REPORT No.

537

TESTS IN THE VARIABLE-DENSITY WIND TUNNEL OF RELATED AIRFOILS HAVING

THE MAXIMUM CAMBER UNUSUALLY FAR FORWARD
By EASTMAN N. JACOBS and ROBHRT M. PINKERTON

SUMMARY Following the designation system previously employed

AfamiJy of relatedairjoi.h havingthe position OJmaxi- for the N. A. C. A. family airfoils, the fl.rstdigit of the
mum camber unusually far forward w inve&g&ed in airfoil number is used to designate the reIative magni-
the variabletiy tunnel as an aziension ~f the 8tUdy tude of the camber. The various mean-line shapes
recently completed of a large number of relded aiqbii%. are designated by the remaining two diggts as follows:
The new airjoils gave improved characttiticc over those I~\\RWonof~. I ,.w I ,*& I ,,& I ,a I ,= I
prm”ou.slyinvedigated, especially in regardto thepitching
moment. Some oj the new sections are markedly mpm”or
to well-known and commonly used sectw~ and should
reptuce them in appli.cbons requiring a 81i.ght@cam-
I Shpb-—--.–-..-.
RdklL____.-...-––
-..-.– ;! 20
21
I
f
I
40
a
I
K1
61
I
bered 8ection oj moderate thickm?w, having a d The ordinates of the airfoils were obtained by the
p“tching-moment coe&enL method described in reference 1, which consists briefly
in disposing the desired thickness fom about a given
INTRODUCTION mean line. The thiclmess form used is the same as
The investigation of n large family of related airfoils, that used for the U-percent thick airfoils of the earlier
reported in mferonce 1, indicated that the effects of investigation. The airfoil profiles are shown in figure 1.
camber in relation to maximum lift coefficients were Each mean line is defined by two equations derived
more pronounced with airfoils having the maximum so as to produce a shape having a progressively decreas-
camber forward or aft of the usual positions (0.3c to ing curvature from the lead@ edge aft. The curva-
0.5c). The scope of the investigation, however, was not ture decreases to zero at a point slightly behind the
extended to include airfoils having extreme camber maximum camber position and, for the simple mean
positions because the mean-line shapes originally em- lines, remains zero from this point to the trailing edge.
ployed could not be sntisfrmtorily extended. A con- The following expressions taken to represent the simple
sideration of a program to include these extreme posi- mean lines are chosen to satisfy these conditions:
tions led to the elimination of the after yositions
nose: (3=0 to z=m) ~=kl (z–m)
because of the rtdvemepitching momenta to be expected-
The investigation reported herein deals with a family
of related airfoils having mean-line forms derived to tail: (z=m to z=l) g=o ‘
extend the camber position from normal to extreme
forward positions. These airfoils are divided into two The mean-line equations are derived from them expres-
groups, each group containing five airfoils of the same sions. The constants of integration are determined
thickness (0.12c) and covering a range of maximum by the following conditions:
x=() y=l)
camber positions from 0.05c to 0.25c. One group is X=m YN=’l/T
based on a simple mean line (mean line without
revenml of curwzture) and the other on a reflexed mean
line. Instmd of investigding each mean-line shape
through a rrmge of camber ratios as in the previous x=1 y=o

investigation of related airfoils, only one camber ratio
is used for each type, the value of each be~m selected
to give an optimum lift coefficient of 0.3.
DESCRIPTIONOF AIRFOILS
The airfoils described herein are designated by the
following numbers preceding the number 12, which
designates the thiclmeas:
Z1O,220, 230, 24I3,25o,
211,221, 231, 241,251
where the subscripts ~ and T refer to the fore and aft
equations, respectively. The solutions of the equa-
tions then become:
nose: y=~kJ&-3m&+m2 (3 —m)z]
tail: y= ~k1m3(1—z)
The values of m were determined to give five positions
of maximum camber, namely, 0.05c, O.1OC,0.15c, 0.20c,
and 0.25c. Finally, values’ of k, were cahmlated to
521
. .._. -._— —.. .

522 RDPORT NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMZFI’E E FOR AERONAUTICS

give a theoretical lift coefficient of 0.3 (cLr = 0.3) at
the “ideal” angle of attack (reference 1). Table I
presentsthe values of m and kl for convenient reference.
N.. CA. 2!0?2
The equations for the reflmed mean lines are derived
from the following expressions again taken to give
progressively decreasing cnrmture and to give zero
curvature where the two parts join. The tail part,
however, is represented by an expression giving a
curved mean line permitting of adjustment to give zero
pitching moment.

nose: (z=O to z=m) d%

~=kl (z—m)
.— .— .— . —
taih (z=m to Z=l) ti
~=kz (Z–m)
lvAcA 22012
Determiningg the constants of integration by the same
conditions as for the simple mean lines, the solutions
.— .— .— .—. of these equation9 are:

NJ.CA. 230J2 nose:

y=+ kl
[
k,
(Z—m)s—rl (I—m)s Z—maZ+ma
1
tail: v=+ k, ~ (z–m)a–$
[
(l—m)az—nzsz+ma
1
.—. — .—-—. —
The ratio & is expressed in terms of the position of
‘ NACA.24012
maximum camber p and the juncture point m.
k,_3 (m— )’—ma
.—. — .— -—-— K–+

/?&f.GA25012 For each of five values of p (0.05c, O.1OC,0.15c, 0.20c,

and 0.25c), m was determined to give G&J=O and,
holly, kl “wascalculated to give CLI= 0.3. Vrdues of
—- —-—-— . k,
~ ~1,m, and kl, are given in tnblo I.
NALM 22112
The models, which are made of duralumin, are rec-
tangular and have a chord of 5 inches and a span of 30
inches. They are constructed from the computod
.—. ——-—
ordinates by the method described in reference 2.
N/1.CA.23112
TESTS AND RESULTS

- Routine measurements of the lift, drag, and pitching

.—. —-—. — moment about the quarter-chord point wore made nt n
Reynolds Number of approximately 3,000,000 (tank
NA.CA24112 pressure, approximately 20 atrnosphercs). A descrip-
tion of the varitibledensity tunnel; in which the tests
were made, and of the method of testing is given in
.— -—-—-— reference 2.
The discussion of precision in reference 1 points out
h!ACA 25112 an error in the velocity measurements due to a change
HQUEE
L—AIrfeilPI’oflk&
in the apparent density of the mrmometer fluid with
TABLE I
a change in tank pressure from atmospheric. This
yii
Mean-linedesfgnntlon m t, k~k, source of error has since been eliminated by correcting
kg
— — — . the manometer settings used in iking the tunnel air
210-------------------------- :: am 33L4 ----------
speed.
m....-..------------------- .rm 5L64 ----------
m-------------------------- .15 .202s 1s.9.57 --.--–-–
m-------------------------- .m a.o’n –-- .. .... The data axe presented in standard graphic form
m.-_ . ..._. _--. .... .. :3 .amo
211---------- ------------- .0s (figs. 2 to 10) as coefficients corrected after the method
El-------------------------- .10
ml-------------------------- .15 of reference 2 to give airfoil characteristics for infinite
241--------------------------
BE ------------------------- , % .4410 aspect ratio rind aspect ratio 6. Included in those
Ie data for tbh afrfoflare not Includedbwanse the afrfofltakil was sak- tigures are tables of airfoil ordinatas ot standard sta-
1 fennd to differfrom tb lntend6drdrfeflthroughen errorin derivingthe
la. tions and n plot of the profile.
 AIRFOILSHAVING TRE M44mMuM CAMBER UNUSUALLY
FAR FORWARD 523

L&lI)4 I I I I Ill
.+WW+WWH
I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I
48

.11 44
I !Il 1111 !
OW 60100

11 II
-It Ofcbord
11 I 1/( .44
.10
.09
m 40

& ,
2.0 .40 *.. O3
I
I I I I I I I I I I I I iii
.07

.05
.= “

!2:.24* ~&.04
,
, , , I ,
=141 l.o~ .20$ .:.03

o
I

,2 .04 j 1-.1
1 t 1 n I L w I I I I I ii~~il o 0 $-.2 I I I I I I -8 ~
. ----- ----- . . ----- --- I I I I I I I I I I Ii iii -K
-.3 ! I I I -12
Aidoil: N.4CA. 21W2 R./’i320QOO0OO
..Dofe: 4-24-34 Tesf: k D.Z 1126 .-/6
-.4
Correcfed io in fhiie osp+f raiio
74 .2 0 .2 .4 .6 .8 LO 12 L4 L6 M
Angl. of offack, a (degrees] LH we f7icied, C.

Fmum 2.—N.A. O. A. !MO12

afrfoil.

.44

.40

.36

.08

.04

> -.3 I I I I I I I
. . . ..
ii I I I AlrJOll:
kA.C~. 22’0/2 ‘ /7;).!: 3; 170,bO0 “c
E -.J Dofe: 4-23-34 Test: K D. Z 1125. -,6
Co~cf~d #q in fip!fe pspqc/ rqfrn ,
$
-.4 .2 0 .2 .4 .6 .8 1.0 1.2 1.4 f.6 1.8
Angle of offack, ff (degrees) Liff coeft7cient, CL

Fmum 8.—N . A. O. A. ZOll tiU.

524 REPORT NATIONAL ADVTSORY COMMITTEE FOR &ORONATKIZCS
.

. f2 48

44
“Jmll I I I
I

u I , , , I , , 8 I I 1 , r k 1 1 1

I I II II I I I
?-+-
1> in
.02
i
tQ I I /1 ! ! I I
.60.12 .01 -h
q
.44.08

.2 .04
I , , I I I I I I I I I I 1++-1 I I
O? 00
<-
~-.2
I I I I I I I I ,I I I, I, II I I, I! I, I, -8 ~
. 0 T
-4.: Size: Fx30- Vel (f
-.2 :-3 1!1 ! I I Ill!
R R=es(stkiafm)2iM Dc. _. . _ . Airfoik M.KA. 23012 R. A!: 3,230,000 ’12
6 Where fesfed:LK4.L Ted ERZ 1124 ~--- . ,ii [.&r;._-.
Dofe: 4-21-.34 -----
........
-8 m%l -. -— fw funnel-wall effecf 4 ‘-4
Correcfed
I ecfed to in fini+e ‘e”+:
asDect v D T ‘1P4rofio - -16
-8&=P%- 4 8 12 f6 20 24 28 32
Angle of .+fo&, & (degrees) Ljff coefficlen~ C= – ‘“ ‘“- ““-

FmuEB A—N. A. 0. A. m alrfdl.

.12

./1

.10

.44 .09
&
.40 %- . Ck3
.$
.36 $.07
L
0
o-m
u

o p.os
-0
20 Ill I E/Dl
,$.04
~
:.03
a
.02

80 .6 ‘.12 .01
~
/00 .4<.08

.2 .04 J-.;
~:
00 U-.2
Airfoil: ~A.C~ 24012 I%W>J2QOoo -

‘M
o

I I
-8-404
I I I
Size: 5“X30”
Pres (sthdofm+2114
Where fesfed:LMA.L.
Cmecfed

Angle
8 12
of ofiack
Vel [fi/sec.):
Do fe:4-20-34

fbr funnel-well
16 20 24
a (degrees)
636

Ted KD.% 1123_.~

e ffecf.
28
I
_-2

32
‘-3
%.

s
$74

.4 .2 0 .2 .4
Liff
.6 .8
coefficient
/..
CL
/2 /.4 i6 1.8

FIGUEE5.—N.A.O.A.24D128kfOfL
 AIRFOmtsHAVING THEl MAxumJM CAMIIDR UNUSUAILY FAR FORWARD 525

, I
,

.01
I I I II I I II
i
0 ! , , 1
I
J-.1 4’

%’ -.2

: -~
0,

Angk of offack, e (degrees) L iff coefi7cien~ C=

Fmms &-N. A. O. A. W12 afrfdl.

Angle of affack Q’ (degrees) L iff coefficient. CL

Fmmm 7.—N. A. C. A. Z212

airfoil.
. . . . . ... ..-. —-- —— -----

526 REPORT NATIONAL ADVISO13Y COMMITKEE FOR AERONAUTICS

.44

.40

.36

./2

.08

.04

0
Airfoil: ~A.I+A. 23112 R.h!:3, 110,000

~-”z
,- 404
Where fesied:L.MA.L-

8121620242832
Angle of atfack w (degrees)
7ZSf: ED.Z 1129 _-4.

Lift coefficient C.

—20

02040 ~80100

.44

.40

.36

.32
u’
. 28%-
5
!.<
“> I ~ , , , , ,
1 , I , , , , I , ,
.24 <.Q.
~
.20 ~

./6 ~
Q
-12

.08

.04
Q.’l I I I I I I I I I I I I I L#
0

Angle of oftack, a (degrees) L i+ coeficied, C.

~GUES 9.—N. A. O. L 24U2airfd.
 AIRFOIIS HAVING TECEl MAXIMUM CAMBER UNUSUALLY FAR FORWARD 527

In addition to the standtird plots the important
chrmcteristica of these airfoils are presented in table
II, including also the N. A. C. A. 0012 and the N. A.
C. A. 2212 airfoils for comparison. These tabulated
characteristics me corrected for turbulence and tip
effects as discussed briefly in the succeeding para-
graphs. The more accurrh section chamctaristim
thus obtained are designated by lower-case instead of
cnpitfd letters, e. g., c~O~i~
instead of CDO~m,etc.
an effective value. The data given in table H are
therefore directly applicable at the effective Reynolds
Number and, when supplemented by additional infor-
mation to be published about the character of the
scale effect as indicated by the scale-effect cla&iica-
tion, will enable improved predictions of maximum lift
coefficients at other values of the Reynolds Number.
DISCUSSION

Section clmracteristim derived from ‘wts of airfoils
having square tips are subject to small corrections made
necessary by tip 10SSW. hfaking the reasonable
assumption that more acccrate section characteristics
can be obtained from tests on rounded-tip airfoils,
corrections have been determined from comparative
The important independerit variable, as mentioned in
the introduction, is the camber -position. The varia-
tion of the aerodynamic characteristics with camber
position, discussed in the following paragraphs, is
shown by cross plots (iigs. 11 to 16) of the character-
istics taken horn the standard plots (figs. 2 to 10).

.12 48

.11 44

.10 40
2
.44 .09 3,5:
&
ii
.40 <-.08 32$
c L
.36 &07 28 ~
L
@ 24:
L
t. 05 20j
+
4.04 16$
~
:.03 /2$
‘1 k
.C
.02 8<
.12 .01
4:
.08 0 0?
o
.04
c1-. I -4 &
0 K’
U-.2 _8 $
o T
U
* -.3 -12

g -4 -16
3
:4 72 0 .2 .4 .6 .8 ,!0 12 1.4 16 1.6
Angle of ottack, a! (degrees) L ;ft coefficient C=
FIGURE 10.—N. A. O. A. 25112
airfotl.

tests of several airfoils with and without rounded tips
and the corrected characteristics are shown in table H.
The maximum-lift values given in the table may be
considered as applicable to flight at the value of the
Reynolds Number given as the “effective Reynolds
Number.” As discussedin reference 3, agreement with
flight is to be expected when the results me thus applied
on tho basis of an effective Reynolds Number in order
to allow for the effects of turbulence present in the
wind tunnel. The tabulated drag coeflicienta have
been corrected for the change in skin-friction drag
corresponding to the change in Reynolds Number to
The slope of the lift curve for each airfoil is less
than the theoretical value for thin airfoils, 2r per
rad+m, and is practically constant over the range of
camber positions tested (fig. 11). The angle of zero
lift is only slightly ail-ected by change in camber
position as shown in figure 12. Zero lift occurs at
slightly greater negative rmgles than the theoretical
values based on the mean line, the values of the
experimental angles difTering by approximately 0.2°
from the theoretical values.
Previous tests have shown that reflexed mean-line
airfoiJs produce a slightly higher minimum drag than
 ——.
— —.. —
------ .

528 RDPO13’P NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMPITOB FOR AERONAUTICS

simple mean-line airfoils. This conclusion is further The variation in maximum lift is ~hown in figure 15
confirmed by &u.re 13, which rdso shows a slight and supporta previous findings that reflex airfoils hnve
increase in drng as the camber position changas from a lower maximum lift. Movirg the camber position

.16 .8 -
I I
CLW, O Simple mean line
x Reflexed * *

$ .12 .4 I I
I
---- --4: ::% FL’’-.fw! ?--- ----- ----- ----- ---- .. ----- X--- -%lculafed CL1
~ 1
8 c
1 11
% d
G .08 I !
o bimple meon line o .05 JO .15 .20 .25
g x Reflexed = - Carder position in fraction of chord
u b“ FIOUEE14.-Variatbn of oRtInmm Uft with cmnlmrposition.
‘um
I
’04
8° forward from 0.25c to 0.15c tends to increase slightly
the mtiurn lift. With the “maximum camber po-
sition forward of 0.15c, the maximum lift of the sim-
0 .05 .10 ./5 .20 25
Comber position in fracfion of chord 2.0

Fmwm 11.-Variatf0n of Mft—mnmSlowWfth mmber pc-sith.

0.15c to 0.25c. The optimum lift (&. 14) for both 1.6
,)
~ ‘
types is about the same but increases as the position x

of the camber moves aft in the range tested. Them

2 1.2
Q 0 Simple m eon line

‘‘;‘ ~
<
o Simple mean line x Reflexed v ●

x Reflexed = = G.u
tk
b
go .8
x
.2

$
~
t!

i -20 ~
.05 Jo .15 20 25 .4
Camber pOsIfion in fracf;on of chord

Fmum 12-Var+atIOn of angle ofm-o Ilft wfth camkr pmftion.

vtiues may be compared with 0.3, the theoretically 0 .05 .10 .20 .25
CWnber posifion in frc%ion of chord
determined vnlue of the lift coeiiicient at the “ideal”
nngle of attack for the merm line, i. e., the angle of FIamw 15.—V8rfatIon
of mo.dnmmlift with mxnbarpcoltbn.

.0/2 ple mean-line airfoils wns unaffected but the reflexed

mean-line airfoils showed a decrmsed maximum lift.

) 6 4:
.006
:.02 0 Simple m eon line
x Reflexed “ ●

CDod Simple m eon line

–--Theore iicol C&I
o L
(Simple mean line)
x Reflexed ● “ 2
.W ~ I ~
ti~o

‘-‘-~ ‘ -- ~
-. ---
c --- --- ---- ----
b
QI
[ :~~
o .05 Jo .15 .25
-.020
timber pasiflon in. fraction o f%hord .05 . .(0 .1s .20 ,25
Camber pas I tIon in fracfion of chord

FmuEE l&—Vi3rlati0n of puchIngmomentwith camberwltfon.

attaolc for which the thin-airfoil theory gives a iinite
velocity at the nose. The optimum lift coefficients The measured pitching moment (fig. 16) for the
for these airfoils me smaller than the theoretical reflexed airfoils remained praoticaliy zero with varin-
value of the ideal lift coefficient (C%= 0-3). tion of position of maximum camber in accordance with
 AIRFOIIS HA’VRTG THlil MAXIMUM CAMBER UNUSUALLY FAR FORWARD 529
design calculations. The simple mean-line airfoils teristic over well-how and commonly used airfoils of
gave exceptionally low pitching moments, somewhat this class. It has a high maximum lift and a low
lower than the theoretical valuea based on the mean pitching moment. Furthermore, the minimum dragi9
line. Both the measured and theoretical curves for the practically as low as that of the corresponding sym-
simple mean-line airfoils are given in @me 16. metrical airfoil, the N. A. C. A. 0012.
The analysis of these charts and the data of table More generally, other sections of this group, such as
II show that the reflexed airfoils, although comparing the N. A. C. A. 21012 and 22012 having an even lower
fnvornbly with other reflexed airfoils, are surpassed by pitching moment than the 23012, should supply the
the simple mean-lime airfoils. I?urthermore, the air- need of many applications requiring a slightly cam-
foils covering a range of camber locations forward bered section of moderate thickness having a very low
of normal positions possess improved characteristics. pitching moment.
A comparison of the N. A. C. A. 24o12 with the
N. A. C. A. 2212 indicates the d.iilerenceathat maybe
attributed to the dlerence between the mean-line
LANGLEY MEMORIAL AERONAUTICAL LABORATORY,
forms. These airfoils having the same camber loca-
NATIONAL ADVEORY COmTTEE FOR AERONAUTICS,
tion but diiferent mean-line forms possess approxi-
LANGLEY FIELD, VA., May 7, 19$6.
mately the same lift and drag characteristics. The
angle of zero lift and the pitching moment, however, REFERENCES
are quite different. Especially noteworthy is the very
much lower pitching moment produced by the airfoils 1. Jacobs, EastmanN., ~ard, ~enneth E., and Pinkerton,
Robert M.: The Characteristicsof 78 Related Airfoil
reported herein. SectionsfromTestsin theVariable-Dtity wind Tunnel.
One of the promising airfoils of this group, the T. IL No. 460,N. A. C. A., 1933.
N. A. C. A. 23012 airfoil (previously referred to as 2. Jacobs,EastmanN., and Abbott, ~ H.: The N. A. C. A.
“the N. A. C. A. A-312”), has been further i.nveati- Variable-Densitywind Tunnel. T. IL No.416,N.A. C.A.,
gated by tests in the full-scale tunnel and over a range 1932.
3. Jacobs,EastmanN., and Clay, Wii C.: ChmmterMas
of values of the Reynolds Number in the variable- of the N. A. C. A. 23012Airfoilfrom Testsin the Full-
density tunnel. These results (reference 3) confirm Scale and Variable-DeneityTunnels. T. R. No. 53o,
the conclusion that this airfoil has improved charac- N. A. C. A., 1935.
TABLE J1—AIRFO~ DATA
— —
Claaocatfrln FMdamaaM
wtfon~ Ikfvd rmd additional ~c3 tkat may be
n.wlforrtrn@ml dos&n
— — — —
c. p. at Wfngobar-
a. c. (parent CL a@Jf6u Tbld%a+F-
c kom c/4)
AIrfou
‘i!
g —
(m-
cent e)
mnndwltips
— —
a o

Q
—
.
~
—
-a
.-’
c1
—
0“
a

.— —
s
f’
0:
z
—
i
#
a
i
O* <
—
g
s~. z
—
1
(9 f?) (93
N.
N.
A.
A.
C.
C.
A.
A.
21012._
2E)L2-.
(312 D2
o12 D2
o L07
L09
15
16
,%!
Kc
B
L1
.. ad
20
L8 8
km
.m
10. @a
10. @a
am
8.24
12
12
N. A. C. A. 2W2_. (JL2 %2 g L07 16 ,Km .. w L7 8 .mi’o 10. m 8.2s Iz
N. A, 0. A. 24012... 012 LIM 16 ,Km ..013 L7 3 10.71 a26 12
N, A. C. A. 250Lz.. c12 03 o L 61 15 ,m ..019 L6 8 :%% Ian a% 12

N. A. C. A. 0012..-. Clo 00 A L69 17 ,W7 ) 2 .mm lo.6a3

N. A. C. A. ‘22E2. . . C12 03 B L@3 16 ,m ..022 H 2 .mn la@ M :

N. A. O. A. 22112... 011 D2 B LE3 15 ml . ml 3 219 ’23 25 .Cm3 8.27 12

N. A. CL A. ‘2311Z. 011 D2 A L67 16 m .(W2 HI ‘4 m 23 % . m% E: 8.2a 12
N. A. C. A. 24112_.. Cll 03 A L 61 ) L9 4 218 22 26 . m’s m. n a 26 12
N. A. C. A. ‘2611! l.. Cll C3 B L&3 ;: !% . W2 L8 3 all 23 27 . ~b 10.73 a% 12
— — — — — — — —
1 Tyfm OfObOrd.A#femfeu&obord
dajlned as a ho jofnblgthe axtrandtk Of tba mamlha.
S TyfM Of ~
J TSW of amle effaot On mdnhrn Mt.
tT~ofll(tuwm penk.wtiown Inthaskotohw

/. L/B/C/D
h’om.-The to oIng clasblcatkma am gfvan bare for mnvmdent futnra rafemnce. A detaflad df.wnmfonwfll ba pnMLtbadfn a kdarrapmt dmllng with the applkatfon
OfafrfOnobamcter%k to dmfga mblams.
JTurbrd8nm factor k Z04.
6Tham data bava bean amwtai for Up affecL