You are on page 1of 84

CD

-DAVID

W. TAYLOR NAVAL SHIP


Bethesda, Md. 20084

RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT CENTER

CA.
STATIC STABILITY CHARACTERISTICS OF A SYSTEMATIC SERIES OF STERN CONTROL SURFACES ON A BODY OF REVOLUTION

by

O
I-

Elizabeth M.Dempsey

uJ

,cr. >
LL

00

0>

APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE:

DISTRIBUTION UNLIMITED

I<0
>-.

C.C
'

/
SHIP PERFORMANCE DEPARTMENT RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT REPORT
-

S .T

,1

t.AuqoSt 1977

Report 77-00O5

MAJOR DTNSRDC ORGANIZATIONAL COMPONENTS

I
S...._

OTNSROC COMMANDER
00 01

TECHNICAL DIRECTOR

OFFICERIN.CHARGE
I E I I I

FOFFICERAINCHARGE

iSYSTEMS

DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT

I SHIP PERFORMANCE DEPARTMENT 15


_SURFACE

AVIAHION AND
EFFECTS

DEPARTMENT 16

(
ESTRUCTURESN DEPARTMENT
_____ ____18 ____ _____

COMPUTATION, ' MATHEMATICS AND LOGISTICS DEPARTMENT

j
PROPULSION AND

-HIP ACOUSTICS

DEPARTMENT 19

AUXILIARY SYSTEMS DEPARTMENT 27

MATERIALS DEPARTMENT

28

CENTRAL INSTRUMENTATION DEPARTMENT 29

UNCLASSIFIED
%IECuMITY CLASSIFICATION OF TNIS PAGE (WtPn Data Entered)

REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE


. REPORT mUMBR--"

READ INSTRUCTIONS BEFORE COM(PLETIN(G FORM I;ESSION NO. 3.


RECIPIENT'S CATALOG NUMBER

77_0085,

..

;. . ..

QOVT A

------------------------------------.............

S.

,P

o"

REPORT I

PERIOD COVERED

STATIC STABILITY JHARACTERISTICS OF A,,.SYSTEMATIC,'


SERIES OF TERN CONTROL SURFACES ON A BODY OF
REVOLUTIONt
--,

1Fia
S. S.. PERFORMING ORG. REPORT NUMSER
S. CONTRACT OR GRANT NUMIER(s)

.....

....

7.-A JTN_.

Elizabeth M

Dempsey

PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME P:

AND ADDRESS

10.

PROGRAM ELEMENT. PROJECT, TASK

David W.

Taylor Naval

Ship

AREA & WORK UNIT NJMERS

Research and Development Center

Bethesda, Maryland
I.

20084

6..53_ . 'R2 3010/' SR

CONTROLLING OFFICE NAME AND ADDRESS

Naval Sea Systems Command


Materials and Mechanics Division Washington, D.C. 20362
iA MONITORING AGENZI Y NAME & ADDRESS(If

1ugusTA.977j Au"9 13.


NUMSER OF PAGES

81
IS. SECURITY CLASS. (of thie report)

different front Conrrolitn# Office)

IS*. DECL ASSI FICATION/ DOWNGRADING SCHEDULE 16 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT (of thli Report)

APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE:

DISTRIBUTION UNLIMITED
--

III.

DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT (of the abestract etnterd In Block 20, If dlfferent from Report)

1'

SUPPLEMENTARY

NOTES

19

E Y WORDS (Continue on reverse side Ifnecessary an~d Identity by block numiber)

Hydrodynamic Forces and Moments Stern Control Surfaces Submarine Stability and Control
20 ABSTRACT (Continue on reverse eade It necmesary and Identitf' by block number)

Experiments were conducted to determine the forces and moments due to angle of attack on a representative streamlined body of revolution alternately appended with members of a systematic series of stern control surfaces The data from these experiments are presented in the report in the form of graphs and tabulations of the nondimensional force and moment coefficients and static stability derivatives. Based on these data empirical mathematical expreqnions have been developed to predict the contribution of stern-

DD

1jAN

1473

EDITION Oi F NOVASIs S IN 0102.L 1 .014 .,601

OBSOLETE

UNCLASSIFIED,
IECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAOER ("*n I
.'

DVote

ntsere)

UNCLASSIFIED
ICCURITv CL&SSIVIC ArION 0 TH VAQ9MlO IS 061ar..lrlrf-e

Block 20 (Continued) planes to the static stability derivative Z ' vhen the sternplanes are appended to : s'rbmsr1i.Pe vinse hasic hull ia~a streamlined body of revolut4on A graph is presented for estimiting the location of the center of pressure of the forces due to the presence of sternplanes.

,t., r-

UNCLASSIFIED
SECURITY rLAStlSi PCA rMOrJ -?"0NIS P&OGg(Wt mVlf If Ea1*0*ed)

*'

TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ABSTRACT ................................ ............................. ...................... 1 1 1 2 ............ 3 6 17 18 24 ... 26

ADMINISTRATIVE INFORMATION .................... INTRODUCTION ............................

............................ ......................

CENERAL CONSIDERATIONS ........................

DESCRIPTION OF BODY AND STER1N CONTROL SURFACES .......... TEST APPARA'TUS AND PROCEDURE. ................... REDUCTION A)ND PRESENTATION OF DATA .......... DISCUSSION OF RESULTS ................. CONCLUSIONS ....................... ............ ACKNO.LtEDG(,',ENTS.......... APPENTDIX A
-

..................... ..................

......................... .............................. ............................

DERIVATION OF AN EQUATION FOR REPRESENTING THE RATIO -Za


CLt

AS A FUNCTION OF "lHE SPAN PARAMETER l--

d2

27

APPENDIX B

GRAPHICAL PRESENTATION OF LONGITUDINAL. ANI) NORMAL FORCE AND PITCHING :fOMENT COEFFICIENTS AS FUNCTIONS OF ANGLE OF ATTACK . ........................... .................

31

APPENDIX C - TABULATION OF LONGITI'DINAL AND NORMAL FORCE AND PITCHING MOMENT COEFFICIENTS DUE TO ANGLE OF ATTACK ........... .. APPENDI)X D STATIC STABILITY DERIVATIVES, INCRFYMFNTAL DERIVATIVES ANT) FREE-STRFAM LIFT-CURVE SLOPES FOR STERN CONFIGUPATION SERIES. ............... ....................... ..............................

53

65 68

REFERENCkES ........................

"

~Ii'

LIST OF FIGURES Page Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3


-

Sketch o0 Representative Control Surface

............

7 8

Sketch of Model 4621 with Contril Surfaces ........... Variation of C and C with Eftective Aspect Ratio

for Various Span Parameters .......................... Figure 4


-

20
.....

Variation of the Ratio CZa

with Span Parameter

21

Cl-a
Figure 5 - Variation of Center-of-Pressure Location with Effective Aspect Ratio for Various Span Parameters .... Figure 6 - Variation of Longitudinal ing Moment and Normal Force and Pitch25

Coefficients with Angle of Attack for Bare 32 and Normal Force and Pitch-

Body .................................................. Figure 7


-

Variation of Longitudinal

ing Moment Coefficients with Angle of Attack for Body with 3A Srernplane ..................................... Figure 8 - Variation of Longitudinal and Normal Force and Pitch33

ing Moment Coefficients with Angle of Attack for Body with 5A Sternplanes .................................... :igure 9 Variation of Longitudinal and Normal Force and Pitching Moment Coefficients with Angle of Attack for Body with 7A Sternplanes .................................... Figure 10 Variation of Longitudinal and Normal Force and Pitching Moment Coefficients with Angle of Attack for Body with 9A Sternplanes .......................................... Figure 11 - Variation of Longitudinal and Normal Force and Pitching Moment Coefficients with Angle of Attack 11A Sternplanec ......................................... for Body 37 36 35 34

iv

LIST OF FIGURES

(continued)

Page Figure 12 - Variation of Longitudinal and Normal Force and Pitching Momnt Coefficients with Angle of Attack 3B Sternplanes . ......................................... Figure 13 - Variation of Longitudinal and Normal Fcrce and Pitching Moment Coefficients with Angle of Attack 5B Sternplancs ......................................... Figure 14 - Variation of Longitudinal and Normal Moment Coefficients with Angle of 7B Sternplanes ......................................... Figure 15 - Variation of Longitudinal and Normal Force and Pitching Moment Coefficients with Angle of Attack for Body with 9B Sternp .,anes.......................................... Figure 16 - Variation of LonKitudi;nal and Normal Force and Pitching 41 Force and Pitching for Body with 39 for Body with 38

Attack for Body with 40

Moment Coefficients with Angle of %\tack for Body with 11B Sternplanes ........................................ Figure 17 - Variation of Longitudinal and Normal Force and Pitching 42

Moment Coefficients with Angle of Attack for Body with 3C Sternplanes ......................................... Figure 18 - Variation of Longitudinal Moment Coeot and Normal Force and !'itching 43

ictents with Angle of Attack for Body with 44 Force and Pitching for Body with 45

5C Sternplanes ......................................... Figure 19 - Variation of Longitudinal and Normal

Moment Coefficients with Angle of Attack 7C Sternplanes ..........................................

Figure 20 - Variation of Longitudinal and Normal Furze and Pitching Moment Coefficients with Angle of Attack for Body with 9C Sternplanes ............................................. 46

Lv

Iit

LIST OF FIGURES (continued) PaRe Figure 21 - Variation of Longitudinal and Normal Force and Pitching Moment Cojfficients with Angle of Attack for Body with 47

lIC Sternplanes ........................................


Figure 22 - Variation of Longitudinal and Normal Force and Pitching Moment Coefficients with Angle of Attack 3D Sternplanes .......................................... Figure 23 - Variation of Longitudinal and Normal Force and Pitching Moment Coefficients with Angle of Attack 5D Sternplane ........................................... Figure 24 - Variation of Longitudinal and Normal Force and Pitching for Body with for Body with for Body with

48

49

Moment Coefficients with Angle of Attack 7D Sternplanes .......................................... Figure 25 - Variation of Longitudinal Moment

50

and Normal Force and Pitching for Body with 51

Coefficients with Angle of Attack

9D Sternplanes .......................................... Figure 26 - Variation of Lougitudinal and Normal Force and Pitching Moment Coefficients with Angle of Attack for Body with

lid Sternplanes .........................................

52

vi

LIST OF TABLES Page Table la Geometric Characteristics of Bare Hull Expressed in U.S. Customary Units .................. ................... Geometric Characteristics of Bare Hull Expressed S. I. Units ................... ........................ Geometric U.S. Table 2b Characteristics of Sternplanes in 5 in 9 in 13

Table

lb -

Table 2a -

Expressed

Customary Units ................

...................

Geometric Characteristics of S. I. Units .................

Sternplanea Expressed ........................

Table

3 -

Tabulation of Longitudinal and Normal Force and Pitching Moment Coefficients Due to Angle of Attack .... ........ .. 54 Static Stability Derivatives, Incremental Derivatives and Free-Stream lift-Curve Slopes for Stern ConfiguratiCn I .. .. .. .......... ........................

Table 4 -

66

It

S
V

NOTATION A Projected area ef one sternplane extended to hull centerline (leading edge continued at same angle) (end of afterbody) 2b 2 aspect ratio, 2b2 Effective Aft perpendicular Distance between sternplane tip chord and hull centerline Span parameter Lift coefficient, L

AP a b 2b
d

CL

Mean chord of sternplane, chord and root chord Maximum diameter of hull 11ydrodynanic lilt force,

average of tip

d L

positive upward

Length of hull M M'1 10 MM w w .,


-

M
3

U M w OL3U
AM

Hydrodynamic mroment about y-axis Derivative of moment component with respect to velocity component w Contribution of sternplanes to M

w U

, .

w -

3U

Velocity of origin of body axes relative to fluid w' w X z io U7


2
-

w Xx'

Componen.

of U along z-axis longitudinal force, positive

Hydrodynamic forward

zZ'

IHydrodynamic normal force,

positive downward

viii

Z
Z W Z w
'

p 2 U LZ

Derivative of normal force component with respect to velocity component w Contribution of sternplanes to Z

LZ

AZ

'

ne 2 U

Cx

Angle of attack Mass density of water

'.x

_ &-

NL

-o
ad.

\\

\,I

N.JJ '1)

Ki

I-,

ABSTRACT Experiments were conducted to determine the forces and moments due to angle of attack on a representative streamlined body of revolution

alternately appended with members of a systematic series of stern control surfaces. The data from these experiments are presented in the report in force and moment

the form of graphs and tabulations of the nondimensional coefficients and static stability derivatives.

Based on these data

empirical mathematical expressions have been developed to predict the contribution of sternplanes to the static stability derivative Zw ' when the sternplanes are appended to a submarine whose basic hull is lined body of revolution. A graph Is a stream-

presented for estimating the location

of the center of pressure of the forces due to the presence of sternplanes. ADMINISTRATIVE INFORMATIUN This project was performed under the sponsorship of the General Hydrodynamic Research Program. INTRODUCTION An experimental investigation was made of the static stability characteristics of a streamlined body of revolution alternately appended

with each set of a family of low-aspect-ratio stern control surfaces. The purpose of the investigation was to determine the contributions of the control surfaces to the forces and moments on the total fin-body combinations and to present the results in a form that would be useful in the preliminary design of submarines from a stability point of view. In the past extensive experimental work was carried out at the

David W. Taylor Naval Ship R&D Center to determine the tree-stream

,',aracteristics

of a family of

low-aspect-ratio control surfaces.

This

effort provided comprehensive

information more directly applicable to In the aerodynamic this report was perof control

submarine appendage design than had been available literature. As a next step, the work presented in

formed to provide fundamental data on the characteristics surfaces when fin-body interaction factors are present.

This report describes

the model and stern control surfaces; outpresents graphs and tables

lines the procedures used in the experiments; of

,he experimental results; and present empirical methods for estimat-

ing the contributions of sternplhnes to the static stability derivatives for submarines whose basic hulls are streamlined bodies of revolution. NEtIERAL CONSIDERATIONS I'he hulls of most modern submarines are basically bodies of revolution with afterbodies such that diameter (the portion of the body aft ef the maximum diameter) (or afterbody) to the maximum a

the ratio uf the length of the tail falls somewhere between 4.2 and 4.6.

This chara.reristic is

roigh indication chat

the fullness of the tails and the nondimensional luyer in the vicinity of the stern control sur-

thickness of the buundaty

faces do not vary markedly from submarine to submarine.


For this reason the assumption was made that an experimental study

of fi'-body combinations

composed of stern control surfaces mounted on a

body of revolution having a fairly representative tail section would yield fin-body interaction effects that could be applied to other bodies having generally similar afterbodies regardless of the shape of the forebodies.
1

11icker, I., Folger and Leo F. Fehlner, "Free-Stream Characteristics of a Family of Low-Aspect-Ratio, All-Movable Control Surfaces for Application to Ship Design," DT>M Report 933 Revised Edition (December 1958).

An existing streamlined body of revolution having an afterbody fineness ratio of 4.4 was chosen as the test vehicle. A family of 20 sets

(4 identical stern control surfaces per set) was selected which covered a

range of sizes, relative to the hull, that could reasonably be expected to be of interest for submarine design. No propeller was used,
the trailing edges were

The planform of the planes was such that

normal to the tip chords. same for all.

The sweep angle and section shape were the

The spana and tip chords were varied in a systematic way

so that for each of four outreaches from the centerline of the model there were five sets of planes with different tip chords. The vehicle was tested with each of the 20 sets of planes oriented
on the hull in the cruciform arrangement with trailing edges normal to slightly

0l1 lungiLtudial axis of the hull.

'le rudders were located

forward of the sternplanes and the longitudinal positions of the trailing edges of both sternplanes and rudders with respect model remained the same for all configurations. DESCRIPTION OF BODY AND STERN CONTROL SURFACES to the AP of the

1:Te body was Model 4621,

a 180-inch (4.572-metre)

strearlined body of
The hull

revolution with a 24.52-inch (0.623-metre) was fiberglass with a mahogany tail cone.

maximum diameter.

The offsets of the model and la and lb.

other pertinent characteristics are given in Tables

The control surfaces were constructed of mahogany and consisted of a family of 20 sets of 4 identical square-tipped planes. The trailing

edge uf each of the planes was normal to the tip chord.

Each had a

quarter-chord sweep angle of 15.25 degrees and a NACA 0015 section shape.

"lhe bases

of the planes were cut on a 12-degree

slant to fit

the average

r3

TABLE 1A - GEOMETRIC CHARACTERISTICS OF BARE HULL EXPRESSED IN U.S. CUSTOMARY UNITS

Length,

ft.
ft. sq. ft.

15.0
2.044 70.55 29.53 ft. 6.684

Maximum diameter,

Wetted surface area, Volume, cu. ft.

Longitudinal center of buoyancy,

Hull Offsets X in inches Y in inches X in inches Y in inches

0.0 3.6 7.2 10.8 14.4 18.0 21.6 25.2 28.8 32.4 36.0 39.6 43.2 46.8 50.4 54.0 57.6

0.000 3.500 4.977 6.108 7.047 7.850 8.549 9.160 9.697


10.17

10.58 10.93 11.24 11.50 11.71 11.89 12.03

93.6 97.2 100.8 104.4 108.0 111.6 115.2 118.8 122.4 126.0 129.6 133.2 136.8 140.4 144.0 147.6 151.2

11.82 11.66 11.49 11.29 11.07 10.83 10.56 10.27 9.954 9.613 9.243 8.843 8.411 7.945 7.447 6.910 6.334

61.2
64.8

12.13
12.21

154.8
158.4

5.715
5.053

68.4
72.0 75.6 79.2 82.8 86.4 90.0

12.25
12.26 12.25 12.21 12.15 12.06 11.97

162.0
165.6 169.2 172.8 176.4 180.0

4.344
3.584 2.774 1.908 0.984 0.000

TABLE IB - GEOMETRIC CHARACTERISTICS OF BARE HULL EXPRESSED IN S. 1. UNITS

Length, m Maximum diameter, m m2

4.5720 0.6228 6.5545 0.8362 m 2.0373

Wetted surface area,

Volume,

Longitudinal center of buoyancy, Hull Offsets X In Metres 0.0 0.0914 0.1829 0.2743 0.3658 0.4572 0.5486 0.6400 0.7315 0.8230 0.9144 1.0058 1.0973 1.1887 1.2802 1.3716 1.4630 1.5545 1.6459 1.7374 1.8288 1.9202 2.0117 2.1031 2.1946 2.2860 Y in fietres 0.0 0.0889 0.1264 0.1551 0.1790 0.1994 0.2171 0.2327 0.2463 0.2583 0.2687 0.2776 0.2855 0.2921 0.2974 0.3020 0.3056 0.3081 0.3101 0.3112 0.3114 0.3112 0.3101 0.3086 0.3063 0.3040

X in netres 2.3774 2.4689 2.5603 2.6518 2.7432 2.8346 2.9261 3.0175 3.1090 3.2004 3.2918 3.3833 3.4747 3.5662 3.6576 3.7490 3.8405 3.9319 4.0234 4.1148 4.2062 4.2977 4.3891 4.4806 4.5720

Y in T-tres 0.3002 0.2962 0.2918 0.28b8 0.2812 0.2751 0.2682 0.2608 0.2528 0.2442 0.2348 0.2246 0.2136 0.2018 0.1892 0.1755 0.1609 0.1452 0.1283 0.1103 0.0910 0.0704 0.0485 0.0250 0.0

ilope of the hull at the mounting points.

A sketch of the general planform Figure 1. the The

and the dimensions coanon to all of the planes are presented in When the planes were mounted on the tail cone of the model,

trailing edges were normal to the longitudinal axis of the body.

position of the trailing edges of the sternplanes was maintained at 7.9 inches (0.201 metres) forward of the AP. The rudders were 2.25 inches The spans and tip chords

(0.057 metres) forward of the sternplanes.

were varied in a systematic way so that the sternplanes had four different outreaches from the centerline of the model, and for each outreach The outreaches 0.3048, and 11 inches

there were five sets of planes with different tip chords. of the sternplanes were 9, 0.3683 and 0.4445 metres). (0.0762, 0.1270, 0.1778, 12, 14.5, and 17.5 inches 5,

(0.228, 7, 9,

The tip chords were 3, 0.2286, and 0.2794 metres).

Because of the the outreach greater

longitudinal offset between the rudders and sternplanes, of the rudders was, in each case, 0.48 inches (1.22

centimetres)

than their matchlng sternplanes. The geometric characteristics of the sternplanes are given in Tables 2a and 2b. Figure 2 is a sketch of the modcl with control surfaces. TEST APPARATUS AND PROCEDURE The experimental work was conducted in the deep-water basin on Towing Carriage 2 using the DTNSRIDC Planar-Motion-Mechanism The model was supported by two struts in tandem, metres) apart. System. 2

6 feet (1.829

The reference point was the center of buoyancy of the associated NSRDC

bare hull and was located midway between the gimbal-centers


2

Gertler, Morton, Report 2523 (July

"The DTNB Planar-Hotion-Mechanism 1967).

System,"

Sweep Anwie of Qu&rter Chord = 15.25 degrees

_____Tip

Chord-

---

NACA Section IX:IL

0at to

Chord Line

Figure 1

Sketch of Representative Control Surface

'*1

7
.'A

('JO

4'

bLi

U'IN

('

CJ

TABLE 2A - GEOMETRIC CHARACTERISTICS OF STERNPLANES EXPRESSED IN U.S. CUSTOMARY UNITS

Span A

(Values are for I sternplane) Sternplanes Span from CL of hull, Tip chord, Root chord, Taper ratio Span, distance from root in. in. 25.4 1.50 41.75 36.2 0.98 59.75 46.3 0.72 77.75 55.6 0.56 95.75 64.0 0.45 113.75 in. in. in. 3A 9.0 3.0 5.24 0.57 6.16 SA 9.0 5.0 7.17 0.70 5.96 7A 9.0 7.0 9.10 0.77 5.77 9A 9.0 9.0 11.03 0.82 5.57 Il.A 9.0 11.0 12.96 0.85 5.37

chord to tip chord, Projected area, Aspect ratio sq.

Projected area of I plane extended to hull centerline, sq. in.

Aspect ratio of I plane extended to hull centerline

1.94

1.36

1.04

0.85

0.71

I9
---

TABLE 2a (continued)

Span B
(Values are for I sternplane)

Sternplanes

3B

5B

7B

9B

11B

Span from Tip chord,

cL of hull, in.
in. in.

12.0 3.0 6.30 0.48

12.0 5.0 8.22 0.61

12.0 7.0 10.14 0.69

12.0 9.0 12.08 0.75

12.0 11.0 14.01 0.79

Root chord, Taper ratio

Span,

distance from root


in. in.

9.06

8.86

8.66

8.46

8.26

chord to tip chord, Projected area, Aspect ratio sq.

42.0 1.95 62.2

58.4 1.34 86.2

74.1 1.01 110.2

8R.9 0.81 134.2

103.0 0.66 158.2

Projected area of I plane extended to hull centerline, sq. in.

Aspect ratio of 1 plane extended to hull centerline

2.32

1.67

1.31

1.07

0.91

10

TABLE 2f (continued) Span C

(Values are for I sternplane) Sternplanes 3C 5C 7C 9C LIC

Span from C Tip chord, in.

of hull,

in.

14.5 3.0 7.18 0.42

14.5 5.0 9.11 0.55 11.27

14.5 7.0 11.04 0.63 11.07

14.5 9.0 12.97 0.69 10.87

14.5 11.0 14.88 0.74 10.68

Root chord, in. Taper ratio Span, distance from root in. in.

11.46

chord to tip chord, Projected area, Aspect ratio sq.

58.2 2.26 81.75

79.3 1.60 11C.75

99.6 1.23 139.75

119.1 0.99 168.75

137.8 0.83 197.75

Projected area of 1 plane extended to hull centerline, sq. in.

Aspect ratio of 1 plane extended to hull centerline

2.57

1.90

1.50

1.25

1.06

Ak

?11

AA
..ii

TABLE 2a (continued) Span D

(Values are for 1 sternplane) Sternplanes 3D 5D 7D 9D liD

Span from Tip chord,

cL of hull, in.
In. in.

17.5 3.0 8.22 0.37

17.5 5.0 10.16 6.49 14.16

17.5 ..0 12.09 0.58 13.96

17.5 9.0 14.02 0.64 13.76

17.5 11.0 15.94 0.69 13.57

Root chord, Taper ratio Span,

distance

from root in.

14.36

chord to tip chord, Projected area, Aspect ratio

sq. in.

80.5 2.56 108.2

107.1 1.87 143.2

132.9 1.47 178.2

158.0 1.20 213.2

182.3 1.01 248.2

Frojected area of I plane extended to hull centerline, sq. in.

Aspect ratio of 1 plane extended to hull centerline

2.83

2.14

1.72

1.44

1.23

12

'.0 r0.

~~

0~Ae *
. CN

0t0

.44 en

"01

en

-4

14

'0

4L

ci
('4CJ

0
C4 CI

C~4

'-4

Pgo
kn

V)

r"9 r-.
P-4

C)1

11

M4

C.9

-.4

-4

r00
(4 Oj* .4

1'J
('4

0
1-4

1?
.4

L 0"

00

OD4

No

0!C
'AOL

C,,N

-z4

I"

0.0

-~~141 0) :1 LA~ 0 0 '-4 03 u

~
LA -4 e,0 ' 0

C4I:

-4 : 01

.4

44

la .0

0 00 w

cI-.
0 W V -4.

4.0

a,

w aIU.
41

Jt

oA
.4

us
(0 I.

0 w 0

e5 w
-1 to

-4
1.' 4) qn
to

w0
46 04

610 r.C -n X
0 61Cv

u. u

IV m

IVI i

(f

41

m4

41

U4

a- 41 .

13

ao

It

00 0-4

00

~C

C'J

'. C4 -4

00

'0

0% '0 -4 0

4Y0

'0

OD 0

e-J 0

*,

r'

M0

'

C4 .

-4 0

'

-4

-0

00 Ne-

'

rs on

0o

to

Lr0l4

0 '
--

0
4

0 0-

'0

4-)4

r_

IA
'0

wa

0 CO
S 0

v
4-J

-7~~
-

0 0
'0

r. '0 0 -4 C
A.

000'
C'0 4 -4

0V

(-j

61

4o
4

v
(LI &J
-

t-0) :

A-.

la. F--

t40
4.-0.

1. <

910

go

ON

-4
( -

co(

00

~~~

0' 4

00

eJ

(n

rn

-4

-4-4

Go

10

10

C4

C>-4

(n

N 1'0 cc0'Ln

-j

00

-~~e

f( .

C-1

.00

0j

a'0( 0~

w0

0-

ci

14

&ju

&

w
4. Li"Ci0 cc

0
U CL

CG 0

w 9 c

0-4 0j ( m4

4 . (N w

4 41 4 $-4 -u x

(n

Ln

4C

U -%

10 9'-.

*t4

'.0 0

VI *

.-4 ' 4

c"4
'-4

0%

'4

0n

1--4

co

C14

W%-4

c"

Co 00

C14

(4

9-

co
-S -4

en

00

0 U

0% 4
'A 0 -4 14

'4~~i

'

w:

v4

Q" (P4

0%

(4

C 144-4

'0

0A

61-

0090
&j

93

m
0 6 > 4 j

CD

-4C jo
U0 &j m.4

fotv

0 v
G0 ) 0. 1

to0

M. c

ii iiI

4.

&

fl6I

with the two struts.

The longitudinal and normal force components with

respect to the body axes were measured by means of internal force balances located at each strut. (3.048 metres) All of the tests were run at a depth of 10 feet

to the centerline and at a speed of 6 knots which corre-

sponds to a Reynolds number of 1.4 x 107 based on model length. The experimental program consisted of static stability tests on the bare hull and on the hull appended with each of the 20 sets of control surfaces. The forces and moments were measured over a range to 18 degrees. The control surface angle

of angles of attack from -6

settings were zero at all times.

To stimulate turbulence a sandstrip

was installed on the hull 9 inches (0.229 metres) aft of the nose.
REDUCTON AND PRESENTATION OF DATA

The data obtained from the captive-model experiments are presented in nondimensional form in the appendixes. appendixes is as follows: The organization of the

Appendix A contains a derivation of an equation for representing the ratio CZ /CLa as a function of the parameter 2b/d. Appendix B

contains plots of the nondimensional hydrodynamic coefficients X', Z', and M' as functions of angle of attack. Data for the bare body as well

as for the body appended with each of the twenty sternplane configurations are presented. Appendix C presents tabulations of data shown in Appendix D contains tabulations of the deriva,Z, CLu which apply to each configuration.

the plots in Appendix B. tives Zw M wt, ' AM

Summary figures based on the data obtained from the experiments are given in the body of the report.

17

DISCUSSION OF RESULTS As mentioned in an earlier section, the major objective of this

investigation was to determine the contributions of control surfaces to the forces and moments on the total fin-body combinations in order

to obtain information that would be useful in the preliminary design of submarines from a stability point of view. In accordance with this objective, the stability derivatives Zwt

and M ' were determined for all configurations by taking the slopes, at the origin, of the curves shown in Appendix B of Z' and M' versus angle cf attack and converting them to "per radian" measure. of Z ' and M ' w w The values

for the bare hull were then subtracted from the covreto obtain the Zw' and

sponding derivatives for the body with control surfaces

incremental effects which are referred to in this report as


W

In order to divorce the incremental effects of the control surfaces from the length of the particular body on which they were tested, values of (-Z .') were re-nondimensionalized 2A. the

using the projected area, since for small

of the two sternplanes extended through the body.


-

angles L : -Z and a

w',

this procedure in effect converted the increGZa, which could be compared with free-

ments into lift-curve slopes, stream results.

The work done by Whicker and Fehlner (Reference 1) has shown that good correlation exists between experimentally-obtained lift-curve

18
" I '""'....... " I' 'y IF ... .. ...

slopes for low-aspect-ratio control surfaces

in the free stream and the

following semi-empirical expression for lift-curve slope

1.8wa 1.8 + cos. (-Aco + 4)(1 coo

(1)

where C slope of lift coefficient with respect to angle of attack a in radians at i - 0

a - effective aspect ratio A - sweep angle of quarter chord line Values of CLa for various effective aspect ratios and a sweep angle

of 15.25 degrees were computed from this equation and were plotted as a function of effective aspect ratio in Figure 3. The derivatives CZa

from the sternplane series were also plotted in Figure 3 as functions of their respective effective aspect ratios (aspect planes through the body). It ratios of the stern-

can be seen from the figure that the experi-

mental values of CZo (indicated by the symbols) are functions of outreach a. well as of aspect ratio. The solid lines drawn through the data points were determined in the following manner: mental values of C For each span parameter. d-, the ratios of the experi-

to the corresponding values of CLa from Equation (1)

were computed.

Then the average of these ratios was computed and a curve


the values of CLc by this average ratio. ZL a plot of the average ratios, --- , as a function of the CLa

was constructed by multiplying Figure 4 is span parameter,

2bLc
2--

The curve joining the symbols is

the following

19

4.0.

-j-T

C Uf run, Equation (1) 0 3.6,. ICZ from Experiments

... *. . . .
. I...
, I ,8 ,I .. . ....

... .. . . i...
: .. . . . t. . .

.~' I _
... . .. ...
I

. . . . . . . . . ..
I

. .

SI
N

I
. ..

Span Parameter.
. . *I

i]

..

1.427

2.4"
:
U

'

I1.183

*0 2.4

41.

1.2

I
010

II,

I-

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

Effective Aspect Ratio, a Figure 3


-

Variation of C

and C with Effective Aspect Ratio Za Lu far Various Span Parameters

20

0.8

1
1
t
I
!7

0.7

0.6--I
N L

I
,

I
_ _,_

.
__ _

o.
0I

I_____ ____
i i

0.4

Span Parameter, 2b

Figure 4

-Variation

of the Ratio C c/Ca with Span Parame~ter 21ei Li

least-squares fit C.-

of the points: 0.3644 + 1.2380


2b

-003728

CLa
for the range 0.734

())2 (2)

2b/d " 1.426.


(2),

Combining Equations

(1) and

C 1.8 + Cos 1.8-aa1- + 4) A(lo-n--A


-

[0.3644

1.2380

(2b)

+ 0.3728 2 d+032 -

(3) 3

Equation (3) given set of

may be used

to compute the contribution

to Z ' of

sternplanes on a

given streamline body as follows:

since

C za

6 w 2A
of the sternplanes extended 2b A
2

and the effective body is

aspect ratio

through the

a--

then

. .8 w 1.8 + cos A(-~ '3

0.3644-

1.2380

2b

+ 0.3728 (.Lb2

(4) (4)-)[-34

for the range 0.734 : 2b/d -

1.426.

While Equation for values of CL2

(2) a

in

gives a very good representation of the ratio the range between 0.734 and 1.426, extrapolations

22

As the span of the sternplanes beyond this range cannot be relied upon. approaches infinity the ratio should approach unity. Equation (2) CLa does not satisfy this condition since it reaches a maximum value of 2b 2b 0.663 at -- 1.6604 and becomes zero at 2.994. CZ An alternate equation for representing the ratio is derived in CLa Appendix A. This equation fits the experimental data slightly less well than Equation (2) For this reason it but has the advantage of becoming unity at is recommended

2b

-d-

that this alternate equation which is

__

0.56inb

1(0~.401 5 db) 0.1612]


-

CZA

0.2556b)

0.6366 sin

2b/d

(5)

2b

be used for 0.4015

2b

0.734 and 1.426 e

The use of Equation (5)

then gives the tollowing equation for LZ w

,z
w

_
.2b.2

1.8na
+ 4) (

! 2.b,)0.2556
1

1.8 + Cos.

(.2b.6

(6)
0.4015.}
-

0.161211-

0.6366 sin si

2b/d~

23

2b f or 0.4015 .- L-

-0.,34 and

I.416

2h d

The longitudinal positions of the center of pressure of the forces due to the sternplanes with respect to the hull LCB were determined by AM I the ratios z- . These center-of-pressure locations were then referred w-r
w

to the trailing edge of the sterrplanes and the resulting distances were nondimensionalized by the mean chords c. Figure 5 shows a plot of the center of pressure locations as functions of effective aspect ratio. in the data, Although there is considerable scatter it can be seen

particularly for the A sternplane series,

that for a given aspect ratio the center of pressure in general moves forward as the span parameter -L. increases and, ally forward of the planes. CONCLUSIOIS From the experimental results of this investigation empirical in some cases, Is actu-

mathematical expressions have been developed to predict the contribution of sternplanes to the static stability derivative Z ' when the sternplanes are appended to a submarine design whose basic hull is streamlined body of re,olutian. A graphical method is provided to a

estimate the location of the center of pressure with respect to the trailing edge of the sternplanes.

24

".4

*N

S-d

10)

c.

4I

I0.

CLi
10
*

>
0

0~ 08

Jo

02P3

OJ

3VSUl~~nTur

-'II3

25*4

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The author wishes to express her appreciation to Messrs. A. Goodman

and M. Gertler formerly of DTNSRDC who initiated this experimental program; to B. Carson, R. S. Dart, E. H. Dittrich, Dr. E. C. James, N. King,

and 1. Mahoney who participated in the experimental work; and to Dr. J. P. Feldman for his contributions and guidance.

26

APPENDIX A DERIVATION OF AN EQUATION FOR REPRESENTING THE RATIO cZ-- AS A FUNCTION OF THE SPAN PARAMETER -b
SLot d

C2

27

r
APPEND)IX A

Derivation of an Equation for Representing the Ratio CZa 2h as a Function of the Span Parameterd C Lct

If
is

the lift distribution on a control surface in the freestream


the lift,(
1

assumed to be elliptical,

.i,

is

proportional to

2b

o '

(b, - x-)

bdx ---

If is

the lift

due to sternplanes on a streamlined body of revolution

assumed to be proportional tc the shaded area in the sketch Iree-ptre-' lift

bb

C7

i 1

proportional

to

2:

bW -

x)

dx

7b[: -

)-

sin- 1 K]

2M

The ratio Cz is then CLx

Czr

-K(1-

K,)!,

2- sin

(7)

C~aC?

A value of K for the average experimental value of C--C71 span was determined from Equation C
with

for each

(7) 2b

and listed in Tabulation 1 together

' -4'2 and the product K(d).

TA.BULATION I 2b
-4d C

KZ()
C L,1

KK(I--) 0.542 0.415 0.335 0.285

0.734 0.978 1.182 1./,?0

0.3436 0.4868 (".5810 0.6420

0.3978 0.4059 0.3960 0.4064

It

can be seen from Tabulation constant,


,

1 that the values of K(-) are


-

cs9entially
or K L

giving an average value such that K(

0.4015

0.4015 b

This indicates that the "defect" through the body is 2 x Kb - 0.4015d.

in the effective

span of the wing

Substituting 0.4015 2b

for K in Iquation

(7)

gives

(7)4

CZa

0.2556

[(d2b)-

0.16122

0.6366 sin-

0.4015 2b/d

1~

( b)""

Tabulation 2 compares the values of CZ'- from the experiments with CLa those computed from Equations (2) and (8).

TAB'LATIoN 2

2b

(CZ. -

CZ_

CL i Experimental

C ," rquation (2) 0.3434 0.4898 0.5781 0.6420

CL.1 Equation 0.3-00 0.4924 0.5760 0,6463 (8)

0.734 0.978 1.182 1.426

0.3436 0.4868 0.5810 0.6420

can be seen that Equation (2) gives slightly better agreement CZ' with the experimental values of than does Equation (8). CL,

It

30

APPENDIX B GRAPHICAL PRESENTATION OF LONGITUDINAL AND NORMAL FORCE AN PITCHING MOMENT COEFFICIENTS

AS FUNCTIONS OF ANGLE OF ATTACK

1.

31

14-," ,..

.- ,

-----.

r..

m-,

. __..3=

. .

"k-.- 4
I.

+0

x i

140

I
I

s..

28

I-i

/
I

H.8

'i'

'

'
14 '

81

I
I

__

I
.,I .*----

..1 0 0:

LP..........

I,4

Iz
I

,i

-.

4.,

I,

I_-_--

/-

I:

T-

4--

-.4

FIgure 6 -Variation of Longitudinal autd Normal1 Force and Pitching Moment Coefficients with Angle of Attack for Bare Body
*'A

1'04

4-

24 x10-4

0C-

--

20

41....

..

O
S
.

Si
S..
* I

4
0 4 8
i'

.----

4i-

I' I

4
Angl of Atac a indgre

I
I L

\_

-*0-

-4

6Z

F1g~7Anglle

of.til 0in de~re

Fisuee 7 -Variation of Longitudinal and Normal Force and Pitching Moment Coefficients with Angle of Attack for Body with 3A Sternplanes

33

I0i

100

-10-4

20

so

16

611111142
;, 4o 0
6o z
U

,
U4

0
0

"a 0

,4

0
A.l .

4
1 Atta.. a n

i
i"

1f
"

Figure 8

-Variation

of

Longitudinal

and Normal Force

and Pitching Moment

Coefficients with Angle of Attack for Body with 5A Sternplanes

34

I0**

--

I0

-4

2-

10

60

..

A,

40.-

1
,,,

I.

,,.1

--

S.

.4:.2

kIJ

-4

12

16-Z

AngIe of

Uttack 0 in degrees

Figure 9 - Variation of Longitudinal and Normal Force and Pitching Moment


Coefficients with Angle of Attack for Body with 7A sternplanes

35

10

-, 100 o

I
I

20 . 10 1

60r

12

Ia
. . .. . . !..

--

I- -

T)

20
T
i, I

(40

II

S
'1
. 4j ( . . .
,-4

4 ""-

-16

I,

-.

-4

\II.

4 K'

"

16

20

Figure 10

Variation of Longitudinal and Normal Force and Pitching Moment Coefficients with Angle of Attack for Body with 9A Sternplanes

3b

In

x IfO-

--

x t10

I+

'

':f 7
4
x OC

'4I

" bi

.4

. .. .. ...

Ang:

,f Attack C in d-gr..ci"

Figure 11

Variation of Longitudinal and Normal Force and Pitching Moment

Coefficients with Angle of Attack for Body with 11A Sternplanes

.,.

IC' x" Oi

'

I1

I2!

0 x o

ii

~I

"I

--

!~'

,.QI -,\

AII

Figure 12

-Variation

of L.ongitudinal and Normal Force and Pitching Moment


Angle of Attack for Body with 3B Sternplanes

Coefficients with

3A_

o 0

I8

16

,o',

20

Z
4

Ui
0

L..

xU

S-40

i1

-8o

'

.16

-*

.4

4 0 Angle of Atlat Ik in d e\s

16

102

Figure 13

Variation of Longitudinal and Normal Force and Pitching Moment Coefficients with Angle of Attack for Body with 5B Sternplanes

39

I(-

~x

112 M

1 0-'

0.

220

-24

t811

120

Angle of Atta, k 0i in aegr~ee

Figure 14

-Variation

of Longitudinal and Normal Force and Pitching Moment Coefficients with Angle of Attack for Body with 7B Sternplanes

10

60

10

M'

40

to

E'Io

-40

-a4

lb

-b4 -8

CE

-80

"

_-16

\iigi

At'

'

n i r

'

-100
Fiue1 Vraino

Lniuia andNo,,a

,I
Frc

S
anJicigMmn

-zo

-b

-4

8 Atta, P a in dekrpee

It

if,

10

"\Figlv vf

Figure 15 -Variation

of Longitudinal and Normal Force and Pitching Moment.

Coefficients with Angle of Attack for Body with 9B Sternplanes

SI:

./4l

60 4

101
I"

-4

-F Coefficient
..

1 A1

.....

S:

I
-100

_ _ _ _i

* I

iI
-12O0

___
_____

r-0
___

______

-24 16 2O

-8

-4

12

Figure 16

Variation of Lonigitudinal and Nor'mal Force and Pitching Moment Coefficients with Angle of Attack for Body with lIB Sternplanea

4'-

4i
40
-

C.

EE

Z,-Z

-- 1

SI

iI

An~le of Attack a in degreesa

Figure

17

-VariatIon

of Longitudinal and Normal

rce and Pitching Moment

Coefficients with Angle of Attack for Body with 3C Sternplanes

' _ A

I0Q

1 40

M'i

x|0.

:0

'40.

* 100

.140

LJ~L

Figure 18

-Variation

of Longitudinal and Normal Force and Pitching Moment Coefficients with Angle of Attack for Body with 5C Ste:nplanes

44

IO'x

40

K 10"

zo L

" .. .-

0
"x
L-- 40-

X,-

0E

7
VK

-O

0 U

-I

II

-100--~

.8

-4

16

z0

Angle vi Atta k a in degrees

Figure 19

-Variation

of Longitudinal and Normal Force and Pitching floment Coefficients with Angle of Attack for Body with 7C Sternplanes

'

- --

-- ]

...

..

..

-2c
-40

-4

"-40

I.z

zC

-10

,t~

Anl '

of

n dere

-420

-24

ArKle uf Attack. 0 in deKfe~el

Figure 20

Variation of Longitudinal and Normal Force and Pitching Moment Coefficients with Angle of Attack for Body with 9C Sternplanes

46.

10

40

10____

II 0 0

I!f
t

I*I
.

AI

"
.-

..

..-

'-

"4--'
--

IbO 3

_ --

_ i -.----

1
z

"I
--

44 .I

4RI.l

5
Figure 21
-Variation

of Longitudinal and Normal Force and Pitching Moment Coefficients with Akigle of Attack for Body with 11C Sternplanes

47

Iox

0
I-I

--0--

-4

4i -40 zE

-~-40

4 -I

i'

_ i

-s

-E

CI

.60

""-j--80
.. r. . . .. . . . .

I,

4i

I
I

I
z Z16

"

.. ..

. . , . . .

. .

..

. ... _ __..

- -""-'
-- 0

-100

.8

-4 Ang-l

4 of Atta

8 ! degree@ in .k

lb2

Figure 22

-Variation

of Longitudinal and Normal Force and Pitching Moment I: ' th Angle of Attack for Body with 3D Sternplanes fI Ienw ,oef

48

10

~40

--,-. --.- - , -.
M,

0'

,-

,-

"C-

UU

-60

,-Iz

-164

2
-M

.4
-4 4 Z~ I

.40

Figure 23

Variation of Longitudinal and Normal Force and Pitching Moment Coefficients with Angle of Attack for Body with 5D Sternplanes

IIgr

3-Vraino

o~tdn]
et*wt1n o

n
)

oc
nywt

tetgH~n
D trpae

C&ef

takfr

104x
0

40

0'

o,

2
I.

60

---

__

4
0 ,

1..

4
-60

I,

C -100o

-i-

.140

. -8

-4

Izj

'3

Angle of Attack a

in drfgrr~e

,A

Figure 24

-Variation

of Longitudinal and Normal Force and Pitching Moment

Coefficients with Angle of Attack for Body with 7D Sternplanes

50

4.

.40

h
I12 I16

CL

.14

Anxi

,I

%Il,__ain

___~r

Figure 25

-Variation

of Longitudinal and Normal Force and Pitching Moment Coefficients with Angle of Attack for Body with 9D Sternplanes

10

XZC 10 4R

-4

10

ixNi
- 0 -4

H-60
-

SI

-'

S!I

__

"I
I

Ii

Mc
--'-

If
-,

""U

1z

16

z(

Figure 26 -Variation of Longitudinal and Normal Force and Pitching Moment Coefficients with Angle of Attack for Body with 11t) Sternplanes

')2

APPENDIX C TABULATION OF LONGITUDINAL AND NORMAL FORCE AND PITCHING MOMENT COEFFICIENTS DUE TO ANGLE OF ATTACK

53

TABLE 3 - TABULATION OF LONGITUDINAL AND NORMAL FORCE AND PITCHING MOMENT COEFFICIENTS DUE TO ANGLE OF ATTACK

Bare Rody
VALUE! OJr ALL C IFFICIENTS MUST 01 MULTIPLIED BY 10 "1

Deg Deg -6
-4 -3

X)

Z'

Ilvi

-10. 9
-10.7 -10.7

10.7
6.5 4.4

-12. 29
-8.84 --6.62

-Z -1
0 1 2 3 4 6 8 10 12 14

-10.7 -10.5
-10.6 -10.8 -10.7 -10.7 -10.6 -10.6 -10.5 -10.6 -10.4 -10.0

2.6 1. 3
0 -1. 3

-4. 42 -2.23
0 2. 22 4. 42 6.64 8.49 12.69 16. 31 19.28 21.86 24. 27

-2.8 -4.7 -5.8 -10. -16. 5 3

-24. 1 -33.8 -45.6

16
18

-9.6
-8.5

-58.4
-73. 1

26.4Z
28. 55

54

Ip

r-

-Cl

-r

0.

co

IQ

x~

.0.

'1

-X-

0!

'i-i,

s-.f ,,

~r0(]

~G
L(n

t-

-1 .o oo

00

t'o

NJ

r-

14i

r-N

r'0

-O

CO

r-

rn

00

(-I,,

-3-

C-t4

1
ON

1-

N
'1

Q
-4

o
L.

r-

N if

rN

N
t

if I

O''0 NO
U

0
I

0' N

1*
.

N 0 'ON
I

r'J
I I

___

-fj
i

U
*

Z X
;'
-

-r

-r
I

'0

'0

NO 0 0
I
I

0
I I I I I I

0'

(0

t-

.E

__

;ur:LI:i:
-

-3

*1*

'..O

*1*

'.0

0
U

I-

I--I
I--".'

--

L1

0"

'J

'0

r--- N
-

I
a
1

E
.1
I,)

N
-i

'

r
'3(0
I

0' -I-

'0(0 N

'0 '01 N

-i

*P
I

rI

-J
I

'

**1

N -.3

C.

2-0

-'2

-'-

0'

-t

-t

'-I

*0

-.

-.0
I

.t
I

''

N
I I

-J
I

'

'0

(0

0
-

N
-

1'
-

'0(0
-

C-

01-

VI

-M

r.;

-o

0r1

0*

C),

C)

aa

'C

rn'

L-

-~

-~

~-

--

'.4~0

r-

CO Sr

a,

II

4.04lj

't

t-

N-0

N-N

I 'D

V~

cJcc

etaj
-D -

t-

S-r

-c

- cc

- o

r-

t-.

--

m 77r 11

1r

'0

'o

N -" D3

-r

-n-

0,

00ck

'r

0o

U,

r- .

I 14

NJ

'~

>00

4)

>

ID

LI

LA

-o

t-

MJ

It

--

-j

mi

rI N:

-,j

NJ

"i

'~

cN

a:

c,

ID

-A

.~

;'

4.40

r- afl

~ co N

r-

UN

I Or3,

go

r-

in N

LnU 0.

'0
I

0- -r

t-

C 0'

rn

-4

'o CO
I

1,

1*1 CO
.- q4

0
"

0
4~U

'

oN

r-4

I~a,

-P

-y

-1

co

r.:

-D

t.

0,

jo
0v
U6

.1coL

-,

-t

-D

-Jw-

'r

0,

C)

-v

r-

30
..-

-VD 0
I . '~1~ .

oS..

~
I

7-

CD

"r

4I

U~~~~~~

-.

..

--

.-

---.

vA'1 N

LAL

0 D

- I
co
N

71 'D

u'

--

--

-.0

~0 ro

00

- t~.. a- ~

Or

a..

WN

'D

00 N

'00

f-

(1

L, a

U-

*01 E N O* co '.0 N 00 r1'.

IV

--

z-

-r

'o

APPENDIX D STATIC STABILITY DERIVATIVES, INCREMENTAL DERIVATIVES AND

FREE-STREAM LIFT-CURVE SLOPES FOR STERN CONFIGURATION SERIES

65

TABLE. 4 -

STATIC STABILITY DERIVATIVES, INCRFMENTAL DERIVATIVES, AND FREE-STREAM LIFT-CURVE SLOPES FOR STERN CONFIGURAT1ON SERIES

Se1neZ'
S te mr l a ne p Configuration zw

'

Z LZw

M' amw

Cz
Cz lC

mw

3A 5A 7A 9A

-0.01117 -0.01189 -0.01218 -0.01239

0.01117 0.01072 0.01060 0.01061

-0.00315 -0.00387 -0.00416 -0.00437

-0.00145 -0.00190 -0.00202 -0.00201

1.223 1.049 0.866 0.739

3.502 2.944 2.509 2.169

IIA
3B 5B 7B 9B 11B

-0.01239
-0.01499 -0.01662 -0.01776 -0.01833 -0.01862

0.01061
0.00906 0.00825 0.00770 0.00759 0.00768

-0.00437
-0.00697 -0.00860 -0.00974 -0.01031 -0.01060

-0.00201
-0.00356 -0.00437 -0.00492 -0.00503 -0.00494

0.622
1.815 1.616 1.432 1.244 1.085

1.903
3.754 3.277 2.883 2.558 2.287

66

TABLE 4 (continued)

Ste rnp lane Configuration

Z'

Hw '

.Zw'

tMw

3C 5C 7C 9C lic 3D 5D 7D 9D lID

-0.01933 -0.02199 -0.02396 -0.02500 -0.02sbc -0.02498 -0.02840 -0.0 11 37 -0.03438 -0.03572

0.00716 0.00586 0.00526 0.00469 0.00468 0.00496 0.00359 0.00229 0.00162 0.00073

-0.01131 -0.01397 -0.01594 -0.01698 -0.0175.8 -0.0169r' -0.02038 -0.02 335 -0.02636 -0.02770

-0,00546 -0.00676 -0.00736 -0.00793 -0.0079q -0.007,66 -0.0C,904 -0.01033 -0.01100 -0.01189

2.241 2.043 1.848 1.630 1.440 2.539 2. 305 2.122 2.003 1.808

3.893 3.472 3.111 2.804 2.542 4.013 3.645 3.321 3.037 2.791

Notes:

1.

Z w

and M w

for the bare body

are -0.00802

and 0.01262

respec-

tively. 2. CLA is computed from Equation (1) using the effective aspect

ratio of 3.

the planes extended


*

through the body.

C.

-AZ

2A

[7

REFERENCES 1. Whicker, L. Folger and Leo F. Fehlner, "Free-Stream Characteristics of a Family of Low-Aspect-Ratio, All-Movable Control Surfaces for Application to Ship Design," DTMB Report 933 Revised Edition (December 1958). Gertler, MorLon, "The DTMB Planar-Motion Mechanism System," Report 2523 (July 1967). NSR.DC

68
OH~~ OOFPwwa u n HJt iN .. '.... .. H D |'~l ilN | | .tA

INITIAL DISTRIBUTION Copies 1 I 2 WEr CHONR/438 Cooper NRL i 1 Code 2027 Code 2629 Copies 1 2 NAVSHIPYD LBEACH/Lib NAVSHIPYD MARE 1 Lib 1 Code 250 NAVSHIPYD PUGET/Lib NAVSHIPYD PEARL/Code 202.32 NAVSEC SEC 6034B I SEC 6110 I 1 1 I 1 1 I SEC SEC SEC SEC 6114H 6120 6120 6136 SEC 6144G SEC 6148 NORVA/6660.03 Blount

1 1 8

I 1 1 1 4

ONR/Boston ONR/Chicago ONR/Pasadena NORDA USNA Tech Lib 1 1 Nay Sys Eng Dept 1 B. Johnson Bhattacheryya 1 NAVPCSCOL 1 1 1 Lib T. Sarpkaya J. Miller

1 12 I I 1

NAVSEC,

DDC AFOSR/NAM AFFOL/FYS, NSF/Eng Lib LC/Sci & Tech DOT/Lib TAD-491.1 MMA 1 U. U. J. Olsen

1 3

NADC NOSC 1 1 I Lib Fabula Hoyt

1 1 1 1 4

I I 1

NCSL/712 1). Humphreys 131 NCEL/Code NSWC, Dahigren

Lib of Bridgeport/E. Uram

NAVSEA SEA I I SEA 1 SEA 1 SEA 3 SEA

0322 033 03512/Peirce 037 09G32 032C

of Cal/Dept Naval Arch, Berkely I Lib 1 Webster 1 Pauling 1 Wehausen U. of Cal/San Diego 1 I A.T. Ellis Scripps Inst, Aero Lib T.Y. Wu A. Acosta Lib

I 1 I I I

NAVFAC/Code

NAVSHIPYD PTSM11/Lib NAVStIIPYD PHILA/Lib NAVSHIPYD NORVA/Lib NAVSHIPYI) CIIASN/LIib

CIT 1 1 I

Catholic U. of Amer./Civil & Mech Eng

69

Copies 1
1 1 2 Colorado State U./Eng Res Cen U. of Connecticut/Scottron

Copies
5 SIT I 1 1 I I

Cornell U./Sears Florida Atlantic U. 1 Tech Lib 1 S. Dunne Harvard U./Lib U. of Hawaii/Bretschneider U. of Illinois/J. Robertson 1 I 2

Lib Breslin Savitsky P.W. Brown Fridsma

U. of Texas/Arl Lib Utah State U./Jeppson Southwest Rest Inst 1 Applied Mech Rev 1 Abrahamson Stanford U. I Eng Lib 1 R. Street Stanford Res Inst/Lib U. of Washington/Arl Tech Lib

1 1 1 3

U. of Iowa 1 Lib I Landweber I Kennedy Johns Hopkins U./Phillips Kansas State U./Nesmith U. of Kansas/Civil Eng Lib
.

1 I C 1 1 5

Lehigh U./Fritz Eng Lab Lib MIT 1 1 I I Lib Mandel Abkowitz Newman 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 5

Webb 1 I 1

Inst Lib Lewis Ward

Woods Hole/Ocean Eng Worchester PT/Tech Lib SNAME/Tech Lib Bethlehem Steel/Sparrows Point Bethlehem Steel/New York/Lib Bolt, Beranek & Newman/bib

SLeehey

U.

of Minn/St. Anthony Falls I Silberman I Schiebe 1 Wetzel 1 Song

Exxon, NY/Design Div. Tank Dept General Dynamics, EB/Boatwright Gibbs & Cox/Tech Info Hydronautics 1 Lib 1 I I I E. A. V. C. Miller Goodman Johnson C. 11su Sunnyvale/Waid

U. of Mich/NAME I Lib 1 Ogilivie I Hammitt U. of Notre Dame bib 1 En I Strandhagen Parkin

III I

Penn State/Arl/B.

Lockheed,

Princeton U./Mellor

70

Copies 2 McDonnell Douglas, I J. Hess 1 T. Cebeci Long Beach

1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1

Newport News Shipbuilding/Lib Nielsen Eng & Res Oceanics Rockwell International/ B. Ujihara Sperry Rand/Tech Lib Sun Shipbuilding/Chief Naval Arch Robert Taggart Tracor

CENTER DISTRIBUTION Copies 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 10 1 1 1 30 1 Code 1500 1504 1520 1521 1524 1540 1552 1560 1561 1564 1564 1568 1572 1576 5214.1 522.1 522.2 W.E. V.J. Cummins Monacella

R. Wermter P. Pien Lin Morgan

W.C. W.B. J.

McCarthy

G. Hagen C. Lee J. E. Feldman Dempsey

G. Cox M.D. W.E. Ochi Smith

Reports Distribution LI.b (C) Lib (A)

71

DTNSRDC ISSUES THREE TYPES OF REPORTS (1) DTNSRDC REPORTS, A FORMAL SERIES PUBLISHING INFORMATION OF PERMANENT T-CHNICAL VALUE, DESIGNATED BY A SERIAL REPORT NUMBER. (2) DEPARTMENTAL REPORTS. A SEMIFORMAL SERIES. RECORDING INFORMATION Or A PRELIMINARY OR TEMPORARY NATURE. OR OF LIMITED INTEREST OR SIGNIFICANCE, CARRYING A DEPARTMENTAL ALPHANUMERIC IDENTIFICATION (3) TECHNICAL MEMORANDA, AN INFORMAL SERIES, USUALLY INTERNAL WORKING PAPERS OR DIRECT REPORTS TO SPONSORS. NUMBERED AS TM SERIES REPORTS; NOT FOR GENERAL DISTRIBUTION.