NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE

FOR AERONAUTICS
N AC11 · IK--' ~ "f
REPORT No. 664

WIND-TUNNEL INVESTIGATION OF
AN N. A. c. A. 23012 AIRFOIL WITH VARIOUS
ARRANGEMENTS OF SLOTTED FLAPS

By CARL J. WENZINGER and THOMAS A. HARRIS

1939

REPRODUCED BY
NATIONAL TECHNICAL
INFORMATION SERVICE
u. S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
SPRINQFlELD, VA. 22161
 AERONAUTIC SYMBOLS
L FUNDAMENTAL AND DERIVED UNITS

M etric English

Symbol
nit Abbrevia - Un it Abbrevia-
tion tioJl

L cngth _ _____ l m eter __________________ m foot (or mile) _ __ ______ ft . (or mi.)
Time _______ t second _ __ ______________ s second (or hour) __ __ ___ sec. (or hr.)
FOTce ________ F weight of 1 kilogram _____ kg weight of 1 pound __ ___ lb.

Power _______ P horsepower (metTic) _____ -- - --- ---- hor epower _ _______ ___ hp.
Speed __ _____ {kilometers p CI' hour. _____ k.p.h. miles per houL _ ____ __ m.p.h.
V meters p er second ___ ____ m.p.s. feet p er second ____ __ __ f.p. s.

2. GENERAL SYMBOLS
w, Weigbt=my P, Kinematic viscosity
y, Stands.r d acceleration of gravity=9.80665 p, Density (mass per unit volume)
m/s2 or 32 .1740 ft.fsec. 2 Standard density of dry air, 0.12497 kg_m- 4_s2 at
lIV 15° C. and 760 rom; or 0.002378Ib.-ft.-4 sec. 2
m, Mass=-g Specific weight of "standard" au', 1.2255 kg/m3 or
I, Moment of inertia=mk2 • (Indicate axis of 0.07651lb. /cu. ft .
radius of gyration k by proper subscript.)
!J., Coefficient of viscosity
3. AERODYNAMIC SYMBOLS

S, Area Angle of setting of wings (relative to thrust

Sw, Area of wing line)
G, Gap Angle of stabilizer setting (relative to thrust
b, Span line)
C, Chord Q, Resultant moment
b2 n, Resultant angular velocity
Aspect ratio
S' Vl
p- ' Reynolds Number, where l is a linear diInension
V, True air speed !J.
(e.g. , for a model airfoil 3 in. chord, 100
q, Dynamic pressure= 4 p 112 m.p.h. normal pressure at 15° C., the cor-
responding number is 234,000; or for a model
L, Lift, absolute coefficient OL= :S of 10 em chord, 40 m.p.s., the corresponding
number is 274,000)
D, Drag, absolute coefficient OD= :; Center-of-pressure coefficient (ratio of distance
of c.p. from leading edge to chord length)
Profile drag, absolute coefficient ODO= ~S Angle of attack
Angle of downwash
Induced drag, absolute coefficient ODt= qS
D
Angle of attack, infinite aspect ratio
Angle of attack, induced
Parasite drag, absolute coefficient OD'P=~S Angle of attack, absolute (measured from zero-
lift position)
0, Cross-wind force, absolute coefficient Oa= q~ Flight-path angle
R, Resultant force
/

REPORT No. 664

WIND-TUNNEL INVESTIGATION OF
AN N. A. C. A. 23012 AIRFOIL WITH VARIOUS
ARRANGEMENTS OF SLOTTED FLAPS

By CARL 1. WENZINGER and THOMAS A. HARRIS

Lanller Memorial Aeronautical Laboratory

I 47167-3f --1

, I
 NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS

HEADQUABTEBS. NAVY BUILDING. WASHINGTON. D. C.

LABORATORIES. LANGLEY FIELD. VA.

Created by act of Congress approved March 3, 1915, for the supervision and direction of the scientific study of the problems of
flight (U. S. Code, Title 50, Sec. 151). Its membership was increased to 15 by act apprO\'ed :\-larch 2, 1929. The members are
appointed by the President, and serve as such without compensation.
JOSEPH S. AMES, Ph. D., Chairman, ROBERT H. HINCKLEY, A. B.,
Baltimore, Md. Chairman, Civil Aeronautics Authority.
V.\~~EVAR BUSH, Se. D., Yice Chairman, JEROME C. HUNSAKER, Sc. D.,
Washington, D. C. Cambridge, Mass.
SYDNEY M. KRAUS, Captain, United States Navy,
CH.4.RLES G. ABBOT, Sc. D.,
Bureau of Aeronautics, ::-I'avy Department.
Secretary, Smithsonian Institution.
CHARLES A. LINDBERGH, LL. D.,
HENRY H. ARNOLD, Major General, United States Army, New York City.
Chief of Air Corps, War Department. FRANCIS W. REICHELDERFER, A. B.,
GEORGE H. BRETT, Brigadier General, United States Army, Chief, United States Weather Bureau.
Chief Mat~riel Division, Air Corps, Wright Field, Dayton, JOHN H. TOWIIBS, Rear Admiral, United States Navy,
Ohio. Chief, Bureau of Aeronautics, Navy Department.
LYM.4.N J. BRIGGS, Ph. D., EDWARD WARNER, Sc. D.,
Director, National Bureau of Standards. Greenwich, Conn.
CI.1N·roN M. HESTER, A. B., LL. B., ORVILLE WRIGHT, Sc. D.,
Administrator, Civil Aeronautics Authority, Dayton, Ohio.

GEORGE W. LEWIS, Director oj Aeronautical Research

JOHN F. VICTORY, Secretary

HENRY J. E. REID, Engineer-in-Charge, Langley Memorial Aeronautical Laboratory, Langley Field, Va.

JOHN J. IDE, Technical Assistant in Europe, Paris, France

TECHNICAL COMMITTEES
AERODYNAMICS AIRCRAFT STRUCTURES
POWD PLANTS POR AIRCRAFT AIRCRAFT ACCIDENTS
AIRCRAFT MATEBlALS I!'IVENTlONS AND DESIGNS

Coordination oj Re8earch Needs oj Military and Civil Aviation

Preparation oj Research Programs

Allocation oj Problems

Prevention oj Duplication

Consideration oj Invention.

LANGLEY MEMORIAL AERONAUTlCAL LABORATORY OFFICE OF AERONAUTICAL INTELLIGENCE

LANGLEY FIELD. VA. WASHINGTON. D. C.

Unified conduct, for all agencies, of scientific research on the Collection, classification, compilation, and dissemination of
fundamental problems of flight. scientific and technical information on aeronautics .

• • I
I\ ,
 REPORT NO. 664
WIND-TUNNEL INVESTIGATION OF AN N. A. C. A. 23012 AIRFOIL WITH VARIOUS
ARRANGEMENTS OF SLOTTED FLAPS
By CARL J. WENZINOER
SUMMARY
An investigation was made in the 7- by 10100t wind
tunnel and in the variable-density wind tunnel of the
N. A. O. A. 23012 airfoil with various slotted-flap ar-
rangements. The purpose oj the investigation in the 7-
by 10100t wind tunnel was to d~termine the airjoil section
aerodynamic characteristics aa affected by flap shape, slot
shape, and flap location. The flap position for maximum
lift; polarsjor arrangements consickredjaoorabkjor take-
off and climb; and complete lift, drag, and pitching-
moment characteristics jor selected optimum arrange-
ment8 were cktermi'TU'd. The be8t arrangement was
tested in the variable-density tunnel at an effective Rey-
nolds Number oj 8,000,000. In addition, datafrom both
wind tunnels are incluckd for plain, SPJit, external-air-
foil, and Fowler flapsjor purp08e8 oj comparisim.
TM optimum arrangement oj the 810Ued flap was
8Uperior to the plain, the split, and the ezternal-airjoil
type8 oj flap on the basis oj 17UJ.2'imum lift coefficient,
low drag at mockrate and high lift Coefficient8, and high
drag at high lift coefficient8. The increment oj 17UJ.2'imum
lift due to the 810Ued flap was Jound to be practically
independent oj the Reynolds Number over the range
inve8tigated. The 810Ued flap, however, gave slightly
lower maximum lift coefficient8 than the Fowler flap. It
was jound that 810t opening8 in the airjoil 8Urjace at the
flap caused a mea8Urable increaae in drag oj the airjoil
for the condition oj high-speed flight even if the 810t was
smoothly 8ealed on the upper 8Urjace and there was 11,0
flow through the 81ot. It was also jound that, in order
to obtain the highest lift coefficient8, the M8e oj the flap
should be located slightly ahead oj and below a slot lip
that direct8 the air downward over the flap. The M8e
oj the flap should have a good aerodynamic jorm and the
slot entMJ shO'l.dd have an easy shape to obtain low drags
at mOckrate lift coefficients.
INTRODUCTION
Most present-day airpllUles, because of their high
wing loadings and cleanness of aerodynamir deRign,
employ some form of lift-increasing and drag-increasing
device to assist in landing them in a field of restricted
size. Also, increases in lift without increases in drag
appear desirable in the take-uff and in the climbing
conditions of flight.
and THOMAS A. HARRIS
The foregoing considerations indicate that the most
desirable form of high-lift device is one capable of
providing high lift with relatively low drag, and also
probably high lift with high drag. Some other desirable
aerodynamic features are: no increase in drag with the
flap neutral; small changes in wing pitching moment
with flap deflection; low forces required to operate the
flap; and freedom from possible hazard due to icing.
Some form of slotted flap was believed to be the most
promising for the conditions noted. Various forms of
slotted flap include the external-airfoil (references I
and 2), the Fowler (references 3 and 4), and the Handley
Page types (references 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9).
The present investigation was made in two main
parts. The ~ts reported in part I were made in the 7-
by IO-foot tunnel of slotted flaps somewhat similar to
the Handley Page type. Flaps of three different sec-
tions and with several different slot shapes were tested.
Surveys were made of flap location to obtain the best
aerodynamic characteristics for each arrangement. In
addition, a plain flap, a split flap, an external-airfoil
flap, and a Fowler flap were included for purposes of
comparison.
Part II reports tests made in the variable-density
tunnel of the best slotted flap arrangement (2-h) de-
veloped in part I, to determine the effects at high Rey-
nolds Numbers. In addition, slotted flap 2-h was
tested in combination with a 60-percent-chord plain
flap to see whether, as in previous unpublished tests of
the plain flap alone, rounded lift-curve peaks could be
obtained.
The tests reported in part II were made by the var-
iable-density-tunnel staff and the material presented as
part II was prepared for publication by Harry Green-
berg and Neal Tetervin.
I. TESTS IN 7- BY to-FOOT WIND TUNNEL
APPARATUS AND TESTS
THE MODInED 7. BY to-rOOT WIND TUNNEL
Before the present investigation was started, the 7-
by IO-foot open-jet wind tunnel (reference 10) had been
modified, mainly by the addition of a closed test
1
2 REPORT NO. 664-NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS

section and a new entrance cone! (See fig. 1.) With
these changes, the static pressure is practically constant
along the axis of the test section and the noise during
tunnel operation is fairly low. In addition, by making
the top and the bottom of the test section parallel, an
arrangement is obtained whereby two-dimensional-flow
tests can conveniently be made of large-chord models
completely spanning the jet in a vertical plane. The use
of such an installation permits a large ratio of chord of
model to height of jet together with small wind-tunnel
corrections (references 11 and 12) so that the range of
Reynolds Numbers of the tests for obtaining airfoil
tween the model and the tunnel walls is indicated by
the flashing of neon lamps connected in an electrical
circuit including the walls of the test section and thin
metal plates fastened to each end of the model.
The standard force-test tripod used with the pre-
vious open-jet wind tunnel (reference 10) to support
horizontally the smaller finite-aspect-ratio models has
been replaced by a single cantilever streamline strut.
The opening in the floor of the closed test section
through which the strut passes is made airtight by a
mercury seal. The existing scales are used with both
types of test; however, in the case of the two-dimen-

Horizontal sec lion

------------------------63'2·-------------·------------~

c
Vertical secfion

A,eatranoeccme. E, hoaeyoomb. H, propeller.

B,esltcou. F, balance IIId model· I, motor, 200 hp.
C, retum pun... IUpportlDI strut. J, statIc platlll.
0, plde yane •• G,model. K, 8Dtlawlrl YIIIIII.
F10UKJ: 1.-DIairam 01 the 7· by 11).100t wind tUDDel with eloeed teat _tloD.

section data in a given wind tunnel can be considerably
increased.
The wind-tunnel balance has been slightly modified
by installing tubular supports on the top and the bottom
of the balance frame surrounding the test section se "lilt
the model can be held vertical. The tubular supports
extend through circular holes in the closed test section
to sockets with clamps in the ends of the model; they
can be rotated with II. motor drive by gears and shafting
to change the angle of attack from outside the wind
tunnel. A clearance of about ~2 inch is allowed
between the ends of the model and the top and the
bottom of the test section (fig. 2). Any contact be-
sional-flow tests, lift is measured on the cross-wind
scale and pitching moment on the yawing-moment
scale. (See reference 10 for arrangement of scales.)
Sphere tests have been made to obtain an indication
of the turbulence present in the air stream of the closed
test section. The turbulence was found to have
changed slightly from that of the open-jet wind tunnel,
so that the turbulence factor (reference 13) has been
increased from a value of 1.4 to 1.6. The dynamic
pressure of the air stream at the working section in
either horizontal or vertical planes is constant within
± 0.5 percent, and the air stream is parallel to the
axes of the test section within ±0.5°.
 AN N. A. C. A. 23012 AIRFOIL WITH SLOTTED FLAPS
MODELS
Plain airfoil.-The basic model, or plain airfoil,
(fig. 3) was built of laminated pine to the N. A. C. A.
23012 section (table I) and has a chord of 3 feet and a
span of 7 feet. The trailing-edge portion of this airfoil
was made easily removable so that the model can be
quickly altered for testing different flap arrangements.
3
Plain fiap.-The plain flap (fig. 3) also has a chord
20 percent of the airfoil chord and is mounted on a
removable section, which replaces that of the plain
airfoil. Fittings supporting the wooden flap are of
thin steel and are equipped with ball-bearing hinges so
that the hinge moments of the flap can be measured.
The flap angles (38° up to 75° down) are set by a push
rod and bell cranks, so arranged that the settings can
be changed from outside the wind tunnel. The gap
between the flap and the airfoil is sealed top Ilnd
bottom by thin metal plates.

Removab/e
, ! ~--------_ _--..,-..<. porllon

f::::=--- -.--;f~
f-I2.0"--·
I - - - - - - - c · 36 0 " - - - - = : . . = - - - -
10-,

Wind Plain airfOil

dir~ction , 3,-J
I C :

~-.-.-.-.-.-.~
Splil flop, '~~
o<:". ,

Plain flap, ZOe

Solonce frome·· t C.' 36.0' [.02Be.,

~_._._._ ~L0725;:
,
,, ,,
,
I
I
Exfernol-oirfoll flop,
,
.Ic"m
Hinge aXIs
t'J.. Z4C-
.• ~
i
,,, ,I,
, .,
, "
I c~· .2667e",
,, ',
, ,
.,, ,,,
--+-+-- .
;...,
-t-. . - - - - - - - c. ·360"----
~_ _ _ _ _ , _ _ . 7??m
---j
I ,OZ5c",

, , ~,.....! 7436C.-------Il·.... ··· ...... ,:~

I
- - - - - .

:, ,::, Fow/~r flop, Cj • .2667e", ~./

:. ,,
FIG171I& 3.-Sections or the plaln N, A. C. A. 23012 aldoU and or the alrroil·wttll
ditTerent types 01 !lap. -

VerI/col s~ction ..!xternal-airfoll fiap.-The external-airfoil flap, avail-

FI0171U: 2.-Model IDlltailatiOD ror two-dlmeDSionlll·!!,-'" teets In the 7. by
wtnd tunnel.
Split dap.-A simple split fla.p with a chord 20 p"
cent of the airfoil chord (fig. 3) was used in conjunctim
with the plain airfoil. This flap is of plywood, ~4 mcl!
thick, and is fastened to the model by scre'~ s. The
flap angles (0° to 75°) are set by wooden blocks cut to
the desired angles and placed between the flap and
the airfoil.
l~root
;.ble il'om another mvestigat.ion, was used without
alteration although it was somewha.t larger than de-
sired, having a chord 26.67 percent of the airfoil chord
(fig. 3). The flap has the N. A. t;J. A. 2301~ section
and was.loca.ted with respect to the main.,airfoil in
accordance With the results of reference 2. The flap
is supported on the main airfoil by thin metal fittings
arranged so tha~ the flap angle can be set 3° up to
50° down.

. -----
4 REPORT NO. 664-NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS

Fowler flap.-The external-airfoil flap was also used when the flap is neutral. Shape e was further modi-
as a Fowler flap (26.67 percent of the main airfoil fied by different roundings of the slot entry. The slot
chord) after modification of the main airfoil (fig. 3). entry with the 0.02c radius' is designated as e2 and the
No actual data were available showing the best location one with the 0.04c radius, as e•.
of a Fowler flap of N. A. C. A. 23012 profile with a Two methods of hinging flap 1 were employed. The
main airfoil of the same profllt!';' however, the flap was first method was to hinge it about a single predeter-
located on the basis of tests of external-airfoil flaps . mined axis location obtained from reference 8 for com-
of N. A. C. A. 23012 profile (reference 2) and of tests
of Fowler flaps of Clark Y profile (reference 4). The .8270c I 2-h
flap is supported on the main airfoil by thin metal I~ I ',~:, .07890 R' . OB//< I.
fittings so that the flap can be set from 0° to 60° down F=-.:=-~- -.-.-.~
when completely extended. The main airfoil is ar- I 37' I, 0475 c
'----------.808Ic I .
L_________ -90Dc I I-a ~---------c----------

~i~
---~~~~~~~-~~-~~-:--CO-8-le~~'-'!'!..---.:~-.!:~
. 8270c~ 2
! I -1

~----~~
r--------.8000e I-b
I 7;420 I 256k--:
_ - - - - - -_ _:{:'~~-:..:.'O~7~89c ,'.R • . DBlle
--. I Frous 1I.-Sect1oDI of airfoil with arranltmeou of slotted tlap 2.

parison with recent Handley Page practice. The

>---------.80Ble------..!
second method was to mount the flap on the main air-
_________ c---------~ foil by special fittings that allowed the flap to be
BOOOe . I I-c located at any point over a considerable area with
i '_~~~C respect to the main airfoil.

§
,:R-.08/1e

ic __________
r.~
-_ ~08-IC . ==esc j- Slotted flap 2.:'-It was believed that a good airfoil
section would probably make the best flap shape, espe-
cially from considerations of drag at low flap deflections.
The front portion of slotted flap 2 was therefore made
I .aaaoe I l-e to the N. A. C. A. 6318 airfoil section back to the maxi-
I' .8170c---j 3-f

~ ~
:R •. 03S0C
1-=--- --.----.~ ~

FIOUlls 4.-SectiODI of airfoil with arraDCtmeDU of slotted tlap 1.

• ~~4JIC 1'-.20c---:
~

ranged 80 that the N. A. C. A. 23012 Fowler flap may

be almost completely retracted for the flap-neutral
condition. (See fig. 3.)
kI ___ .__ .__
'i'817DC1
~c
~ I
3-g

./858c-
Slotted flap 1.-The three slotted flaps tested are <-

designated by numbers and the slot shapes by appended I: .7~56C 'r-2148c~

letters. Slotted flap 1 (fig. 4), which is representative
of recent Handley Page practice, was built according
to dimensions taken from reference 8. The ordinates
for this flap are given in table II. The slot variationFl
used with flap 1 are shown in figure 4 and in tablp; I ..
Shape a is also representative of recent Handl~,: Pagif
practice and was built according to dimensions taken
from reference 8. Shape b is the same as shape a
except for an increase in the length of the slot lip to
close the slot on the upper surface of the airfoil with
the flap neutral. Shape c is an intennediate step
toward closing the slot on the lower surfa.ce, and shape
e has the slot sealed all the way thruugh the airfoil
FloUIi 6.-Sec:tloDll of airfoil with arrangtmeots of slotted !lap 3.
mum thickness and was faired into the contour of the
main airfoil over the rest of its length. The arrange-
ments of slotted flap 2 and the slot variations used in
conjunction with it are shown in ~.:..'Ure 5 and in tables
T and II. Slot shape h is the same as shape a except
t "t the lip is made long enough to seal the slot on the
U?i>~r surface of the airfoil with the flap neutral. Slot
shape ~ (table I) is sea.led all the way through the wing
with the flap neutral except for the radius at the slot
entry. Flap 2 was hinged in a manner similar to the
second method for flap 1.
 AJ."I" N. A. C. A. 23012 AIRFOIL WITH SLOTTED FLAPS
Slotted flap 3.-Slotted flap 3 has an arbitrary shape
with a very blunt nose (fig. 6). Slot shape f is the same
as slot shape e except for the longer lip to seal the slot
on the upper surfaces of the airfoil when the flap is
neutral. The ordinates for this slot shape are given in
table I. Slot shape g (fig. 6) is designed to give a good
expanding slot shape for flap deflections up to 50° with
the flap hinged at a point on the lower surface of the
flap 20 percent of the airfoil chord from the trailing
edge. The same main fittings were used on the airfoil
to support this flap as for flaps 1 and 2; they allow the
flap to be located at any point over a considerable area
with respect to the main airfoil.
GENERAL TEST CONDITIONS
The two-dimensional-flow installation in the 7- by
10-foot closed-throat wind tunnel was used for the
tests. (See fig. 2.) The regular six-component balance
(reference 10) was used to measure the lift, the drag, and
the pitching moment of the model. The hinge mo-
ments were measured with a special torque-rod balance.
A dynamic pressure of 16.37 pounds per square foot
was maintained for all of the tests except those of the
external-airfoil and the Fowler flaps. This dynamic
pressure corresponds to a velocity of about 80 miles per
hour under standard atmospheric conditions and to an
average test Reynolds Number of 2,190,000. Because
of the turbulence in the tunnel, the effective Reynolds
Number R, of the tests was approximately 3,500,000.
The models with the external-airfoil and the Fowler
flaps were tested at a dynamic pressure correspon~
to a velocity of 63.2 miles per hour under standard
atmospheric conditions. With this velocity, the test
Reynolds Numbers were also 2,190,000 for the teste
with the external-airfoil flap and with the Fowler flap
fully extended, based on the sum of the chords of the
main wing and the flap. In addition, tests were made
of the wing with the Fowler flap fully retracted at both
80 and 63.2 miles per hour.
Tests were first made of the plain airfoil and of the
airfoil with split, plain, external-airfoil, and Fowler
flaps through a complete range of flap deflections and
angles of attack for comparison with other test.s and
also for comparison with the slotted flaps of the pre~nt
investigation. As an examplo of one of the recently
used Handley Page slotted flaps (reference 8), a few
tests were made of one slotted flap hinged about a pre-
determined axis location. The greater part of the
investigation, however, consisted of surveys to deter-
mine the optimum flap positions and deflections for
maximum lift and climb. Sufficient angles of attack
at each flap deflection were taken to determine envelope
polars over the complete lift range from zero to maxi-
mum lift. Data were obtained at 2° increments of angle
of attack and at 10° increments of flap dE-flection for
each flap location. Lift, drag, and pitching moments
were measured for all positions of the flaps over the
5
angle-of-attack range tested. Hinge moments of the
plain flap and of one slotted-flap arrangement were also
measured.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
COBPFICIENTS
All test results are given in standard section nondi-
mensional coefficient form as follows:
e" section lift coefficient (l/qe).
elo, section profile-drag coefficient Cdolqe).
c"'c•••• >o' section pitching-moment coefficient about
aerodynamic center of section with flap in
neutral position (m(a.e.lo/qc2).
Clip section hinge-moment coefficient of flap
(h/qcl)·
where
l is section lift.
do, section profile drag.
m(.... )o, section pitching moment.
h, section hinge moment of flap about a speci-
fied axis.
q, dynamic pressure (~p V').
e, airfoil chord including flap; for models with
external-airfoil and Fowler flaps, e is the
sum of the chords of the main airfoil and
the flap (c .. +c,).
c" flap chord.
and
~ is the angle of attack for infinite aspect ratio.
8" flap deflection.
PBBCISlON
Accuracy of tests.-From repeat tests the accidental
experimental errors in the results presented in this
report are believed to lie within the limits indic~t.ed in
the following table:
ao- - ---------- ±0.5° ±0.0006
C'mas- --------- ±0.03
C"o(CI_2.5) - - - - - - - ±O. 002
C"'(u.C·)o - - - - - - - - ±0.003 0,_____________ ±0.2°
C"o(CI_O)- ------- ±0.0003 Flap position ___ ±0.001e
The profile-drag coefficient Clio of the airfoil-flap
combinations has not been corrected for the effect of
the flap-hinge fittings. From tests of the airfoil with
various flaps neutral and hinge fittings in place, but
with all openings in the airfoil surface sealed, it was
found that the drag increment was consistently about
0.001. No tests were made to determine the hinge-
fitting drag with the flaps deflected because of the large
number of additional tests required. The relative
merits of the various flap arrangements should not be
appreciably affected by hinge-fitting drag since the
same hinge fittings were used for all
With a few of the slotted-flap arrangements, two sets
of data could be obtained, an indication of two types
of air flow. For these cases, the data for the more
stable of the two flow conditions were used.
6 REPORT NO. 664-NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR AERONA.UTICS

Wind-tunnel corrections.-Certain theoretical cor- the present time, however, indicate that the drag
rections have been derived for the effect of tunnel walls results are about 10 percent higher than expected.
on the lift of a flat plate completely spanning the jet There are no theoretical corrections for the, drag
at an angle of attack (references 11 and 12). An (reference 11) except for a symmetrical body at zero
attempt was made to check these corrections experi- lift. No corrections for the apparent tunnel effect
mentally for an airfoil in the two-dimensional-flow were applied to the drag data. Since any correction
installation and, at the same time, to examine the effect would presumably be about the same for any of the
of tunnel walls on the drag and the pitching moment. airfoil-flap arrangements at given lift coefficients, the
This experimental investigation showed the correction relative merits of the various combinations should not
for lift to be about 1 percent greater than the theoreti- be markedly affected by a drag correction. All the
cally derived correction for ratios of model chord to jet drag data have been corrected in accordance with
height up to 0.4. The experimentally determined cor- reference 14 by a constant .6.Cdo of -0.0008 so as to
rection has been used to correct all the lift data pre- apply at an effective Reynolds Number of 3,500,000.
sented in this report. The maximum lift coefficients Tests to determine tunnel corrections showed that
the pitching-moment coefficients required no correc-
tion within the experimental accuracy of the tests.
I ~
.048
PLAIN N. A. C. A. _12 AIRFOIL

The section aerodynamic characteristics of the plain

J.040 N. A. C. A. 23012 airfoil, as determined in the two-
dimensional-flow installation, are shown in figure 7.
The polar is in good agreement with a generalized polar
I J for the N. A. C. A. airfoils given in reference 14. The
f rnirnirnum profile drag is, however, about 10 percent
! c~.
higher than the minimum profile drag of the same air-
- - ~~LL. --.!. /
II foil section for the same effective Reynolds Number.
:~.c.J.1 'IIW This difference is not considered serious, and some con-
~ ,Olcc I
~ V templated additional tunnel-effeet tests will probably
/ furnish infonnation as to the indicated differences.
The pitching-moment coefficient about the aerody-
namic center checks the pitching-moment coefficient
I ~ I6
~ ti. given in reference 14 for the same effective Reynolds
/' A ~ Number. The slope of the lift curve dc,lda is 0.107
- . / O""'i
I
I ./' I ~o
from the present tests, as compared with 0.098 from
.008
..0
V L I
Btj' the results for infinite aspect ratio of tests of models of
! i.-P a. ~ finite aspect ratio given in reference 14. This difference
i ~ i ......
C)
V- I
...... in lift-curve slope, although not yet adequately ex-
o
V ! plained, should not affect the relative merits of the test
o~
A
".-

o ,4 ,B 1.2 1.6
!

-4
t results of the flap combinations presented in this report.
The angle of zero lift, within the experimental accuracy
of the tests, agrees with the angle of zero lift as deter-
Section lift coefficient, c,
min'ed by other tests (reference 14).
FIouu 7.-Sectlon ~ynamlc characteristiC! or N. A. C. A. 23012 plaln aIrfoU.
FLAPS FOR COMPARISON WITH SLOTTED ARRANGEMENT
given are about 10 percent higher than those given by
a rectangular airfoil of aspect ratio 7 but are probably Split fiap.-The- section aerodynamic characteristics
the same as would be obtained with an airfoil designed of the N. A. C. A. 23012 airfoil with a 0.20c split flap
to give elliptical lift distribution. This excess of lift are shown in figure 8. The lift curves have auout the
was checked by testing the same model (12 inches same slope as that of the plain airfoil. The angle of
chord by 84 inches span) in the two-dimensional-flow attack for maximum lift decreases from about 15° with
installation and on the regular three-dimensionru-flow the flap neutral to 14° with the flap down 45°. With the
set-up. The results agree very closely with the results flap down 60° or 75°, however, the angle of maximum
of pressure-distribution tests and with theoretical con- lift is only about 12°, a change of 3° from the plain
siderations of the span loading on rectangular wings. airfoil. A change of this magnitude in the angle of
(See reference 14.) attack for maximum lift may have considerable effect
The investigation to determine a correction for drag on the manner in which a wing stalls for combinations
has not been conclusive. The tests completed up to with partial-span split flaps.
 AN N. A. C. A. 28012 AIRFOIL WITH SLOTTED FL.ll'S 429

..,
E

'4 ,.....
.-P
- '-
0..... n

...
16
if

12
P
It
~.
vII" 6,
,~

I deg. . :

/ a t..
-
~.., 5--x
'IO~ f-
+ If .t,/ 20, I f-
04
~~ 30---<>
4 5 - 0 f-
~ 60 A f-
.75---,0
a
18 JIl ~ ':J .....
./
;<' /' ~ / y

8
./
./ ~
,...,.. -::; . /./
./
,,- ~7 Y
,P'"
./
",
./
, ~
iri

l.> ...... -;:. L;- v v r,,;...-' V

V Iv V P ,+" V 1/ . / ~
......- ~r
J,./
. / I.... ~~
~~
V
v "
..,., . / /
V
I.o;:::?"
0 / I~ ~ ./
......- t,.... r / ..,., ~ P"
,J>t'
l...-:: P " .... ' '/'
-0
"/ ~ ..,., ~ .....
"
V I.A ~ P'
....... ..,.,rr' -"
,....I""
,....
-8 ...... .....
..I> P Y EP 1./
~ ... ~ ~
a.f- J,~
I""
16
-.4 o .4 .B 1.2 1.6 eo 2.4 208
Secfion liff coefficient, c.
F1GUU 8.-eectlon aerodynamlo characterlstIos of N. A. C. A. 23012 ahfon with I O.2Oc IPUt flap.
430 REPORT NO. 8M-NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS

-
I -~

-
-.4 "

.e

"
""
t-

,- t-
I~ <>-

.2.0 :;".

'..0-
- i-:""
"
J
~.15
~

.... ~
.v
c:: f- ....-
,.
-
11-
.~
1;:
III pi

f
~
8·12

~.08
- .-
.-
- ",,/

.I
;;-' I
'7
tS",deg,
Ii ~
;...-
/ 75---0 -
c::
.~
11
JJ.04
I
~
- - -'"

.-
t:Y"

~ 7'
/>/
60
45~
30--0
d

20--,-+.,
-
-
-
L ~ ,L, , / 10 f- ..
-.
i:::::" ~
_19""
V btl:: ~ 0
:""/0" .
-EO
-.30
4.
I< -
01 ; -
b.
o -J8 ~-
1:=
15
...-:;; ~ .,.
:!--.:,~
./
..,
V Y. ,;- V. ./ )t
,/ ,- / ' ,- II" ~ ,/ " ~

r/
Jl
,- "/ ./ V

t
ti, B
./
"/ . / ::,...-
c:. ' . i.AC
".
:r i.d'
.<
./
, J1"
..... ,- ,- /. :7
/. ~..,

,- ,-
'i
1.... [7
-'
;;;;; ..... ,- / ' '-""
IP"
,..... -"'" /.
;:...-
~-
7 -"'" ,- . / :..J .,.- ./~
':;::1' 7 ./ Y' / r'" ,/.<1" - I-
D
:~ ./ V
,- ;r' ,.,./
V'y M": >-"
0 .,.,. ,-W ..... ,,-
't-.
0
/
,..... ,,- -"" p...
-:;,-
,..... ~ , /
~,-
~ -<
I:h
/.' . / /. V
~ -8 ,- /' ,- V ;/
/
"7 ,- .,.- / , /
,- ,-
.......: ;- ;v
-15 "'" D
-.4 .8 .4 /.Z. 1.5 2.0 2.4 "

Secfion It'lf coefflclenf, c,

Frolln g.-Section aerodl'namlo characteristics or N. A. O. A. 23012 alrton with. O.2Oc plain Dap.
 AN N. A. C. A. 23012 AIRFOIL WITH SLOTTED FLAPS 9

~-(67C~OI4~ I--,--,---,-,-L'- I, I
- ::: I , 1
-
-
-
-[ldc.lei""'
'- c..
TcrJ ~r- 225 0
~

c·c",+c,
I

V-
L/
... \ V ',rP
;:::... I--'" / k'1 1ft.
"- ..::: ~ po-

+- ! A
rfi
. ~
+ - +_';1 1"--+-
..t.~ V/
tr' ,
"- - :- + +1-> f-"+
.¥

!
-.4

.20 6" I~
deq"

t
-25~
IO.2----ll.
\ .,
11\ 20.2---0 .A'll
\
30.2--~
40.5--+ \ .......- -,....
\ 50.4--v A-' ...- "\ 1\
V- \ \ ,\
1\ 1\ ? \ \ i\
\ \ ~ \
\ A \ .\
1\
1\
....... ....- 7"-
7 \ .
\
\ 1\ ill
\ ",v
1\ l ..-1.
1 .... ~ 17 rI

-- --
""'~ ...... f...... -) V A /'
~- "-
,/'
V ~ :::=. ~
~ ~~

"'-

o
15
!)"
p/ I)
./
V V P/ I" +

c:i. 8 V L ~ j
~ ,/
. /V ./~ /
~a
V . /V V ./
""
./
~'
V . /V ~"'" / ' V-
./ V- V
~ .1
0!
...... 1--'" l/: P"
"-
I:) . /V l,./ ..... f.-:::: ~ b--' /
....o Vf" V ./ V V
~ ,,;- ~ I.Y V
,/T
V
Ch ,/ V V ,/r'"
~ -8 ./
r/

-
/' ./
V ~ i.--" ~
;.-"

---- .- :::-::: f-" f-"

-16
-.4 o .4 .8 1.2 1.5 20 24 2.8
Section liff cQ,efficienf, c,
FIOURE lO.-Section aerodynamic characteristics of N. A. C. A. 23012 airfoil with So 0.2667c. N. A. C. A. 23012 uternal-alrfoil flap.

Preceding page:;blank
10 REPORT NO. 664'-NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMl'ITEE FOR AERONAUTICS

TTl I I
I
, I I

~ =::ffiL- -' I i I
I I : !
.2~-----;a.c.)/ L. ~
I
I- - I i !
OI5c I I I
o '--I--
- f-.

--
.....
'""" :;::1-- -
....... 1-.
-- I- "'-
'-- .....
.
r- 0-. -....
- ...... r-
--
./

~+
-- -- ....
- '"<)...
'-
......,
-- - -
-+

I)-.... I
+
- ~- ---'
::::0

+---"" '
i
I
I

-.6 I ~
I ,

Flop fully retrocted---

.20 I
8"
dfl9. I
0 t>. I
10
...~.1f5 20--+'"
30---0
II
40---0 :/ ~ 1

I ./ I \

- ~
..... 0
.<r

- -
-<r
'-
-'"
\ >- -p- , ~
I
I
......
I • V!
/

~
, j
/
-.;::;-
/ ./
...-::: ;./
i

......-i? ...::::: .,.""

/'
;;;;;'"
.~ i
I

v!
... - 0._

,-l- I
~;::::--

I
I

I
I
!

I
I
I
I

I
I

o I I
I I I
! I i I
16 I
If hi I
.
/1 , -~ t-!-
"

./ I ~
,,- ./ V V l.P1:~ ~
ci.. 8
."" ~ V I /~, V
~ /' ./ ...... I i I
/ ' /V j7
'1$0 V- I- I J,./" I I k:: v- ........- I

V vI-"" ......v, I , I 'pr::-- v, i I

~'
..- .......
<J
....
0
.... 0 .. / . /
......
-- V Iy ./ I I I

-- - ./--
t1 '"" ~ ~~ ./.-Jor ,

....0 ....-.::::
;;::.;..--- ...... ...... ...... .....-:: ;;.-- ././ I
,/ T
,./ ./
~
..-
~ -8 -- V V ........ !

--
I
,

---'
V ./ I
......- I : i I
--:- -+
_7»' ,...... ~
./
I ,I I I

-16 0- .- j
:
-,4 o .4 .8 1.2 1.6 20 24 28
Secfk;n lift coefficient, c,
FIGURII: n.-Sectlon aerodynamic characteriltica of N. A. C. A. 23012 alrloU with a 0.2667(. N. A. C. A. 23012 Fowler ilap.
 AN N. A. C. A. 23012 AIRFOIL WITH BLOTTED FLAPS 11
The increment of maximum lift coefficient for a about 0.05 in maximum lift coefficient. The angle of
given flap deflection is from 4 to 10 percent larger than attack for maximum lift with the flap set at 30° is only
the increment obtained in previous tests of a model of 10°, which is a decrease of 5° when compared with that
finite span at a much lower Reynolds Number (reference for the plain wing. This decrease is greater than that
15). The increases may be almost entirely accounted for any of the other flap arrangements.
for by the difference in span loadings because the PRBLDUNARY TESTS OF SLOTTED FLAPS
reference tests were made with a rectangular airfoil
A preliminary investigation was conducted of the
in three-dimensional flow. Increments of maximum
Handley Page slotted flap, designated flap 1, and of
lift coefficient of an airfoil with a split flap may be
four slot shapes, the combinations being designated
considered to be practically independent of Reynolds
Number. The increment of minimum profile-drag
coefficient for a given flap deflection for these tests is 2.8 f-H--+-+-+-+-+--+-+-+....,-+_--1.~H>----+.-+-+--+-I:
about 10 percent greater than for the tests of reference f-j-+--+-+--+-+---I'---+~bq,hr-~-+-+-'t-f----i-!_-.,1
15. The pitching-moment coefficients from the two- 1/ \ ! :
dimensional-flow tests are in good agreement with the V /.....--~
2.41-+-+--+-+--11-+,J:-h4/---,-!£4-+-l-'-<\""'r\-+-+-+---t-i
pitching-moment coefficients given in reference 15 for
the same flap deflections. //1/ 1\
Plain llap.-The section aerodynamic characteristics
of the N. A. C. A. 23012 airfoil with a 0.20c plain flap
are shown in figure 9. Comparison of these results with
the plain-flap results of reference 15 shows about the
same differences that were observed for the split flap.
The section hinge-moment coefficients given in figure 9
are of about the same magnitude as hinge-moment §
coefficients of a 0.20c plain flap on a Clark Y airfoil .~ . ~ f-------~-~";,~
(reference 15). It should be noted that the charac-
teristics for the plain flap with both up and down
~1.21-+--+-r- / 1 - - -r-r-
t::
'--t-
'------ - -;OS3Sc
deflections are useful for the estimation of aileron as
well as flap effects.
j H--4- .BOc ffii.7C}eOXi5j'
.8~-+~4-+-~-+~4-+-~-+~~~
1

External.airfoilllap.-The section aerodynamic char-

acteristics of the N. A. C. A. 23012 airfoil with an
N. A. C. A. 23012 external-airfoil flap are given in
figure 10. The relative merits of this flap arrangement
are about the same as a. similar arrangement tested in
three-dimensional flow (reference 2) at the same effec-
tive Reynolds Number. Peculiarities in the curves of
lift, profile drag, and pitching moment at the high
flap deflections seem to be characteristic of this type of
flap and probably indicate a marked change in flow
pattern around the combination. As pointed out in
reference 2, the pitching-moment coefficients with this
type of flap are higher than with the split or plain flaps.
Fowler llap.-The section aerodynamic character-
istics of the N. A. C. A. 23012 airfoil with an N. A. C. A.
23012 Fowler flap are given in figure 11. The data for
the model with the Fowler flap fully retracted included
on this figure are taken from the tests at 80 miles per
hour. These results are in good agreement with pre-
vious results of tests of Fowler flaps. (See references 4
and 16.) The large pitching-moment coefficients ob-
tained with this flap may, in a large measure, affect its
use for a particular design. It is of interest to note that,
with the flap fully retracted, there is no measurable
increase in profile drag over that of the plain wing (fig. 7)
for lift coefficients (c,) below 0.8 but there is a loss of
~-+-+-4-'
Slotted flop 1-0
. I-b --------00J±~I
.4f--1f--+--+-+..·I-~r-
• I-e -----------<J
I-e _ _ _ _ +:I '
I I !
: ! I
!
O~~O~~~~20~~~~4~O-L~~6~O~~~80
Flop deflecfion, 0, , deq.
FIGUaa 12.-Etrect ohio' shape OD (,_. Flap 1 at predetermiDed axis locaUon.
I-a, I-b, l-c, and l-e (fig. 4). For this part of the
investigation, the axis about which the flap was de-
flected was determined from the data of reference 8.
Effect of slot shape on maximum lift.-The maximum
lift coefficients c'",az are plotted against flap deflection 5,
in figure 12 for the several slot shapes. These data
show that extending the lip of the slot so that the slot
is sealed at the eXIt when the flap is neutral (shape I-b)
gave an increase of 4 percent in maximum lift coefficient
over shape I-a. Increasing the slot-entry angle (shape
l-c) caused a very slight decrease in maximum lift
coefficient. A further change in slot shape to close the
gap through the airfoil with the flap neutral (shape I-e)
decreased the maximum lift coefficient 11 percent from
the value obtained with slotted flap I-b.
12 REPORT NO. 664-NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS

Effect of slot shape on pro:fUe drag.-A comparison coefficient for take-ofl with a good slotted flap seems to
of the envelope polars for slotted flaps I-a and I-b be around 2.5j therefore, it is important to have as low
(fig. 13) shows that, for both mgh lift and low drag, a profile drag as possible at these high lift coefficients.
slotted flap I-b is superior. The higher drag of arrange- It is probable that the lower drag of slotted flap I-b at

.24
i\
. .
Slotted flop {-b - - - - - - - -
{-c
60·
.20 ;
1\
1 \

50·' ~
\
J
1 ,

~~~~~'5ttti
I1lL
:;"9'
.•Oc . -. ax;.
40·
/ .I
/
.. t
-¥" •
V
, 0:::

,~

.04 ZO° ..... ~

l--!'I'-
Of -10· 1,..000 j..-or f"'"
- I-- -H-r
o o .4 .8 lZ l6 ZO Z4 2.8
5t!Ction lift c~fficienf. c,
FtoOJl lJ.-ComparlloD of alotteclllapll'" aDd l-b.

.ZO'~-+~~4-+-~-+~~+-~-+-+~~+-~-+-r~~sot.~~~rr~
1\

f-~--+-+Slo tted flop 1-0 - - - - - - t--t--t--t--+-+--+--t--t--t-+l\-Irl-_'\--t

• • I-b - - - - - \

--
<Sf- IO • ....-~-

0~~0~~~-.4~~~~.8~~~-I.~.2~~~~1.~6~~~~G~O~~~2~.4~~~2~.8
Section lift coefficient, c,
FlotraJl 14.-Comparison or slotted ftaps 1-b and 1-e.

ment I-a in the low-lift (high-speed) range can be the higher lift coefficients may be accounted for by the
accounted for by the open slot through the airfoil with better shape of this slot lip, which directs the air down-
the flap neutral. With the wing and the power loadings ward over the flap and prevents it from stalling at the
of present-day large transport airplanes, the best lift higher flap deflections. There is no appreciable dif-
 AN N. A. C. A. 23012 AIlU'OIL WITH SLOTrED FLAPS 13
;- ____ 1__ ~_1 I

2 ./ '.~~
--f-._.,," ... -:-- of.deq. I I
0---<3 I--
If-TT-r", , Llf535c IO--J:l I--
20 I
r-
~ .80c:--;.--.-;..r -'-Hinge axis 30----0
40-----Q I--
0 45---0 r-
SO_
55 q l--
60--.:. r-

-. 2
-
a. ..q

r-

1 I
-. 4
0

-
- .... ..0-
V"

.......
4"

-. 4
. ~
.1 5
/ 1/
J
2
~~
...,. f-
""'"
~
-~
~
- V'"

~~ /
....... ~ !If
..... ~ -r
u. ...- ,..- ] --'-

v.. -
~ ~
~ ,-
J
...... - t?'
!L . /

- :::::l ~

0
5 --, ....
V / / ..~
-""- ,/' ./ l? ;....- /'
~
...... ~ k::: ~
8
V
V
.......- ~
/11'"
....-::: ~ f<" [...-<t
"'" ~
.-K ....... --- ~ ~ ;;..-- ~

.t"
v.
fo"'"
. ./
I----'"
~
~ ---
V
,v:: ~ ~ V
l.,;; % ~
0
.......-
V ~ ~V .......- ~p
~
~ IJ..-
"..,
/'
V ~ ." '"
...r V ...... i:;o': ~

---V --- . . . vr-- I---" I,.,:::: ~

-I6
8

-.4
'1

.,..
V

1-"'" c
I--"
o
-
./"

-
V
--- ?
V' -:;.-V
",.,.
~

~V

.4
",.

.. 8
Section lift coefficil!!nf,
1.2 1.6
c;
20 24 28

FIOVU 16.-Sectlon _odyuamio characteristics 01 N. A. C. A. 23012 airfoil with liotted !lap I-b.
14 REPORT NO. 664-NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS

ference in drag between slotted flaps I-b and l-c up to
lift coefficients of about 2.5 (fig. 14). Because of the
lower maximum. lift of slotted flap l-e, the drag data
for it were not obtained. Other tests of slotted flap l-e
will be discussed later.
axis location was used. The profile drag was also among
the lowest. An inspection of the curves of ao against
c, in figure 15 shows that the slope of the lift curves is
practically unaffected by flap deflection except for the
very large values. As previously _mentioned, com pari-

(0) .,-.... (d) .,-40".

Chord
(f)

\
\
\
.~

(0 ,,-60".
Flo".. i6.-Contoun of llap locatloD for c1.... Slotted llap i-b.

Complete data on slotted dap l-b.-The complete son of the c.... with the flap neutral with the cdo of
-~~ .~

section aerodynamic characteristics of the N. A. C. A.
23012 airfoil with slotted flap I-b deflected downward
various amounts are given in figure 15. This flap ar-
rangement gave the highest lift coefficient of any of the
four arrangements for which the Handley Page fixed-
the plain wing (fig. 7) shows that there is a difference of
about 0.001. The greater part of this increase in drag is
caused by the flap hinge fittings; the remaining ~Cdo is
due to the break in the lower surface of the airfoil
caused by the slot and will be discussed later.
 AN N. A. C. A. 23012 AIRFOIL WITH SLOTTED FLAPS
The pitching-moment coefficients for this flap arrange-
ment are about the same as for the external-airfoil flap.
A small change between the pitching-moment coeffi-
cients for the flap undeflected (15,=0°) and for the plain
airfoil (fig. 7) may be attributed to 0. slight downward
deflection of the slotted flap. The hinge-moment co-
efficients are about one-half as great as those for the
plain flap (fig. 9) because the hinge-axis location for
the slotted flap was designed to give partial balance.
DETERMINATION OP OPTIMUM SLOTTED.PLAP ARRANGEMENT
POR MAXIMUM LIPT
The data presented in this section are the results of
the maximum-lift investigation of the various flap-and-
slot combinations in which the flap, at a given deflec-
tion, was located at points over 0. considerable area
15
than for the same deflection about the predetermined
axis location (fig. 15). The optimum position of the
nose point of the flap for this deflection is about 1 per-
cent below the slot lip.
The contours of figure 16 show that, for small flap
deflections, the optimum position of the flap for maxi-
mum lift coefficient is much less critical than it is for
the larger flap deflections. It is also evident that there
is 0. considerable loss in lift coefficient if the nose of the
flap is moved back of the slot lip. These results are in
agreement with previous test.'! of external-airfoil and
Fowler flaps. The highest maximum lift coefficient
2.8 I
-- -_ I !

with respect to the main airfoil. The data are presented

,' ~- '1\. I
,b?: v
as contours of the position of the nose point of the flap " r/ !\
2.4
for a given lift coefficient. The nose point of the flap is ,'l' V ~
defined as the point of tangency of a line drawn per-
pendicular to the airfoil chord and tangent to the lea.d- .
=
~
,'./
,
'b V I

ing-edge arc of the flap when neutral.

Slotted flap l.-Contours of flap location for maxi- :/
mum lift coefficient for 0. given fla.p angle are given in
:/
figure 16 for flap I-b. At 10° flap deflection (fig. 16
(0.», the area of flap positions covered was not suffi-
fJ
cient to define the optimum. position. The highest
e,.... is, however, 19 percent higher than it was for ~.
,Path of flap nose
flap I-b at 10° deflection about the predetermined axis q,:;drio·~.
location (fig. 15). It appears that a large gap between
- - - It .......
-'!?:' \ d: '
\
-:- ' - - \
wing and flap is desirable for low flap deflections from \
~ \
considerations of maximum lift. At 20° flap deflection \
\
\
(fig. 16 (b», the optimum position of the nose of the .8 \ \
\ \
flap is 4 percent below and 2 percent ahead of the slot \ \
\ \ I
lip. In this position, the maximum lift is 10 percent ~
higher than it WIl8 for the combination given in figure - ~ i
510 fled flop Slot-entry radius, R
15. At 30° deflection (fig. 16 (c», the optimum posi- .4 I-e o O.OOc .- -
tion of the flap for maximum lift is slightly above the I-e.
f-e
f-
0-- -
--
-
.02· - r-
/1----------
.04' I-+--
position for the 20° deflection. The maximum lift is 3 I• I I i I I I I I
percent higher with the flap in the optimum position at a
this deflection than it was for the same deflection about o 20 40 60 80
Flap deflecfion, 0, , deq
the predetermined axis location (fig. 15). The optimum
FlOUR 17.-EtIect ohloHntry radius OD el_ •.
position of the flap for deflections up to 30° probably
should be chosen from a 'consideration of the drag coeffi-
cients rather than the maximum lift coefficient because WIl8 obtained with the nose of the flap directly under
the take-off distance of an airplane may be decreased the slot lip and with a gap between the flap nose and
by depressing the flap. It is therefore desirable that the slot lip of about 1~ percent of the wing chord.
the drag coefficient be a minimum for a given lift coeffi- Because of a possible hazard from icing of large
cient corresponding to the lift coefficient for best climb. openings in the surface of a wing, flap 1 was also tested
With the flap deflected 40° and 50° (figs. 16 (d) and using slot shape e, with the flap in the best position
(e», the maximum lift coefficient is about the same as for maximum lift coefficient from the tests of shape b.
for the same deflections about the predetermined axis The results of these tests are given in figure 17 as plots
location (fig. 15). The optimum positions of the nose of maximum lift coefficient against flap deflection.
point of the flap for these deflections are, respectively, The effect of rounding the slot entry on maximum lift
about 2.5 percent below and 0.5 percent ahead of the coefficient is also shown in this figure. The maximum
slot lip and 1.75 percent below and 0.5 percent ahead of lift coefficient of slotted flap l-e from these tests is
the slot lip. For the GOO flap deflection (fig. 16 (f», about 8 percent higher than it was for this combina-
the maximum lift eoeffieient is about 4 percent higher tion with the flap deflected about the predetermined
1171fi7-:l~-3
16 REPORT NO. 664-NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS
axis location (fig. 12). With the slot entry rounded to
a radius 2 percent of the wing chord (slotted flap l-e2),
the maximum lift coefficient is about the same as it
was for slotted flap I-b (fig. 16 (f)). A further rounding
of the slot entry to a 4-percent-chord radius had a
detrimental effect on the maximum lift. It appears
from these results that the shape of the slot is not
Percenf wing chord
(al .,-10".
(el 11,-30°.
FIGURa 1S.-Contours of ftap locatlon for e, ••;
critical for maximum lift provided that the flap is
located properly with respect to the slot lip.
Slotted fiap 2.-The contours showing ma.ximum lift
coefficients for the various deflections of slotted flap
2-h are given in figure 18. This combination gives a
higher lift coefficient at each deflection than was ob-
tained at the corresponding flap deflections with flap
1-b (fig. 16). The total projected area of flap 2-h
and the main airfoil is greater than the area of the COUl-
bination with flap I-b, which accounts for the increases
in lift. The best positions for the nose of flap 2-h rela-
tive to the slot lip are practically the same as fo~ flap
I-b.
The contours showing the maximum lift coefficients
for the various deflections of slotted flap 2-i are given
in figure 19. This arrangement is inferior to both I-b
(b) .,-20".
Chord
(d)
(d) &,-40".
(tl
Slotted ftap 2-b.
and 2-h throughout the complete range of flap deflec-
tions. The maximum lift coefficient was obtained with
the flap deBected 60°, which is 10° greater than for
either flap I-b or flap 2-h. The maximum lift coefficient
with Bap 2-i is about the same as it was for flap 1-62 (fig.
17), a comparable arrangement. The position of the
flap nose for maximum lift coefficient for this arrange-
ment is only about 0.5 percent of the choru below unu
about 0.25 percent back of the slot lip.
 AN N. A. C. A. 23012 AIRFOIL WITH SLOTTED FLAPS 17

(a)

4 - - __ _
Percenf ..,,,-:'~,..n"rn -__ _

(a) ,,-10". (b) ,,_20°.

(el ',-31)0.

(e) " - SO".

FlOUBS IO.-Contours 01 ftap location for c'_. Slotted flap 2-1.

EFFECT ON PROFILE DRAG OF BREAK IN AIRFOIL SURFACE

Slotted flap 3.-Contours of the fla.p-nose position
for the maximum lift coefficients of slotted flaps 3-f
and 3-g are given in figures 20 and 21, respectively.
Both of these flaps are inferior to all the other slotted-
flap combinations tested, and both have about the same
maximum lift coefficient. No tests were made at
the small flap deflections because of the inferiority of
the flaps at the large flap deflections. The nose shape
of this flap is probably too blunt to obtain a satisfactory
flow of the air over the upper surfuce of the flap.
DUE TO SLOT
The increments of profile drag ~CdO caused by the
breaks in the airfoil surface at the flap Ilre plotted in
figure 22. These data were obtained by making tests
with the flap undeflected both with and without the
breaks in the surface. (The breaks in the surface were
sealed with plasticine for the tests without the breaks.)
The curves given in figure 22 are differew'cs between
faired curves through the test points for the inuividuul
18 REPORT NO. 664-NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS

tests. Slotted flap 1-0., which has an open slot through
the airfoil with the flap undeflected, gave the largest
increment of profile-drag coefficient for all lift coefficients
up to 0.60. At the higher lift coefficients, the ~c"o de-
creases probably because of some boundary-layer con-
gave 0. ~c"o of 0.0004, which increased to 0.0009 at the
higher lift coefficients. Slotted flaps 1-e2 and 2-i
a:re the next in order giving, at zero lift, 0. ~c"o of 0.0003
increasing nearly to 0.0008 at the higher lift coefficients.
Slotted flap 1-e gave a ~c"o of about 0.0001 for the low-

• (d) ',-00".
FIGURS 2O.-Cootoun of nap location for ',_. Slotted nap 3-f.

(al ,,-rH'o (h) "_~o.

FIGURS 21.-ConWurs of llap location for c,.... Slotted llall 3-C.

trol from the air ejected on the upper surface of the lift condition, which increased nearly to 0.0003 at a lift
airfoil. The ~Ctfo for slotted flaps 1-b and 2-h in- coefficient of about 0.50 and then decreased to zero n t
creased from about 0.0008 at zero lift to about 0.0013 higher lift coefficients. Slotted flap l-c showed no
Itt a lift coefficient of 1.0. At zero lift, slotted flap)-e. increase in profile drag. It should be pointed out
 AN N. A. C. A. 23012 AIRFOIL WITH SLOTl'ED FLAPS 19
that a Ac"o less than 0.0003 is too small to measure drag at CI= 1.5, 2.0, and 2.5 are, respectively, about
definitely because such a small value is within the 15°,22°, and 30°.
experimental accuracy of the tests. No detailed surveys were made with slotted flap l-e,
but the e1lect on ClIO of rounding the slot entry is shown
DETERMINIt.TlON 01' THE OPTIMUM SLOTTED.I'LIt.P in figure 24 as envelope polars. Rounding the slot
AaaIt.NGEMENTI'ORPRO~EDRIt.G
entry with a radius 2 percent of the wing chord gives
The results presented in this section are intended to
aid in the determination of the optimum positions of
the several slotted flaps for take-01l and climb from
considerations of low drag. The best take-01l and
climb to clear a specified height in the shortest hori-
zontal distance will be the lowest drag coefficient at the
lift coefficients corresponding to take-01l and climb.
The data are therefore given as contours of the nose
position of the flap for constant drag coefficients at
certain selected lift coefficients that cover the range 4 Z
Percenf wing chord
for which the drag coefficient is decreased by deflecting
(a) c.-1.1I.
the flap. The data previously presented show that, for

TI I
" ".
-~
.- I I I
1.-'
~.
./
--
'-, Slot arrangement
,.-' ~ '.......- -·······-1-0
--I=b and c-"
,/
.>., ......
'
'- .. - -"I-e '--I-e, and c·i (b)

-- -.
,/ -·--I-e.
/
i--'

- .,-
.4
"-
.8 .8
1.0
Section lift coefficient,
TT I
I I I
I.e
C,
1.4

l"IGUU 22.-Effect of slot opealup In mrfaoe of alrfoU DO IDcnmtDta of proJlle dnI.

1.6
6 4 Z
Percent wing chord

If, 0"; effective ReJDOidS Number, 3,800,000.

lift coefficients of 1.0 or less, the drag is lowest with the

flap undeflected.
Slotted flap 1.-The ('on tours of the position of the
nose point of slotted flap I-b for constant ClIO are given
in figure 23. The best position for this flap at a lift
coefficient of 1.5 (fig. 23 (a)) is with the nose point of
the flap 5 percent of the chord below and 4 percent of
the chord ahead of the slot lip. The minimum profile-
drag coefficient is 0.027, and the position for drag
coefficients up to 0.028 is not very critical. At a lift
coefficient of 2.0 (fig. 23 (b)), the best position is about
1 percent above and much more critical than the best
position for a lift coefficient of 1.5. The minimum FIGUBII 23.-Contours of flap location (or c... Slotted lIap I-b.
profile-drag coefficient is 0.046 with the flap in the best
position at a lift coefficient of 2.0 .. The optimum
a considerable decrease in Cdo at ~U values of the l'rt
position of the nose of the flap, for minimum drag at a
lift coefficient of 2.5 (fig. 23 (c)), is 2.5 percent below coefficient. When the entry radius is increased to 4
I
and 2.5 percent of the chord ahead of the slot lip. percent of the wing chord, however, there is no further
The minimum profile-drag coefficient, when the flap decrease in Cdo but a considerable increase at the high
is in this position, is 0.096 and the position for the low lift coefficients. The best arrangement of slot shape
drag is very much more critical than at the lower lift e, slotted flap 1-e2, is inferior to slotted flap 1-b through-
coefficients. The flap angles for minimum profile out the complete range of flap deflections.
20 REPORT NO. 664-NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS

Slotted dap 2.-The contours of the position of the ceding comparison of slotted flap I-b and 2-h shows
nose point of slotted flap 2-h for constant Cfto are given arrangement 2-h to be superior throughout, probably
in figure 25. At c,=1.5 (fig. 25 (a)), the minimum because of the better nose shape of the flap.
profile-drag coefficient is about 4 percent less than it The contours of the position of the nose point of
was for slotted flap I-b. The position of the flap slotted flap 2-i for given profile-drag coefficients are
nose for the_minimum profile-drag coefficient is not very shown in figure 26. A comparison of these contours
critical and...the tests did not cover a sufficient area to with those for slotted flap I-b (fig. 23) and 2-h (fig. 25)
close any of the contours. For cl=2.0 (fig. 25 (b)), shows flap 2-i to be inferior to both of the others through-
the minimum profile-drag coefficient is about 8 percent out the lift range. It is therefore apparently necessary

.28 '\
Slotted flop. Slot-entry rodiu5. R
I-e O.OOc
I-e. I-- - - - - - .02-
70' \

.24
I-e. I-- r - - - - .04-
'" '\ \
,\
\
..... I'
c: \.
:~.20 60o~

..
!O::
'\;;

a
I

~
B'
~.16
I
:!!
.,;:

~c:.12
r R~
---,d,,':"h of flop nO$'
\
\
I
\
4(

1.
500if

oJ!
W
IL'
f,l
'I

\
\.l
III
II')
\
\
\
\
, 30· f
\
\
\
\ I~
\ \
.08 \ \ /
\
\ ,
\
~
\~
~
.......: ~
o,-/~ rP
.04
V ~

o
I ~
- :-::::: r-

o .4 .8 1.2 /.6 2.0 2.4 2.8

Section lift coefficient, c,
FIOVU 24.-E1rect of sloWDtry radlwl on c4.'

lower than for slotted flap I-b. The contours are not
closed for this lift coefficient and the position for mini-
mum profile drag is again not very critical. The
contours of profile-drag coefficient at c,=2.5 (fig. 25
(c)) show the minimum to be 25 percent less than it was
for slotted flap I-b. The position of the flap nose for
minimum profile drag is critical at about 3.5 percent
below and 3.0 percent of the wing chord ahead of the
slot lip. There is, however, a second region of low
drag farther ahead and closer to the slot upper bound-
ary for which the contours are not closed. The pre-
that the slot have an easy entry in order to ha,-e low
drag together with high lift.
EJ'I'ECTS 01' SLOTTED FLAP WITH SPLIT I'LAP
Effect on maximum lift.-The effect on c, of the
""a
addition of a 0.05c .. split flap, deflected downwaro 1'11)0,
to slotted flap I-b is shown in figure 27. This compari-
son was made with the slotted flap hinged in such a
way that it was in the optimum position for the maxi-
mum lift coefficient when deflected downward 60°
without the split flap. The increase in maximum lift
 AN N. A. C. A. 23012 AIRFOIL WITH SLOTTED FLAPS
coefficient for small deflections of the combination is
quite large. The maximum lift coefficient with the
combination down 25° is the same as it is with slotted
flap I-b alone down 50°. The maximum lift coefficient
with the combination down 50° is, however, only 2 per-
cent higher than for the slotted flap alone in its opti-
-·-·-·-:~~~~I
Chord
(a)
Chord
(b)
Chord
(e)
(c) cl-2.5.
FIOUU 2&.-CODlO\lll or flap location ror c 4,' Slotted flap :r-b.
mum position. It is possible, however, that higher
maximum lift coefficients may be obtained by a more
comprehensive investigation.
Effect on profile drag.-The effect on CliO of the
addition of the split flap to slotted flap I-b is shown in
figure 28 by envelope polars. The combination has
21
higher drag than the slotted flap alone for lift coefficients
less than 2.2. It is possible, however, that lower drags
could be obtained by using smaller deflections of the·
split flap at the smaller deflections of the slotted flap.
The combination has a lower drag than the slotted flap
alone at lift coefficients above 2.2. These results indi-
-.
FIOU" 28.-ContourJ of flap location ror c • Slotted flap 2-\'
4e
cate that multiple-slot flaps might be developed which
would be superior, from considerations of low drag for
take-off and high lift for landing, to any of the slotted
flaps investigated. Further investigation is recom-
mended of multiple-slot flaps and of slotted flaps in
combination with plain and with split flaps.
22 REPORT NO. 664-NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS

OPTIMUM ARRANGEMENT 011' SLOTTED FLAP

The optimum. flap arrangement was chosen on the

basis of minimum. profile-drag coefficient at a given
lift coefficient for lift coefficients less than 2.5 and of
maximum. lift coefficient for the larger flap deflections.
On this basis, slotted flap 2-h was superior to any of
the other flap combinations tested. The data for
slotted flap 2-h, when moved along the optimum path
shown, are given in figure 29. Flap-load and moment
data from pressure-distribution tests will be available
for this combination at a later date.

COMPARISON 011' PlVE TYPES 011' FLAP

§
.~
Effect on maximum Iift.-Increments of maximum ~ 21-t-IH~/r-r----__-=--~ ,Path of flal2 nose:
lift coefficient Ac,_% are plotted in figure 30 against flap 1;:/. 39~-~ 1

deflection to show how the effect of flap deflection .....~ ~'Jo.\ \.

'I-=-
d. \ -I" 6O.-fj
'-i---Ji
upon maximum lift varies with the five types of flap ~
lJ ,
,,
\
\
\
'
I
tested; namely, split, plain, external-airfoil, Fowler, .8 t-I-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-t--t--t-, \
and slotted flap 2-h. All coefficients are, of course, t-I-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-t--t--+-+'\ \\ -+-+-+-''
based on area with the flap neutral and the increments, t-I-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-t--t--+-+-+ f, \ +-+-+----11
t-I-+-+-+-+-I--+-+--+--+--+-~ f..# +-+-t----c:
except for the external-airfoil flap, are taken from the
c, _% of the plain wing.
It is evident that the two slotted types which give
.4t-1-+-+-+-+-+-+-+--+--t--+-+-+-+-+-+-~,
Slotted flap /-b - - - - - - ' -
Siolled flap 1-6 and I I 1 I 1-
H-+-+0.05c split flap down 60· 0-
R
I
increased area in the deflected positions give the
highest maximum-lift increments. The values for 0~~Q~~~-2~O~~~4-0~~~-6~O~~~~80

slotted flap 2-h are somewhat lower than for the Flop deflection, 0, . deq.
Fowler flap. The Fowler flap, however, may be con- Flov.. 27.-Elrect OD c,_ 01 oomblDlnl spllt Cap with slotted Cap. Slotted
sidered as a special case of the slotted flap in which the Cap l-b.

fI~P l
t
20 s)ot;eJ I/_b I
Slotted flap I-b and ~ ,I 11 1
0.05 c iP~it (lor ~oin ~O·II I 50· I
I
'~alh of flap nose I

f ~~60"-<-~
d ' JO'\
'1:::::='-'-r-'.
1\
\
'. ,
\J-+-
\
\
\
_\ 60'
~
40·1 0
/
\

'30~'
\
I \
\
\
, I I\ \ \
~, \ i If II
,
I I I ,
I
I~..• ~: 1/
! I I
V...... /1
I

i .-
- -- ./--
f..-;'
/" 20·
- l- .-l- I-- I
I
1- ~ r- ...... / I

- -- IS, -10·
- I-

!
I
a o .4 .8 1.2 1.6 2.0 2.4 Z.8
Section 11ft coefflc/~!nf, c,
FIGUIIJ: 28.-EClect on c,, of comblDtDI split flap with slotted lIap. Slotted flap I-b.
 AN N. A. C. A. 23012 AIRFOIL WITH SLOTTED FLAPS 23

o !
I

j
.J
-.4
""'""'
0/, I :
deg. i
.20 0 t>.
20 v I~
130~ I r I
50----t> I
,J.16
60 t- --. " I
:7
Ii?

[ ~ ~ Pafh of flap no~ T

r
V
/7 !
V 'I ! !

,...... ....- ...-/ i I

- -
_.-""
..... ""'"

_r0-
it'"' ~
k::: .... -
~ ,......1-"'"
I

0
c:;. 16
{: t

r ) .... I
I i
•• /" A
,....""
..,- r:J' ~ I

-g"
....
....tl
8 / ......
V
V
/'
"
..AI ......
-tv'

.....0 1/ V ",,""

---- ..... V ....v

~ ..,- V
0- /" A"" Vj
"{
c: 0 l.Y VI-"'" ..,- ~
fJ" 14"
o .4 .8 1.2 1.6 2.0 2.4 2.8
Section lift coefficient, c,
Path of flap nOH lor various flap
delIactlona. DistanCII meuured
from 10_ edge of Up in percent
akloU abord c

(~) % ,
0 8.38 3. 91
10 6.'1 3.81
20 3.83 3.~
30 2.83 3.37
.0 1.34 2..a
50 • .50 1.63
60 .12 1• .a

FIGUItI!: 2II.-Sectlon aerodynamic charactarlstics 01 !'f. A. C. A. 23012 airfoil wltb slotted flap ~h.
24 REPORT NO. 664-NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS

lip of the slot is extended to the trailing edge of the ; ! I I j i I

basic airfoil. The flap is therefore moved through a ;:,4 I 1 I I 1 ,~,
greater distance when extended and deflected and, r---S;;~!nr/~p ------ : I
consequently, gives more lift because of the greater ~
[--,- External-airfoil flap - - - - - - ~
lifting surface exposed to the air. Slotted flaps could
J [__I- Fowler flap-------------------- 1 i
be developed with the slot lip terminated at any point
~Z.O[--r-5Iorter f(a12ih IT-ili-Ti--- T'
between the location for slotted flap 2-h, or farther ,§ /11111 1~
forward, and the trailing edge of the airfoil. These ~ ~60~!-+-+-1
~ L-/~4a'
slotted flaps would "be expected to give c,_s increases 8 /. 6 r-- 'r-'r- lS, ~h of flap ~o1e -1--,.:,.1.,-l--4
corresponding to the increased airfoil area. ~ , ( s l o t t e d flap c-h)
Etrect on pro1ile drag.-The effect on CliO of the five §
types of flap is shown in figure 31 by envelope polars. '~ ~c~~-+-+~~1-~~~~~_,_+~~
The five types of flap have about the same profile-drag ~
coefficients for lift coefficients less than 0.90. The
airfoil with slotted flap 2-h has the lowest profile drag
for lift coefficients from about 1.0 to 1.7. The airfoil
c:
,0
.;::
u
III
I/) .8
,
,,
,
L
V
V

,,IV
- ,
,

I---r-
'4.. , ./ ~ 1 I
with the Fowler flap is somewhat better than slotted 0 ,, ,/ 1/ \ I
flap 2-h as regards low profile drag at lift coefficients
....
i !d j..-
greater than 1. 7. Here again it is pro bable that a i~ .4 LI. L
slotted flap with a greater lip extension could be \,j 'V 1/
developed to give an even lower drag' at high lift oS WL/
coefficients. .:/
JIj/
When the horizontal distance to land over a given 0
0 20 40 60 80
obstacle is restricted, if a high drag together with a high nap deflection, 6, . deq.
lift is desirable, slotted flap 2-h is superior to the four
lI'IOVU ao.-Compar\loll of 1IlInm8ll&s of maximum Uft coelllclel)&s Cor live types oC
other types of flap tested. !lap.

III i"Qo 7S·

.20
Split flap L\
\

Plain· ----
external-airfoil flap - - - - -
'.
6!-· I \

Fowler flap---- - - - - - - - - J I~ \

Slotted flap 2-h--------- \

I
JI6
\Ii / \

lL \

4S Y 1\
,, ,

r
'/

-~~LUJJ
l
\ /
L J40• , ,
30"
'L V ! / I
I

4 'Path of flap nose

/ , '/ 0' J
J

(5lotted flap2-h) J

20· I
J

~
L ~
~
~

/ ~ ,
// ,
, ,
.
1",
lab , / ~

s· ~ .--:i;.:
I 0, ~ 10~_ ~ ..... i"""
~
o ." ---'---
o .4 ,8 /.Z 1.6 2,0 2.4 c.d
Section liff coefficient, c,
FlonK 3L-Compar\loll oC prollJe.drlll coeJ!IoImw for live types or ftap.
 AN N. A. C. A. 23012 AIRFOIL WITH SLOTTED FLAPS
II. TESTS IN VARIABLE-DENSITY WIND
TUNNEL
APPARATUS AND TESTS
The variable-density wind tunnel is described in
reference 17, except that an automatic electric balance
has been insto.lled to measure. force coefficients. The
precision is discussed in references 14 and 18.
The basic airfoil was made of duralumin to the
N. A. C. A. 23012 profile. The 25.66-percent-chord
slotted flap was built of brass to the ordinates given for
flap 2 in table II. The shape of the slot and the posi-
------B27oc-------1
_ - - - -_ _ _-....::R~•.~0~78:9c~
C
, . . . - - - - - - - BOO/e - - - - - -
S;~I
---------c----------
c;;___-~
~~
----- ~9ge-----~~
; ---_.-/.~
0"
B I 3 6 c - - - - - - 1 30'
C;;;;;_ _ _72fti~, .0071c
-----.8272c - - - - - -
C;;_ _ _-72S~,
I
------.8366c - - - - - -
.0129c
FlO11U 32.-Seetl0D8 of atrtoU with o.~ slotted IIap 2-h.
tions of the flap for the various flap deflections (8,) are
shown in figure 32. In the investigation made in the 7-
by lO-foot tunnel, these positions were selected as the
optimum, the critprion being low drag in the lift range
below a value of 2.5 and high maximum lift above this
range.
The flap was attached to the wing by five smoll
steel brackets i 0. different set of brackets was made for
each flap position because the position was determined
by the size and the shape of the brackets.
The 60-percent-chord plain flap (fig. 33) was built by
cutting the wing at the 40-percent station and connecting
the two parts by a narrow flexible plate flush with the
25
lower surface. When the flap was deflected, the V-
shape groove formed on the upper surface at the 40-
percent point was filled with plaster of paris, forming
a fair and rounded juncture.
The lift, the drag, and the pitching moment were
measured from below zero lift to beyond maximum lift
at an effective Reynolds Number of about 8,000,000.
The lift in the region of maximum lift was also measured
at an effective Reynolds Number of about 3,800,000.
The measurements were made at flap settings of 0°,
1 R-.OBlle
. 6,-0
20'
P'lOUU aa.-SectioDI of airfoU with O.6Oe plaiD IIap dedected 12" and o.~ slotted
IIap 2-h.
20°, 30°, 40°, and 50°. In addition, at flap settings of
30° and 40°, the Reynolds Number range from 900,000
to 8,000,000 was covered .
The slotted flap was also tested at deflections of
40'
20°, 30°, and 40° in combination with the 60-percent.
chord plain flap deflected 12° .
.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
50' PRESENTATION
The results are presented as a series of lift curves for
a rectangular wing of aspect ratio 6 in figure 34; the
two groups of curves in the figure correspond to the two
Reynolds Numbers at which all the tests were run.
The section characteristics, indicated by lower-case
letters and presented in figures 35 and 36, were worked
up as explained in reference 18.
MAXIMUM LIJIT
The lift reaches a maximum at a flap deflection of
40° (fig. 34). The variation with Reynolds Number is
shown in figure 37. The maximum lift increases with
Reynolds Number but appears to be leveling off at the
end of the Reynolds Number range tested (about
8,000,000). The results of tests in the 7- by IO-foot
26 REPORT NO. 664-NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS

wind tunnel are also shown on the figure and the had practically no effect on the drag. If the slot is
agreement with the variable-density-tunnel results, for perfectly sealed when the flap is neutral, a decrease of
the two points shown, is good. It will be noted that the minimum drag ot the order of 15 percent may
the increment of maximum lift is nearly constant over accordingly be expected.
the range tested. A comparison of these results with The drag of the wing at high lifts, with slotted flap
those of references 2 and 19 shows that, at a Reynolds 2-h deflected to its most favorable position at each
Number of 8,000,000, the slotted flap can reach a maxi- lift coefficient, is included in figure 39. This curve,
mum lift coefficient of 2.86 as compared with ·2.54 for which may be called a profile-drag envelope polar, is

.3.2
..
I I I a60c plain flop of _ - EHective fteorOlds Numberr-
_ cffecft"ve fibt.naldS Number
___ 8.200.0 O(appr~x.) .1 I I I I OG
o/.deg. 020304050 203040
12 G
I I 4- I
I
3,600.0 O(approx.) r-r-r-
0 0 6 ... 0 ~"<l i

-
2.8
~ I
: ./ ~ 1.1'1"1 I

2.4
I
I
I ih'
~
It
J,{f I

:
1,(
, A
~JI.{
I

,({,M
!Si' I

I
I
I

'\: I;f '\ I I

~ ilJjlI ~ ~ I I i
.I' 1/ Ih ~ IP ~
if' ~ Ii If ~
2.0 ~ ./ ~ t(
1/ 11/ I\. ~

.•.~: lh I
~
j,
1/
~ ~ ..
~i\,
Ub'~
a.
~ /.6 rl VJ 'f\~~ l.
~ Q, I
V- I),
,/1 I rf
'-.l r-::~ rfC
Iii ~
a...
rl II (j, J ....... , r'"'
8 1.2 I 1'1.
it:
" / JJI I -1 Q.
-.J I J I I V~ I
.8 il I A..!
VlV ·1
) ,.
II p I
1 II I
.4
II ! I /" f. 'f
jI I I
I J II L
~ VJ
0
d I r
If
~ II I 1

-.4 <II-'
(
/ i-- _.+- I
-)- I
I

j- I
-1 i
-32 -24 -16 -8 o 8 24 3216 0 8 /6 24 32
Angle of attock. d ,deg.
l"Iovu 34.-LIft apIust mele of attack for N. A. C. A. 23012 alrfoO with O.2IMIec slotted llap 2-b, rectancuJar wine. aspect ratio 6.

the split flap, 2.39 for the plain flap, and 2.37 for the the envelope of o.ll the polars for the wing with o.ll flap
external-airfoil flap. settings. A series of such curves for various flap types
The deflection of the 0.60e plain flap had only a minor and arrangements shows the relative merit of each type
effect on either the maximum lift or the shape of the lift for such an item of performance as take-off where,
curve near the maximum (fig. 34). other things being equal, lower drag at high lift coeffi-
cients is advantageous. Such a series of curves (fig.
PROFILE DRAG
39) shows the 0.2566e slotted flap 2-h to be definitely
The wing with the slotted flap in the neutral position superior to the 0.20e plain and split flaps, as was also
had 15 percent higher minimum drag than the plain shown by the 7- by 10-foot tunnel tests. Slotted flap
airfoil, as shown in figure 38. In order to find out to 2-h is also slightly superior to the external-airfoil flap
what extent this drag increment could be reduced by on the basis of low drag and is greatly superior to it on
preventing flow through the slot, tests were made with the bo.sis of maximum lift. The data for these other
the upper slot closed. The closing of the slot exit flap arrangements are taken from references 2 Rnd 19.
 AN N. A. C. A. 23012 AIRFOIL WITH SLOTTED FLAPS 27
0 --
I l' .-'1' I
! I I i
i
UY .r I
I
1 I
i-- !
·J
,
1>-
-
,

I
'"
~

I 9>~
- .-
!
i
- --: - --
-l- -- .----- -
I
I T I
4. \
.024 ,
I I \ \ \ \ 1

i I 1\ I \ i
\
I !\ J II \
/'

.020
i ! 1"'- .4'" \ /
,
\
\

I I
"- ~
~
,/ \ \ !

I I / I/' \
"\ "\
1/ / \
\
V \ \ \
r-..., / /~

"'" I'-a.. A \ I'

-
-a.... r-: l.% V · '\

/ r'\
1\ /- _10- \
I
!

I I
L \ ....,1-- ~
...,... ~....... V
V , ..... ..-'

"
0....
r-..... ~ i>"'

..
"

' . ~ ...-'I '- , :

V- 1'""7 7

--
J

I- ,...- /
-9

.... "
;. -- - O.lcJ.
....- 'J1 .t.'"
~
.004
.J,.

o
i 1

,
1

i q
0-
- I--
J.. )I'

! i Q.. ~ I
24 I I
~t i
I I
I
I

I
'" It
\
~
~il..
I
16
i
I
- t?: ~
~
!j..
, I
I

~
"""v
V
\-c " ~
I'" , -"V' ~V
'i 8 ,
f.o'" ~ J>d.. B-
,/ V I-'" ~'/
-"C V,
u La ~~
....~tl ! IY' I ,...;:V l.:::<i ~ I

....0 /' /fW' i.b!I ~

0
..:;. i ,,/ V ~ W'
-!!
0- ~
V ! ~ 6 ~ I 6.1 .deg.
~
I::
.;
Ier"" I----" ,....;;; ~ ~ 0
c
0
20
-8
1..... ..-'
~ ~ /" i to 3()
I-.a ~ ~~ v 40
10 50
;.c .... ,,/ ~
0
I;;"
....

-
p '7 ~
........ v- JP/
-16
,..... A :64
,J/: ::Q-'
I
-.4 o .4 .8 1.2 1.6 2.0 2.4 2.8
Section lift coefficient. c,
PIO'I1B& ~.-Bection aerodynamic cbaracterlstir.os or N. A. C. A. 23012 IIlrroll wltb O.2M6e slotted flap 2-b and the O.6Oc plain flap neutral. Effective Reynolds Nllmber,
approximately 8,200.000.
28 REPORT NO. 664.-NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS

a ! ,

1'\ ,
4 1 I I ,
\.a... , 1 I
,

,
'\~ 1 I

"-' ~ ~ I I
,
00;;:
"'- ['.. "'-.. ... f-- l>- I
i
I,

'r--....
--- ~~

:-- ""'- ...

,
,,
,,
A.

i
.+--
d"'::
r-
I- ~

.024
c... Q !
,\ : !

~ la-' : \J i

"- ....D
.... / ! \ I
,
,

I : , i"" 1 Ia" ' 1 \j ,

1 , I ,\
.020
\ "- V : I I
: "- I 1
\. 1>-' v I 1\
,

I'< ...0 V I rI , '{

I \ ,
I,
t\ \\
\ t--... 1\ I
/
f':.,'\ 1 II
[\ 1'\ I

, i \ /
[\1\ \ \ ~
\ 1 I I 1L
1\ ~

- .....
: , ! ~:
~
'/
~P
'T
'i" I I I /
!\ "\ ...,~ .- f-:I
~ ~ ,..- I}J
"
rf
!\ "'" ,.-, IA: ~,
.004 ,
1\ \
-' t-;-: ~ O.le..
, '-... B.c: P'f!4. I- .-c V

I
o I
,
I 1,\ 1 1
I I ~
16
: I ~ I
i I I, ~
~ I
1 I ~
i ~
8 ,I
I 1 f' ~ I
1 1 ~
~ b. I
.f ,
,
,
V
lIT

~
-12 b2'
~ a I V l..;:; V
i /' .... ~ ,
.s?
....
{:)
: b-- v IPt
~
:
~v i
'0 -8
I
v ~
~ ,/ ~v-
.f ...... 1"'"
'r'"
,/
Y
~ !A"
4,deq.
-16 ,.P
'.",
0 20
V ...-c V v c 30
~ 40
V / a"" .)l'V
f(Y' ,.a
~ ~ .K
-24 ~ ./
I
-r I
I
-A- o .4 .8 1.2 1.6 20 24 28
Section lift coefficient. c,
FIOURlI: 36.-Sectlon aerodynamic characteristics of N. A. C. A. 23012 nlrCoil with 0.256&: slotted lisp 2-h and the 0,60<: plain lisp dellected 12". Effective Reynolds Number,
approximately 8,200,000.
 AN N. A. C. A. 23012 AIRFOIL WITH SLOTI'ED FLAPS 29
PITCWNG-MOMENT COEFFICIENT
of attack, the pitching moments are the same for all
three flaps.
The pitching-moment coefficient increased with flap
deflection up to 40°. Tbe pitching moment for the .020 I , : I i ,

same deflection is greater than that of the plain and I

, I
the split flaps but, when the comparison is made on the i , ,
I
i, I o SIot5 un!leoled ,
basis of deflections giving the same lift at the same angle I o Upper 5/0t sealed I i
i!~015 f v Plain airfoil ,
I I i i I I

~
.•
~
4.8
ll:S'd~
t>4d' g'}111111111111111
II II
I I

I
I
,
, I
I

,,
,
,
,
I
,
! , ! I I i ! ,
4.0 o 30 Voriable-den~ity tunnel
...:
t:: o Plain winq I I I I I II I I i I LJ : i i/I, i
.S! x 30 } I ,I I I I I I!
I
, ./"/\ ! !
+ Pia n winq 7-bY 10i foot tunnel -~

-
~3.2 I
..... I I , ' I L1 I I I I J l~ VI
I
i
i6l:::l
I
i f./:~
~
(j2.4 I ~ ~~
i
!

...... ..-- ~~ i ,
I

i
I

.....
~
§ 1.5
Aci~~
I ,...~
.........
"'"
"'-- -~ I
I
I
I

.~
I
~ .8 I I
<::
.0
I
..::: 0
of 5 5 7 1,000.000 2 3 ... 5 10,000,000
I I
Q
Jl Effective Reynolds Number, R. o .4 .8
Section lift cot!fficit!nt, Ct
FIGUBJ: 37.-Sca1e eJlect one, for N. A. C. A. 23012alrfoll with and withoutO.2M&: Flavas 38.-E1!ect of slot open1q on prom. drac of N. A. C. A. 23012 alrfoU with
- slotted llap 2-h. slotted llap 2-b neutral. EJlect!ve R8JllOIds Number, apprOximately 8,200,000.

..zOe plain flap I I , !

.20
I I i
I I i i
I
I ~2Oc !Split flap ! i
I , i
1 ! I i I
I
I I I I I ! I !
I I ,
I 1 I
i I
I
I i ,
I
I
I I I
II ' 1/ I ,
I
I j / !
; /1 V 1/ {y-40- " !
/ I / ~ !
,

1/ / , J
V / V ~2560c 5/0tted flap 2-n ,

/ / / ~ ,

/.. / 30" , ,
,
/ / r

v-:: ,/ .,.1'/ I I ! !

o o
,D·
T
o.~

.8
...::i::=""

1.2
j
--
~ :::.--
'-20°
1.5
,~ V~·-.20c", external-airfoil flop

Sec.-,an lift coefficient, C,

i
2.0
i

2.4
1

2.8
i

3.2
,

i : ,,
3.6
I
,
,

FlQUlLJ: av.-Proflle-draa envelope polan, N. A. C. A. 23012 alrfoU witb various llaps. El!ectIve Reynolds Number, approximately 8,200,000.
30 REPORT NO. 664-NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS

CONCLUSIONS TABLE I-Continued

1. The optimum arrangement of the slotted flap ORDINATES FOR AIRFOIL AND SLOT SHAPES-Con.
tested was superior to the split, the plain, and the
external-airfoil types of flap compared on the basis of Slot shape e
maximum lift coefficient, low drag at moderate and at
Station Ordlnate
high lift coefficients, and high drag at high lift coeffi-
cients. The slotted flap, however, gave slightly lower 74. 811 -0.18
76.41 .58
maximum lift coefficients than the Fowler flap. 76.93 1.18
76. 46 I.M
2. The increment of maximum lift due to the ~lotted 77.50 2.32
78.118 2.87
flap was found to be practically independent of the 80.00 2.97
Reynolds Number over the range investigated.
3. Openings in the lower surface of the airfoil for the
slotted flaps tested had a measurable effect on the drag
Slot shape 1
for high-speed flight conditions even when the slot was
smoothly faired to maintain the contour of the upper Station Ordlnata
surface and there was no air flow through the slot.
74. 811 -0.18
4. The slotted flap gave the highest maximum lift 76.41 .58
76.93 1.18
coefficients when the nose of the flap was located 78. 46 I.M
77.60 2.32
slightly ahead of and below the slot lip and with a slot 78.118 2.87
80.00 2.117
lip that directed the air down over the flap. 81.70 2.72
5. The lowest profile drags at moderate lift coeffi-
cients were obtained by using a slotted flap with an
airfoil nose shape and with an easy entrance to the slot.
Slot shape I
6. It appears that still further improvement may be
obtained in low drag characteristics at moderate and Station Ordlnate
high lift coefficients by the use of multiple flaps or by
74.0 ---::0:22---
slotted flaps with greater lip extensions. 74. 74
76.08 .13
76.eu .68
78.33 1.11
78.117 1.46
78.26 2.00
711.63 2.36
80.81 2.58
LANGLEY MEMORIAL AERONAUTICAL LABORATORY, 82.08 2.68
82.60 2.60
NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEII FOR AERONAUTICS,
LANGLEY FIELD, VA., February lS, 1998.

TABLE I TABLE II
ORDINATES FOR AIRFOIL AND SLOT SHAPES
ORDINATES FOR FLAP SHAPES
[StatioDi and ordlnatelltn percent of wtnr chord)
[StatioDl and ordlnatelltn percent 01 wlDl chord]
N. A. C. A. 23012 AlrfoQ
Flap 1
Station

0
1.2&
=
-----i-67---
Lo.....
aurr-
0
-1.23
Station
= La_
surfaoII

2.6 3.61 -1.71 0 -1.61 -1.61

6 4. 91 -2.211 .52 -.18 --._--
7.5 5.80 -2.61 1.04 .58 -2.41
10 6.43 -2.92 1.156 1.16 -2.43
15 7.19 -3.50 2.00 1.63 -2.42
20 . 7.50 -3.97 3.13 2.30 -2.37
2& 7.60 -4.28
-4.46
4.61.
6.63
2.84
2. 97
------
-2.16
~ 7.56
7.14 -4. is 11.82 2.88
50 6.41 -4.17 16.63 1.68 ::i:23
60 5.47 -3.67 20.63 .II'J -.70
70 4.38 -3.00 26.63 .13 -.13
80 3.08 -2.16
90 1.68 -1.23
98 .92 -.70 Center 01 L. E. arc
100 .13 -.13

L. E. radius: US. Slope 01

radius through end 01 chord:
0.72
I -1.61

0.305. L. E. radius: 0.72

 AN N. A. C. A. 23012 AIRFOIL WITH SLOTTED FLAPS 31
TABLES II-Continued 6. Irving, H. B., and Batson, A. S.: Summary of Data on
ORDINATES FOR FLAP SHAPES-Continued Slotted Wings Obtained in the Wind Tunnel of Messrs.
Handley Page, Ltd. R. & M. No. 930, British A. R. C.,
Flsp2
1926.
7. Anon.: Re.sum6 of Investigations Made on Handley Page
Slota and Flaps. A. C. I. C., vol. VII, no. 639, MaMriel
BtatIoD ;:&: Low.
IIurfaoe Div., Army Air Corps, 1929.
8. Clark, K. W., and Kirkby, F. W.: Wind Tunnel Tests of the
0 -1.211 -1. 211.
.to -.32 -2. 011 Characteristics of Wing Flaps and Their Wakes. R. &
.72 • 04 -2.21 M. No. 1698, British A. R. C., 1936.
1.38 .81 -2.38
2.00 1.04 -2.t1 9. Higgins, George J.: An Airfoil Fitted with a Slotted Flap.
2.M 1. to -2.-U
3.112 1.~ ...... Jour. Aero. Sci., vol. 3, no. 12, Oct. 1936, pp. 431-433.
6.20 2.30
::2." is 10. Harris, Thomas A.: The 7 by 10 Foot Wind Tunnel of the
6.M
8.~
--2."M .... ---- National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics. T. R.
...------
7.76 2.63
No. 412, N. A. C. A., 1931.
9.03 2.511 -..... -
10. 31 2.46
::i:23 11. Glauert, H.: Wind Tunnel Interference on Wings, Bodies.
16.M 1.68
200M .92 -.70 and Airscrews. R. &; M. No. 1566, British A. R. C., 1933.
2A.M .13 -.13 12. Tomotika, Susumu: The Lift on a Flat Plate Placed in a
Stream between Two Parallel Walls and Some Allied
CeDter of L. E. arc
Problema. Report No. 101 (vol. VIII, 5), Aero. Res.
Inst., Tokyo Imperial Univ., Jan. 1934.
0. D1
I -1.211
13. Platt, Robert C.: Turbulence Faciors of N. A. C. A. Wind
L. E. radlus: O.Dl Tunnels as Determined by Sphere Tests. T. R. No. 558,
N. A. C. A., 1936.
14. Jacobe, Eastman N., and Sherman Albert: Airfoil Section
RElERENCES CbaraoteristiOll as Affected by Variations of the Reynolds
Number. T. R. No. 586, N. A. C. A., 1937.
1. Platt, Robert C.: Aerodynamio CharaoteristiOll of Wings 15. Wenzinger, Carl J.: Wind-Tunnel Investigation of Ordinary
with Cambered External-Airfoil Flaps, Including Lateral and Split Flaps on Airfoils of Different Profile. T. R.
Control with a Full-Span Flap. T. R. No. 1541, N. A. No. 554, N. A. C. A., 1936.
C. A., 1935. 16. Wenzinger, Carl J., and Anderl!lon, Walter B.: Pressure
2. Platt, Robert C., and Abbott, Ira H.: Aerodynamio Char- Dlatribution over Airfoils with Fowler Flaps. T. R. No.
acteristlOll of N. A. C. A. 23012 and 23021 Airfoila with 620, N. A. C. A., 1938.
20-Percent-Chord External-Airfoil Flaps of N. A. C. A.
23012 Section. T. R. No. 1573, N. A. C. A., 1936. 17. Jacobs, Eastman N., and Abbott, Ira H.: The N. A. C. A.
3. Weick, Fred E., and Platt, Robert C.: Wind-Tunnel Testa Variable-Density Wind Tunnl'l. T. R. No. 416, N. A. C.
of the Fowler Variable-Area Wing. T. N. No. 419, A.,1932. .
N. A. C. A., 1932. - 18. Jacobs, Eastman N., Il.nd Abbott, Ira H.: Airfoil Section
4. Platt, Robert C.: Aerodynamio Charaoteristioa of a Wing Data Obtained in the N. A. C. A. Variable-Density Tunnel
with Fowler Flaps Including Flap Loads, DOWDwaah, and &8 Affected by Support Interference and Other Correc·
Caloulated Effect on Take-OtY. T. R. No. 534, N. A. tions. T. R. No. 669, ~. A. C. A., 1939.
C. A., 1931i. 19. Abbott, Ira H., and Greenberg, Harry: Tests in the Variable-
5. Glauert, H.: The Handley Page Slotted Wing. R. &: M. Density Tunnel of the N. A. C. A. 23012 Airfoil with Plain
No. 834, British A. R. C., 1923. and Split Flaps. T. R. No. 661, N. A. C. A., 1939.

U. I. GOVl"NMINT '.'"T1N' oPPle.: list

 "- "- (J

"

z
Positive directions of axes and angles (forces and moments) are shown by arrows

Axis Moment about axis Angle Velocities

Force
(parallel Linear
Designation Sym- to axis) Designation Sym- Positive D esigna- Sym- (compo- Angular
bol symbol bol direction tion bol nentalong
axis)
- -
LongitudinaL ____ X X Rolling ___ __ L Y--) Z Roll ___ __ q, u p
LateraL _________ y y Pitching __ __ M Z--) X Pitch __ __ IJ v q
NormaL ____ _____ Z Z yawing __ __ N X--)Y yaw ___ __ w T

'"
Absolute coefficients of moment Angle of set of control surface (relative to neutral
L }vI position) , o. (Indicate surface by proper subscript.)
C t = qbS Cm = qcS
(rolling) (pitching)

4. PROPELLER SYMBOLS

Power, absolute coefficient Op= pn~D5

D, Diameter
P,
p, Geometric pitch
p/D, Speed-power coefficient= \I~~:
Pitch ratio c.,
V ', Inflow velocity
V., Slipstream velocity 'f/, Efficiency
. T n, Revolutions per second, r.p.s.
T, Thrust, absolute coefficient CT = 2D4
pn Effective helix an gle=tan-{2!n)
Q, Torque, absolute coefficient OQ=
pn
9LF
n.

5. NUMERICAL RELATIONS

1 hp. =76.04 kg-m/s=550 ft-Ib. /sec. 1 1b. = 0.4536 kg.

1 metric horsepower = l.0132 hp. 1 kg=2.2046 lb.
1 m.p.h. = 0.4470 m.p.s. 1 mi. = 1,609.35 m=5,280 ft.
1 m.p.s.=2.2369 m .p.h. 1 m=3.2808 ft.