https://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?

R=19930092691 2018-11-05T07:39:08+00:00Z

MR No. 3F12

NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS

ORIGINALLY ISSUED
April 1943 as
Memorandum Report 3F12

WIND-TUNNEL llNESTIGATION OF DEVICES

FOR IMPROVING THE DIVING CHARACTERISTICS

OF AIRPLANES

By Albert L . Erickson

f U
Ames Aeronautical Laboratory
Moffett Field, California of t • l\Jational
ry CUrTITll
Aer uti
O. c.

WASHINGTON

NACA WARTIME REPORTS are reprints of papers originally issued to provide rapid distribution of
advance research results to an authorized group requiring them for the war effort. They were pre-
viously held under a security status but are now unclassified. Some of these reports were not tech-
nically edited. All have been reproduced without change in order to expedite general distribution.

A-66
 . - - _ ._- -- - -

NArr;.rONAL ADVISORY COELI~r.::L= FOR A2RO=~AUTICS

-------- ---
for the

Nat eri.e 1 Command, Array Air Fo:::'ce s

vvIND-T1JF:7EL IFV~STIGAT:O:·: OF DEVICES

FOR I~iPROVn\G T!-!~ D:VI:TG CF-A...1i.ACTZR:STICS

By Albert Le Sricks on

A 1/6-scc:Le rJl)del of a pur Sl.:i t type 8.irplane "tv-as tested

in the 16-fol)t vrinc~ tunnel at the .rlr::e s Aero~[tutical Lab':cat0ry
for the purpose ~f deteroining t h e effect I)f deveral devices
that might be applied. to the airplane to impr0ve t:Lle high-speed
pi tchin~-m0ment characteristic So '::11is investit;a ti 0n vlaS
initiated because SaLle diff ic ulties l~ave been experiencecl Hith
this airplane in l'ec ov erin8 frl)El hi : ..h- s~)eed diveso
T_ e results i ndicate that up to a l:ach nULl[::.er 'Jf 0 0 74,
auxiliary flaps at t he 33-percent-cl:'01'ct stati0n ~n tl-:.e 1011er
surface 0f the i.·ring, or a contr~llable stabilizer J l·rill
pr 'Jvide adequate c0ntr'")1 to 0verC~De t~e larGe pitc~in s D~Ii1ents
enc0untered during high- speed. cUves ')f the airplane., :'~e
results also indicate that a change in uin g cl)nt:)U.l' at the
center sectil)n vrill relieve the cUvin::; tendency up to a lift
coefficient I)f 0 1 ar:d D. Each nULlber of 0" 74e This chance I'Till
0

iLlpr8ve t he diving characteristics 2nd could De a?plied tl)

airplanes already cons trl:cted and in serviceo

Pilots of the airplane tested have had difficulty in

recovering fr0L; high-spe ecL divesc> Inv e sti gati0n of the pr0blem
by the Hatil)nal Advisl)ry 0041]";li ttee fl)r Aeronautics vIaS beGun
at the Langley I~eEnrial Aeronal~tical Laborat0ry .• La.nglcy Field,
Virginia c A full-scale airplane l-m s tested in the full-scale

I •
 ---- . - - - -- - - -- -- - - -

"(vind tunnel , and a 1/6-scale model of the airplane Nas tested

i n t h e G- foot h i bh-speed. ,'iind tunne2. o F'urt:ler investigD..tion
of the 1/6-scale moc1e1 vJEiS carried on in the ::t.6- f0'Jt vTind
tunnel at ti.le Ane s _!.'..errmE'.ut ical Laboratory ~ Re sult s 'Jf the se
i nvesti gations are report ed in references I ) 2 , 3, and 40

A chanGe i n the shape of the tv,selage \las recoDmenc1ed in

reference 4, bLt t he results cUd ll'Jt Lldicate: tr..at it Hou l cl
oVerc'J.1e the objectio n~b~e pi.tciling rJ')[]ent s at all lift
c')effici ent s o The l'efo:c"e j t~le m')d.e l vms r etu:..'ned to the Ames
Aeron2..ut ical LabOl'8.tor y, c'. t the re(~Ue3t of t he Nati on9.1
Advis0ry ComLlit tee for Aeroi1C'..ut ic s , to ir:.vesti gat e the effe ct
of auxilie.ry flaps, cor;:'c:r'o lIable s tC'. b ilizer, Emd change of uing
c ont')ur upon the diving c~aracteristico in an endeavor to
pr')vide adequate c0ntrol .

APPAtiliT]S .AN:O iIETHOD

'\'" incL Tunnel and EquipDent

The t es t s Nere co nducted in t_"!.e lo- f'J'Jt "lind tunnel at
the Ames Aeronautical L<lb'Jr,:1.torY a This 1'Jincl tunr:.el has a clo Ged
test secti')n , a single c~osed-r eturn paGsaeo , and is 'Jf circular
cross se c ti')n througho ut 0 ij'he [Jodol uas su.:.)~) ortec1 on t1To struts
lv:i,. t h lin~.:s f or controllin g t~1e anGle of c'tta.cl': in the sarJO'
Danner as for the t es t s repo~ted in referenco 40 ~he forces
on t he model we r e Deasured by se l f - balancinG , roc'Jrding beam :.
scales o
mhe results of the t es t s hav e boon corrected f or t unnel-
lvall effe cts · by addin g t he follovling corrections:

i n degrees

Appr'Jxinate corrections for tare for c es and m'JQen t s llave been

appli ,e c1 o The p itching mO[lOnts v.rcre C0[lput ed vIi t h rospe c't to
tho · 25- percent point on t ho r.lOan aer')clyno.r,lic ' c h ora , 3. 23
inches abovo t ho trunni ono
 3

liodel
The model of t he ai r plane (fiG. 1) 'Vms fll.rnished by the
r.1<lnufac turer . Except for the r.1Qdifications investigated; it
vJaS the sar.le as used for the test s r eport ed in refere nc e L!.•
Th e Prestone , oil , sparl';:- plug cooling and carburetor scoops.,
an 0_ the turbosupercharger installa til)ns were not on the Dl)c1el,
because previous tests (reference L!.) hac1.. S~lQ'l,'m tllat these
accessorie shad nQ sisnificant effec t Qn the pi tc h in g-r.1l)rJen t
characteristics. A cor.1plete clescri_)ti;n I"ill be found in
reference 5. The principal model dir.1ensiai.1S 1-Jere 8.S follO't-IS:
\Hng a r ea . •
·· ·· ·· ·· ·· ·· •· •• ·• • • · ·• • .9 1O square feet
C1
8 0 66 feet
·· ·
Uing span . . •
11enn aero dynamic chord •
· · • · · 1.17 feet
. · · · · · · · · ·· ·• ·· ·
Stabilizer area . , · 105 square feet
.0,, 68 square feet
Elevator area . 0
·
Horizontal tail area
·· ····•·· · .2018 square feet
The auxiliary flaps 1'lere testecl at t i'JO c hord p a si tions
on the nodel , one l-vi th a h in g e line at ap~)rQxinat ely 33 Rer-
cent , and "the other "lith a hinge line at ap')ra~n;:1atel~T 65
perc ent of the 1'ling c h qrd f rO"il the lea(ing cc1ee Ii The
locatians thus chosen were s~ruutlirall; suitc~ far applica-
tiQl1 of the se flaps to the full- ccGle airplane '.":ho Ge
0

auxiliary flaps are i;Llustro..toc1. in fiGure 2.

The changes to t 1.e contour I)f tno l;ing center section,
cl)nsisting I)f several alteration s to t~lC uPl)er and lQuer
surfaces , are shavm i n fi gures 3 a~lC:' 4- .
In the tests of auxiliary flal)S and 'Vling contaur
chan ge s , the stabilizer and elevo.tar 110re set at 0° ..
Adc1itil)nal tests of the standard D0<1el we r e Dade with several
olevatQl' 8.nglos ane tho stabilizor sot at 00 end -2°.

RESULTS AED DISC~'SSIOl

Auxiliary Flaps

Tho auxiliary flaps nay bo considered contrQllable

devices to provide lone;i tudinal co ntrl)l at tho hieher ::ach
numbers at Irlhich the stability Qf the airplane increases tl)
such an extent that t lle elevGtor i s incapable of l)r')vic"..ing
contr o l. The ml)ro inportant results, 1iliich aro givon in
 figures 5, 6, and 7, show that all of the flaps tested pro~uced
p0si ti ve incre :Jent s of pitching r.10Llei lt uhich , in general,
increased as the Each number increasec1 •

. Of t he fl(1.p s tested, those at the 33-percent-c ~1 0rd ste.tion

1'18 re the most effective . ~he flaps inboard of the' booms
procluced large~ inc:"'er.~ ent s of pitching Ii10L1ent t~an did the
flaps outboard of, the boor.1s o In fact, vJith flC1.ps at tpe
33- percent - chord static!l1 , t h e l-inch ino 0ard flaps had a lar ge r
effe ct than the 2- inch f'la!,>s outboaI'c1 of t he b'lo[1s c

As indic a ted in figure 6 J the l-i nch inboCLrd flaps had_

li tt le effect on th-e 2.) i-t ching' monent s' u:len they' 1.'"-e1"'e set at .,
7 05 0 , but as the anGJ.e vJaB inCre8,'8cd to 15°', tll'clr 'effective-
ness increased rapidly} especial::':]T at· the ~. i gher :=ach cumbers 8 ,'

Because of this rHt:'lcr rapi cLi'lCl"eaBe' in 'et'fec t~ ,v ene SS , the

flaps shoulc. be· operated car efu'l~'Y to ' pTevent' t hc' deve 2.o::?r,wnt
of too large accele~'ati0ns Q '
I
Fig"\lre S ShOllS t he effect of t he i nb 'lClrd flaps on tllo lift .I
coefficient at 1.vhich the [1odel bala:1ced ~ At a :=ach nur11ber of
0 .. 725 , a 4-5 0 a.eflection of the 1- 1/2- i n c11 flapFl increasod the
lift coofficient for balance by 0 . 53 (>.\t t .. is :;8.ch lTU.r:1ber J at
an altitude 0f 25 , 000 feet and. ui th a Hin[; loadir:.g of 1..;.5 poune.s
pcr squarc foot , a lift cocfficient of 0 55 uill proc'.ucc a
0

3.5g pull-out from a vcrtic al divc . '

The variation of pitching- rJor.1ent cocfficicnt l1ith lift

coefficient for the l-inch inboard flc.ps o.Jc thc 33-percer:.t-
chorc1 s tation, at a :iach ,m.lL1ber 0f 0 725, is S:lOvm in fi Gure
0 9.
Fi Gurc 10 shov's the CI~"'a g cocfficic~lt, enGle' of attD.cl~ , and
pitchin g- moL1ent coefficicnt versus lift coeffici en t for the
1-1/2- inch inboard flaps 7 set 300, at t he saLOW station o '
Corre sponding data f0r the standc.rd r: oc1el ,\ii t.l0Ut flaps arc'
s h 01m in fi gure 11. ~hcse data arc presented f0r use in
cakin g addit i0 nal cO[1parisons if ~esired.

The inboo.rc1 o.nc.!. 01.1.tboard fl<:>..ps hRc1 :lee,rly the sCtme offect
on lift coefficier..t J as may be seen b:r c0nr"arinf, t he re sul t s
given in fi gure 12 i;Jith tho sc of fi t:;uro 130 ~ ho 2.argc
differences in mo~ent increDcnt provi0usly ~oted in fic ur e 5
aro probably accounted for by the l arger effoct, of the i nb0ard
flaps on tho do-vmwash at the tCLil " ,

The drag incref,1Gnts c.'-uo t'J the fl~.ps Gro inC,icatec1 i n

figuros 1 4 and 150 The fl.s.ps He re i10t i ntcncleo. f or U8eTo dive

l ~_
 5

brakes , but it is natural that t~le y sh0ulcl. increC'.se the cll. . ag

at c ertai n lift c0efficients 0 E011ever, at high lift
c0efficients , the nodel actually hac1 a 10Her c1rag uith the
I - inch inboal"o. flaps at the 33- percent-ch0rd statilJn ~n_al1
without the flaps , as is indicated in .f~gure 16(1
:1i th reference to the question of uha t loads "viII occur
on the flaps and attachr.lents , figure 17 Sh')vTS the pressure
that occurred on the 1-1/2- inch flaps at the 33-percent 7 chord
stat ion g At a Each number ' of OQ 74 anc1 a flap angle of 45'),
the maxir:lUm clifference between the pressures on the front and
.
back -fa c es of the flaps 1'!aS l e3 tiDes the dynamic pressure~

Alt oge t her , the results indicC'.te that the- auxiliary flaps
shOlJ.ld p r ovi de a prac tical -anc1 --effective longitudinal control
to pullout of high- speed.-diveso i.Jith the ' eleva~or free, the
lift c o efficients for trim will differ fro~ the balance li~t
coefficients shotvl1 in figure 8, but the effectiveness of the
flaps should nlJt be impaired o

The '.ring- contQ1..1l' changes r.lay be c0noiderect fi:x;ed devic'es

that alter the variation of pi t -c:1L1f rJ')[}ents "1i th l:ac11. nULlbeJ;'
so as t o improve the high- speed eli ving charac t-erist ic'S 0 The
upper- surface c0ntour cl;.[',nges Here t 'cstec1 boce',u se in slJme -
prev~ous tests of the 'sta~dard D')del (referenc~ 4~, the diving
DQL1ents started to decrease at C', ::E'.cl'l ' mmber I)f O~ 75, Rnd uhen
the cr1 tical speed of the center sectil)n _ of the \.Tin" vms
increased by a .change I)f cont')ur, . t:~is teno.e:1cy disap:)eareo.•
It \'ras therefore reasoned that decre'asing the critical speed
at t~e wing center seuti0n w~ulc c~use the diving DODents to
st-o..rt de c reas ine; in the sC'.rJe Danner ['. t a lOI'JOr ::ach nUL1ber
I>

The 101'Ter- surfac~ cont0UT changos 'Jere tested because it Ims

believed that the shock 1Thieh t~ey cause to fl)rD on the lower
s'LU'face of- the ling at high 11['.ch nUDbers tJ.ight ~1.ave Em ,effect
sirJilar tl) the auxiliary flaps and thereby iL1l")r0ve the diving
characteristics ..
'Figure 18 shmlTS the variati0n 01' pitching-moment .
coefficient \'Tlt:t ~iach nUIJ"!Jer at lift cl)efficients of 0.1,
0.2 , ano. O . l.~ , due to chantes to the csntour 0f the upper ,
surface of the I'linGo ':'~1 e large inboc..rd up~)er-surface c0ntl)Ur
change (fig . 18 , curve C) is the 0nly I)ne _o f those changes",
6 . I

that had any appreciable effect on t he pitching-moment charac-

teristics. This chan ge causes the diving mor,lents to decrense
at l:ach nur.1bers above 0.725 for a lift coefficient of 0.1, but
the effect is too scall to be of value,
Figure 19 shows the effect of lower-surface contour
changes. At a lift coefficient of · O.l, t he contour change at
the 52-p ercent -ch ord station shous a relatively .snall variation
of pitching- morl1ent coefficient Ivi th ~ ·=8.ch nunber. The other
changes had less favorable effects.
The curves of pitching-morJent coefficient versus lift
coefficient (fig. 20) show that for lift coefficients less
than about 0.1, t he pitching- nocent coefficient increases as
the Hach nur,1ber increases, and for greater lift coefficients ,
it decreases with increasing !~ch nunber . These characteristics
tend to make the airplane balance at a lift coefficient of
about 0.1 as the speed increases above that corresponding to
the critical 11ach nur.1ber.
The lift increments due to the c0nt'mr changes are shovm
in figure 21. At an angle of attack of -lo, · all the contour
changes decreased the lift coefficient at 10vl speeds and
increased it at high speeds, except for the contour change at
the trailing edge, l.vhich acted oppositely. The contour change
at the 52-percent-chord station gave the naximum reduction in
lift at lov,," speeds anc1 clid not increase the lift until a Hach
number of 0.675 vlaS exceeded. Above t l-:is value, the lift
increnent increased rapidly. This increase in lift increnent
tends to maintain the clowrn.vash at t he tail, which is probably
r espons ible for the favorable effects on t he pitching cocents.
The results for the standard model (fi g . 11) Shov1 that for all
lift coefficients great er than -0.18, the pitching-m0!:1ent
coefficient decreased as the l1ach nunber increased above the
critical. The results with t he wing contour change at the
52-percent- chord station (f ig. 20 ) sho11 that the lift
coeffiCient, above which the pitching coefficients decrease
"\'lith incroasing Bach number, is increo.Sod from -0 13 to 0.1.
0

Therefore, thDre should be loss difficulty in recovery frOD

dives at 11ach numbers up to at least 0.74 , the liuit of the
tosts,
All the contour changes on the lower surfaco increased
the drag at a Bach number of 0.725 or less (fig . 21) . Above
this 11ach number, the drag was reduced by the c ont our changes
at the 43-percen~~nd 52-percent-chord stations . The contour
 - -- -- - - - -

change uhich gave the best pitching-moment characteristics

(that at the 52-percent-.chord station) causec1 the least '
increase in drag ..

CO ~l trollable Stabilizer
A 2° ,de crease in stabilizer incidence increased the
pi tching-:D0ment coefficient by a~Jl)l"Jxiuately 0 "I t:~,):1e;hout
the speed ran ge (fi g' ? 22) 0 For t_le sta:r.&arc1 airplane y tl:is
chang e in pi tc hil1G- r,1()[,lent coeffic ient C0lTe sp0nds to an
increase in lift coefficient for bo.lance of about 0~2 at a
Each nULlber of 0 () 725 0 Figure' 22 8.1so 8110'\'>Js that the effec-
tiveness of the elevator, i n proclucing chan.:;es in pi tcl1.ing
mODent , remained essent~ally cons~ant for all l~ch nuobers
of the test for both 0° and _2° stabilizer incidence o
Although the elevator i s effective in prod~c~ng changes in
mOL1Emt, tr_ese are too small to oV'ercOT!le the greatl;y-
increased stabilitJ prod.uced by a fixed stabilizer "Then the
angle of d01Jm·.rasn decreases at thc ::igher Bach nULlbers e
Em'Jever, the Lloment required can -oe prx1ucecl by cha.nging the
stabilizer angle 0 l'he so result s inchcate t:lat a contro:i..lable
sto.bilizer should provide longi tuclinal control of t1:.e airplane
in dives up to at least a Each Dunbor ')f Oc74c

For Each numbors up to at least 0 0 74, tho liDit of

the tests, t he results i~dicate th~t:
10 Auxiliary flaps at the 33-percent-chord station on
the lovler surface ')f t ho winG betueon the bo')r.1s o3.n(1 fuselage
'\'>Ji11 provide longitudinal co;, trol in dives.
2" A chango to t10 co: tour ')f t~o lover surface of the
wing betwoon tho bOOLlS will relievo t~o eivilg tendency for
values 0-:: t ho lii't coef-::icicntG up to O"l o This cl:ange
aLlount s to thickoning t 10 I"in[; at tho 52-perc ent-chord stati ')n
an a_ fairin G to t ho original IJ'ing s1.~rfaco ..
3.. A controllablo stabilizor will Dr0vido longitudinal
c')ntrol in ~l i bh- spe cd di vos .
Aue s Aeronaut ical Lab OI' a tory,
national Advisory C')Qwittee for Aorona J.tics;
1

Hoffctt Fiold, Calif.

 REFEfu: ~·T CES

l~ G·uryansl:y, Eugene R o , and Preston, G.. lierri tt;

Full-Scale \,Jii1d.-·T unnel I nvest i gCl.ti011 of Buffeting and
Di ving 'J1:ndencie s of the YP- 38 .r"ir ~)12~ ne a rACA RER ,
Barch 19Li-l"

2" Preston, G" l1erri tt, C'illd G·uryansl:y , E'_lgene Ro:

Drag _wal ys is of t:l.e Lo c khe ed 2:P- 38 Airplar:e °
NACA RIm l1arch 19420
Dra ley, Eug ene C.: Tests of 1/6-Scale P-3 8 Eo de l in the
8-F00t High-Speed Tunnele HACA RI:R Hay 1 942 0

L~o Eric ks 0n, Albert Lc: Investi ga ti')n 0f Diving l~·,)r.1en t s of

a Pur su it Airp lane Ll ti.1e AL1e s l6- F0')t Bish-Spe ed ~ in(l-
Tunne l. NACA Ci~R Octo 19 42~
5. Hodel Desi gn Gr0up : P- 38 1/6-S cale High-Speed 'ind-Tunne l .I
l:odelo Loc khe ed Aircra:t Corporatil)n Report ~'Jo L.A. L.
0

17, Parts I, II, III, IV, and Append.ix , December 16 , 1941"

and April 10, 1 9~-2 g
Figure 1.- Model used in tests wi th standard fuselage.
 .A-6b.

NATIONAL ADVISORY
CO lot lot I TTEE FOR AERON AUT I CS

fo C 66% C
3
1 j

f-L-AP C HeRO CONSTA NT

FLAP ANGLe
ALON, SPAN ~

SE"cnOlV THRI,! W/~ WITH FLAP

F"IGURE 2.-AUXIL-IARY FI...AP.s

 A-66

NATIONAL A Dv l SORT
148%C C O"' ~ I THE
FOR AERONAUT I CS

3070c
Isa. 70 c
I I-

I
I
~~
~x:: -jX y
CHAN GES A.T
-X I-.+X"
I
0.30.0.48
, j
o .sz. c. LEADING EDGE CHANG~ TRA ILING E DGE CHANGES

X Y x y x y
0 0 . 35 0 0 0 0
+ 0·5 0·3'" o. 5 0.12. I 0.5 0.29
AL. L COORDINATES
o .2. Go.
+ 1. 0 0 . 34- 1. 0 1.0 0·38
VEN
GI' IN INCH ES o ,"3Q'-
+ \·5 O . 2.~ -FeOR MODEL
1. 5 0,'3" I. S'
+2 .0 0 , £.::; 2 .0 0,40 Z.O 0.'"31
+2 .5 o. I~ c .s 0.42 2..5 0 . 1'l
+3 .0 0 . I 2- 3.0 0.41 3.0 0.10
- 0 .5 0 . 32 3 .S 0 · ~10 3,5 0 , 04
- 1.0 0.2<1 4 .0 0·2" 4,0 0
- IS 0.24 4.5 0 . 2, 0
- 2.0 0 . 2.0 5 ·0 0 · 13
-2.5' 0.14 G·O 0.03
- 3 .0 0.o"
----

F'1G'uF<E .3 COORDINATES OF' CHANGES TO LOWER WING SURFACE

CONTOUR S .

-- ~- ~- --~~-
 A-66 .

NA T IONAL A DV I SORY
CO "',,'TTE E FOR A ERO NA U TI CS

OVT!O!tt.RD
INBOA~D
T L LOCATION
'/4 '1 OuT6OA~

B 1 2 1- V4 8 INBOAR.D
C I 4 1 ~h 8 rNBOA~D

11~NG
A LL DIMENSIONS IN I NCHES

\ /
CHORD - -

CIRCULAR
L L .... /1tC S~CT'ON R
I~ R

*= cr ==~===============---~ ~
"I
R

F'lwURf: ~ .- COORDINATE',s OF CHANGES TO UPPE. R WING

1 .sURFAC ~
CONTOURS.

~
 o.s
33'70 C,
0,
ACl't'\, INBOARD

0./

c:P ~ '7D C.
0
.2- .8 .+ .S .~ .7 ,8
M

HATIOH"L ADVISORY
CO~~ITTEE FOR AE~ONAUTICS
0.8

0.2-
AC m OUTBOARD
( .... , 33'70 C.
0./ I
/ ~ (0<070 C .
.., I -33 '70 C
--------- - (;" % C
0
.2- ..3 .4 .5 .8 .7 .8

0.3 ..3.3 '7., C

INBOARD
O.
AND
Ae m OU,BOARD
0.1
Go <; '7. C

0
.2 .3 ,S .r;. .7
•• M
.13

!-"INCH 15° FLAP':;

2;- 1NCH 30" FLAPS

FIGURE fS ' .-E:FFECT Or CHORD PaSJllON OF FLAPS

ON IVIQMEN-, COt:F_rICI E NT.
 I-I NCH FLAPS
0
0.4
0 . 720 MACH NUMBER
I
~ 0 .700
0.3
.6. Cyn
_ _- - - - E )
0 . G5
0.2- O.SO

0.1

0
oc. 40 U 60"
FLAP ANGLE

' A TI O NA L A D III~U KY
CO MM I Tr EE F::>R AERONA UTICS

I~-INCH FLAPS

'0. - - - ---4> '0.725 MACH NUMBER

O. 0.70
6C".. O.GS
O.e. 0.50

0.1

2:.0° 40" 60 ~

FLAP ANGLE

FIGURE 6 .-EFFECT OF INBOARD FLAPS AT 3S% CHORD

ON ·. MOMENT COEFFICI ENT FOR C L : 0 .15.
 OUTBOARD

OA

0.3

O.t

0./

o O~o----~~Z-O~o~--------~------~--~o---

FLAP ANGLE

NATIONAL ADVISOHY
COMI.41 TrEE F. JR AERONAUTI CS

INBOARD AND OUTBOARD

0,

0.3

0.2.

0;/

40" 60"
FLAP ANGLE
----. -- .- - - - .'. -- -,
MACH NUMBER - 0.50 0 .'05 0.70 P.~~5
.- - f- - . - -
0.610 iNCH CHORD 0 I:. d ¢
1.00 INCH CHORD (;) 8 ~ 0- -
c..00 INCH CHORD 4
"
[J ~

FIGURE 7 . • - EFFECT OF OUTBOA RD AND INBOARD-OU1"'BOARD

FLA P':; AT 33'70 CHORD O N MOMENT C()EFFIGIENT
FOR C!-=- 0.1!5,
r--~----~~---~-------~~ -~------------ -~-~

o.(O!') MAC.H
O.67~ NUMBE R
0.70

0.<0 _ _- - - 0 0.725
-----+ 0.740

0.4-

I-IN CH FLAPS

0 .2.

0
0° ISo (30° 45° GO° 75°
FLAP ANGLE 00.G5

~A 0.675 MACH
NUMBER

~0 80.70

/;:;:~~
O.G ~ 0.725
"+ 0.74

~ NATIONAL AOVISORY
CO ~~ ITTEEFO~ AERONAUTICS
0 .4

C L I -'--INCH FLAP.5
t

0.2

o ..30 0
45° 7 ':y
a

FLAP AN6 LE:

FIGURE a- EFFECT OF FLAP ANCL £ ON THE C L AT BALANCE,£ Le: VAT oR

0
ANO 6TAJJlLIZeR AT 0 , FLAPS INBOAR D AT 33"/0 CHORD.

)
 NATI ON AL ADVISORY
CO MMITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS

O.G

0.4 FL.AP
0 Af'\GL E.
4.5
30°

0.2.

- 0. 2.

- 0.4 em
-0.1 o 0.1 0.2 0.3

FIGURE 9.-EFFECT OF FLAP ANG \"'E ON MOME.NT

AT M .;:: 0.725 . ONE-INCH Pt-APS INBOARD AT ..33<70
CHO RO.

/
 -~-~-- ..,

I I
.o ?
ro ()
r
()
o
f\l
o
OJ
o

N ATION A L AUYISORY
CO ...... , T TEE FOR AERO. AUTICS
b
N

9 e

o ()
6'\ 0

\
.o
OJ

~
f\)

~
~
x ~ IY t:l 0 ()
I
I
P ~ P P P z
()'>
0 -...J --.) (5'\ ~ ()) c
I\l a ~
, Q "ot 0 0
Ul
~ 'f1l
CI XJ

I
f\)
C>

0 R
(\).

~
0

o
o ~
I\)

FIGURE IO.-AERODY NAM IC C HARACTER I S T ICS fOR STANDARD MODE:L

WITH I ~-INCH a Do F"LAPS I NBOARD OF' BOOM S AT -3J"7o CHORD ON LOWER
,sURFACE.
 A-66

I
P r
o o
N o Q
o

o
I\l

o (}
(5)0

o
())

o
~
x <3 t7 a 0 ~
(')
I
I
'!...
~ P p .0 ,0 ,0
r\l NATIONAL ADVISORY '-J 6) 6) Z
"
III CJ)
CO'NITTEE F:lR AER:l'AUTICS l\l 0 a 0 c
I O! CJ: ~
~II CJJ
["'1
:::0
I
~
0

c X
I\l
0

~o

~
c

I
o

o \)
~

I
FIGURE IJ.-AERODYNAMIC CHARACTER/STICS FOR 6TANDARD MOOE:L
 I-I NCH FLAPS

D.
0.72..5 MACH NUM BER
\.0
\.0 0.70
I 0.65
~
0.50

0.1

o 0" ~ e.oO 40" 60°

F"LAP ANGLES

NATIONAL ADVISORY
COMMI TT EE FOR AERONAUT I CS

o. , i - INCH FLAPS 0.70 MACH NUMBER

Z 0.72.5
o.~s

0.50

0.1

o 0" 2.0° 40" GOo 80°

FLAP ANGLES

FIGUREI2..-EF FE CT OF INBOARD FLAPS Al 33°10 CHORD

ON LIFT COE.rF lelENT FOR C>C '= _1°
 OUTBOARD
0,4

o .

0.1

°O~O---------=--------~--------~--------
c.Oo 40" GO°
FLAP ANGLE

INBOARD AND OUTBOARD

0.6

0.5

0,4-
•
AC L 0.:3

0 .2 N ATIONAL AOVI SORY

6/ COMMIT T EE FOR AERONAUTICS
I

0,1

0 0 " 20° 40 0 60 u
r'LA P ANGLE:.:

MACH NUMB E R 0.50 0.6 5 0 . 7 010.72.5

0 . 66 INCH C t !O IW if t( d I 6
!. oo INCt-i CH O R D 0 /},.
I IJ I V- I
2..00 I NCH C H O; W ..) ~ ~ ! ,;

FIGURE 13.- EFFEC'I OF OUTBOA H D A ND INBO A RD-au rBOAHD

FLAP.:5 AT .33 '10 Ct10F<LJ O N LIFT C OEFF IC IEN T FOR 0<:..;:_1 °.
 .fM I-I N C H FL APS
0.72.5 ~ MACH
0,70 Fl NUMBE.R
0 . 105 A
.04- 0.50 0
I
~
.03
AC O
.02.

.01

0
40 60°
F LA P A NGLE

.07
,i-IN C H FLAPS
a
,06 0.05 A MACH
o 72.5 ~ NUMBER
0.70 [.,
.05
0.50 0

.04
AC O
.0.3
N AT I ONAL AUVISUIH
COI.4Io1I T TEE FOR AERON AUTI CS
.02

.0 1

a o~~---------~--o~o--------4-0~o--------6-0~o--------~--oro'--­

FLAP ANGLE

FI~URE 14.- EF ,'-ECT OF IN80AHU FLI"\P6 /\T 33% CHOl-,D

ON DRAG COEFFICIEN r r'or, CL~O.15 .
 .05

.04

.03

.02.

.01 OUTBOARD

ZOO 40"
FLA~ ANGLE

.10

.Oq

.08

.07

.01'0

NATIONAL AOV I SORY

COIIIII TTEE FOR A ERO N AUT I CS
.6C D Os

.04
MACH NUMBER 0.50 0.65 0 .70 0.7Z.~

0 .106 INCH CHORD Gf 5, if ~

.03
1.00 INCH CHORD 0 8. !!J 0
~.OO INCH CHORD (J & III ~
.02.

.01 IN BOARD AND OUTBOARD

0
0° 20b 40°

.. FLAP A NGLE

FIGU RE 15.- EFFECT OF OUTBOARD AND INBOAF:D - OUTBOARD F"LAPS

AT 33'70 CHOR D ON DRAG C OEFFICIEN T F"OR CL =0./5.
 •

,~

,+ NATIONAL ADVI SORY

COMMI TTE E FOR AERON AUT I CS

,2.

c'-
o
.02. . 04 .06 75 9 I.~

Co

- ,2

-F l. AP ANGLE

- .+

F'IGURE /6 .-EF'FECT OF FLAP ANGLt. ON DRA~ AT M=O.72.5

ONE - INC H F" I- A PSI N BOA R D AT 03 \3 ~o C H 0 RD.
•

LEAD I NG EDGE
«~-
OF WING 35'70 WING CHORD

/,0 tv". :: 0.3 M=O.74-

O.g

Of,
•
0.4
PRES5URES ON FRONT SURFAC E
PRE.S5URES ON REAR SURF"AC E.
0,2-

P 0
P.s = F"REE 5TRt::AM STATIC

-0.2 PRESSuRE

~
.
~
0- - , - , PF':: F LAP PRE 5 5 U R E
v---..'7"
-0,4
0- - . -
8- -03- -
~
-
'tJ:irN~
GI-- ·-0- -

0$- -o--~
-06
AIRPLANE ANGLE
OF ATTACK
-0.6
<:>--<:>---0
,0
0 -.5~

-1.0 I
0 -,. 0 , 0
.30 .50 .75 .30 ..50 ,75 <:> ,..32:
POSITleN ON F'"'LAP CHORD
II C'
I~ -15

NATIONAL ADVISORY
CO~~ITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS

I , (J M = 0.3 0.7.4 0.3

0 .8

0.10
~
o

0.4

0 .2

F 0

- 0.£ B-=-=8.: -:X

c- -0 - --:J
-0.4 0--0--4)
0--8---8
<:>--~--o
-0.6

-0.8

-1.0 I I I I I I I •
. 30 .50 .7~ .30 .50 .75 .30.:50 .7S
POSI T ION ON FLAP CHORD
L - - - - - --I..!..',- 45
C
°------...J

FIGURE 17 . - FLAP PRES6URE:S F'OR I~-INCH F'LA PS INBOARD OF" BOOM AT a3 "10
CHORD ON LOWER WING .sURF"A CE.
 0 ..:3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0,6
MACH NUM6ER

0./

- 0.05"
c
0,1

C'r1) 0

NATIONAL ADVISORY
co .... ITT E£ FOR A E RD N AU TIC S
-0.1

0.05

A OUT60ARD
A-+-e OUTBOARD AND
-0.1 6 I NBQARD
C INBOARD
6EE FIGURE 4- FOR DRAWING
OF WING CONTOUR CHANGES.

FIGURE le.-EFFECT OF CHANGING UPPER SURFACE

WING CONTOURS ON MOMIt.NT COEF"FICIE:NT.
 A-66
1
0 ()
0
:1 .:t j

• I I
P a a 9 0 P 0 0 !:J P
0 0 N
OJ 01

() () ()
r r
II r;. II

.0
~
.0
ro
.0

9
~
~
}>
()
:t

Z ~
C OJ
~
CP
'"
11

0
(j)
I
I
I

P
"-l
t

p
OJ
NATION~L ADVISORY
C Ot.ll.llTTEE FOR AERO NAUTICS

(J)

-<
I~ 1f11 10 10 IOJ I~ s:
0>
o
r

~
Ot --+_Ol
- + - - f\> ~
~
o .o

FIGURE: 19.- EFFECT ON MOMENT COEFFICIENT OF CHANGlNG LOWER SURFACE

WING CONTOUR.
 •

I
9 P
I o
r
~ f\) o
o
NAT IONAL ADV I SORY
CO ...... ITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS

.D
I\)

o
o

-C
~
l>
()
)( <J Ii" 0 0
I
.- 9 P P 0 0 Z
ru '-l .....J 5) 0) t> C
f\> 0 './
0\ Uj ~
• C1J
/Tl
6\0 ;tJ
,
~
~

I
~
0

0 R
~

6\
, 0

F IGURE 20.- A ERODYNAMIC CHARACTERISTICS FOR ,sTAN DA R D MODE L WITH

WI NG CONTOUR CHANGE AT ~2~o CHORD ON LOWER SURF"ACE .
 ~ --1

,04- NATIOIIAl ADVI SORY

C L = 0.1 CO ..... ITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS

.03
\.0
\0 ACO
...J .02-

,01

0
0::) 0,4 0.15 o.e
MACH NUMee:.R

0 e CONTOuR CHANGE, SEE FIG. Ie

6 C
lil 0
• ~ I::

OB
l( F
t

•
.o~
DC;: -/~
.0 C'- .04-

,OZ-

0.3 0.4 0.5 0.'> 0.7 (;) O.S

MACH NUM8ER

FIGUREe/.,-EFF"EC'T OF CHANGING LOWER ~VRFACE WING

CONTOUR5 ON LIFT ANI.) DRAG •

•
 ~ATIOHAl A DVISORY
CO ...... , THE rOR AERONAUT 'CS

o. 0.2.
M =0.3 M::O.5

CL.
0.1 c
0:4- L 0"J O•4
1::.. CY'l1 0.1 O.Z
0.2.

0 0
o· -I- -,- _,so _4- 0 _.fi 0 0
_,0 _~o -~. _4- -~
~ LE VATO~· A NGL.E
Se

0 . 1 CL 0.1
O. ,. -::J O.Z ,0.4- O. ./ /
/ ",. 0.2 CL..
" "
,/,/ ,. ./ ..- 0.4
/
M =0.6 /./
/,/ M"'O.0C -?" .--
.//
,....:,/,/ ,.. Q
.-
,/
,/

.,/ .
//"
CL..
/
-- .--
,/
,/

AC m 0.1,0.2
-
.-- ' ''/
6 C.,.,., ..- -::: ... 0.' ,0.1 C
/

.----.-- --
.,/ /

,/...- ............. ,. o.~ \..

0.1 0.4 0 .1
•

o ~------------------------- o ~--------------------
0· -I" -5" o- -2:

0 .2- /0.1 O.
M = 0 .70 ./ /..- ./ o.e CL,. M :0.72.6
__ "-;': ~ 0.£
... O. I CL,.
".- ,/
".-

---
.................
-' -:::.. ----
A Cn'I --:;::::--
--- ~.5 :: - e" ;;:::-
0.' 0.1
0.2 CL. 0.1 CL,.
0.2
0.4

O.lC~-----------
o~ _,0 _2..0 Se~o _,4.0 -5- o· _,0 _2.0 Se-3° _,,-0 -5°
DASHED L..INE6 FOFt .9TA6I.1.lZER AT-2."
S-O LID "" I , /I 0°

FIGURE 2.2.- E:FFECT OF' EL.EVAT OR AND STAB IL..IZER

ANGL..E ON MOMENT COEF'P'IC'~NT.

...