## Are you sure?

This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

3 COSATI: 01-01, 16-04

83

**Some Experimental Results of Subsonic Derivative Obtained in the T-38 Wind Tunnel by Forced Oscillation
**

Marija Samardžić, MSc (Eng)1) Zoran Anastasijević, PhD (Eng)1) Dragan Marinkoviski, BSc, (Eng)1)

The results of an experimental determination of the subsonic direct damping derivative in roll are presented. The method applied in the T-38 wind tunnel is the rigidly forced oscillation technique [1-4]. The wind tunnel tests were conducted on two missile models: a Modified Basic Finner Model (MBFM), and a missile model developed in the VTI (BUMBAR) [5,8]. The tests were made at Mach number 0.6 for the MBFM model, and at Mach numbers 0.2, 0.4, 0.6 for the BUMBAR model. The obtained test results are compared with theoretical values for roll-damping coefficients obtained by the “DMAC” semi-empirical method [6] and for the MBFM model with results obtained in the AEDC wind tunnel [7]. Key words: wind tunnel, experimental aerodynamics, aerodynamic derivatives, stability derivatives, subsonic flow, forced oscillation.

Nomenclature

CLP,

Clp + Cβ& sin α

– non-dimensional dynamic direct derivative in roll, [1/rad]; – non-dimensional static direct derivative in roll, [1/rad]; – model diameter, [m]; – amplitude of excitation moment, [Nm]; – model reference area, [m2]; – dynamic pressure, [bar]; – moment of inertia, [kgm2]; – velocity, [m/s]; – free stream Mach number, – aerodynamic angle of attack, [°]; – aerodynamic sideslip angle,;[°] – amplitude of the primary motion, [°]; – reduced frequency, (ω ⋅ d / 2V ) ; – angular velocity, [1/s]; – phase shift.

CLBETA, Cl β sin α

d LT S q Ix V M

α β ϕ ωR ω η

The results of the experimental determination of the subsonic direct damping derivative in roll for two missile models are presented in this paper. The first test was conducted on the Modified Basic Finner Model (MBFM) for the sake of verification of the roll apparatus [5]. This paper presents the results only for a Mach number of 0.6 in the range of the angle of attack from α = -5° up to α = 4.5°. The measured roll-damping coefficients were compared with the calculated roll-damping coefficient values by the semi-empirical methods “DMAC” [6] for α = 0° and with published experimental data from the AEDC wind tunnel (Arnold Engineering Development Center-von Karman USA, [7]). A semi-empirical method “DMAC” is used in the VTI. The second roll oscillations experiment was the rolldamping test on the BUMBAR model at Mach numbers 0.2; 0.4 and 0.6 in the range of the angle of attack from α = -6° up to α = 6°. The measured roll-damping coefficients for α = 0° were compared to the values calculated by the “DMAC”. For Mach number 0.2 and for each angle of attack two test runs were done for checking repeatability of the measurement [8].

technique for stability derivative testing in the T-38 wind tunnel is the forced oscillation technique, measurements of reactions. All the experiments are based on the application of small/amplitude oscillatory motion to a model in the primary degree of freedom and the measurement of aerodynamic reactions produced by such motion in that particular (primary motion) and in other (secondary motion) degrees of freedom [1-4]. These reactions yield relevant direct and cross as well as crosscoupling derivatives due the motion considered herein.

1)

A

Introduction

**Apparatus and experimental procedure
**

Wind tunnel. The T-38 test facility of the Military Technical Institute (Vojnotehnički Institut) is a blowdowntype pressurized wind tunnel with a 1.5m x 1.5m square test section, [9]. For subsonic and supersonic tests, the test section is with solid walls, while for transonic tests a section with porous walls is inserted in the tunnel configuration. The porosity of walls can be varied between 1.5% and 8%, depending on Mach number, so as to achieve the best flow quality. The Mach numbers in the range 0.2 to 4.0 can be achieved in the test section, with Reynolds

Military Technical Institute (VTI), Ratka Resanovića 1, 11132 Belgrade, SERBIA

84

M.SAMARDŽIĆ...: SOME EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS OF SUBSONIC DERIVATIVE OBTAINED IN THE T-38 WIND TUNNEL BY FORCED OSCILLATION

numbers up to 110 million per meter. Models. The modified Basic Finner model geometry is a 2.5 caliber tangent-ogive cylinder fuselage with trapezoidal fins in the + configuration. The center of the mass is located 5 diameters from the nose along the longitudinal axis of the body. The basic dimensions of the MBFM model are presented in Fig.1. This model is a standard calibration model for dynamic wind tunnel tests.

1.333d d=100mm 5d

center of mass

10d 0.667d 0.5d

53. 13°

2.5d

**0.99d 1.333d R0.2 0.047d
**

4° 4°

Fin Details

R0.2

Forced-oscillation Apparatus. The oscillatory rolling motion is impaired by a hydraulic driving mechanism. The device includes the following sensors: primary oscillatory motion sensor, excitation moment sensor and feedback position sensor. A five-component internal balance is of a monoblock type and semiconductor strain gauges are used in order to increase its sensitivity, and consequently, signal to noise ratio as well [10]. Test Procedure. A typical wind tunnel run includes the following stages: − tare run (wind-off run), when the model is oscillated but the tunnel is not running. This measurement enables determination of inertial forces, − wind-on run, when model is oscillated at the same frequency as during the tare run but with the wind tunnel running. The static and dynamic direct derivatives in roll are calculated using the following data for the wind-on and wind-off measurements: moment of inertia in the primary degree of freedom, amplitude and frequency of the primary oscillations, amplitude of the excitation moment, and phase shift between the signal from excitation moment sensor and the signal from the primary motion sensor. Nondimensional coefficients of direct damping derivative in roll are calculated as:

CLBETA = Cl β sin α L L ⎛ ⎞ 2 = 1 ⎜ − I x (ω 2 − ω0 ) − ⎛ T cos η − T 0 cosη0 ⎞ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ q⋅S ⋅d ⎝ ϕ0 ⎝ ϕ ⎠⎠

Figure1. Basic dimensions of the MBFM model

**The basic dimensions of the BUMBAR model are presented in Fig.2.
**

d = 136 mm

2d

d

d R6.5

0 0.2 6d

R.P 3.55 d 6.85 d

Figure 2. Basic dimensions of the BUMBAR model

The MBFM model and BUMBAR model mounted in the T-38 test section are shown in Figures 3a) and 3b)

The values determined from wind-off run are marked with index “0”. The static (CLBETA) and dynamic direct derivatives (CLP) are respectively obtained from the in-phase and quadrature components of the excitation moment, and from the amplitude and frequency of the primary motion. To obtain the frequency and amplitude of the primary motion, the power spectral density in the frequency domain is calculated from the measured primary motion. The amplitude and phase shift of the excitation moment are calculated in the frequency domain by applying the crosspower spectral density. The signals from the excitation moment sensor are cross-correlated with the primary signals generated by the primary oscillation motion sensor.

d

**Experimental results and discussion
**

Static direct derivative in roll Static direct derivative in roll for both of the models are presented in Fig.4.

a)

CLBETA

1.5 1.2 0.9 0.6 0.3 0.0 -0.3 -0.6

T-38 Wind tunnel BUMBAR M=0.2 T-38 Wind tunnel BUMBAR M=0.4 T-38 Wind tunnel BUMBAR M=0.6 T-38 Wind tunnel MBFM M=0.6

-6

-4

-2

0 α[deg]

2

4

6

Figure 4. Static direct derivative in roll for the BUMBAR and the MBFM model b) Figure 3. MBFM model a) and BUMBAR model b) mounted in the T-38 test section

The configuration of the MBFM model is symmetrical, and therefore the static direct derivative coefficient CLBETA for MBFM is equal to zero in the entire range of attack. The

M.SAMARDŽIĆ...: SOME EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS OF SUBSONIC DERIVATIVE OBTAINED IN THE T-38 WIND TUNNEL BY FORCED OSCILLATION

85

wing section of the BUMBAR model is asymmetrical, so the coefficient CLBETA is not equal to zero, except for α = 0o. Dynamic derivative in roll Modified Basic Finner Model. Fig.5 depicts the direct dynamic derivative in roll as a function of α for the MBFM model, for M = 0.6.

4 2 0

T-38 Wind tunnel ωR=0.016 AEDC Wind tunnel DMAC M=0.6

-2 -4 -6 -6 -4 -2 0 α[deg] 2 4 6

Figure 5. Direct dynamic derivative in roll for the MBFM model, M = 0.6

The roll-damping coefficients measured in the T-38 wind tunnel showed a good agreement with the results obtained in the AEDC wind tunnel and the values calculated by “DMAC”. BUMBAR model. Figures 6 - 8 depict direct the dynamic derivatives in roll as a function of α for the BUMBAR model, for M = 0.2, M = 0.4, M = 0.6.

3 0

measurement. For the angle of attack α = 0o, ±2o a high level of repeatability of the obtained results can be noticed. Account the difficulties in dynamic stability derivatives measurements, especially in intermittent wind tunnels; it can be assumed that repeatability is good in the entire range of the angle of attack. The problems of a small amplitude of output signals from the force and moment sensors are common in measurements of dynamic stability derivatives. It should be emphasized that in the applied technique for stability derivative testing uncertainty in measurements is mainly a result of raw data scatter. For this reason, the regime of data acquisition process is very demanding. The duration of a typical dynamic test in the intermittent wind tunnel is approximately 10 seconds [11]. In the presented rolloscillation experiments one test run was done for each angle of attack. The duration of test runs was 12 seconds, where approximately 8 seconds was the sampling time. Finally, the cross-correlation functions were determined from 82 periods of model oscillations and from 8192 samples. The applied regime of data acquisition process showed very good results.

CLP

Conclusions

This paper presents the experimental results of the subsonic derivative for two models: Modified Basic Finner Model and BUMBAR model. The experimental data obtained in the T-38 wind tunnel, for both models, showed a good agreement with the values calculated by “DMAC”. Also, the roll-damping coefficients for the MBFM model measured in the T-38 wind tunnel showed a good agreement with the results obtained in the AEDC wind tunnel. Measurements of aerodynamic stability derivatives are one of the most complex wind tunnel tests. On the basis of the presented results it can be concluded that the Experimental Aerodynamics Division in the VTI developed high quality equipment and software for data acquisition and reduction for these measurements.

T-38 Wind tunnel ωR=0.067 T-38 Wind tunnel repeated runs DMAC M = 0.2

CLP

-3 -6 -9 -12

-6

-4

-2

0 α[deg]

2

4

6

**Figure 6. Direct dynamic derivative in roll for the BUMBAR model, M=0.2
**

3 0

T-38 Wind tunnel ωR=0.032 DMAC M=0.4

CLP

-3 -6 -9

References

[1] ANASTASIJEVIĆ,Z.: Prilog novim metodama merenja aerodinamičkih derivativa stabilnosti u erotunelima, Doctoral dissertation, Vojna akademija, Beograd, 2007 [2] SAMARDŽIĆ,M.: Istraživanje uticaja na tačnost merenja aerodinamičkih derivativa stabilnosti u aerotunelu T-38, M.A. examination, Mašinski fakultet, Beograd, 2007. [3] ORLIK-RÜCKEMAN,K.J.: Techniques for dynamic stability testing in wind tunnels, Agard cpp-235, May 1978. [4] ANASTASIJEVIĆ,Z., MARINKOVSKI,D., SAMARDŽIĆ,M.: Merenje aerodinamičkih derivativa stabilnosti u aerotunelima, Naučnotehnička informacija, VTI Beograd, 2001, Br.1. [5] SAMARDŽIĆ,M., MARINKOVSKI,D.: Testing of MBFM calibration model in the T-38 wind tunnel, Study number V3-2916-I025, VTI Beograd, August 2006. [6] STOJKOVIĆ,S., ĆURČIN,M.: Semi-empirical methods for calculating aerodynamic coefficients, VTI Beograd, 1997. [7] BOB,L. USELTON and LEROY,M. JENKE: Experimental Missile Pitch and Roll-Damping Characteristics at Large Angles of Attack, ARO, Inc. Arnold Air Force Station, Tennessee, Vol. April 1977, 14, No.4. [8] SAMARDŽIĆ,M.: Merenje prigušenja u valjanju na modelu BUMBAR u aerotunelu T-38, V3 2849-I-025, VTI Beograd, September 2004 [9] ELFSTROM,G.M., MEDVED,B.: The Yugoslav 1.5m Trisonic Blowdown Wind Tunnel, AIAA Paper 86-0746-CP [10] JANJIKOPANJI,G.: Laboratorijska ispitivanja uređaja za merenje derivativa stabilnosti u valjanju za aerotunela T-38, V3-2684-I-EA, VTI, Beograd, 1992.

-12 -6 -4 -2 0 α[deg] 2 4 6

**Figure 7. Direct dynamic derivative in roll for the BUMBAR model, M=0.4
**

3 0 -3

T-38 Wind tunnel ωR=0.022 DMAC M=0.6

CLP

-6 -9 -12 -6 -4 -2 0 α[deg] 2 4 6

Figure 8. Direct dynamic derivative in roll for the BUMBAR model, M=0.6

The roll-damping coefficients for the BUMBAR model for the angle of attack α = 0o showed a good agreement with the values calculated by the “DMAC”. For Mach number 0.2 for each angle of attack additional runs were done for checking repeatability of the stability derivatives

86

M.SAMARDŽIĆ...: SOME EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS OF SUBSONIC DERIVATIVE OBTAINED IN THE T-38 WIND TUNNEL BY FORCED OSCILLATION

[11] BEYERS,M.E.: Subsonic Roll Oscillation Experiments on the Standard Dynamic Model, National Research Council of Canada, Ontario, Canada, AIAA Atmospheric Flight Mechanics Conference, 1983.

Received: 20.12.2007.

**Eksperimentalni rezultati merenja aerodinamičkih derivativa stabilnosti u subsoničnoj oblasti brzina u aerotunelu T-38 prinudnim oscilacijama
**

Izvod Prikazani su rezultati eksperimentalnog određivanja direktnog derivativa stabilnosti u valjanju u subsoničnoj oblasti brzina. U aerotunelu T-38 primenjuje se metoda krutih prinudnih oscilacija [1-4]. Aerotunelska ispitivanja urađena su za dva modela: Modified Basic Finner model (MBFM) i model rakete razvijene u VTI (BUMBAR) [5,8]. Ispitivanja su urađena na Mahovom broju 0.6 za model MBFM i na Mahovim brojevima 0.2, 0.4, 0.6 za model BUMBAR-a. Dobijeni rezultati upoređeni su sa izračunatim vrednostima koeficijenta prigušenja u valjanju pomoću poluempirijske metode “DMAC” [6], a za MBFM model i sa rezultatima dobijenim u AEDC aerotunelu [7]. Ključne reči: aerodinamički tunel, eksperimentalna aerodinamika, aerodinamički derivativi, derivativi stabilnosti, subsonično strujanje, prinudne oscilacije.

Les résultats des mesurements expérimentaux des dérivées aérodynamiques de stabilité dans le domaine subsonique des vitesses obtenus par les oscillations contraintes dans la soufflerie T-38

Les résultats de la détermination expérimentale de la dérivée directe de stabilité du roulement dans le domaine subsonique des vitesses sont exposés dans ce papier. Dans la soufflerie aérodynamique on applique la méthode des oscillations contraintes rigides [1-3]. Les essais aérodynamiques ont été effectués pour deux modèles: Modified Basic Finner model (MBFM) et modèle du missile développé à VTI (Bumbar)[4, 7]. Les essais ont été faits à 0.6 de Mach pour le modèle MBFM et à 0.2, 0.4, 0.6 de Mach pour le modèle Bumbar. Les résultats obtenus ont été comparés avec les valeurs calculées des coefficients d’étouffement du roulement par la méthode semi-empirique "DMAC" [5], et pour le modèle MBFM avec les résultats obtenus dans la soufflerie aérodynamique AEDC [6]. Mots clés: soufflerie aérodynamique, aérodynamique expérimentale, dérivées aérodynamiques, dérivées de stabilité, courant subsonique, oscillations contraintes.

- Transfer Function Models Representing the Dynamics of a Missile
- Missile System Design
- 5.- Wind Loadingontiltedroof-Topsolararrays 2013 Matthew
- Tactical Missile Autopilot Design
- Missile Roll Control Part II
- Richards
- Aerodynamic Predictions, Comparisons, And Validations Using Missile DATCOM (97) and Aeroprediction 98 (AP98)
- Missile Roll Control-High Frequency Model
- 2_FlightMechanics
- DownloadComponent4
- Class 39 - 41 Introduction to Missile Dynamics
- Missile System Design
- Missile Roll Autopilot Overview
- Automatic Control of Aircraft & Missile Blake Lock)
- Missile Autopilot
- golf ball
- Experimental and Numerical Investigation of Secondary Flow on Compressor Blades
- Wind Effects on ‘Z’ Plan Shaped Tall Building- A Case Study_published copy.pdf
- Wind Pressures and Buckling of Cylindrical Steel1
- SAE reference bodies for vehicle aerodynamics
- Solar Chimney Power Technology – Veering effect and Simulation Methodologies
- Nasa Ntrs Archive 19710026939
- Jlwind Sample
- impactul dezastrelor
- 103820090201
- Dual Degree L 2015
- annurev%2Efl%2JAKOB ACKERET AND THE HISTORY OF THE MACH NUMBER
- Sem 1
- 3 Sec Gust Wind to Hourly Wind Speed
- Publication 30

Skip carousel

- Blended Wing Body-A Potential New Aircraft Design
- Atmosphere of Freedom Sixty Years at the NASA Ames Research Center
- America in Space. the First Decade, Aeronautics
- American Aviation Historical Society
- A Review on Design Optimization of Air Dam for Lift Reduction of a Car Using in Wind Tunnel and CFD Analysis
- NASA’s Wind Tunnels
- Investigation On Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) Simulation for Wind Effects On Tall Tapered Buildings
- Comparative Assessment of Aerodynamic Forces Generated Due to Wind Deflector of Passenger Car by CFD and Experimental Method
- tmpA422.tmp
- We Freeze to Please a History of NASA's Icing Research Tunnel and the Quest for Safety
- Hugh L Dryden's Career in Aviation and Space
- tmp53C2.tmp
- Apollo Experience Report Aerothermodynamics Evaluation
- Moffett Field Map (1991)
- NASA Facts Aeronautics Test Program
- NASA Facts Flight Research What is Flight Research
- Fifty Years of Aeronautical Research
- Aeronautics in NACA and NASA
- The High-Speed Frontier. Case Histories of Four NACA Programs, 1920 - 1950
- NASA Facts Triumph of Technology NASA Contributions to the Boeing 777
- Review of the X-15 Program
- Revolutionary Atmosphere the Story of the Altitude Wind Tunnel and the Space Power Chambers
- NASA Aeronautics
- Anti-Aircraft Journal - Dec 1948
- Computational Study of Turbulent Flow around a Generic Car Body (Ahmed BODY)
- NASA Facts Langley's 30 by 60 Foot Tunnel
- Vintage Airplane - Nov 1990
- Boone v. Goldin, 4th Cir. (1999)

Skip carousel

- Columbia Accident Investigation Board Volume Five Book Three
- Davis Manta Glider
- NASA Facts the Blended-Wing-Body
- X-15, Research at the Edge of Space
- Short Field Take-Off and Landing Performance as an Enabling Technology for a Greener, More Efficient Airspace System (PDF)
- Research-Airplane-Committee Report on Conference on the Progress of the X-15 Project a Compilation of the Papers Presented, Held at Langley Aeronautical Lab., Langley Field, VA on 25-26 October 1956
- X-15 Research Results With a Selected Bibliography
- Hyperloop CrowdStorm
- Review of Our National Heritage of Launch Vehicles Using Aerodynamic Surfaces and Current Use of These by Other Nations
- tmp53C2.tmp
- As NZS 3580.9.3-2003 Methods for Sampling and Analysis of Ambient Air Determination of Suspended Particulate
- NASA Aeronautics Research and Technology
- Reentry F Experiment
- Army Aviation Digest - Sep 1955
- The Next Decade in Commercial Aircraft Aerodynamics-Boeing
- Mach 3+ NASA USAF YF-12 Flight Research 1969-1979
- NASA Facts Aeronautics Test Program
- As 2428.5-2004 Methods of Testing Smoke Heat Release Vents Determination of Discharge Coefficient and Effecti
- Research Airplane Committee Report on Conference on the Progress of the X-15 Project October 25-26, 1956
- NASA Facts Fundamental Aeronautics Program
- Shuttle Performance Lessons Learned, Part 1
- The Vanguard Satellite Launching Vehicle an Engineering Summary
- Review of the X-15 Program
- Investigation On Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) Simulation for Wind Effects On Tall Tapered Buildings
- Comparative Assessment of Aerodynamic Forces Generated Due to Wind Deflector of Passenger Car by CFD and Experimental Method
- Exploring in Aeronautics
- NASA Facts F-15 B Aerodynamic Flight Facility
- Anti-Aircraft Journal - Dec 1948
- Apollo Experience Report Mission Planning for Apollo Entry
- General Dynamics Corporation, and American Airlines, Inc. v. Richard T. Whitcomb, 443 F.2d 630, 4th Cir. (1971)

Sign up to vote on this title

UsefulNot usefulClose Dialog## Are you sure?

This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

Close Dialog## This title now requires a credit

Use one of your book credits to continue reading from where you left off, or restart the preview.

Loading