Lameke de NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS i Nee = TECHNICAL be a eats PROPELLER-EFFICIENCY CHARTS FOR LIGHT AIRPLANES By John L. Crigler and Robert E. Jaquis Langley Memorial Aeronautical Laboratory Langley Field, Va. Washington July 1947 c BRAK LANGLEY MEMORIAL ABRONAUTIONL4 NATIONAL ADVILORY COMMETIEE FOR AERONAUTICS TECUNIGAL NOTE NO. 1338 ‘PROFELUER-EFFICIRUCY CHARTS FOR LIGHY ATRPLANES By John L. Crigler end Robert E. Jequis SUMERY Gre selection of a Gropeller on the basis of efficiency for application to a Light~airplene design cen be accomplished by the use of the charts yrosonted) ‘he required calculations exe mede @ minimm by presenting the dimensional propeller veramoters directly om the cherte. Values of power of 50, 100, 150, 225, and 300 horsepower wre covered for airsposds of 50, 100, 150, and 200 miles per hour, propeller diameters of 6, 8, end 10 Zest, and Diade numbers of two, Tour, six, and eight over'a wide renge of propeller roteticnal’ speed The epplication of the results to design problems is denon strated by three examples: (1) the investigation of tho efficiency of @ wide variety of propellers for e given design condition, (2) the investigation of the efficiency of a controllable-pitch Constent-speed provellor as a fumction of atrepeed, and (3) the Investigation of the efficiency of a fixed-pitch propeller as a function of airspeed and engine operation. TRERODUCTION ‘The operation of light eirplenes near residential néighbarhoods presents the problem of noise reduction. One of the sources of eixplene noise is the airplane propeller. In mahy instences the noise can be reduced by the proyer seloction of the airplene propeller. The problem of the efficiency of the quiet propeller, however, is also of importence. The present peper gives the efficiency of a wide selection of airplene propellers for light aivplanes to aid in the required compromise betweon efficiency and noige reduction or any other operational or design condition. Selection chavts for propellers ere presented in reference 1. The renge of low aavance-disnster ratio, however, is not covered in these charts. Qhe Brecent reper gives cherte for values of advence-diemeter retio down to 0.31h. The calculated efficiency for propellers of optimun load éiatribution along the blade for2 NACA TH No. 1338 @ given operating condition 16 presented. ‘The advantage of using this efficiency is that 1t presente a maximm value that cannot be exceeded vith a given propeller diemeter and blade number but can de obtained with Hroper design. ‘he uethods of analysis are given in tho appendix. Comparisons of the calculated efficiencies with experimental data cn propellers show good agreement. “the selection charts given herein present directly the efficiencies as a function of the propeller operating conditions Investigation of a given proveller for epplication to a given design condition requires nothing more than the reading of a few charts end interpolating between these charts to obtain the results. SYMBOLS a axial-velocity interference factor B number of propeller blades » chord of propeller blade elenent section drag coefficient (4/aA) ©, section lift coefficient (1/a4) Op power coefficient (P/pn3D5) Cg —toraue coefficient (a/on®D>) thrust coefficient (t/pn®D") D ‘ Propeller diameter 4 —@vag of propeller bse element for infinite aepect ratio J eavence-diauster ratio (¥/nD) Lift of blade section aoe ‘propeller rotational speed, revolutions per minute 8 Eropeller rotational speed, revolutions per second ‘ input power to propeller Pe Power disk-loading coefficient (P/aAV)NACA WH No. 1338 f= =D @ ‘torque of propeller dynamic pressure of air stream ‘tip redins vedius to eny blade element disk eres of propeller ‘thrust of propeller exdel velocity of propeller vadial location of blade element (x/R) elenent torque coefficient ao an’D?) cima owt scertsens (LEA a propeller efficiency «Meal. propeller efftosency Tope, offtotoncy vith optimm load distribution without axeg p mass density of air . : ° propeller-eleuent solidity & ac, . propeller-eleuent loea coefficient ¢ angle of inclination of resultant velocity to plene ‘of rotation Y _] Subsoripte: OeTR at 0.7 neaius ae > due to drag4 NACA ‘IN No. 1338 * RESULES t Propeller effictencios for Light eirplanes exe presented in terms of engine power, velocity, blade mumber, blade diameter, and ; propeller rotational Speed for the use of light-airplene manufacturers end operators. A wide range of propeller selection is presented in order to permit evaluation of the efficiencies obtained with high- solidity low-rotetional-speed propellers compared with low-solidity high-rotatianel-speed propellers. The charts are intended to cover the requirements thet my be needed in the stuly of the sound eduction of light-eirplane propellers. The scope of the results end @ key to figures 1 to 22 are given in table I. Figure 1 shows the breakdown of the propeller losses for one condition end vill aid in interpreting the results presented in the other figures. ‘The value of the ideal efficiency 74 given for figure 1 is the value obtained from consideration of the minimum nonentum increase in the veke. Only exial monontua end a uniform increase in velocity over the entire disk area are considered. The A(l ~ ny) ~ a end is fixed for a given power, velocity, end propeller diameter. = The shaded area in the figure shows the induced losses for propellers having optimm efficiency. The optimm officiency np, 18 the efficiency (without drag) for a propeller with an optimm load distribution ag given dy Goldstein for the specified mmber of Dledes. This efficiency considers the rotational and axial momentum of the wako and distributes the loading along the blede so that the integrated sum of the losses is a minimm. ideal efficiency is given by the relationship 2, = ‘The propeller efficiency 9 given in all the figures is obtained by oubtrecting the blade dreg from the optimm efficiency. The magnitude of the blade areg can be seen to vary greatly with the section loading. In figure 1 the low-solidity propeller 1s highly loaded at low rotational speed and is very close to the stall condition at 1250 rym. The approach to stall 1s indicated when the propeller efficiency end the optimm efficiency nop, beein to diverge. ] 3 pial «| T 2700 | 612 8} 6 | 79.0 2700 | 6! & 8] 8 {71-5 180 | 6; 2 20} 2 | 85.0 1g0 | 6 | & 10] & | 68:0 180 | 6] 6 $| 6 | 72.0 180 | 6) 8 8| 8 |73-5 60 | 8! 2 8b |B. imo | 81 816 | 83.5, 1350 | 6] & 8} 8 |é-0 1350 | 61 6 aw [2 [87.0 - 1350 | 6} 8 ao | h | 83-0 1350 | 8| 2 10} 6 175.5 3350 | 8] & 30 | 8.47105 ” Meny of those propellers ere close to stalling at 150 miles per hour and at lower velocity would stall and give very poor efficiency. Investigation of eny propeller Zor a range of velocities is teken up in exemple II for a controliable-pitch constant-speed propeller end in example III for the fixea-pitch propellers. II - Controlleble-Pitch Constant-Spoed Propeller Figure 23 18 @ cross plot of the propeller efficiency as a function of the forvard velocity for a 100-horaepower engine operating at constant speed. ‘The curves in figure 23(a) show the efficiencies for an 8-foot-Gianoter tvo-blade propeller end the curves in Pigure 23(b) show the efficteuctes for a 6-foct~diemeter oix-dlade propeller. ‘The data for these curves vero obtained fron figures 16 to 19 and ere very close eprroxinations to the efficiencies that would a bo obtained for controliable-pitch constant-syeed propellers of the see dieneter-end solidity: Jn a similar mnner the propeller efficiency for constant rotational opeed cin bo obtained fram the .NACA Bi No. 1338 7 figures for any combination of ongine power, propeller diameter, “ lade number, and range of forvara velocity covered in the study. ‘TIL - Propeller Perfomance for Fixed~Pitch Operation In order to determine the variation of the performance with airspeed of @ given propeller for fixed-pitch operation, it te necessary to determine the variation of the engine speed and brake horsepover with efrepeed. Since en engine operates at approxinately constant torque the variation of engine apeed with velocity depends on the propeller characteristics. An example is given to illustrate ‘the procedure. Consider a 6-foot-dienster. four-blede (6 me 0.138) fixea- pitch propeller designed to ebsorb 150 horsepower at 1600 rm et 150 miles per hour, Calculate Cp as follows: P Pe ~ al 2m Dane 150 x 550 0.002378 ae Fra? = 061655 s venains constant over the speed range. Therefore 2 -sami = 1g -8 ’ ACA ON Ho. 1338 5 For the design condition 7 Largo BO 2 a” & ito 6 = 10222 Use experimental or calculated date for the solected propeller, Af avedleble, or use a set of curves of C, against V/nD at various velues of pitch setting for sone value of Gy oq of about 0.138. The number of blades for the test resulis 4s not very important since only the shape of the curve 1s required. Plot V/nD against’ Op on a trensparent sheet of paper and place it over the curves of experimental dete. Through the given point fair in a representative curve Zor the variation of Cp with V/nD for the fixed pitch in question as is done in figure 2h. This curve will approximate the variation of the design propeller as closely as ie possible without specific experimental tests of the propeller. - In order to calculate the performance at 100 miles per hour, ‘assume 2 value of Y/nD a little higher than the ratio of atrepéede - would give since the rotational rropeller speed 4s going to be reduced. ‘Tmo the celculated value 1s given by v 200 wp 7 P21 3B = 0.814 Try, 08 & first epproximation, T= 0.85. thon ne vis =D v a 200. x 16467, 6 x 0.85 = 28.75 .4 WAGA TH No. 1338 9 end . ° Te8.ra = 0.160 Flot the point Cp = 0.18, 2 = 0.85 on the cme. It is econ thet this point felis bolov the curve end that a higher value of V/sd 4s requirea. try 2 = 0.95. then n= 246.7 6 x 0.95 = 25.70 u a= 2, (25-7) = 0,225 225, 0.95 fetis on the ome, the vellue of V/nD 4p correct, and Since the point Cy = N= (25.70) (60) = 1540 xp ‘The breke horsepower is reduced by the ratio of ue or reduced from 150 to 126 horsepower. ‘The efficiencies for 150 miles per hour and 150 horsepower are reed fra igure 1h at 180 xmas 7... = 90 percent, 1 = 5 percent, and Any = 6 percent. It is necessary to read the curves for 100 miles per hour at 100 end 150 horsepover for 1540 rym and to estimate the10 NACA IN No. 1338 efficiency at 128 horsopower. ‘The efficiencies for 100 miles por hour end 100 horsepower are read from figure 17 et 1540 rm as Nope = 4.5 percent, = 60 percent, and Any = 4.5 percent. The efficiencies for 100 miles yer hour and 150 horsepower are reed from figure 13 at 1540 rym es ny, = 6 percent, 4 = 76.5 percent, end Any = 345 percent. It shovld be noted that the propeller efficiency for the condition of 150 horsepower at 1540 rpm is close to the stall region. This stalling condition will require somo care in estineting the efficiency by this method if the propeller is stalled at the higher engine pover. An accurate determination of the propeller efficiency near the propeller stalling condition cannot ‘be made without specific experimental data on the propeller and eirplene combination. The efficiency for 128 horsepover at 100 miles per hour falls between the value of 76.5 percent for 150 horsepower and the value of & percent for 100 horsepover, probably at about 78.5 percent. ‘Then Trust horsepower = 128 x 0.785 = 100.5 ‘The procedure for other velocities is a repetition of the foregoing calouletion. A breaktown of the power losses es shown gives a good indication of the possibility of obtaining @ gain in efficiency by increasing ‘the propeller solidity. If Any is small there is not much to be gained by increasing the solidity. APPLICATION TO SPECIFIC UESIGN ‘The charts presented herein permit the selection of the primary propeller parameters - namely, diameter, rotational speed, blade number, and solidity - requivea for a given design condition. A comparison of the efficiencies for a wide variety of these paremetera shows large changes in efficiency. The large change-in efficiency demonstrates the importence of e careful selection of the primary propeller parenoters. Whenever any of the primary propeller paremeters are affected by considerations of noise output, ground clearence, end so forth, the present paper is particularly weful in otemmning the best catpramise.A ~ NACA TN No. 1338 a The secondary parameters such as pitch distribution, plan fom, thickness distribution, and strfotl section are not directly treated herein, An estimate of their effect cen be obtained, however, by the wse of the cherts. The optimm load distribution means that ‘the product of the chord and the lift coefficient (ee, ise definite value for each redius at a given design condition. Small aepartures from the optimum load dictribution do not cause epprecieble chenges in the efficiency. Either the ritch distribution or the plen form can be altered to obtain the optimm load distribution. Which alteration 1s made to give this loeding 1s unimportent. When results of tests of pitch distribution or blede plen form show large losses in officiency, they are caused by the chenges in the drag loss due to stalling of some of the sections or to operating of acne of the sections at very lor lift coefficient et which the areg ie large in ccmparigon with the lift. Blade section and thiclness distribution affect the blade arag Joes of the propeller. If this blade drag loss (Any from the charta) 4s enell, only small effects can bo expected, For operation at section Lift coefficients in the range of ¢, from 0.3 to 0.7 this areg oss 1s sual for nomel airfoil sections operating below critical Mach nmibers. If the eluent 1ift coofficients are outelde this range, the dzeg loses Decne importants Once the primary paremeters are selected the next step te tho physicel design of the propeller, which consists of designing the pitch distribution end blade-choré distribution to obtain the proper @isteibution of loading along the redius. One mothed of designing a propeller to give the optimm distribution of loading for any ‘operating condition is outlined in reference 2. Iangley Memorial Aeronautical Leboretory Wational Advisory Comittee for Aeronautios Tangley Field, Vas, uly 2, 19h7we HACA TH Ho. 1338 APPEEDIZ CONSTRUCTION OF CHARTS, MUTHOUS AND ASSUMPTIONS ‘The yropoler-performance cixves given horo!n voro obtained for most of the renge by the method given in reference 1. In reZeronce 1 charts aro nresented giving the maximum possible propeller efficiencies without dreg for e wide renge of operating condition. The charts were prepared Zor the optiimm distribution of loading along tho blade es given by Goldstein for light loadings. ‘he effect of drag wes added to the induced lose to cbtein the propeller efflotencios given herein. Comparison of exporimental deta on propellers in current use with data obtained by the present-method of analysis shows good agreement over the renge of operation. For light blade cedinge (oy dolov 0u15) end hoavy biado Leadings O.7R (ip iyq Ore 0-8)pclonent oalowations by the methods given in reference 3 were used. In the prosent peper, performance charts similar to those in reference aro given far values of V/aD down to 0-314 (2/10) « These charts are procentea in figure 25 for two", four-, ix-, and eight-blade propellers. ‘The ordinates give valuos of the optima efficiency for propollora without dreg end the cbsoisses reprosent values of = eD pe Against these scales, curves of conctent element load coefficient (2-1), zm *2° crossed by curves of constant V/pd. Those charts, thus, not only give the optimm propeller efficiency with dreg noglocted but, with operating V/s. and 1 = D282 imown, give the required blade loading (soliaity VFe & ‘times the lift coefficient at the 0.7 radius). ‘the effect of blade profile drag on the propeller effictency is also given in charts, ‘The following formulae, taken from referonce 1, give tho effect of drag on the thrust and torque coefficients for Zero loading? a, Bic Be Es (any? @)‘ NACA TH No. 1338 13 and = ='004 SE Ps (nx)® (2) ‘These formilas, modified to include induced velocities end to epply for eny loading, are @) 3 f (4) Te reaulte of the integrated thrust and the integrated power coef fotenta due to drag calculated by the zero-loading formiine ant the formlas including the induced velooities vere compared for several ‘blade loadings end each blede number. The results for the fuur-blade propeller with (9°4)5 7m = 0.09 end eptimm load Atatribution along the blede are shown in figure 26, The difference in the thrust and pover cosffictents aie to drag end the romiltant efficiency computed by the two sets of formulas vore suali and therefore the arog losses vere computed for only ane loeding for each blade maher and. these coefficients vore applied to all Yeluss of (0¢)p.7m+ the Yaluss of (6%4)5.7q for vhich amg losses wore couputed were (00))5 7_ = 0.08 for the two-blade propellers, (er), rm 70:09 for the fomr~biade propellers, (o-), nm" O.U} fox the six-blade propellers, and (1), 7m 0718 for the etght-biade propeliers. The aistributicn of c, slong the blade was determined by use of the thiciness distribution and plan form of a conventional propeller operating at the blade loading for optimm distribution. The distri- ‘bution of cq used was the seme as that on the propeller of reference 1. The change in profile-dreg coefficients is very srall for a wide’ renge of Let cosfficient so that averege veluss were used in the calcu- lations. Because the profile drag increases rapidly near tho stalling angle, it was necessary to make element calculations to obtain the propeller performance for heavily loaded biedes.ab NACA TW No. 1338 - ‘REFERENCES : 1, Crigier, Jom L., and Talkin, Horbert Ws: Charts for Determining Propeller Efficiency. NAGA ACR No. Lir29, ipllt. 2. Origier, Joim L., and Talkin, Herbert W.1 Propeller Selection from Aerodynamic Considerations. NACA AGR, July 19k2. 3. Origier, John I.t Comparison of Calculated and Bxperinental Propeller Charecteristios for Four-, Six, and Eight-Blade Single-Roteting Propellors. ACA AGR No. MBOl, 19h.15 ACA TY No. 1338 ABIE I INIEX 10 FIGURES 1 90 22 o per blade DHHHHGGHHSOOOHOOOOO DITTO T GTI TTR TTS 2 OOOO, © AAAAAAI9SAgagsgaggsgaga Ga TvITToToooTTO OT v ) WDOGTOTRA TTI TTATT STATS | HRSRERSRSRSRSRERY AKER 5 pa RERRRRRANTTRRARG SIERRA ® dams worm ngs Ta GES IAN NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS40 NATIONAL ADVISORY ‘COMMITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS aie 00 2000 000 N, rpm Figure 1.- Breakdown of propeller power losses. B = 4; D = 8; V = 200 miles per hour; P = 300 horsepower; 1, = 0,97. Stet “ON NL VOVN # wyFig. 2 NACA TN No. 1838 (a) d= 8.0; 7000 300 Nirem a (b) D = 8.0; 9, = 0.98. 1 a é ? 6 a Nrem (0) D = 10.0; , = 0.90. Figure 2.~ Propeller effioteney. ¥ © 100 niles per hour; 900 horeepower; B = 4NACA TN No. 1838 2 Fig. 3 0 fay D wo (@) D = 8.0; 9, = 0.97. ” Nir see 7 eS amt Nam wo ve10 Figure 3.~ Propeller effictenoy. V = 200 aie per hour; P = 900 horaspower; B = 4.Fig. 4 NACA TN No. 1338 woe 0b) D 8.0; a = 0.81. coma Fon ona Mp (0) D 10.0; » * igure 4.~ Propeller effiotency. ¥ * 80 ntleo per hour; P = 300 horsepower; op. * 0.08408.NACA TN No, 1338 « 6 tepr |_| : Zz : y 6 x 4‘ ° r 5 Niro (a) D+ 6.0; m * 0.80 2 N, cam (0) D = 8.0; my # 0.68. i. ez a or s NATIONAL apvisony ‘COMMITEE FR ADONIS 40 Boe 705 3805 A N, rem : (0) D = 10.05 a * 0.00. + Propeller afficieroy. Y= 100 ailee per hour; P = 300 horsepower: ey oq = U-USA58. FigureFig. 6 NACA TN No. 1338 a 1 Ny rom (b) D = 8.0; my = 0.046. * ; : 1 le he a i c 7 Boe 7 N.rem ay = 0.96, Figure 6.~ Propeller efftotency. ¥ per hour; P = 800 horsepower: #9 qq * 0.03480.NACA TN No, 1838 Fig. 7 © opt 1 8=44 tDe comet Foc ABORT N, rem (0) D = 10.0; a * 0.88. Figure 7.~ Propeller efficiency. ¥ = 200 nllea per hour; P = 200 horssyower; ey oq = 0.03458.Fig. 8 NACA TN No, 1338 = 2 + 1 = so 05 N, rom (a) d= 6.0; 4 = 0.87. a M, rem (0) d= 8.0; 4, = 0.65. - 1 . al conn Fx ABTS N, rom A (0) D = 10.0; 9 = 0.71. 2 Figure @.- Propeller effioionoy. V = 50 wilea por hour; P= 226 horsepower: #9 yg * 008408.NACA TN No. 1838 a ta , cpm 6.03 my 2 0.88. wo arionas sbvisony conn Fox MOMS Figure 9.- Propeller efficiensy. V = 100 niles per hour; P = 228 horsepower 9, 7q ~ 0.0248.Fig. 10 NACA TN No. 1338 e - _ . ae : es i+ : fe — Te 0 3000" wos uss, Te }— J] T . : r,t q ‘ ‘ 7000" 05 3000" = , tm 00) 0 = 6.0; ay = 0.988. Z “WATIONAL ADVISORY je ye “COMHITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS s “o T0805 7060" 3008 Nrem : te) 0 #200; 4 + 0.97. : Figure 10.~ Propeller efficiency. V+ 150 ates por hoi: P = 228 horsepower: 0.7m * 00888.tp NACA TN No, 1888 Fig. 11 rr = ti gtie-4 lee s = fe a M, rem fo) D = 6.05 1 N, rem (@) D = 8.0; a = 0.98. o aa a B22] 1 NATIONAL ABVSORY comMITTE Fx ABORLETCS G a | Ne 7 ao c 0 Be N, rem (0) D = 10.05 m= 0.985. Figure 11.- Propeller efficiency. ¥ * 200 alles per hour; P = 228 horsepower; egyrp * 0.09458.Fig. 12 NACA TN No, 1888 r 1 ~ Wgp 184 She D os abs st. W. ran * Pans : 4 - M, cm EEE 1 {Mog 184 = 5 ae, Se Ao 1000 "2000 3005 peoNACA TN No. 1338 Fig. 13 ~ ~ . — a 7) 6 8 le 4g oo 65 3000 rem (a) D = 6.0; m 4 ie ei a 1 Ss 7 | a a “6 oo 5 N, com wD o 2 % Bz] ariowat aovisony comartts Fea aOMUTICS s “ Bs Do er WN, rom (0) D = 10.0; m= 0.94. Pigure 18.~ Propeller efficiomy. ¥ 100 alles per hour; P = 180 horsepower: = 0.09468. “o.mFig. 14 NACA TN No. 1388 N, rem (a) D = 6.0; m = 0.95. ” N, rem 0) 0 = 8.0; 4 = 0.97. LI-F el a ore i 1 Se youre rk couse Pe 2s * 4 1, tom (0) D+ 10.0; m = 0.98. Figure 14.- Propeller affioseney. ¥ = 150 alles per hour; P = 150 horse nove om * 000188. ’a NACA TN No. 1888 Fig. 15 a 40 Toe 7 (Dd we : JRE Z POTS i she . 2 2 4o EOS wo = “ = lopt 3 8 = A B2 NATIONAL ADVISORY 1 coma i ce . « % i) TOO, Oo 3000" ”, rom, Co) D=10.0; 9, = 0.99. eure 15.- Propelisr eftioteney. V5 200 alles por hous P = 160 horspowees og, og * 0.00488.Fig. 16 1 © Figure 16.- Propeller efficiénoy. Y= 60 flea per hour; P * 100 horsepover #9 99 = 0.03452. NACA TN No, 1838. N, rpm aD ™, rpm mesNACA TN No. 1838 Fig. 17 + 10 a C E a = Xr = 2, NN sa * 4 65 N,rem (a) D = 6.0; 4 = 0.00 . © 1 | . 5 A Ss 4 c N, rem (o) D = 8.0; 4 + 0.946 . * comets foe MOTs 1 5 46 Boe 3 N, rem . fo) D = 10.0; n, = 0.88. Figure 17.~ Propeller efficiency. ¥ * 100 silee por hour; P= 100 horsepower; oy oq * 0.03468.Fig. 18 NACA TN No. 1838 © a 6 o 1 ‘ 3000 N, rem c 0; a te Tobe : : are a o 2 00 2 1 s pe le: ao 705 a0 365 a M, rem 2 (o) D = 10.0; a, = 0.985. Pigare 10.- Propeller efficiency. ¥ = 160 alles per hour; P = 100 horeepover: ey op * 0.05488.NACA TN No, 1838 Fig. 19 * 1 td yor 4 Torr (0) D = 8.0; my * 0.08. RATIONAL ABVISORY co N, rem (0) D = 10.0; my = 0.995. igure 19.- Propeller efficienoy, V = 200 alles per hour; P = 100 horsepower w ‘oom = 9-02488.Fig. 20 NACA TN No. 1338 10 (a) D = 6.0; my = 0.785. 1 s 1 Totitne NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS , 10 "oo 2 7 6 p ‘ aa eee) lens e “ee Ba 20 N, rom (o) D 10.0; 5 = 0.875. 0.c2483. Pipure 20.~ Propeller effiotensy. 60 niles per hour; P = 80 horsepower; ey og agNACA TN No, 1338 Fig. 21 y- re 1 - E Tope 4 4 rt z | «s Some 7 7 46 ad NATIONAL ADVISORY (COMMITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS. 0° a it 7 6 a 4¢ eat 2255 wee t N, rpm we fo) D = 10.0; 9, = 0.98. Figure 21.~ Propeller effiofexoy. Y= 100 alles per hour: P = 60 horeepower oy og * 0.08458.NACA TN No. 1838 Fig. 22 wo * ’ “ a 4 — 1 * bd + 3000 NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS ‘0 : 2 ? ~ L \ py 40 3000 N, ram (0) D + 10.0; y+ 0.66. Fare 22.~ Propeller atttotenoy. = 150 alee por tour; Po 60 boreyowt ey on + 0.0388,NACA TN No. 1388 Fig. 28 . a : + é 2 c 500 : Iso’ Wai000 pm a 50 (00 150 V. mph ° (a) D = 8.0; B = 2. = 12, z iL a bea tt 2 é Or t NATIONAL ADVISORY COnMITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS 4 75O Zao : io VY, mph (b) D =6.0; B= 6. Figure 23.- Propeller @fficiency. P = 100 horsepower.Fig. 24 NACA TN No, 1338 28 24 Cp/é M2 08 NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE FoR AERONAUTICS Figure 24.~ Power-coefficient curve for use in fixed-pitch analysis. O v/np * le ry ahge Ww 2 @ a 16 UE (a) oblate peopelters. ure 28. Propllar parfornaten chart. Wittort drat. 7 8 7 rte 20. a Ss8T “ON NL VOVN gg "ShrTY We () foue-tlete ropstlors. igure 6.~ Gorntd, 4 rm 76 77 78 9 age “Sua 88eT “ON NGL VOVNPM r 2 3 10 0 (o) ats-blade propellers ‘iaare 25.- ontlaned. Ww 1 w 75 ett 16 BET ‘ON NUL VOVN. 29g “Sha8 910 () mane-olads weopliera, gure 25,~ Contuded, y w CLT a eas NATIONAL ADVISORY ‘COMMITTEE Fow AERONAUTICS, 76 a7 gad pee “ST Ses “ON NL VOVNee ent ety (fac Eira? (3, = acy sin Calculated for where oC, of Q7R =0,09 Caleulated for = acg gt Tilltal cos 9 = 2S s a = ; = Gey ING? + tax a8 s 1 acy ME NTP Gra? -.004| op -.002 2H 2 Vnd Figure 26.- Variation of thrust and pover coefficients due to drag with V/nD for constant drag distribution. B= 4. eeeT “ON NL VOVIN 98 “Shr