0.0437 -0.0353 - -0.0395 -0.0343 -0.0301 -0.0529 -0.0593 -0.0582 -0.0744
31 -0.0153 -0.0055 -0.0144 -0.0257 -0.0309 -0.0320 -0.0412 -0.0308 - -0.0370 -0.0327 -0.0284 -0.0497 -0.0569 -0.0568 -0.0711
173
36 20 28.4617 72.70 0.0324 0.0321 0.4473 0.3541 0.0932 0.4317 0.3495 0.0822
36 20 28.4657 72.47 1.0204 1.0121 1.4816 0.4033 1.0783 1.4649 0.3833 1.0816
36 20 28.4658 72.10 1.6054 1.5923 2.0765 0.4101 1.6664 2.0575 0.3715 1.6860
36 20 28.4649 72.00 2.6105 2.5892 3.0914 0.4186 2.6728 3.0734 0.3491 2.7243
36 20 28.4651 71.90 3.6026 3.5732 4.1183 0.4303 3.6880 4.0959 0.3285 3.7675
36 20 28.4663 71.80 5.2096 5.1670 5.7028 0.4085 5.2943 5.6801 0.2572 5.4229
36 20 28.4647 71.90 7.8040 7.7402 8.2855 0.3777 7.9078 8.2482 0.1428 8.1053
36 20 28.4647 72.10 10.4076 10.3226 10.9130 0.3550 10.5581 10.8780 0.0269 10.8511
36 20 28.4642 72.40 12.9934 12.8872 13.4335 0.2638 13.1697 13.3860 -0.1544 13.5403
36 20 28.4660 72.70 15.5945 15.4671 15.9372 0.1380 15.7992 15.8972 -0.3842 16.2814
32 25 28.7614 72.50 0.0194 0.0192 0.4290 0.4599 -0.0310 0.4589 0.4620 -0.0030
32 25 28.7593 73.26 1.0269 1.0185 1.4848 0.5219 0.9629 1.5205 0.5105 1.0100
32 25 28.7627 73.60 1.6189 1.6057 2.0291 0.4836 1.5456 2.0619 0.4575 1.6044
32 25 28.7617 73.80 2.5942 2.5730 3.0102 0.4811 2.5291 3.0521 0.4248 2.6273
32 25 28.7608 74.03 3.5836 3.5543 4.0180 0.4821 3.5359 4.0598 0.3954 3.6644
32 25 28.7615 74.20 5.2019 5.1594 5.6254 0.4617 5.1637 5.6648 0.3236 5.3412
32 25 28.7612 74.30 7.7914 7.7277 8.2057 0.4216 7.7841 8.2400 0.1981 8.0418
32 25 28.7641 74.40 10.3987 10.3137 10.8170 0.3948 10.4221 10.8311 0.0804 10.7508
32 25 28.7591 74.50 12.9848 12.8787 13.3740 0.3010 13.0730 13.3708 -0.1041 13.4749
32 25 28.7616 74.50 15.5807 15.4534 15.8859 0.1784 15.7075 15.8357 -0.3263 16.1620
33 25 28.7589 74.10 0.0303 0.0301 0.4121 0.4487 -0.0366 0.3987 0.4509 -0.0521
33 25 28.7550 74.34 1.0324 1.0240 1.4499 0.4931 0.9569 1.4473 0.4812 0.9661
33 25 28.7560 74.50 2.1294 2.1120 2.5587 0.4923 2.0664 2.5547 0.4533 2.1014
33 25 28.7553 74.50 4.1954 4.1611 4.6345 0.4837 4.1508 4.6283 0.3793 4.2490
33 25 28.7560 74.60 6.2106 6.1599 6.6429 0.4643 6.1786 6.6312 0.2920 6.3392
33 25 28.7539 74.60 8.8181 8.7461 9.2164 0.4124 8.8040 9.1996 0.1531 9.0465
33 25 28.7546 74.70 11.4016 11.3085 11.7959 0.3793 11.4166 11.7775 0.0312 11.7462
33 25 28.7538 74.80 14.6011 14.4818 14.9098 0.2278 14.6820 14.8668 -0.2402 15.1070
33 25 28.7562 74.90 18.1586 18.0102 18.3090 0.0282 18.2808 18.2664 -0.5669 18.8333
33 25 28.7553 75.10 23.3912 23.2001 23.3160 -0.2748 23.5908 23.2462 -1.0647 24.3109
174
36 0.032 2.385 2.825 5958.8 5.256 0.053 0.085 0.110 0.068 92,931 38.756 2.1011 -7.8917 -10.849 -10.446 -8.7431 -10.536 -11.252
36 1.012 2.214 2.678 5970.0 30.194 0.304 0.479 0.102 0.064 93,856 1.2073 0.3721 -0.1003 -0.3550 -0.3678 -0.2739 -0.2852 -0.1942
36 1.592 2.121 2.643 5977.5 37.916 0.381 0.583 0.097 0.063 94,413 0.7313 0.2348 -0.0827 -0.2617 -0.2780 -0.2192 -0.2228 -0.1342
36 2.589 1.965 2.610 5992.5 48.396 0.485 0.697 0.089 0.062 95,395 0.4136 0.1238 -0.0920 -0.2171 -0.2371 -0.1810 -0.1509 -0.0714
36 3.573 1.777 2.561 6045.0 56.884 0.565 0.748 0.080 0.060 96,926 0.2854 0.0674 -0.0959 -0.2015 -0.2156 -0.1644 -0.1257 -0.0467
36 5.167 1.470 2.384 6112.5 68.440 0.672 0.791 0.064 0.055 99,108 0.1763 0.0197 -0.1032 -0.1938 -0.1952 -0.1531 -0.1152 -0.0375
36 7.740 1.013 1.979 6262.5 83.803 0.803 0.785 0.042 0.043 103,160 0.1023 -0.0170 -0.1070 -0.1811 -0.1831 -0.1403 -0.1033 -0.0300
36 10.323 0.599 1.498 6412.5 96.800 0.906 0.691 0.024 0.031 107,116 0.0637 -0.0340 -0.1062 -0.1772 -0.1743 -0.1326 -0.0984 -0.0274
36 12.887 0.241 1.044 6618.8 108.174 0.981 0.432 0.009 0.020 111,778 0.0429 -0.0442 -0.1058 -0.1749 -0.1701 -0.1311 -0.0970 -0.0269
36 15.467 -0.101 0.606 6810.0 118.518 1.044 -0.334 -0.004 0.011 116,138 0.0272 -0.0511 -0.1062 -0.1740 -0.1653 -0.1282 -0.0942 -0.0274
32 0.019 2.622 4.675 5906.3 4.005 0.041 0.044 0.122 0.114 93,073 45.004 -23.622 -39.264 -39.189 -34.249 -31.555 -30.882 -31.555
32 1.019 2.581 4.169 6060.0 30.120 0.298 0.353 0.114 0.096 96,249 1.1329 0.1291 -0.4336 -0.6994 -0.6853 -0.5934 -0.5976 -0.5538
32 1.606 2.559 3.937 6131.3 37.862 0.371 0.460 0.110 0.089 97,798 0.7669 0.1481 -0.2438 -0.4456 -0.4447 -0.3873 -0.3864 -0.3030
32 2.573 2.488 3.817 6180.0 47.974 0.466 0.580 0.105 0.085 99,264 0.4540 0.0941 -0.1661 -0.3127 -0.3172 -0.2764 -0.2495 -0.1711
32 3.554 2.403 3.752 6195.0 56.416 0.546 0.669 0.101 0.083 100,207 0.3184 0.0579 -0.1459 -0.2671 -0.2659 -0.2185 -0.1828 -0.1038
32 5.159 2.244 3.723 6195.0 68.007 0.659 0.758 0.095 0.082 101,359 0.2138 0.0259 -0.1320 -0.2336 -0.2348 -0.1901 -0.1521 -0.0665
32 7.728 1.877 3.536 6240.0 83.270 0.801 0.812 0.078 0.077 103,846 0.1413 -0.0095 -0.1265 -0.2113 -0.2113 -0.1705 -0.1310 -0.0510
32 10.314 1.513 3.213 6360.0 96.226 0.908 0.817 0.061 0.067 107,394 0.1008 -0.0271 -0.1222 -0.2011 -0.1981 -0.1578 -0.1205 -0.0447
32 12.879 1.191 2.846 6468.8 107.546 0.998 0.798 0.046 0.058 110,684 0.0788 -0.0378 -0.1187 -0.1941 -0.1881 -0.1502 -0.1137 -0.0397
32 15.453 0.882 2.413 6592.5 117.820 1.072 0.748 0.033 0.047 114,125 0.0642 -0.0448 -0.1162 -0.1892 -0.1812 -0.1442 -0.1089 -0.0363
33 0.030 2.625 4.638 5917.5 5.048 0.051 0.055 0.122 0.112 92,949 30.569 -14.760 -23.385 -24.247 -18.402 -17.060 -17.922 -17.060
33 1.024 2.592 4.162 6067.5 30.229 0.299 0.356 0.114 0.096 96,052 1.2067 0.1942 -0.3514 -0.6158 -0.5891 -0.4977 -0.5244 -0.4443
33 2.112 2.531 3.843 6146.3 43.489 0.425 0.534 0.109 0.086 98,081 0.6033 0.1458 -0.1453 -0.3185 -0.3240 -0.2742 -0.2606 -0.1712
33 4.161 2.355 3.739 6198.8 61.113 0.592 0.711 0.099 0.083 100,373 0.2907 0.0612 -0.1156 -0.2288 -0.2309 -0.1810 -0.1464 -0.0602
33 6.160 2.110 3.663 6210.0 74.395 0.719 0.791 0.089 0.081 101,965 0.1949 0.0240 -0.1148 -0.2081 -0.2067 -0.1632 -0.1275 -0.0421
33 8.746 1.714 3.417 6296.3 88.682 0.845 0.810 0.070 0.073 105,049 0.1376 -0.0083 -0.1130 -0.1954 -0.1937 -0.1519 -0.1170 -0.0371
33 11.308 1.355 3.063 6382.5 100.862 0.948 0.801 0.054 0.064 108,045 0.0995 -0.0257 -0.1123 -0.1888 -0.1823 -0.1435 -0.1095 -0.0320
33 14.482 0.972 2.594 6562.5 114.159 1.044 0.747 0.037 0.051 112,718 0.0757 -0.0366 -0.1092 -0.1826 -0.1762 -0.1383 -0.1051 -0.0287
33 18.010 0.566 2.003 6750.0 127.324 1.132 0.611 0.020 0.037 117,596 0.0605 -0.0431 -0.1084 -0.1783 -0.1704 -0.1333 -0.1000 -0.0271
33 23.200 0.068 1.299 7057.5 144.524 1.229 0.124 0.002 0.022 124,992 0.0419 -0.0502 -0.1108 -0.1775 -0.1691 -0.1307 -0.0998 -0.0266
175
Run 0.020 0.137 0.255 0.373 0.490 0.608 0.725 0.843 0.020 0.137 0.255 0.373 0.490 0.608 0.725 0.843
36 35.216 0.8016 -8.6982 -8.7879 -10.491 -9.1912 -10.849 -8.8327 36.247 1.5634 -9.1464 -10.401 -8.7879 - -10.043 -9.5496
36 1.1333 0.3337 -0.1245 -0.2639 -0.3692 -0.2767 -0.2767 -0.1202 1.1931 0.3977 -0.1259 -0.2966 -0.2753 - -0.2497 -0.1330
36 0.7014 0.2176 -0.0899 -0.2029 -0.2780 -0.2201 -0.2029 -0.0790 0.7394 0.2583 -0.0908 -0.2174 -0.2192 - -0.1948 -0.0872
36 0.3930 0.1144 -0.0964 -0.1754 -0.2260 -0.1810 -0.1498 -0.0375 0.4297 0.1444 -0.0920 -0.1815 -0.1910 - -0.1448 -0.0469
36 0.2753 0.0621 -0.0959 -0.1668 -0.2067 -0.1636 -0.1261 -0.0225 0.3124 0.0875 -0.0959 -0.1741 -0.1753 - -0.1301 -0.0330
36 0.1833 0.0158 -0.1060 -0.1615 -0.1938 -0.1517 -0.1183 -0.0258 0.2162 0.0356 -0.1057 -0.1668 -0.1679 - -0.1208 -0.0310
36 0.1036 -0.0207 -0.1111 -0.1552 -0.1813 -0.1422 -0.1059 -0.0201 0.1244 -0.0040 -0.1143 -0.1602 -0.1567 - -0.1096 -0.0278
36 0.0598 -0.0377 -0.1124 -0.1507 -0.1725 -0.1359 -0.1011 -0.0186 0.0860 -0.0239 -0.1170 -0.1569 -0.1523 - -0.1038 -0.0260
36 0.0361 -0.0486 -0.1141 -0.1500 -0.1702 -0.1343 -0.0991 -0.0185 0.0612 -0.0346 -0.1208 -0.1551 -0.1507 - -0.1023 -0.0260
36 0.0204 -0.0549 -0.1161 -0.1493 -0.1683 -0.1313 -0.0977 -0.0200 0.0438 -0.0424 -0.1233 -0.1538 -0.1494 - -0.1013 -0.0261
32 42.984 -26.841 -40.087 -34.998 -34.923 -30.807 -31.555 -29.460 39.691 -26.167 -39.264 -35.896 -33.576 -32.229 -32.229 -30.807
32 1.1315 0.0909 -0.4449 -0.5821 -0.6853 -0.5679 -0.5807 -0.4775 1.0990 0.1277 -0.4605 -0.5920 -0.5948 -0.6075 -0.5679 -0.4972
32 0.7723 0.1292 -0.2420 -0.3622 -0.4438 -0.3703 -0.3703 -0.2555 0.7445 0.1445 -0.2429 -0.3613 -0.3793 -0.4035 -0.3541 -0.2752
32 0.4686 0.0824 -0.1599 -0.2551 -0.3161 -0.2607 -0.2450 -0.1420 0.4669 0.1020 -0.1655 -0.2506 -0.2708 -0.2808 -0.2344 -0.1532
32 0.3261 0.0498 -0.1415 -0.2172 -0.2610 -0.2099 -0.1836 -0.0831 0.3313 0.0676 -0.1419 -0.2160 -0.2253 -0.2282 -0.1800 -0.0941
32 0.2152 0.0167 -0.1298 -0.1935 -0.2309 -0.1862 -0.1499 -0.0522 0.2233 0.0340 -0.1323 -0.1957 -0.1996 -0.2010 -0.1474 -0.0626
32 0.1363 -0.0167 -0.1272 -0.1783 -0.2077 -0.1669 -0.1325 -0.0430 0.1409 -0.0016 -0.1302 -0.1798 -0.1850 -0.1783 -0.1326 -0.0525
32 0.0866 -0.0337 -0.1269 -0.1719 -0.1949 -0.1572 -0.1223 -0.0384 0.0944 -0.0198 -0.1317 -0.1729 -0.1748 -0.1692 -0.1237 -0.0460
32 0.0604 -0.0433 -0.1249 -0.1660 -0.1881 -0.1502 -0.1161 -0.0334 0.0751 -0.0314 -0.1306 -0.1680 -0.1678 -0.1609 -0.1174 -0.0421
32 0.0398 -0.0497 -0.1243 -0.1610 -0.1834 -0.1455 -0.1110 -0.0307 0.0529 -0.0380 -0.1305 -0.1646 -0.1638 -0.1575 -0.1137 -0.0376
33 28.892 -16.245 -23.002 -20.606 -19.695 -16.197 -17.539 -16.197 27.167 -15.383 -23.864 -21.277 -17.970 -18.402 -17.970 -17.970
33 1.1955 0.1591 -0.3627 -0.4977 -0.5877 -0.4850 -0.5103 -0.3950 1.1871 0.1956 -0.3514 -0.4963 -0.5103 -0.5244 -0.4977 -0.4021
33 0.5965 0.1376 -0.1508 -0.2551 -0.3233 -0.2674 -0.2483 -0.1419 0.6060 0.1615 -0.1453 -0.2612 -0.2674 -0.2865 -0.2422 -0.1494
33 0.2855 0.0550 -0.1156 -0.1859 -0.2232 -0.1769 -0.1447 -0.0461 0.3017 0.0733 -0.1156 -0.1866 -0.1931 -0.1924 -0.1447 -0.0554
33 0.1940 0.0173 -0.1151 -0.1719 -0.2009 -0.1616 -0.1249 -0.0323 0.2029 0.0338 -0.1148 -0.1733 -0.1775 -0.1740 -0.1293 -0.0412
33 0.1216 -0.0139 -0.1153 -0.1629 -0.1875 -0.1484 -0.1134 -0.0282 0.1328 0.0024 -0.1178 -0.1639 -0.1675 -0.1629 -0.1196 -0.0368
33 0.0791 -0.0287 -0.1168 -0.1584 -0.1816 -0.1450 -0.1098 -0.0273 0.0973 -0.0160 -0.1208 -0.1626 -0.1625 -0.1573 -0.1135 -0.0331
33 0.0521 -0.0406 -0.1178 -0.1565 -0.1777 -0.1408 -0.1049 -0.0247 0.0690 -0.0281 -0.1227 -0.1587 -0.1584 -0.1518 -0.1087 -0.0300
33 0.0321 -0.0482 -0.1171 -0.1522 -0.1733 -0.1369 -0.1006 -0.0228 0.0475 -0.0360 -0.1238 -0.1572 -0.1549 -0.1485 -0.1053 -0.0278
33 0.0184 -0.0562 -0.1192 -0.1525 -0.1724 -0.1351 -0.1012 -0.0235 0.0318 -0.0439 -0.1270 -0.1569 -0.1541 -0.1473 -0.1049 -0.0294
176
Run 0.020 0.137 0.255 0.373 0.490 0.608 0.725 0.843
36 38.039 2.1459 -7.4884 -10.043 -9.0567 -7.8020 -9.6393 -10.446
36 1.3041 0.4233 -0.0476 -0.2767 -0.2838 -0.2426 -0.2639 -0.1714
36 0.8181 0.2818 -0.0411 -0.1948 -0.2174 -0.1912 -0.2029 -0.1116
36 0.4881 0.1639 -0.0558 -0.1654 -0.1871 -0.1654 -0.1548 -0.0675
36 0.3547 0.1020 -0.0660 -0.1523 -0.1777 -0.1539 -0.1374 -0.0519
36 0.2454 0.0487 -0.0820 -0.1439 -0.1693 -0.1470 -0.1255 -0.0461
36 0.1678 0.0068 -0.0840 -0.1368 -0.1600 -0.1394 -0.1141 -0.0406
36 0.1103 -0.0129 -0.0888 -0.1357 -0.1566 -0.1354 -0.1096 -0.0391
36 0.0855 -0.0245 -0.0927 -0.1340 -0.1548 -0.1342 -0.1078 -0.0391
36 0.0716 -0.0319 -0.0952 -0.1327 -0.1534 -0.1325 -0.1065 -0.0382
32 43.058 -24.221 -35.746 -37.019 -32.977 -28.637 -30.807 -31.555
32 1.1739 0.1531 -0.3686 -0.5552 -0.6061 -0.5510 -0.5694 -0.5298
32 0.7767 0.1678 -0.1855 -0.3371 -0.3873 -0.3524 -0.3541 -0.3039
32 0.5128 0.1266 -0.1247 -0.2400 -0.2724 -0.2506 -0.2400 -0.1672
32 0.3763 0.0891 -0.1042 -0.2022 -0.2318 -0.2079 -0.1836 -0.1127
32 0.2562 0.0466 -0.1008 -0.1834 -0.2063 -0.1840 -0.1549 -0.0776
32 0.1767 0.0105 -0.1036 -0.1701 -0.1869 -0.1660 -0.1371 -0.0669
32 0.1351 -0.0092 -0.1010 -0.1659 -0.1780 -0.1568 -0.1296 -0.0589
32 0.1012 -0.0204 -0.1025 -0.1624 -0.1720 -0.1525 -0.1217 -0.0530
32 0.0803 -0.0270 -0.1025 -0.1599 -0.1679 -0.1477 -0.1181 -0.0497
33 29.802 -14.137 -21.085 -20.175 -17.539 -16.581 -17.060 -17.539
33 1.2489 0.2462 -0.2867 -0.4724 -0.5103 -0.4555 -0.4850 -0.4457
33 0.6558 0.1915 -0.0949 -0.2299 -0.2749 -0.2415 -0.2483 -0.1794
33 0.3398 0.0917 -0.0769 -0.1734 -0.1931 -0.1689 -0.1478 -0.0713
33 0.2349 0.0507 -0.0840 -0.1616 -0.1824 -0.1564 -0.1310 -0.0557
33 0.1735 0.0147 -0.0911 -0.1573 -0.1717 -0.1499 -0.1206 -0.0480
33 0.1298 -0.0039 -0.0904 -0.1554 -0.1648 -0.1453 -0.1163 -0.0461
33 0.0956 -0.0157 -0.0938 -0.1533 -0.1612 -0.1399 -0.1116 -0.0432
33 0.0767 -0.0248 -0.0951 -0.1521 -0.1576 -0.1370 -0.1088 -0.0399
33 0.0685 -0.0336 -0.0991 -0.1531 -0.1571 -0.1371 -0.1079 -0.0403
177
Run 0.051 0.139 0.228 0.316 0.360 0.404 0.448 0.492 0.536 0.580 0.624 0.668 0.714 0.809 0.905 1.000
36 -0.8564 -0.2291 -0.0498 -1.3045 0.3983 -0.2739 -0.4531 -0.9460 -2.9177 0.0398 0.8464 -0.3635 -0.0946 0.3983 -0.4531 -1.3941
36 -0.0106 0.0235 0.0022 -0.0249 0.0022 -0.0049 -0.0106 -0.0135 -0.1031 0.0306 0.0292 0.0050 -0.0135 -0.0106 -0.0249 -0.0547
36 -0.0013 0.0123 -0.0013 -0.0176 0.0069 -0.0049 -0.0176 -0.0275 -0.0845 0.0005 0.0078 -0.0076 -0.0194 -0.0176 -0.0347 -0.0619
36 -0.0052 0.0087 0.0004 -0.0208 -0.0152 -0.0074 -0.0152 -0.0163 -0.0614 -0.0147 0.0004 -0.0091 -0.0269 -0.0308 -0.0314 -0.0681
36 -0.0028 0.0109 0.0049 -0.0141 -0.0064 -0.0120 -0.0213 -0.0145 -0.0435 -0.0096 0.0013 -0.0056 -0.0294 -0.0290 -0.0326 -0.0632
36 -0.0174 -0.0057 -0.0121 -0.0302 -0.0277 -0.0269 -0.0355 -0.0280 -0.0483 -0.0380 -0.0224 -0.0221 -0.0564 -0.0536 -0.0589 -0.0846
36 -0.0041 0.0018 -0.0041 -0.0181 -0.0164 -0.0211 -0.0302 -0.0235 -0.0283 -0.0267 -0.0162 -0.0160 -0.0373 -0.0440 -0.0475 -0.0696
36 -0.0002 0.0057 0.0011 -0.0146 -0.0158 -0.0168 -0.0275 -0.0185 -0.0222 -0.0222 -0.0171 -0.0144 -0.0327 -0.0418 -0.0430 -0.0621
36 0.0002 0.0058 0.0002 -0.0123 -0.0164 -0.0206 -0.0278 -0.0196 -0.0184 -0.0227 -0.0174 -0.0153 -0.0308 -0.0423 -0.0423 -0.0658
36 -0.0003 0.0069 -0.0011 -0.0124 -0.0168 -0.0213 -0.0279 -0.0201 -0.0176 -0.0220 -0.0185 -0.0177 -0.0321 -0.0445 -0.0444 -0.0646
32 -12.023 -10.226 -12.023 -12.771 -11.349 -9.6277 -10.675 -10.750 - -11.948 -9.9270 -10.526 -12.172 -9.9270 -11.349 -10.152
32 -0.2131 -0.1650 -0.1862 -0.2131 -0.2003 -0.1523 -0.2003 -0.2159 - -0.1848 -0.1862 -0.1834 -0.2428 -0.1735 -0.2399 -0.2046
32 -0.1873 -0.1326 -0.1622 -0.2035 -0.1703 -0.1416 -0.1703 -0.1721 - -0.2026 -0.1533 -0.1524 -0.2465 -0.1873 -0.2044 -0.2223
32 -0.1045 -0.0967 -0.1096 -0.1252 -0.1146 -0.0967 -0.1252 -0.1157 - -0.1297 -0.0939 -0.0878 -0.1571 -0.1303 -0.1460 -0.1622
32 -0.0746 -0.0613 -0.0706 -0.0823 -0.0819 -0.0690 -0.0896 -0.0827 - -0.0929 -0.0783 -0.0661 -0.1164 -0.1010 -0.1087 -0.1241
32 -0.0436 -0.0372 -0.0436 -0.0592 -0.0567 -0.0506 -0.0592 -0.0570 - -0.0642 -0.0514 -0.0433 -0.0776 -0.0723 -0.0826 -0.1011
32 -0.0253 -0.0210 -0.0270 -0.0426 -0.0393 -0.0369 -0.0479 -0.0411 - -0.0424 -0.0374 -0.0337 -0.0566 -0.0616 -0.0652 -0.0806
32 -0.0201 -0.0129 -0.0187 -0.0331 -0.0331 -0.0328 -0.0447 -0.0345 - -0.0395 -0.0330 -0.0303 -0.0500 -0.0564 -0.0577 -0.0757
32 -0.0157 -0.0080 -0.0157 -0.0271 -0.0313 -0.0313 -0.0407 -0.0324 - -0.0365 -0.0313 -0.0281 -0.0468 -0.0532 -0.0552 -0.0745
32 -0.0110 -0.0028 -0.0092 -0.0196 -0.0248 -0.0267 -0.0378 -0.0274 - -0.0292 -0.0257 -0.0240 -0.0368 -0.0491 -0.0507 -0.0659
33 -3.6913 -3.8830 -3.6913 -3.6913 -3.2601 -2.5892 -3.7392 -4.2184 - -2.7330 -3.2121 -3.1642 -3.3559 -2.3496 -3.7392 -2.0621
33 -0.0927 -0.0716 -0.0786 -0.0927 -0.0927 -0.0716 -0.1053 -0.0955 - -0.0899 -0.0392 -0.0631 -0.1081 -0.0392 -0.1194 -0.0842
33 -0.0649 -0.0417 -0.0458 -0.0519 -0.0581 -0.0356 -0.0587 -0.0533 - -0.0574 -0.0512 -0.0444 -0.0724 -0.0519 -0.0778 -0.0792
33 -0.0256 -0.0173 -0.0194 -0.0291 -0.0353 -0.0243 -0.0388 -0.0329 - -0.0350 -0.0353 -0.0284 -0.0519 -0.0419 -0.0516 -0.0682
33 -0.0164 -0.0087 -0.0122 -0.0230 -0.0274 -0.0244 -0.0339 -0.0297 - -0.0314 -0.0251 -0.0248 -0.0449 -0.0426 -0.0512 -0.0667
33 -0.0189 -0.0090 -0.0174 -0.0310 -0.0342 -0.0278 -0.0403 -0.0312 - -0.0434 -0.0279 -0.0263 -0.0585 -0.0541 -0.0571 -0.0752
33 -0.0154 -0.0053 -0.0141 -0.0261 -0.0284 -0.0271 -0.0391 -0.0284 - -0.0367 -0.0284 -0.0236 -0.0484 -0.0521 -0.0544 -0.0707
33 -0.0091 -0.0005 -0.0091 -0.0211 -0.0239 -0.0269 -0.0359 -0.0257 - -0.0305 -0.0249 -0.0212 -0.0431 -0.0490 -0.0507 -0.0687
33 -0.0067 0.0023 -0.0045 -0.0178 -0.0223 -0.0242 -0.0334 -0.0229 - -0.0284 -0.0216 -0.0187 -0.0376 -0.0468 -0.0483 -0.0647
33 -0.0066 0.0043 -0.0066 -0.0181 -0.0227 -0.0256 -0.0359 -0.0237 - -0.0281 -0.0234 -0.0201 -0.0391 -0.0494 -0.0503 -0.0670
178
34 30 28.7490 73.42 0.0377 0.0374 0.4209 0.4006 0.0203 0.4170 0.4046 0.0124
34 30 28.7471 73.90 1.0240 1.0156 1.4674 0.4539 1.0135 1.4612 0.4448 1.0164
34 30 28.7489 74.20 1.6112 1.5980 2.0382 0.4392 1.5990 2.0327 0.4166 1.6161
34 30 28.7464 74.40 2.6074 2.5861 3.0470 0.4497 2.5973 3.0400 0.3963 2.6437
34 30 28.7451 74.50 3.5639 3.5348 4.0258 0.4483 3.5775 4.0140 0.3658 3.6482
34 30 28.7483 74.60 5.1985 5.1560 5.6503 0.4287 5.2216 5.6303 0.2987 5.3316
34 30 28.7459 74.70 7.8028 7.7391 8.2318 0.3836 7.8481 8.2176 0.1669 8.0508
34 30 28.7485 74.80 10.4128 10.3277 10.8348 0.3574 10.4774 10.8101 0.0553 10.7548
34 30 28.7483 74.90 12.9910 12.8849 13.3734 0.2742 13.0992 13.3345 -0.1191 13.4536
34 30 28.7450 75.00 15.6074 15.4799 15.8746 0.1295 15.7451 15.8393 -0.3663 16.2056
35 30 28.7481 74.50 0.0279 0.0277 0.3995 0.3879 0.0115 0.3954 0.3911 0.0043
35 30 28.7461 74.60 2.1213 2.1040 2.5796 0.4576 2.1220 2.5740 0.4188 2.1552
35 30 28.7481 74.71 6.1909 6.1403 6.6214 0.3999 6.2215 6.6041 0.2339 6.3703
35 30 28.7486 74.90 12.4848 12.3828 12.8622 0.2750 12.5872 12.8130 -0.0956 12.9086
35 30 28.7466 75.00 17.6811 17.5367 17.8520 0.0024 17.8495 17.8144 -0.5653 18.3797
35 30 28.7500 75.10 19.7782 19.6166 19.8685 -0.1289 19.9974 19.8167 -0.7681 20.5848
35 30 28.7471 75.20 21.7844 21.6064 21.7866 -0.2478 22.0344 21.7302 -0.9590 22.6892
35 30 28.7485 75.33 23.3917 23.2006 23.2982 -0.3460 23.6442 23.2376 -1.1065 24.3441
35 30 28.7505 75.60 26.0346 25.8219 25.9138 -0.4262 26.3400 25.8564 -1.2888 27.1452
35 30 28.7505 75.73 28.5688 28.3354 28.3654 -0.5600 28.9254 28.2951 -1.5088 29.8040
179
34 0.037 2.687 6.074 5842.5 5.648 0.058 0.049 0.128 0.151 91,746 19.436 -19.652 -22.772 -20.923 -17.958 -15.185 -14.992 -14.068
34 1.016 2.629 5.867 5883.8 30.109 0.307 0.263 0.123 0.144 93,152 1.0966 -0.0094 -0.5283 -0.7920 -0.7367 -0.6077 -0.6375 -0.5538
34 1.598 2.594 5.722 5925.0 37.812 0.383 0.332 0.120 0.138 94,240 0.7465 0.0616 -0.2943 -0.4971 -0.4863 -0.4223 -0.4205 -0.3367
34 2.586 2.549 5.521 5962.5 48.148 0.485 0.427 0.116 0.132 95,568 0.4832 0.0661 -0.1811 -0.3370 -0.3409 -0.2858 -0.2736 -0.1861
34 3.535 2.546 5.238 6041.3 56.318 0.559 0.519 0.113 0.122 97,482 0.3783 0.0617 -0.1465 -0.2756 -0.2703 -0.2230 -0.2092 -0.1196
34 5.156 2.548 4.924 6123.8 68.051 0.667 0.659 0.110 0.112 99,917 0.2667 0.0441 -0.1139 -0.2231 -0.2218 -0.1746 -0.1480 -0.0614
34 7.739 2.447 4.875 6191.3 83.407 0.808 0.775 0.104 0.108 102,762 0.1832 0.0189 -0.1070 -0.1986 -0.1969 -0.1526 -0.1167 -0.0335
34 10.328 2.233 4.830 6183.8 96.379 0.935 0.826 0.095 0.107 104,449 0.1455 -0.0058 -0.1076 -0.1915 -0.1911 -0.1483 -0.1146 -0.0315
34 12.885 1.967 4.621 6225.0 107.671 1.038 0.844 0.082 0.101 106,789 0.1179 -0.0184 -0.1059 -0.1876 -0.1826 -0.1428 -0.1091 -0.0292
34 15.480 1.739 4.394 6356.3 118.031 1.114 0.842 0.070 0.092 110,382 0.0991 -0.0280 -0.1064 -0.1854 -0.1792 -0.1406 -0.1074 -0.0284
35 0.028 2.730 6.087 5827.5 4.840 0.050 0.043 0.131 0.152 91,200 29.768 -24.091 -27.265 -25.704 -18.835 -14.048 -15.765 -15.036
35 2.104 2.598 5.660 5970.0 43.452 0.437 0.383 0.118 0.135 95,007 0.6387 0.1123 -0.1587 -0.3319 -0.3366 -0.2750 -0.2792 -0.1779
35 6.140 2.503 4.890 6210.0 74.347 0.718 0.702 0.105 0.108 101,588 0.2403 0.0489 -0.0904 -0.1908 -0.1915 -0.1434 -0.1174 -0.0240
35 12.383 1.965 4.672 6262.5 105.649 1.012 0.813 0.081 0.101 106,652 0.1326 -0.0093 -0.0981 -0.1788 -0.1770 -0.1343 -0.1038 -0.0182
35 17.537 1.449 4.135 6416.3 125.757 1.176 0.787 0.057 0.085 112,205 0.0939 -0.0279 -0.1007 -0.1764 -0.1705 -0.1316 -0.0997 -0.0210
35 19.617 1.274 3.911 6510.0 133.014 1.226 0.763 0.049 0.079 114,824 0.0868 -0.0314 -0.1017 -0.1753 -0.1685 -0.1293 -0.0978 -0.0194
35 21.606 1.093 3.639 6603.8 139.604 1.268 0.728 0.041 0.071 117,348 0.0791 -0.0347 -0.1026 -0.1749 -0.1685 -0.1277 -0.0977 -0.0204
35 23.201 0.958 3.425 6648.8 144.667 1.306 0.697 0.035 0.066 118,933 0.0735 -0.0366 -0.1032 -0.1745 -0.1672 -0.1272 -0.0975 -0.0202
35 25.822 0.740 3.050 6783.8 152.627 1.350 0.626 0.026 0.056 122,329 0.0645 -0.0404 -0.1058 -0.1744 -0.1676 -0.1263 -0.0969 -0.0202
35 28.335 0.555 2.740 6915.0 159.888 1.387 0.537 0.019 0.049 125,557 0.0576 -0.0426 -0.1077 -0.1748 -0.1674 -0.1268 -0.0972 -0.0210
180
Run 0.020 0.137 0.255 0.373 0.490 0.608 0.725 0.843 0.020 0.137 0.255 0.373 0.490 0.608 0.725 0.843
34 17.896 -19.575 -23.965 -19.383 -17.573 -15.146 -13.722 -12.643 17.973 -19.229 -23.888 -18.998 -15.878 -16.186 -15.146 -13.375
34 1.0569 -0.0306 -0.5410 -0.6445 -0.7339 -0.6063 -0.6190 -0.5141 1.0810 0.0204 -0.5283 -0.6389 -0.6204 -0.6573 -0.5935 -0.5141
34 0.7257 0.0526 -0.3033 -0.4033 -0.4763 -0.4115 -0.3871 -0.2952 0.7600 0.0851 -0.3033 -0.4079 -0.4124 -0.4358 -0.3952 -0.2943
34 0.4737 0.0533 -0.1861 -0.2685 -0.3287 -0.2791 -0.2641 -0.1561 0.4954 0.0828 -0.1811 -0.2730 -0.2797 -0.3042 -0.2591 -0.1700
34 0.3730 0.0515 -0.1424 -0.2210 -0.2650 -0.2218 -0.1990 -0.1012 0.3864 0.0768 -0.1424 -0.2218 -0.2259 -0.2397 -0.1990 -0.1029
34 0.2606 0.0402 -0.1142 -0.1776 -0.2201 -0.1757 -0.1419 -0.0466 0.2723 0.0601 -0.1114 -0.1776 -0.1840 -0.1880 -0.1422 -0.0525
34 0.1762 0.0158 -0.1076 -0.1623 -0.1934 -0.1526 -0.1147 -0.0237 0.1838 0.0323 -0.1089 -0.1655 -0.1671 -0.1640 -0.1184 -0.0311
34 0.1237 -0.0080 -0.1109 -0.1599 -0.1854 -0.1490 -0.1116 -0.0252 0.1392 0.0070 -0.1157 -0.1635 -0.1641 -0.1599 -0.1169 -0.0326
34 0.0912 -0.0219 -0.1132 -0.1575 -0.1816 -0.1438 -0.1076 -0.0249 0.1121 -0.0068 -0.1178 -0.1605 -0.1592 -0.1553 -0.1109 -0.0282
34 0.0719 -0.0310 -0.1145 -0.1564 -0.1787 -0.1427 -0.1065 -0.0246 0.0979 -0.0168 -0.1207 -0.1592 -0.1583 -0.1537 -0.1110 -0.0298
35 27.323 -25.236 -28.410 -19.772 -18.783 -17.899 -15.973 -14.048 28.311 -23.831 -28.775 -22.218 -18.419 -18.835 -15.973 -16.077
35 0.6154 0.1103 -0.1580 -0.2538 -0.3346 -0.2798 -0.2545 -0.1532 0.6599 0.1466 -0.1587 -0.2641 -0.2737 -0.2983 -0.2545 -0.1512
35 0.2314 0.0482 -0.0930 -0.1500 -0.1854 -0.1441 -0.1071 -0.0142 0.2494 0.0670 -0.0904 -0.1558 -0.1556 -0.1587 -0.1160 -0.0186
35 0.1036 -0.0099 -0.1045 -0.1498 -0.1739 -0.1377 -0.1000 -0.0150 0.1275 0.0058 -0.1082 -0.1536 -0.1515 -0.1486 -0.1056 -0.0206
35 0.0653 -0.0310 -0.1096 -0.1496 -0.1721 -0.1353 -0.0966 -0.0159 0.0916 -0.0162 -0.1157 -0.1537 -0.1508 -0.1466 -0.1037 -0.0217
35 0.0577 -0.0346 -0.1098 -0.1483 -0.1702 -0.1330 -0.0970 -0.0166 0.0802 -0.0200 -0.1165 -0.1527 -0.1497 -0.1442 -0.1019 -0.0223
35 0.0508 -0.0386 -0.1108 -0.1483 -0.1704 -0.1327 -0.0963 -0.0171 0.0708 -0.0242 -0.1174 -0.1528 -0.1492 -0.1445 -0.1027 -0.0226
35 0.0460 -0.0408 -0.1110 -0.1477 -0.1699 -0.1327 -0.0965 -0.0176 0.0637 -0.0274 -0.1182 -0.1523 -0.1493 -0.1443 -0.1019 -0.0230
35 0.0391 -0.0455 -0.1129 -0.1485 -0.1703 -0.1330 -0.0959 -0.0182 0.0564 -0.0319 -0.1209 -0.1532 -0.1502 -0.1444 -0.1023 -0.0245
35 0.0327 -0.0488 -0.1148 -0.1490 -0.1705 -0.1327 -0.0965 -0.0186 0.0499 -0.0355 -0.1229 -0.1540 -0.1503 -0.1448 -0.1024 -0.0242
181
Run 0.020 0.137 0.255 0.373 0.490 0.608 0.725 0.843
34 19.976 -17.110 -20.923 -17.996 -17.110 -13.375 -13.722 -13.375
34 1.1660 0.0871 -0.4347 -0.6063 -0.6247 -0.5552 -0.5793 -0.5666
34 0.8240 0.1337 -0.2276 -0.3700 -0.4169 -0.3637 -0.3943 -0.3448
34 0.5361 0.1179 -0.1288 -0.2485 -0.2891 -0.2613 -0.2585 -0.1967
34 0.4206 0.1021 -0.0968 -0.2027 -0.2336 -0.2055 -0.1949 -0.1273
34 0.3117 0.0824 -0.0746 -0.1651 -0.1882 -0.1631 -0.1469 -0.0748
34 0.2255 0.0491 -0.0754 -0.1541 -0.1707 -0.1463 -0.1228 -0.0477
34 0.1757 0.0235 -0.0837 -0.1539 -0.1673 -0.1461 -0.1201 -0.0471
34 0.1464 0.0077 -0.0856 -0.1529 -0.1635 -0.1418 -0.1153 -0.0445
34 0.1220 -0.0036 -0.0894 -0.1535 -0.1616 -0.1415 -0.1145 -0.0436
35 29.040 -20.448 -26.225 -22.218 -17.638 -13.579 -16.441 -15.505
35 0.7037 0.1958 -0.0950 -0.2292 -0.2709 -0.2306 -0.2477 -0.1847
35 0.2825 0.0899 -0.0529 -0.1418 -0.1580 -0.1322 -0.1176 -0.0376
35 0.1623 0.0219 -0.0749 -0.1449 -0.1545 -0.1309 -0.1080 -0.0354
35 0.1203 -0.0021 -0.0840 -0.1471 -0.1541 -0.1323 -0.1073 -0.0358
35 0.1167 -0.0065 -0.0852 -0.1476 -0.1530 -0.1318 -0.1058 -0.0344
35 0.1081 -0.0106 -0.0863 -0.1483 -0.1525 -0.1311 -0.1060 -0.0346
35 0.1012 -0.0140 -0.0886 -0.1490 -0.1531 -0.1319 -0.1055 -0.0350
35 0.0926 -0.0188 -0.0905 -0.1502 -0.1533 -0.1325 -0.1064 -0.0360
35 0.0865 -0.0229 -0.0922 -0.1511 -0.1530 -0.1335 -0.1074 -0.0362
182
Run 0.051 0.139 0.228 0.316 0.360 0.404 0.448 0.492 0.536 0.580 0.624 0.668 0.714 0.809 0.905 1.000
34 -4.4018 -4.2478 -5.1336 -4.7870 -4.4018 -3.1695 -4.7870 -4.8255 - -5.0950 -3.6701 -3.2465 -5.9038 -4.0553 -5.1336 -4.4789
34 -0.1455 -0.1114 -0.1455 -0.1582 -0.1455 -0.0987 -0.1455 -0.1611 - -0.1568 -0.0916 -0.0902 -0.2008 -0.1185 -0.1596 -0.1497
34 -0.0853 -0.0726 -0.0853 -0.0853 -0.0853 -0.0645 -0.0943 -0.0871 - -0.1015 -0.0681 -0.0582 -0.1366 -0.0771 -0.1195 -0.1213
34 -0.0519 -0.0386 -0.0469 -0.0625 -0.0569 -0.0441 -0.0625 -0.0581 - -0.0614 -0.0414 -0.0352 -0.0787 -0.0569 -0.0781 -0.0892
34 -0.0328 -0.0267 -0.0365 -0.0442 -0.0479 -0.0344 -0.0515 -0.0446 - -0.0511 -0.0287 -0.0279 -0.0633 -0.0552 -0.0629 -0.0788
34 -0.0073 -0.0056 -0.0098 -0.0151 -0.0229 -0.0162 -0.0307 -0.0257 - -0.0173 -0.0173 -0.0145 -0.0257 -0.0332 -0.0436 -0.0517
34 -0.0026 0.0037 -0.0008 -0.0112 -0.0164 -0.0105 -0.0216 -0.0166 - -0.0162 -0.0146 -0.0108 -0.0235 -0.0285 -0.0373 -0.0546
34 -0.0043 0.0042 -0.0018 -0.0147 -0.0186 -0.0170 -0.0277 -0.0200 - -0.0197 -0.0172 -0.0146 -0.0316 -0.0368 -0.0407 -0.0586
34 -0.0031 0.0058 -0.0020 -0.0145 -0.0187 -0.0164 -0.0280 -0.0198 - -0.0228 -0.0176 -0.0144 -0.0321 -0.0384 -0.0415 -0.0589
34 -0.0049 0.0049 -0.0040 -0.0153 -0.0204 -0.0198 -0.0300 -0.0204 - -0.0240 -0.0196 -0.0179 -0.0350 -0.0430 -0.0438 -0.0598
35 -0.4658 -0.2576 -0.9862 -0.5178 0.0026 1.1995 -0.5178 -0.1015 -5.3053 0.0546 0.9913 0.1067 -1.5586 1.4596 -0.9862 0.8352
35 -0.0321 -0.0095 -0.0321 -0.0451 -0.0382 -0.0225 -0.0451 -0.0328 -0.1081 -0.0567 -0.0191 -0.0054 -0.0903 -0.0444 -0.0642 -0.0779
35 -0.0093 0.0006 -0.0093 -0.0158 -0.0179 -0.0130 -0.0245 -0.0182 -0.0376 -0.0266 -0.0156 -0.0090 -0.0442 -0.0355 -0.0463 -0.0616
35 -0.0020 0.0082 -0.0020 -0.0128 -0.0160 -0.0150 -0.0258 -0.0172 -0.0225 -0.0225 -0.0150 -0.0128 -0.0332 -0.0377 -0.0399 -0.0578
35 -0.0024 0.0084 -0.0009 -0.0123 -0.0176 -0.0188 -0.0276 -0.0176 -0.0170 -0.0231 -0.0170 -0.0148 -0.0350 -0.0422 -0.0428 -0.0606
35 -0.0006 0.0103 0.0015 -0.0115 -0.0163 -0.0181 -0.0285 -0.0168 -0.0144 -0.0212 -0.0164 -0.0144 -0.0324 -0.0409 -0.0422 -0.0593
35 -0.0008 0.0103 0.0005 -0.0113 -0.0162 -0.0186 -0.0292 -0.0179 -0.0126 -0.0214 -0.0170 -0.0140 -0.0320 -0.0411 -0.0428 -0.0595
35 -0.0007 0.0113 0.0004 -0.0117 -0.0163 -0.0186 -0.0278 -0.0166 -0.0118 -0.0205 -0.0158 -0.0137 -0.0315 -0.0406 -0.0416 -0.0593
35 0.0015 0.0128 0.0026 -0.0094 -0.0145 -0.0177 -0.0280 -0.0159 -0.0074 -0.0173 -0.0146 -0.0132 -0.0271 -0.0395 -0.0404 -0.0568
35 0.0012 0.0124 0.0012 -0.0115 -0.0158 -0.0193 -0.0294 -0.0169 -0.0084 -0.0188 -0.0154 -0.0141 -0.0291 -0.0413 -0.0417 -0.0589
183

d16011 Ghoddoussi

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

d16011 Ghoddoussi

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

A MORE COMPREHENSIVE DATABASE FOR PROPELLER PERFORMANCE

VALIDATIONS AT LOW REYNOLDS NUMBERS

Master of Science, Wichita State University, 2011

Bachelor of Science, Sojo University, 1998

Submitted to the Department of Aerospace Engineering

All Rights Reserved

L. Scott Miller, Committee Chair

Klaus Hoffmann, Committee Member

Kamran Rokhsaz, Committee Member

Charles Yang, Committee Member

Hamid Lankarani, Committee Member

Accepted for the College of Engineering

Royce Bowden, Dean

Accepted for the Graduate School

Dennis Livesay, Dean

you for your constant support and patience.

or computational solutions. In this dissertation, a series of comprehensive propeller wind tunnel

uncertainties, and instrumental accuracies are quantified and presented here.

1.1 Propulsive Efficiency in Propeller Design ..................................................................1

2. MODERN PROPELLER ANALYSIS AND DESIGN ..........................................................9

2.1 Momentum-Blade Element Theory ............................................................................9

3. PROBLEMS AND GOALS ..................................................................................................31

3.1 Problems in Propeller Validation ..............................................................................31

4. EXPERIMENTAL APPARATUS .........................................................................................37

4.1 Geometry Descriptions .............................................................................................37

5.1 Propeller Performance ..............................................................................................74

5.2.2 COMP Results of Nacelle Pressure Distribution ........................................103

1. Summary of System Accuracy, Precision, and Errors…………………………….……. 67

6. Combined propeller/nacelle/wing grid domain [28]. ........................................................ 27

9. Propeller wind tunnel model and grid domain [30]. ......................................................... 30

10. Sensitivity analysis of pitch angle using JavaProp. .......................................................... 32

11. Sensitivity analysis of chord length using JavaProp. ........................................................ 32

12. Sensitivity analysis of propeller section airfoil using JavaProp. ...................................... 33

17. Model installation and side view in 7×10 NIAR. ............................................................. 42

18. PD1 propeller in OpenSCAD interface............................................................................. 43

19. PD1 Propeller blade assembly. ......................................................................................... 44

23. Nacelle assembly CAD design (dimensions in inches). ................................................... 49

28. PD1 propeller performance analysis. ................................................................................ 54

29. COMP propeller performance analysis. ............................................................................ 55

33. Data measurement and processing block diagram. ........................................................... 58

34. Load cell calibration for thrust. ......................................................................................... 60

54. Nacelle coordinate system. ............................................................................................... 88

AGARD Advisory Group for Aerospace Research and Development

BART Basic Aerodynamics Research Tunnel

CAD Computer-Aided Design

CFD Computational Fluid Dynamics

CMM Coordinate Measuring Machine

CNC Computer Numerical Control

COMP Complex Propeller

CPU Central Processing Unit

FFA Flygtekniska Försöksanstalten (Aeronautical Research Institute of Sweden)

LSWT Low-Speed Wind Tunnel

LTPT Low-Turbulence Pressure Tunnel (at Langley Research Center)

NACA National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics

nsnn No-Spinner No-Nacelle (Configurations)

NIAR National Institute for Aviation Research

PLA PolyLactic Acid

psf Pounds per Square Foot

psid Pounds per Square Inch Differential

rpm Revolutions per Minute

UAVs Unmanned Aerial Vehicles

UTRC United Technologies Research Center

VWT Vertical Wind Tunnel (at Air Force Research Laboratory)