NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE -= FOR AERONAUTICS 16/67531/metadc54310/m...NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS-=. TECHNICAL NOTE No. 1327 ‘i 16 194/ WIND -TUNNEL INVESTIGATION

NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE

FOR AERONAUTICS-=

.

TECHNICAL NOTE

No. 1327

‘i 16 194/ ‘! ‘:,. ..-

WIND -TUNNEL INVESTIGATION OF THE EFFECT OF POWER

AND FLAPS ON THE STATIC LATERAL CHARACTERISTICS

OF A SINGLE -ENGINE LOW-*G AIRPLANE MODEL

By Vito Tamburello and Joseph Weil

Langley Memorial Aeronautical LaboratoryLangley Field, Va.

Washington

June 1947mz A LIBwY -

LANGLEYMEMO= ‘iRONAmM ,.:.,..L~~TORyLandeYField,‘m--–---

s

.—.-—L -- —.

IWTIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS

TECHNICAL NOTE NO. 1327

WIND -TUNNEL INVESTIGATION OF TKE EFFECT OF POWER

AND FLAPS ON THE STATIC LATERAL CHARACTERISTICS

OF A S~GIW4ZNGINE LOW–WING AIRPIANE MODEL

By Vito Tamburello and-Joseph Well

3UMMARY

As part of a comprehensive investigation of the. effect of power, flaps, and wing position on static

stability, tests were made in the Langley 7- by 10-foottunnel to determine the lateral-stability characteristics

w with and without power of a model of a typical lowwing single-engine airplane with flaps neutral, with a “full-span single. slotted flap, and with a full-span doubleslotted flap.

,... Power decreased the dihedral effect regardless- Of-’

flap condition, and the double-slotted-f’lap configur+tion showed the most marked decrease. The usual effect

. of power in increasing the directional stability wasalso shown. Deflection of the single slotted flapproduced negative dihedral effect, but increased the --directional stability. The effects of deflecting thedouble slotted flap were erratic and marked changes inboth effective dihedral. and directional stabilityoccurred. The addition of the tail surfaces alwayscontributed directional stability and generally producedpositive dihedral effect,

INTRODUCTION

Recent trends in aeronautics have been toward thedevelopment of airplanes with increased power andincreased wing loadings, The realization of theseadvances, however, has introduced new and seriousproblems in the stability and control characteristicsof the airplane. Increased engine power has been shown

2 NACA TN No. 1327

to produce large slipstream effects and trim changes,whereas increased wing loadings have presented theproblem of obtaining higher lifi for take-off andlanding without impairing stability and control.

A comprehensive investi ation was undertaken atfthe Langley Laboratory in 19 1 to determine the effects

of power, full-span flaps, arid the vertical position ofthe wing on the stability and control characteristics of’a model of’a typical single-engine airplane. The presentwork includes the lateral-stability and control charac-teristics of the model as a low-wing airplane, Theresults of the longitudinal-stability investigation withthe model as a low-wing airplane are presented inreference 1.

COEFFICIENTS AND SYMBOLS

The results of the tests are presented as standardNACA coefficients of forces and moments, Rolling-,yawing-, and pitching+noment coefficients are givenabout the center+f-gravity location shown in figure 1(26.7 percent of the mean aerodynamic chord). The dataare referred to the stability axes, which are a systemof axes having their origin at the center of gravityand in which the Z-axis is in the plane of’symmetry andperpendicular to the relative wind, the X-axis i.sin theplane of symmetry and perpendicular to the Z-axis, andthe Y-axis is perpendicular to the plane of symmetry.The positive directions of the stability axes, of theangular displacements of the airplane and controlsurfaces, and of the hinge moments are shown in figure 2,

CL lift-coefficient (Lif?t/qS)

Cx longitudinal-force coefficient (x/qs)

C* lateral-force coefficient (Y/qS)

c% rolltng-moment coeff’tci.ent (L/qSb )cm pitching-moment coefficient (M/qSc~)C* yawing-moment coefficient (N/qSb)

.

.

HAGA TN ~?O● 1327 3

Chr rudder hinge -mcment cooffictent. @@5r2)

Tc I effective t.@rustcoefficient based on wing area

NACA TN 1?0. 1327

propel ler.”diameter (2.O@ ft on model)

prcpeller ~peed, resolutions per second

mass density of air, slugs per cubic f~ot

angle of attack of fuselage center” line, de~rees

angle of yaw, degrees

control-surface deflection with respect to chord1ine, degrees

propeller blade angle at-O.~~ radius (25° on model)

effective dihedral, degrees

rate of change ot rolling-moment coefficient withangle of yaw (ac@yJ)

rate of change of -moment coefficient withangle of yaw (~Y;$$ )

rate of change of lateral-force coefficient withangle Or yaw (~cy/’w

Subscripts:

e elevator

r rudder

av average

trim trim condition

lIO12ELJWD APPARATUS

The tests were made in the Langley 7- by 10-foottunnel, which is described in references 2 and ~t ‘The.model was a modifie~ ~-scale model of a fighter airplaneLj .. ,---

.

●

.

.-

.

1

1—

NACA TN NO. 1327 5

.

.

.

.-

and is shown in figure_ 1. No landing gear was used forthe tests. The wing was fitted wi’t a ~O-percent-cho Rldouble slotted flap that_covar~d 93 percent of the spanand was designed frow data in reference ~. For the flajj-neutral tests, the flap was retracted and the gaps.werefaired to the airfoil contour with modeling clay. Therear portion of the flap was deflected 30° for the single-slotted-flap tests, and for tests with the double slottedflap both parts of the fla~ were deflected 300. (Seedetail of flaps in fig. 1.) For the flap-deflected condi-tions, the gap between the inboard ends of the flap(directly below the fuselage) was se_aledwith Scotchcellulose tape.

A more detailed drawing of ,the tail assembly 1sshown in figure ~. T~e.horizontal tail hadan invertedClark Y seotion and was equipped with a fixed leadtng-edge slot. The reasoning behind the horizontal taildesign is treated in re?ergnce 1. When the model wastested with the flaps neutral, the slot was sealed.

The vertical tail (fig. 3) was offset l~” to the left

to help counteract the asymmetry in yswing moment dueto slipstream rotation.

Power for the 2-foot-dismeter, three-blade, right-hand, metal propeller was obtained from a 56-horsepowerwater-cooled induction motor mounted in the fuselagenose. The motor speed was measured by means of an electrictachometer. The dimensional characteristics of thepropeller are given in figure 4.

Rudder;hinge moments were measured by means of &nelectric strain gage mounted in the fin.

TESTS

Test

The tests were made

AND RESULTS

Conditions

in the Lan~”lev 7- by 10-foottunnel at dynamic pressures of 12.5? p;~ds ~er squarefoot foP the power-on tests with the double slotted flapand 16.3’7pounds per square foot for all other tests.These d

ramlc pressures correspond to airspeeds of about

70 and O miles per hour, respectively. The test

6 NACA TN No. 1327

Reynolds numberson the wing mean

were about 875.000 and 1.003.759, basedaerodynamic c&rd of 1.3& feet. “>cause

of the turbulence factor of 1.6 for the tunnel, effectiveReynolds numbers (for maximum lift coefficients) wereabout l,@0,000 and 1,600,000, respectively.

Corrections

All power-on data have been corrected for tareeffects caused by tb.emodel support strut. T@ p-oyei-off data, however, have not been corrected for t+reeffects because they have been foun~to be relati”ve~ysmall and erratie on sindlar models, especially withflaps deflected. Jet-boundary corrections have beenapplied to the angles of attack} Iongitud.inal-forcecoefficients, and tail-on pitching-moment coeffi.ci.ents,The corrections were computed as follows:

All jet

‘cm=-57”’(i-9 ‘~c’ ~jet-bo~dary-co. rrectioq factor at wing (0:112~]

total jet=boundary-correction fac’torat tail(varies between .0.200 and 0.210)

model wing area (9.4& sq ft)

tunnel cross-sectional area (69.Ij9sq ft)

change in pitching-mom.qnt coefficient per degreechange in stabilizer setting as determinedin tasts

ratio of effective dynamic pressure ov~r thehorizontal tail to free-streari d-ynamicpressure

boundary corrections kereaddedti” the t~st flat=

.

.

.

Test Procedure

A propeller calibration was made by measuri~ thelon~itudinal force with the model at zero yaws zeroangle of attack, flaps neutral, and tail removed for arange of propeller speed. The effective thrust” coeffi-cient was then computed from the relation

Tc 1= Cx(propeller operating) - cX(propeller Pemoved)

.The motor torque was also measured and the propellerefficiency computed. The results of the propeller caM-bration .(9 = 2~0 ) are shown tn f;:~ea~a ~:J:ure 6illustrates the relation between which iSrepresentative of w constant-power operating curve for aconstant-speed propeller. For simplicity, a straight linevariation of T~t with CL was used (Tc’ = 0.161CL).The propeller speed requir~d to simulate this thrustcondition was determined from figures 5 and 6. Theapproximate amount of thrust horsepower represented is givenin figure 7 for various model “scales and yi_ng loadings.The value of Tc ! for the tests with the propallerwindmilling was about -0.00~,

.At eaoh a~le of attack for power-onmw tests thepropeller speed was held constant throu&hout tine7awran:e. . Because the lift and thrust coefficients varywith yaw when the propeller speed and angle of’ attac!;are held constar~t, the Qlrust coefficient is strictl;rcorrect O:I1;Yat zero :-aw.

Latertil”-stahilit#deri.vativ&swen?e obtained Jrompitch te’stsat an@es of yaw of *~0 by assmin~ a strai@t-line variation between these points. The effect~vedihedral a~le was determined from the derivative Ctti

n-

by c~hsidering

An outltne

. .. ..,

.,.,.

“Presentation,of Resu”lts I .

to the figures presenting the ‘results ofthe investigation is givefi as follows: .-. ~.. ..

., .-..,. ,.

,,

8 NACA’TITNo. 1327

Fi,gure

Ef’feet of power on C~’ cn~,$ ‘d c%:

Flap neutral . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . 8Single slotted flapDouble slotted flap

_de_flect6d-_. . . . . . ~ .. . ___9deflected . . . . . . . . ..10

increments in C$and C%.’ ~ %resulting from:

,-,,0 11

: :;

Power lo...;..;.. .,~ o.......Flapdeflection, . . . . . . . . . . . . .Tail surfaces. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Aerodynamic characteristics in yawF2ap neutral . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Single slotted flap defb.cted .. . ; . . . .Double slotted flap deflected . ~ . . . . .

aerodynmlc cnaracteri s~lcs in yawsingle slotted flap deflected . .

Rudder control characteristics:Flap neutral ... . . . . . . . . .Single slotted flap deflected .. ,Double slotted.flqp deflected . .

Effect” o~wing and fuselage modl.fic.ationson. . .-----with the.,

.*9*

. .

. . .

.0.

. ‘* ●

,..

● ☛

✌✎

✎ ✎

● ✌

✎ ✎

✎✎☛

✌☛

● ☛

✎ ✎

.

*

I&: 15. 16

..-

. 17 ●

. 18lg

: 20

DISCUSSION

Effective- Dihedral Derivative()%*

. .

The variation 6f “effective-dihedral derivative()Cw

with lift coefficient (figs. 8 to 10) was generally smoothfor all conditions with the’exc6ptLon of the double-slotted-flap configuration. The irregularity of thecurves for this condition is attributed to unsteady liftincrements of the .fl”apon the rig’htand left wing panels.(See,,reference 1.).: —..,

Effect of power.- For all configurations tested,except those with me C@uble slotted flap, the variationof effective dihedral with lift coefficient was approxl-

.

I*’

mately linear for power-off conditions and there was

NACA TN No. 13279

almost no variation for the tail-off configurationsWith power on, however, the effective dihedral generallydecreased with increasing lift coefficient for bothconstant power and constant thrust conditions (figs. &to 10). Unusually large variations of effective dihedral(14° to -.25°)were obtained with the double-slotted-flapconfiguration.

I

.,

.

*

.

The incremental values of effective dihedral (AC )resulting from a change from windmilling propeller to%constant power are shown in figure 11. These data showthat increasing power caused a decrease in,ef’fectived~~. ‘.This decrease was greater as “the llft ccef~lcient wasincreased except for the doubie-slotted-flap cofif~gura’cionfor which the unsteady lift increments of tha flapprobably caused a different trend. Part of the decreasein effective dihedral with power resulted from anincrease in slipstream velocity over the trailing wingduring sideslip, which tended to produce rolling momentsin a direction that would give adecrease in effectivedihedral. The increase in slipstream velocity ~ver thewing-fuselage juncture probably magnified thewing-fuselage

.--r—.

interference, wb.fch on the low-wing airplane caused a ‘- ““~;. ‘—reduction i.ndihedral effect (reference 5) and thus causedan additional decrease in effective dihedral with power.

The reduction in effective dihedral caused by power(model with the tail on) ranged from 0° to 3° throughoutthe lift range for the flap-neutral case from 1° to ~“

~ to 190 for thefor the single slotted flap, and from 11double slotted fla~.

Effeot of flap deflection.- The effect of deflectingthe single slotted rlap on e~fective dihedral is shown infigure 12. Inasmuch as the double-slott~cl-flag”cofifigu-ration was not tested at lift coefficients low enough tomake a direct comparison with the flap-neutral condition,the increments between single- and double-slotted-flapdeflection are also indicated in figure 12 to show the.effect of the double slotted flap.

Deflecting the sfngle slotted flap always producednegative effective dihedral. Vlth the ta$l on, thereduction of cZ* caused by flap deflection was slightlyless. The ohange in effective dihedral caused by ~lgpdeflection was almost independent of the power condition

1

10 NACA TN ]~0, 1327

used. The analysis in reference 6 indicates that partof the reduction in effective dihedr~l when the flapsare deflected can be attributed to the swept-torwardposition of’the flaps.

Deflecting the double slotted flap has an erraticbut pronounced effect on %*” The effective dihedral

is reduced with power cm but:is increased with poweroff. This increase with power off is though~to be aresult of the unsteady flow conditions obtained withthe double slotted flap.

Effect @f tail surfaces.- The effect of the tailsurfaces on the effective dihedral is summarized infigure 13, The data show that the tail sur~aces almostalways contributed a positive dihedral effect; theincrement was slightly greater with the power on. Itshould be noted that the rolling moment contributedby the vertical tail 1s dependent upon the dist~ncefrom the X-axis (fig. 2) to the center of pressure ofthe vertical tail. For a given lift coefficient,therefore, it follows that the double-slotted-flapconditicn would show the greatest positive increrm+nt IncL* and the flap-neutral conditiori the leastr This

trend is shown to occur for the ’flaa neutral and for thesingle slotted flsp and.,in the higher lift ra~ge,forthe double slotted flap. Similar resscni.ng cen be followedto explain the vsriation of AC2~, wtth lift coeff’ictent.

Further, inasmuch 8S the increment in C2,J resulting

from the tail is s function of tail Iift,’it is cbviousthat, if the rudder deflection for trim at the variousangles of si~~slip were consids~e~, dc~ would besomewh8t reduced. *

Effect of modifications.- In an attem~t to reducethe large loss in effectiv~dihedral that occurs-in theflap-down power-on condition, several modifications weremade to the model, tested with the single-slotted-flapconfiguration.

One change consisted in removing the flap centersection beneath the fuselage, its span being equivalentto 9.7 percent of the flap span (fig.~}. Thismodification with constant power, however, gave only“slightly less negative effective dihedral whereas, withpower off, it decreased the effective dihedral somewhRt.(See fig. l?(a) .) The other modification consisted in

.

-.

.

.

.

NACA TN No. 1327

placing a spoiler beneath the fuselage as shown infigure l?(b) . Again no noticeable improvement JVasevident fo’rthe critical constant-power condition(fig. l’7(b)).

(%)Directional-Stability Derivative CEffect of power .- The effects of .ower on the

direc~ stabilit y derivative [cw~ are presentedL

in figure 11. With the tail on, po~er” always increasedthe directional stability for any flap configurationwhereas with the tail removed, power produced both asmall stabilizing and destablliztng tendency. Thecontribution of power to for the model with tail -

c%on varied throughout the lift ra~e from about O to-2.0011 for the flao-neutral configuration, -0. JOIC to-~.003Z with the single slotted flap and -0.0004 to-0.0017 with the double slotted flap, ... .-

The effect of the windmilling propeller was to causea destabilizing shift of about 0.00020 in

c%for most

conditions. With the tail on and wclththe double slottedflaps deflected, the effect was considerably greater(see fig. lC).

Effect- of flap deflection.- Deflection of the singleslotted flap was found t increase the directionalsta”oility. (See fig. 12:)

—...me data indicate ~hat this

increase is augmented when power is on and furtherincreased when the tail surfaces are In place. Thecontribution of AC~1, due to single-slotted-flap

>.deflection (model with tail on) ranges from -0.0015 to-0.0012 with the windmilling propeller and from -0.0022to -0.0019 for the constant-gower condition. It iSshown i?creference 5 that the increase in ‘-enI is..

vpartly oaused by the favorable wing-fuselage interferenceon low wtn,g designs, end is further increased by deflectingthe flaps. ~

Deflecting the double slotted flap also increased.the directional stability for all conditions except thepower-on condition for the model with tail on for whicha considerable destabilizing increment is shown.

12 NACA TN NO. 1527

Effect of taii surfaces.- The tail surfaces, ks ‘ex,pec~ed, always provide directional. stability “n~

(See fig. 13.) For the wlndmilling condition, the tailcontributions remained almost constant throughout thelift range for the flap-neutral and single-slotted-flapconfigurations. With constant power, however, theincrement in Cn~ was found to increase as CL increased.

The increment, moreover, was ~lways g?eater wl~h poweron than with power off.

It has been shown (reference 5) that the effect of’wing-fuselage interfere~ce on fin.effectiveness Isfavorable for low-wing designs. An explanation of thisfavorable Interference is offered in reference 7. Itis sufficient to say that for a low-wtqz, airplane thevertical tail is ~Ldnly in a r~~l,on ~kst~bi,lf,z~~~sidewash.

The effect of tail configurs.tion on the charac-teristics in yaw are contained in figures 1~ to 16.Inasmuch as no ru,dder-free tests were made for thesingle-slotted-flap configuration, the rudder-freecharacteristics were estl.mated from cross plots of’therudder-hhge-moment and yawing-moment curves. Lessdirectional’ stability existed in all cases when therudder was free than when held fixed. No rudder lockoccurred for any o.fthe configurations tested althoughsuch a tendency was present. It is interesting ta notethat in the double-slotted-flap configuration wit-htailremoved, the magnitude of ,Cn~ contributed b~ the flap

is sufficient to cause a stable yawin~-moment curva witiflthe ~ropeller remove”d and, to a lesser degree, with theoropsller windmi>ling. (See figs. 16(a) and (b).)

Directional Control and Trim

Effect of power on rudder control and hinge-momentcharacterist ics*- A summary of ~o~e ofitie principalcontrol and hinge-moment parameters obtained from tb.eresults of the ~aw tests.(figs. IS to 2.0)is given intable I.

.

.

.

FACA T,NNO, 1327 13

The progressively reduced rudder effectiveness 6$/d a~for the’windmilling condition w-ith single-and’ double-slotted-flap deflection 1s caused”by the increased-directionalstability, which w-aybe atit+buted to the flaps. Withpower on, the value of b$/c6r was considerably lowerthan with power off for the sin~lg-slotted-flap condition.It is apparent in this instance.that the increase indirectional stability caused by power was ~reater thanthat caused by the increese in q at the tail.

For the flap-neutrel configuration only sli~ht changesoccurred in the hin,ge-mo~ent parameters ~~~d$ and

dOhr/h‘5r with power. The thrust coe~ficien~ is low forthis condition (low CL) and therefore power effects vouldalso be expected to be low. For the other fla~ conditions,the effect of qower is to ir.crease the values of the hi~e-moment parameters. This effect is especially ,mar%redon

‘ values of LChr/?$ for the double -slotted-flap condition.

Effect of power on tri7.C- A factor of primeimportance to the pilot is the trim change t:d.t~power.The dashed curve for Cy = @ on the ~~wi~~~-m-o:nentcurves(figs, 18 to 20) indicates points on the C1l-curve atwhich the lateral force is zero. The point at which thecurve for Cy = O intersects the Cn-axis gives the -rudder deflection and yaw sngle necessary to maintainstraight flight with zero ban~k, The changes in rudderdeflection required to trim Ivith the wtngs level whenpower is applied and the corresponding cha~es in yawangle are as follows:

--F c~av “ A+trin

t

‘%imFlap (deg)(deg) (deg).— —-

Neutral 1.2 003 -2 o*1

.Single slotted 9*7 2.1 -23 ● 5 6,0

‘Double slotted 7*3 2.9 -28 6.?-. -——

These res~~lts show that alt?m~ the triu.cha~~escaused b~ power are ratll-erIarges control could proba-bly be maintained. The trim charz~esresult from cha~~~e oftwist imparted to tileslipstream’ by the propeller andare dependent upon blade~sqle se.ttln~-and other ~ro~ellercharacter~stics. ‘Ikeuse ofa,skewed thr’wt axis would

—.

●

.

provide an ideal way to reduce the magnitude of t?~cdirectional trim change s.. . “.-

.

CC!NCLUSIONS

Tests were conducted on a pcwered model equinpedwith full-span single slotted and double slotted flapsto investigate the effects of po:tier,flap deflection, –and ta-ilsurf~.ceson the lateral st~bility and controlcharacteristics. ‘Yhefollowing conclusions can be drawnfrom the data presented.

1. Effect of power:

(a) Power produced negative effective ciihec?r~lwhich generally increased with the lift coefficient.

(b) Application of power increased the airec-ttonal stability Or the-complete rncdel. @e9terstability was reeliz.ed as the lift coefficientincreased.

2. Effect o~flaps:

(a) Sinflle-slottx+d-fl.ap deflection producednegative effective dihedral, which w_~svl.rtuallyindependent of the power condition.

(b) Ileflection of Ehe single slotted flapproduced positive incramonts .ofdirectional sta-bility. The increase in diTeCtiOn,al stabilitywes less pronounced es the lif-tcoefficientincreased.

(c) The effe.~tscf double-slotted-fiep deflec-tion were erratic and marked chanpes in both effec-tive dihedral and directional stsbility occurred..

j. Effect of tail surfecei:

(a) The tail ‘surfaces contributed positiveeffective dihedral except through pert cf the liftran~e in the double-slott-ed-fla? configuration, Noconsistent variation with lift coefficient of thaincrement due to the presence of the tail existedamong the configurations test~d.

.

-.

.

.

r

NAcA TN No. lj27 15

(b) Positive inc~ements of directional stabilitywere provided by the tail surfaces. These incrementsvaried slightly throughout the lift ranpe for the .windmilling condition and Increased with liftcoefficient for the constant-power condition.

Langley Memorial Aeronautical Labo@3toryNational ?ldvisoryCommittee Por””Aeio–na.utic”S

Langley Field, ‘/a., April 19, 1946

. ,,.

. .

16 NACA TN No. 1327 - “ .

REFERENCES .

IS Wallace, Arthur R., Rcssi, Peter F.,and Wells, Evalyn G.:Wind-Tunnel Investigation of’the Effect of’I?owerandFlaps on the Static Longitudinal Stability Char:.c- “teristics df a Sin le-Engine Low-WinC AirPlano liod910

5NACA TN No.1239s ~ l.~~

.2. Harris, Thomas A: The 7 by 10 Foot-Wind Tunnel of theNational Advisory Committee for Aermautics, NACARep. No, 412, 19310

3. Wenzinger, Carl J.,and Harris, Thomas A,: $/ind-TunnelInvestigation of an NQA.C.A. 23012 Airfoil withVarious Arrangemefits of Slotted Flaps. NACARep. No. 664,.1939.

—

40 Harris, Thomas A., and Reoant, Istdore G.: Wind-Wu,nnelInvestigation fifNACA 23012, 23021, and 23030 ,Airfoils Equipped with 40-Percent-Chcrd IbubleSlotted Flaps. NACA Rep. Nc. 725, 1941. .

5. Hous=;--Rufus O.,and Wallace, Arthur R. : %’lnd-TumelInvestigation of ~tfect nf Interference en Lateral-Stability Characteristics of Four NACA 23012 Wings,an Elliptical and a Circular Fuselage, and Vert3.calFins. NACA Rep- No. 705, 1941.

6. Tucker, Warren A.: Wi~d-Tunnel Investfgatimn ofEffect rf ‘(YingLoca~-ion, Power, and Flap Deflectionon Effective Dihedral cf a T~ical Single-EngineFight6r-Air~jlane Model with Tail Removed. HACATN No. 1061, 1946.

7. Pass, H. R.: Analysis of Wind-Tu.TlnelData en DirectionalStability and Control. NACA TN No. 775, 1940,

.

.

d

T~LE I - SUMQJIY ~F RUDDER-CONTROL AND HINGE-MOMENT PLRM E,TERS

TFlap PowerNeutral ‘.yi.ndmillingI

Sin@eslotted Wlndmlllin@

Doubleslotted Windmill~nc

Neutral Constant?ower

Single Constantslotted ~Owar

Double Constantslotted power

&

1.2

9.7

7.3

1.2

9*7

7.3

CL

0.3

2.0

2.6

*3

2.2

3.1

b Cnb~

.G.wlo

-.0011

-.0011

-.001.1

-.0017

-.(?019

.—

r—

0. C016 0,0006

-.0025 .0005

.

-.co29 -.0001

-.0019 .0007

-.oo’5~ .0005

-.0053 ,0

,0.56 -0.0020

-.4-4 -.0009

-.3e -.0035

-.58 -.0019

-.31 -.?080

I-.36 -.014C

%

b6r--

-o. cio55

-.0048

-.0059

-,3~47

-.0101

-.0117

.—.

NiiTIONAL AJVISORYCOMMITT5E FOR .AERCNNJTICS

* . .4J.

.

/0.

‘L II-----4.. -3 4

I

,

Gec?mWc ak?mtertilks

Whgarecz, yet. .,.... 9.44Mc, ff.... ., . . . . . . ..l.36LW&mWttif.K) . . . . . . e 26.70

% ;, ...,. NACA ZZIK

7p: L.. v.. .NACA 2209Why Mcidente, deg., , , . . s ~.o

“h a.--’bm

‘P /3.89 @/

L%

46.6

2/, 68etzled W

Fqo /wfn71 W?@? Jwai?%p ncubksA9?z5i&p

Root S@7hm

1- Y7ik6W8 10 itek?voZYhIjge

Thrlh$t

mTmLu -v~m—

Figure l.- Three-view drawing of model a6 a low-wing airplane.All dimensions in inches.

1 ,$

I

Fig.2 NACA TN No. 1327

.—7GI=’ ‘a n

+NATIONAL ADVISORY

\

z COMMITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS

Figure 2 .- System of axes and control-surface hinge momentsand deflections. Positive values of forces, moments, andangles are indicated by arrowa. Positive values of tabhinge moments and deflections are in the same directionsa6 the positive values for the control surfaces to whichthe tabs are attached.

.

.

.,

s .

I

/

Ldme.1Mbk4m

A

SeCth B-B (NAOi 0009)

secrlwl c-s (t/Am 00049

I b

VertiCalto//

Sa.t40n .4-A@OK-Y)

(a) Vertical tail.

I

, 1

1EIE*QYarm,yfi...~.&?lEkmtwrms shad e . .0.2RMkbr Lmm,Syt+ . . .0.506F@ddH Km$.chd)f+ ,0.353t+J,tmti/tIIl/ama,yf+ .1.92Vm+knl tail am, sffl ./. 2SEkvatorspan, ft. . . .2.5QRudder span, #. . . .).@

1!

I Y+a;/

/

1/67C

(b ) Horizontal tail.

I

Figure 3.- Model tail assembly.

Fig.4 NACA TN No. 1327

.

.

,/0 .50

.00 *M

.06 .30

.02 ./0

00

I I I I I I NATIONAL ADVISORYCOMMITTEEFORAERONAUTICS I

Figure 4.- Plan form and blade-form curvesfor the model propeller. D, diameter;R, radius to tip; r, station radius;b, section chord; h, section thickness;RAF 6 airfoil section.

NACA, TN No. 1327 Fig. 5

.

/ -—

Y\

\7

) ~

L

,

4

d

\

- ./’4

\

./2’

Jo

\

.(X3

.06

\ ~,Qc .04

\ (h

.02

‘1 o‘-”

NATIONAL ADVISORY

\ CQNNITTEE ~ AEMNAUTKS

\

\

\ \

\

? )

.3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .8 J9 10 11 L?P.opefler udva~ce -diameter ratio, V/n D

Figure 5.- Effective thrust coefficient, torque coefficient,and efficiency as functions of propeller advance-diameterratio for the model of the low-wing airplane tested.D= 2.0 ft; ~ = 25°.

-. .- —. -. —

.-.=

.5

.4

.3

.2

J

0

NATIONAL ADVISORYCO)IMITTEEFORAERONAUTICS

$ .8 /.2 /.6 2.0 2.+ 2.0 3,2

Lift coefficient, CL

Figure 6.- Variation of effective thrust coefficient withlift coefficient for constant-power tests.

,

—-

● ● I .

NACA TN NO. 1327 Fig. 7

.

.

520G

I

1 1- 1 1/ I ry I t I 1 1 1 1

NATIONAL ADVISORY ~

1A I f 1 I I I I I I I I I

f- I I 1 t

/60

/20

o’

w

.,Figure 7.- Variation of approximate horsepower represisnted

and stalling speeds with airplane wing loading.

Fig. 8a

.0/

cry o

70/

.Lu

%p o

-,(222

NACA TN No. 1327

4

.

4 . .Q d+&+*

Q Propeller off<A Pvopeller wmdmlllng

o

NATIONAL ADVISORY

COMMITTEE F@ ASSONAUTICS

-.4 0 ,8 /2 [6L/’Pt C%wcien? , CL

(a) Tail off.

*002

.

.

—

.

.

,—:

.,

.

.

Figure 8.- Effect of power on the variation of c~+r c%?and Cy

4with lift coefficient for the model as a l.ow-

wing airplane with flap neutral.

r

NACA TN No. 1327 Fig. 8b

.02

.0/Cyv

o

.

.

/,6CL

-,004

10

—

.—

(b) .Tail on.

Figure 8.- Concluded .

Fig. 9a NACA TN No. 1327

.02

.0 I

o

.002

0

“.002

r’

-.004

- ~ ~L

4 hr

. ,“ “’

t’o pm l?/x?r off ~A W pelk$- widmilhhg~Cbnsfun+ ww

F~ p .Q/9v TCI=*5M

NATIONAL ADVISORYCOMMITTEE FC4 AMONNITKS &

o .4 .0Liff

(a

.002

-.002

0

-lo

~

t’s.—-u

u

-1.2 2.o 2.4 20I.lJ

coefflck!n?, cL

Tail off.

Figure 9.- Effect of power on the variation of Cl+, C ,v

and Cy+

with lift coefficient for the model as a low-

wing airplane with full-span single “slotted flap.

.

.

.

.

—.

F

.

) NACA TN No. 1327 Fig. 9b

.

.

.

.03

. .02

c Yy

.0/

o

BHo Propeller offA ‘Prope\\er windm\\\\ ng= COnstcant ~wer~ Td =0. IQI~ Tc’ = 0.540

Elo.

.V

al

7 LV2 -to :

%) lil.. +() :

NATIONAL ADVISORY $WM$IITTSE F~ AERDHAIJTICS

*M

7W6 -30

0 .4 .8 2.0 a f?,%L /?7 co A%’d, CL

(b) Tail on.

Figure 9.- Concluded.

NACA TN No. 1327

.

Fig. 10a

,02

Cyq) ,0/

o

.004

, (M2

o

c“+,j#~

Figure

and

1

w- -

I

o Promller offA Prope\\er ullndmilll~g .❑ Covy&u2n;Opwe r

.0 Tc’v T< = 0:660

a .

\

C&

/\. K

%

NATIONAJ. ADVISORY

COHNITTES FOR AFMNW=

lo. - Effect of power on the variation of c1 ,4Cn+t

Cv, with lift coefficient for the model as a low-

.

.

.*

wing a~!plane with full-span double slotted flap.

NACA TN No.

.

.03

Cw@l

.0/

o

.004

.m

7002

;004

1327 Fig. 10b

0

-.006

.—u

-10 Q)>.—

~

-20$ N-/,2 ‘ L6 S2 3.6 u

Lig? c~e2b4iGie%# , CL

(b) Tail on.

Figure 10. - Concluded.

Fig. lla NACA TN NO. 1327

,0/

AcYy o

70/— Flap neutral

‘— 31ngle slatted flap

—. Double slotted flap “‘2

— A c~y\. - ~ (). ———. —- —

7002

0- + \ .

7002

a~p t/W4

r- <

)

-.006 NATIONAL ADVISORY

COWITTEE m AlmMmcs

(a} Tail off.

Figure 11. - Increments in Cz,Cn>

?+

and Cy resulting

from a change from windmil ing propeller to+constant

power for the model as a low-wing airplane.

,

.

.

.

NACA TN No. 1327 Fig. llb

.02

A+y . / .

.01/

/ / / /“. ~ / - /

/

/ // /

o ~ ~~ “

-.oi ~ o~ —\ \

\ .. .

\ . \\ 4?y

\ -,002\

\ ,-.

-.004

0 —- ,

:002 ‘\ / —

A~Y%‘

:0041 /

FIQp neutral

——— %tngle Slotted flap:006 — Double Sl@ed flap

o .4 .8 E L4 2.6 2.-4 2$Liff coegficientil CL

.NATIONAL ADVISORY

COMMITTEE ~ ASRONAWKS

.

(b) Tail on.



. .

.

,(?/A Cyp

~ _ — _.o A

IncrementFran flap neu{rai——

9 ]Fmm JM9k Sfofted—.

— ~ / —/“/— -— - \ //=

7002

,OLW\

b

.002\

LAC2V .

0\\—

~ .PNATIONAL ADVISORY

7002

COMMITTEE ~ ASRONNJTKS

0

fo single slottedfbp

i%doublesioh$dfhp

.

.

.8 12 /6 2.0 2.4f#f coeffi~i~~?j C,’

(a) Tail off. .

Figure 12. - Increments in c1 J Cn 3+$

and Cy+

resulting

from flap deflection for the model as a low-wing airplane ..—

.

r

.

.

NACA TN NO. 1327 Fig. 12b

.01 ‘ IA CYV - —-

0/

~ “— —

:0/ ‘

.002

0\.

/7002

Incrementro eler wiodmi/!@

‘J’— — Co ston+ power ~ FY~ f/@ neutral+0 s~t@e——— P~opel\er whw!!ZXJh9’ . F~ ~lqfe Sloffecj to d~i—.

v

.002ACZY /

o- _ - .

=

700.2

UATIONAL AWKORY

COMMITTEE FM AERONAUTS

(b) Tail on.


*

Fig.13a

.01ACYP

o

.002

AC2

‘o

-.002

NACA TN No. 1327

Flap neufro/

——— Single S/o+/ed P/cip

— — Douh’e slofted f/Op

*— —— . _.

— -- —. . .-.

.... .

-. .-. .

— — — — - ,— —- - \.— — /

—.

—

c- -

—. —_ //— ~A

L w-..I

— ) ....NATIONAL ADVISORY

COMMITTEE FWAEROWJTICS —

0 4 .8 /2 /?.0 2.4 2.8L. if + Coef’d%f, c.

(al Propeller windmill ing.

Figure 13. - Increments in c1 ,

%CW’ and CW contributed

by the tail surfaces for t e model as a low-wing

airplane .

.

.

.

.

~ .-

f’

NACA TN NO. 1327

Flap neutral

——— Single slotted

— — Double Sotkd

Fig. 13b

flap

flap

.02

ACYY

.0/

o

.(?02

A~y

o

(b ) Constant power.


NACA TN No. 1327

A

: %:off

0

-

m Rlldckrnz%’

—

.-. , ,.. ..—

h .—-.. ----

. . \

% . 720// 077

_. __ _

,

m- ~ ~ H-—UATWIUA1AnUlC13DV

! I I 1 1 1 1 1 , I I ,... , ,V,. ”b “-.,””- .

COHMITIEE RX AEROMAUllCS

I ~,‘1

.

.

,(I3

-40 -30 -20 -10 0 -lo 20 30 40.

Angk of yaw, E degd

(a) Propeller windmilling..

Figure 14.- Aerodynamic characteristics in yaw of the modelas a low-wing airplane with flap neutral., a =1.2°. .

r

TN No. 1327 Fig. 14aconc.

-+0 -30 -20 -10 0 /0 20 so 40

~ Angle of yaw, ~ cieg

(a) Concluded.

Figure 14. - Continued.

Fig. 14b nTAf7A ~T ‘NT.+ i Q917

Iiiiii iii

1 f — -L , — J--

:06

DVISORYUSOMAUTKS

~~-—l-.----.-l..d —-..

.

...

-40 -w -20 -/0 o /0 20 30 40

Angle of yQ w, & deg

( b ) Constant power.

Figure 14.- Continued.

r

NACA TN No. 1327 Fig. 14bconc.

.

.

.

.

@l

-.

-40 -30 -20 -/0 o /0 20 30 40

A@ of (#JW, & deg

(b) Concluded.


H+—H+t+

k00‘5

I I I 1 1 I I 1 1 x 1 l\ I

9 I b’ =,.-_+_

g I A 1

z -.06 Cni\ r \/

\

(s5=0’ iNATIONAL ADVISORY

-mCcqflrrss m MM-” “--” --

b-.04&l

.-

-40 -30 -20 -lo )0f+qk of yaw, ~ decj

(a) Propeller off.

Figure 15.- Aerodynamic characteristics inas a low-wing airplane with a full-spanflap. aS9.7°.

UNAU1lCS I I I I

;0, 1327

.6

.4

‘.6 ●

.

20 30 40.

Yaw of the model.

single slotted-1

ni.

NACA TN No. 1327 Fig. 15a cone.

.

.

d ‘

Tail qffI I I I 1 I I 1 I , I

I,

I I

I

L

D=-— — — — — — — — — —

I 1 1 1 I 1 , It I

c –no

I I I 1

///

,“Q T“’&Ii‘off

I \\

d NATIONAL AOVISOkY bCONMITTSE Fti AERONAUTICS

-40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40Mqle of yaw, y, cieq

(a) Concluded.


Fig. 15b NACA TN No. 1327

iJ-

-.00

t- 1

P

Gr=

w’b

L.

\

* d

d~ by’o” =-~dQ \

\

Cn\

6

,NATIONAL ADVISORY

COHNITTES F~ ASSOSAUTKS.—. .-—

-40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40~nqle of yaw, V, decj

.6

.4

,

.

.

.

.(b ) Propeller windmilling.’


r

NACA TN NO. 1327 Fig. 15b cone.

.

.

.1

0

-J

-3

2.2d

1 1 I I I 1 ,

I t

-40 -30 -20 -lo 20 30 4014nqle of ;Clw,q+ %9 \

( b ) Concluded.‘\,’““-...

Figure 15. - Continued.\

-\)..:,,

.

Ux

.—

,,..

Fig. 156 NACA TN No. 1327G*

L1

u“

708t

-40 -30 -20 -[0 20 3(2 40Angte of y~w, Y, C&

(c) Constant power.


.8

.6

.

-.

—

P

.

e-.

.

Fig. 15c cone.

YG } I I 1 I /1 I I I

d.).g~ I I I 1/”-I/ I I 1

+ t1 1 I

/I 1 1 I 1 1 1 >1 1

.

c 471 I VI I I I I I I I 1~1/1

I Io by= 0°❑ nll off

1 tNATIONAL ADVISORY

COMMITTEE FOS ASSONAUTKS

I Il__L_l~..l_. .-l

-.1 ~

a)CJ

o

,

0 10 20 30do. ,

-40 -30 -20 -loPqle. of yaw,+, deq

(c) Concluded.


Fig. 16a NACA TN ~0. 1327

.

.

.(a) Propeller off.

Figure 16.- Aerodynamic characteristics in yaw of the modelas a low-wing airplane with full-span double slottedflap. aZ7.0°.

.

NACA TN NO. 1327 Fig. 16a cone,

.

.

-40 -30 20- -lo 20 30 4(3Ang~e of ~u”w, ~ i:g

(a) Concluded.

Figure 16.- Continued,

Fig. 16b NACA TN No. 1327

I /1

p$

.W.$

+ 02,’8’u

$:~6.?~

# ..

Pcm.I

(3o

g

L;ff coefficient, CL Pitch~ng-mopnt coetY’icient, Cm ~a

=!

Lo~gitudiM - force cwWIcienf, Cx

Fig. 16c

,/2

.}0

,08

+0

-/2

NACA TN No.

—- p6.. .

-. . .-. ..—

a0

, -J?

— .—..

“- “4-

.— -w“+----

L... .— - -.6

k

—

.....c,,2 8“/-’( ?0

—--- --- —. .— -

/- (> G+ >

L >—-.

---- PIATIONAL ADVISORYCOMMITTEE F~ AERONAUTICS

1111 ..!)“jQ, zo.x..4o

A1-lq/e of yaw, lJr. deg

[c) Constant power.


1327

●

a– —

.

NACA TN No. 1327 Fig. 16cconc.

*

.

-.1

-.

free-3

/’

-+

+noA

-.7

v

{

M

.2%4NATIONAL ADVISORY

C+W’TEE F@ AERONAUTICS

?,0

-+0 -30 -. -/0 o ]0 2,0 30 +()

Ang/e of yaw, y, deg

(c) Concluded.

Figure 16.- Concluded. .

Fig. 17a

—

—

—

—

—

N

‘. .02

Ij.-go0u

-,05

L!iU

-30.

NACA

.

TN NO. 1327

0 Onc%

.

eL

NATIONAL ADVISORY

-/0 o 10 20 30Arqle of ~aw ,9-J,decj

.4

.2

0

-.2

-d

-.6

(a) Effect of removing the flap center section.

u>0.

Figure 1’7.- Effect of model modifications on the aerodynamiccharacteristics of the model as a low-wing airplane witha full-span single slotted flap. a~9.6°; $r = OO.

-.

.

.

.

.

-

.

NACA TN No. 1327 Fig. 17a cont.

,/0

.08

,06

gou o

-.06

-J18

-30 -20 -/o 20 30Angle Ofy~w> v,l~eg

(a) Continued.NATIONAL ADVISORY

aHITISE ~ AESCWUTKS


(D

.

Lift coefficient > CL

●

LJQ

Pitching-moment coefficient, CM

.1 .1w M‘s”’

g-.

.i; ‘1 ‘

, ,


.

.

cm

.

.

.

.

.-

Orl.

w0

❑

0 (%A

.04.

.02% ,

-%

0

-.02

-.04

NATIONAL ADVISORY w

CONNllTES F~ AISOUALITICS46

-30 , -20 -10 0 10 20 30Angle of yaw> v, deg

(b) Effect of adding a spoiler. ”

— .—


Fig. 17b cont. NACA TN No. 1327

.06

.04

z -.02gEg -.04.-3

g -.06

-,08

-30 -20 -10 20 30 40Angie of y~w~ V, k~q

( b) Continued.


1“

.

.—

P4.I

0’

(30

.

Lift coefficient, CL Pitching-moment coefficient, Cm

*G ~ La

.~ o > s!3.


?~ I I I I

-20 -/0 o /0 20 30 40

Ang/e of yaw, & d?g

(a) Propeller windmill ing.

18.- Effect of rudder deflection on the aerodynamic

.

.

.

.

characteristics of the model as a low-wing airplane withflap neutral. a=l.2°.

m.,


.

.

.

*

.

NATIONAL ADVISORY

-20 -10 0 /0 20 30 40

Angie of yaw, ~ dq

I

-—

(a) Continued.


Fig. 18aconc. NACA TN No. 1327

\

; :’..

~ -23

- ~ * ~ @ 4 -Gw

NATIONAL ADVISORYCOMMITTEE FOI AERONAUTICS

-20 -/0 o /0 20 30 40

Angle ot yaw ~ d~g

.

.

.

.

—

(a) Concluded.


NACA TN IfJo. 1327 Fig. 18b

+

.

.06

I

z06

\ A ’75❑ -/50

%

NATIONAL ADVISORYCWHITTEE f~ AERDNAUTKS

-20 “lo o 10 20 30 40

Angle of ya~ & abg

Ls

.

(b) Constant” power.


Fig. 18b cont. NACA TN ?SfO. 1327

&

:0 —-7.5

~ -15~ -23

—. .

00

. , ------- .—...- —.-.. ..,.—. ---b

-- .. ..-

NATIONAL ADVISORY

I COMMITTEE m AERONAUTICS-

1.:”.—-. -.; ——.. f. . —.. - - 1

-20 -/0 o /0 20 30 40

A?@ Of .~a~v, p, G%9

(b) Continued.


.

●

.

.-

.

—

—

NACA TN No. 1327 Fig. 18b cone.

●

✎

*

.

~ ~_ _

A

“1 @~ -

&-~ (d;g]

: :;:

~ -23

.

. .-. _- ...-NATIONAL ADVISORY

CO~.HlllES FOR AERONAUTICS.-

-20 -10 0 /0 20 30 40

AngY’eof yaw, ~ decj

(b) Concluded.


-.

o

./

.2

Fig. 19a N~CA TN NO. 1327

Y

by(d+]

-23\

\\ L h I

--sL\ \“

\ \

\

a \ ,A :;:a

\Q -23 -

m

\w \ y “W

‘1 k\

~

h\

\NATIONAL ADVISORY

CONMITTSS F~ AERONAUTICS

- .—-. L.._._l ‘@J

,3

.2

,/

o

-. /

-, 2

._—_

-20 -/0 30 #A rig/; o T’ y%’w, @“d@g

(a) Propeller windmilling.

.

.-

Figure lS.- Effect of rudder deflection on the aerodynamic-.characteristics of the model as a low-wing airplanewith a full-span single slotted flap. a = 9.7°.

F

.

.

NACA TN No. 1327 Fig. 19a cont.1

.

&.02

$?-

a

A

El

o-

NATIONAL ADVISORY

CONMITTEE FC4 AESONAUTKS

. .

20 - /0 30 40A~g/: Or Y’:W ~ #~89

(a) Continued.

.6

J’

Q)

--


NACA TN No. 1327

-20 - /0 /0 30 40Ang/~ of yaw, PI deg

(a) Concluded.


@

-b3

-.2

4

.

.

—

b

.

—

b-—

s

9

.

.)

.

1327 Fig. 19b

-20 -/0 30 @Ang/: Ot’ ;:W, ~: c?’eg

NATIONAL ADVISORYCOMMITTEE FM ASSONAUfICS

(b) Constant power. ,


Fig. 19b cont.

G’Y

$ .02

.$b owQQ

$-,02

Q

F!-,04

4.~ -.06?

f -.08

NACA TN No. 1327

-20 -/0 /0 20 30 40AD@: Of’ yOW, Yf dc3g

(b) Continued.


■

,6

,4

*2

o

-, 2

-,4

.

.

I

—

—

—.L

,


.$w /.4

.J

7/

o

./

(b) Concluded.

Figure 19.- Concluded,

Fig. 20a NACA TN No. 1327*

)\

\A\

\?.

\JO

(

\) :

\( )

% ~

08\ L

L al

ox -1)A -20 \ o

\.

l\ 1“ ~vx

I \ h I I

-40 --30 -20 -M 20 30 40Arg le of y;w, de;

(a) Propeller windmilling.

1

I

*

Figure 20. - Effect of rudder deflection on the aerodynamiccharacteristics of the model as a low-wing airplane withfull-span double slotted flaps. aZ?.3°.

❑,:


.0’+

I

I l\ \-& I I I I 1 r I I I 1 I I

amt

NATIONAL ADVISORY

CO!!MITTES FLM AERONAUTS

-40 -30 -?0 -/0 o 10 20 30 @Ang /e of YuW, y, deg

(a) Continued.


Fig. 20aconc. NACA TN No. 1327 ● \

(

o

(

...— -—. ..—-

Ux

QIee.

I—

---

._

2!

●

-40 -30 - m 20 3U 4A ng;(d of y%w, ~~&9

“(a) Concluded.

Figure 20. - Continued. #


5

-+

[ I I \ I n I I 1 bI

HN?)w’‘-’ ‘“i I Y-f/l I 1 l\l\l\A#

\ \

t 4 .

~NATIONAL ADhSORY

COMMITTEE fa AERONAUTICS

I I 1 1 I I I i

I I-40 -3 -/33 -10 203540

Angk of y$w,v, ‘$9

./0

.C8

-.oi?g’--3e

-.0+ h

-.06

-m

(b) Constant power.


Fig. 20b cont. NACA TN No. 1327

.08

./2 \

\\

.06

z :06} I I I I I I I I 1 l\\l I I I I 4% Illlllllltl%ll

+-+-i-.08 -

:10 ‘

CWMITTSE FOS A4!RMAuTKs

-,12

I

.6

-40 -t 20 -/0 20 30 40AL@e of ~o~ ~~de~

(b) Continued.


“

::


-J

al?

)

c

.

NATIONAL ADVISORY

CONMITTSS FOS ASSONAUTICS

/

-40 -~ -l?o -/0 20304Ang k of yiW, Y, $g

( b) Concluded.


Documents

NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE -= FOR AERONAUTICS 16/67531/metadc54310/m...NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS-=. TECHNICAL NOTE No. 1327 ‘i 16 194/ WIND -TUNNEL INVESTIGATION