.

WIND-TUNNEL INVESTIGATION
OF A FOWLER FLAP AND SPOILER FOR
A N ADVANCED GENERAL AVIATION W I N G
I

1 -

John We Puulson, Jr.

Luqley Reseurch Center Humpton, Vu. 23665
N A T I O N A L AERONAUTICS A N D SPACE A D M I N I S T R A T I O N W A S H I N G T O N , D. C. JUNE 1976

\..

TECH LIBRARY KAFB,

NM

1. Report No.

~~

2. Government Accession No.

3. Recipient's Catalog No.

NASA TN D-8236
4. Title and Subtitle

WIND-TUNNEL INVESTIGATION O F A FOWLER FLAP AND SPOILER FOR AN ADVANCED GENERAL AVIATION WING
7. Author(s)

June 1976
6. Performing Organization Code
~

8. Performing Organization Report No.

John W. Paulson, Jr.

9. Performing Organization Name and Address

L-10736
10. Work Unit No.

505-10-11 -03
11. Contract or Grant No.

NASA Langley R e s e a r c h Center Hampton, Va. 23665

12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address

13. Type of Report and Period Covered

Technical Note
14. Sponsoring Agency Code

National Aeronautics and Space Administration Washington, D.C. 20546

16. Abstract

An investigation has been conducted in the Langley Research Center V/STOL tunnel to determine the effects of adding a Fowler flap and spoiler t o an advanced general aviation wing. The wing was tested without fuselage o r empennage and was fitted with approximately t h r e e quarter-span Fowler flaps and half -span spoilers. The s p o i l e r s w e r e hinged at the 70-percent chord point and vented when the .flaps were deflected. Static longitudinal and l a t e r a l aerody namic data were obtained over a n angle-of-attack range of -80 t o 220 f o r various flap deflec tions and positions, spoiler geometries, and vent-lip geometries. L a t e r a l characteristics indicate that the spoilers are generally adequate for l a t e r a l con trol. However, the spoilers do have a region of low effectiveness when deflected less than 100 o r 15O, especially when the flaps are deflected 30 o r 40. In general, the spoiler effective n e s s increases with increasing angle of attack, i n c r e a s e s with increasing flap deflections, and i s influenced by vent-lip geometry. In addition, the data show that s o m e two-dimensional effects on spoiler effectiveness are reduced in the three-dimensional case. Results a l s o indi cate the expected significant increase in lift coefficient as the Fowler f l a p s are deflected; when the flap was fully deflected, the maximum wing lift coefficient was increased about 96 percent.

17. Key-Words (Suggested by Authoris))

1 18. Distribution Statement

Unclassified

L a t e r a l control Spoi le r s Fowler flaps General aviation

- Unlimited

Subject Category 08

-.

For Sale by the National Technical Information Service, Springfield, Virginia 221 61

WIND-TUNNEL INVESTIGATION O F A FOWLER F L A P AND SPOILER FOR AN ADVANCED GENERAL AVIATION WING John W. Paulson, Jr. Langley Research Center
SUMMARY

An investigation has been conducted in the Langley Research Center V/STOL tunnel to determine the effects of adding a Fowler flap and spoiler t o an advanced general avia tion wing. The wing was tested without fuselage o r empennage and was fitted with approx imately three -quarter -span Fowler flaps and half -span spoilers. The spoilers were hinged a t the 70-percent chord point and vented when the flaps w e r e deflected. Static longitudinal and lateral aerodynamic data w e r e obtained over an angle-of-attack range of - 8 O to 2 2 O for various flap deflections and positions, spoiler geometries, and vent-lip geometries. Lateral c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s indicate that the spoilers a r e generally adequate for lat e r a l control. However, the spoilers do have a region of low effectiveness when deflected less than loo o r 1 5 O , especially when the flaps a r e deflected 3 o r 400. In general, the 0 ' spoiler effectiveness i n c r e a s e s with increasing angle of attack, i n c r e a s e s with increas ing flap deflections, and is influenced by vent-lip geometry. In addition, the data show that some two-dimensional effects on spoiler effectiveness a r e reduced in the threedimensional case. Results also indicate the expected significant increase in lift coeffi cient as the Fowler flaps a r e deflected; when the flap was fully deflected, the maximum wing lift coefficient was increased about 96 percent. INTRODUCTION The development of new, thick, high-lift airfoil sections has had a profound effect on the general aviation community because these sections offer the possibility of improved performance on s e v e r a l new light a i r c r a f t designs. These airfoils provide higher maxi mum lift coefficients than the conventional 64-Series airfoils used on many general avia tion aircraft. This increase in maximum lift coefficient allows the use of a smaller, m o r e highly loaded wing with less wetted area. These developments can increase cruise performance and improve ride quality. The increased thickness of these airfoils also provides the opportunity f o r wing s t r u c t u r a l weight savings.

'

With an appropriate high-lift device such as a full-span Fowler flap, further reduc tions in wing area may be achieved, and the desirable low landing speeds of typical light a i r c r a f t can be maintained. Full-span flaps, however, generally preclude the u s e of con ventional ailerons, and an alternate method of lateral control i s needed. One such method would u s e partial span spoilers (also known as slot-lip ailerons). Several airplanes which u s e Fowler flaps with the advanced airfoils are already in either the design stage o r e a r l y flight-test stage of development. (See ref. 1.) Some of these airplanes use the 17 percent-thick General-Aviation (Whitcomb) -1 airfoil usually r e f e r r e d t o as the GA(W) -1. (See refs. 2 and 3 . ) One particular a i r c r a f t which u s e s this airfoil is the Advanced Tech nology light twin (ATLIT). (See ref. 1.) This a i r c r a f t u s e s nearly full-span Fowler flaps f o r low-speed performance and half -span spoilers f o r lateral control. These s p o i l e r s are vented when the flaps are extended and unvented when the flaps are retracted. Before the original flight of the ATLIT, t h e r e was concern about the effectiveness of the spoilers at s m a l l deflections when the flaps w e r e deflected 40 because of twodimensional data (refs. 4 and 5). The data of reference 4 indicated that the spoilers had a region of very low effectiveness when deflected less than loo o r 15O. In addition, t h e r e was control r e v e r s a l under certain conditions. If a s m a l l left spoiler deflection was given -c in an effort to produce a negative (left wing down) rolling moment, the result was actually a positive (right wing down) rolling moment. This investigation was undertaken to deter mine to what extent, if any, these two-dimensional effects were ppesent on a three% . . dimensional wing. .t The investigation was conducted in the Langley V/STOL tunnel by using a rectangu lar wing with Fowler flap and spoilers. Static f o r c e s and moments were obtained for the wing with various flap deflections and positions, spoiler deflections, spoiler c r o s s -section geometries, and vent-lip geometries. SYMBOLS The data are presented in the stability-axis system shown in figure 1. The model moment center was 25 percent of the wing chord. A l l measurements and calculations . were made in U.S. Customary Units; however, all values contained in this study a r e given in both SI and U.S. Customary Units. (See ref. 6 . )
b

wing span (without subscript), span of flap, o r vented spoiler (with subscript), m (ft)

CD

drag coefficient,

q,s

Drag

CL

lift coefficient,

L ift
qcos Rolling moment q,Sb Pitching moment q,se Yawing moment q,Sb

Cl

rolling -moment coefficient,

Cm

pitching -moment coefficient,

Cn

yawing-moment coefficient,

CY

side-force coefficient, Side force

%as
wing chord, m (ft) (ft)

mean aerodynamic chord, m roll rate, r a d / s e c

P pb/2V,
g,

wing-tip helix angle, r a d (see appendix) f r e e - s t r e a m dynamic p r e s s u r e , Pa (lbf/ft 2 ) radius, percent of wing chord wing area, m 2 (ft2) (ft/sec)

R
S

v,
X

f r e e - s t r e a m velocity, m / s e c

longitudinal dimension (see fig. 1) longitudinal distance from wing leading edge with respect to mean aerodynamic chord lateral dimension (see fig. 1)

X/C

z
CY

vertical dimension (see fig. 1)

angle of attack of model reference line, positive nose up (fig. l), deg
deflection of flap or spoiler (fig. 3), deg

Subsc ript s :
f
max

flap
maximum
spoiler
APPARATUS AND PROCEDURES

This investigation was conducted in the Langley V/STOL tunnel in support of the ATLIT a i r c r a f t p r o g r a m t o determine the general characteristics of an ATLIT-type Fowler flap and spoiler lateral-control system. An existing aspect-ratio-8.98 rectangular wing with the GA(W) -1 airfoil section was modified to accept the Fowler flap and spoiler as shown in figures 2 and 3(a). The wind-tunnel model was not intended t o represent the ATLIT tapered wing exactly but r a t h e r t o be a general representation of the ATLIT Fowler flap and spoiler system. Tables I and 1 give the coordinates of the GA(W)-1 wing section 1 and flap section, respectively. The wing had a span of 4.01 m (13.16 ft), a chord of 0.45 m (1.46 ft), and an area of 1.79 m2 (19.31 ft2). When the flaps w e r e fully deflected, the wing area was increased by 17 percent to 2.10 m 2 (22.59 ft2). The wing root was at an inci dence of 20 and the wing was linearly twisted to a tip incidence of Oo. For this investiga tion, the model reference line was defined to be the wing-tip chord line. The Fowler flaps w e r e made in four sections on each wing panel (fig. 2) but were always deflected as a unit. Each flap section was mounted on brackets to allow deflections of 00, 100, 200, 300, and 400. Table Ill shows a complete listing of flap deflection and position as well as the spoiler and vent-lip geometries f o r this investigation. Figure 3(b) shows the flap overlap and gap dimensions corresponding t o the various flap deflections and positions. The flap chord w a s 30 percent of the wing chord and the flap span r a t i o bf/b/2 was 0.764. The spoilers w e r e made in four sections f o r the left wing panel only. (See fig. 2.) In o r d e r to simulate the ATLIT spoiler-span wing-span ratio, only the t h r e e outboard sections w e r e deflected during the investigation; the inboard section (spoiler section a)

remained sealed at all times. The t h r e e operative spoiler sections (b, cy and d) had a span ratio bs/b/2 of 0.572 and were hinged at x/e = 0.70. (See figs. 2 and 3(a).) The hinge line was offset 0.015e forward of the leading edge of the spoiler s o that the trailing edge of the spoilers w a s located at x / e = 0.80 when 6 s = 00. This offset hinge line allowed a gap to open between the wing upper surface and the spoiler leading edge as the spoiler was deflected. (See fig. 4.) Each spoiler section w a s removable and could be r e placed with one of three spoiler cross-section geometries (also shown in fig. 4). The vent lip (the downstream lip of the spoiler vent) as w e l l as the spoiler geometry w a s varied during the t e s t as shown in figure 5. The model installation in the V/STOL tunnel is shown in figures 6 and 7. Most of the investigation time was concentrated en the c a s e s with 400 flap deflection. At 400 flap deflection, the control effectiveness problem areas which were indicated in the two-dimensional data of reference 4 were examined over a spoiler-deflection range of 00 to 450 f o r different combinations of spoiler c r o s s -section geometry and vent -lip geometry. Lower flap deflections were tested to obtain longitudinal and l a t e r a l data, but these t e s t s were run by using only the triangular backed spoiler (spoiler B) and the l a r g e radius vent lip. Angle of attack ranged f r o m -8O to wing stall. Most of the data w e r e obtained at a dynamic p r e s s u r e of 1.44 kPa (30 lbf/ft2); how ever, because of hardware constraints, some data were obtained at a dynamic p r e s s u r e of 0.48 k P a (10 lbf/ft2). Whenever the dynamic p r e s s u r e was lowered to 0.48 k P a (10 lbf/ft2), a single p a i r of runs was made with the identical configuration at both the high and low dynamic p r e s s u r e s to establish Reynolds number effects. The Reynolds numbers corresponding to these dynamic p r e s s u r e s are 1.49 Y lo6 and 0.85 X 106, respectively. It should be noted that at the lowest dynamic p r e s s u r e , the Reynolds number i s subcritical over a l a r g e portion of the wing chord. Transition w a s fixed a t 2.24 cm (0.88 in.) downstream f r o m the leading edge f o r the upper surface and 4.32 cm (1.70 in.) on the lower surface (ref. 7). Data were corrected f o r tunnel wall effects of reference 8; no other corrections were applied. PRESENTATION OF RESULTS The data of t h i s investigation have been reduced t o coefficient f o r m and are p r e sented in the following figures: Figure Effects of flap position and deflection on spoiler B characteristics Effects of vent-lip geometry on spoiler B c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s .

........ 8 . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 and 10
5

Figure

............. Spoiler A characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Effects of sequential deflection of spoiler B elements b, c, and d . . . . . . . . .

Effects of vent -lip geometry on spoiler C c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s Effects of dynamic p r e s s u r e

11
12 13

............................ 14 .Effects of flap positions and deflections on wing longitudinal characteristics . . . 15 Rolling moments generated by deflection of spoilers B, C, and A . . . . . . . . . 16 t o 19
DISCUSSION The effects of spoiler deflection, with various flap positions, cross-section geome t r i e s , and vent -lip geometries, on the longitudinal and lateral characteristics of the wing are presented in figures 8 t o 12. It may be seen f r o m these data (particularly CL and C plotted against a ) that the vented spoiler effectiveness i s v e r y low when deflected 2 l e s s than 100 t o 150. In figure 13, the sequential spoiler deflections (sequences 1 and 2) confirm the trends of the previous data; the spoiler effectiveness remains low until the spoiler elements are deflected 150. The data of figures 8 to 13 w e r e used to construct the lift, drag, and pitching-moment curves of figure 15 with 6 , = 0' and the rollingmoment curves of figures 16 to 18. The effects of Reynolds number a r e presented in figure 14. The effects on the lon gitudinal data were s m a l l with the typical increase in C L , at the higher Reynolds ~ ~ number. The effects on the lateral data were somewhat inconsistent but generally not large. Longitudinal Characteristics The data of figure 15(a) show the longitudinal characteristics of the wing at flap deflections of 00, 100, 30, and 400. The basic wing has a design lift coefficient of 0.4 at a = 0.5' and a maximum lift coefficient of 1.32 at CY = 16.7O. At the maximum flap deflection (6f = 40), the maximum lift coefficient is increased 96 percent to 2.59 at a = 12O. Figure 15(b) shows the effect of moving the flap at 6f = 40 from x/E = 1.00 to 0.96. Both lift and drag are reduced as the flap l o s e s some effectiveness when moved beneath the trailing edge of the wing. The drag curves show the typical high drag levels associated with the l a r g e flap deflections. In addition to the high lift and drag, the flaps produce large nose-down pitching moments which must be trimmed for a i r c r a f t applications.

L a t e r a l Characteristics The rolling moments generated when spoiler B was deflected at various flap settings are given in figure 16. For the clean wing configuration (6f = 00, fig. 16(a)), the rollingmoment variation with spoiler deflection is reasonably linear, but somewhat less effective than that of conventional ailerons (ref. 9). At the maximum spoiler deflection of 45O, the wing-tip helix angle pb/2V, i s 0.044; this helix angle i s low according t o reference 10 is which s t a t e s that 0.07 is a n acceptable level. (The method used to calculate pb/2V, discussed in the appendix.) However, a m o r e realistic maximum deflection might be 60 t o a more acceptable level. o r 700; such a deflection would probably increase pb/2V, This low effectiveness is apparent only with 6f = 00; with the flaps deflected, pb/2V, is significantly higher. When the flaps are deflected 100 at x / E = 0.917 (fig. 16(b)), the rolling-moment variation with spoiler deflection becomes more nonlinear and develops three r a t h e r dis tinct regions of effectiveness. A region of low spoiler effectiveness below 6s = 150 becomes apparent. A region of increasing effectiveness between 6s = 150 and 200 fol lows. Finally, the region above 6, = 200 shows fairly high levels of spoiler effective ness. Although these regions are not pronounced at'the loo flap deflection, they do indi cate the trends which become r a t h e r l a r g e a t the 300 and 400 flap deflections. Figure 16(b) shows that the rolling moments become more sensitive to angle of attack as the flap i s deflected. The clean wing had a variation in maximum Cz from 0.045 to 0.050 at angles of attack of -40 t o 80, and the wing with 6f = 100 had a variation in maximum Cz from 0.056 to 0.073 at angles of attack f r o m -40 t o 80. The wing with 6f = 100 and 6s = 450 had a pb/2V, ranging from 0.046 t o 0.059 corresponding to the higher rolling moments. The higher pb/2V, i s indicative of the increased control power available with the flaps deflected. When the flaps a r e deflected 300 at x / E = 0.960 (fig. 16(c)), the rolling-moment variation with spoiler deflection becomes very nonlinear and i s segmented into three very distinct regions. These regions correspond to the regions of the data at 6f = 100 dis cussed e a r l i e r , but a r e much more pronounced. The region of low spoiler effectiveness below 6f = 100 which was of concern in the two-dimensional data i s very apparent. A s in the loo flap-deflection case, the rolling moments are sensitive to angle of attack with maximum Cz varying from 0.099 to 0.122 at angles of attack of -4O and 8O. The pb/2V, corresponding to each of these rolling moments w a s 0.083 to 0.099. Here again the increased control power available with the flaps deflected w a s shown. Although these data are quite nonlinear, they are smooth, without r e v e r s a l s in slope, and appear to be adequate f o r lateral control. When the flaps are deflected 40 at x / E = 1.00 (fig. 16(d)), the rolling-moment variation with spoiler deflection s t i l l indicates three regions of spoiler effectiveness;
7

however, the data in the low effectiveness region (tjS = 150) show l a r g e r e v e r s a l s in slope. This change in spoiler effectiveness i s probably caused by intermittent flow separation downstream of the vent. Above 6s = 150, however, the spoiler effectiveness no longer shows slope r e v e r s a l s . The rolling moments are s t i l l sensitive to angle of attack, and the pb/2V, ranging f r o m 0.089 to 0.123 shows a further increase in control power avail able at 6f = 400. It should be noted that this configuration did have the l a r g e radius vent lip and that some of the slope r e v e r s a l s present at 6 s 5 15O w e r e corrected when differ ent vent-lip geometries w e r e used. Effect of Vent-Lip Geometry and Flap Effectiveness The two-dimensional models of reference 4 used vent-lip geometries which w e r e s i m i l a r to both the blunt-lip and the sharp-lip geometries used in the three-dimensional models. It was originally thought that the regions of low spoiler effectiveness and control r e v e r s a l s (regions of concern in ref. 4 ) w e r e the result of flow separation downstream of the sharp-edged vent lips. Control r e v e r s a l s w e r e defined as a change in sign of the roll ing moment. (A left spoiler up control input to give a negative (left wing down) rolling moment would actually produce a positive (right wing down) rolling moment.) The two additional radius vent lips were intended to reduce these problems. A s figure 17 shows, the rolling-moment data f o r the large and s m a l l radius vent lips and flaps deflected 400 do not show control reversals, and the data for s h a r p and blunt vent lips and flaps deflected 400 show only very slight control r e v e r s a l s . The two-dimensional control r e v e r s a l s evi dent in reference 4 are either eliminated o r greatly reduced in the three-dimensional model. However, t h e r e was in all c a s e s a region of low spoiler effectiveness below 6 s = 100 to 150. A s shown previously in figure 16(d), the rolling-moment data f o r the l a r g e radius vent lip had l a r g e r e v e r s a l s in slope below 6 s = 150. However, none of the other vent-lip geometries exhibited such r e v e r s a l s a t either flap location x / E = 0.96 o r 1.00. In general, the spoiler effectiveness increased with increasing angle of attack both in the lower effectiveness region and at the higher spoiler deflections f o r all vent-lip geometries. Also, the spoiler effectiveness i s higher with the blunt vent lip and with the flap located at x/C = 1.00. Moving the flap f r o m x/E = 0.96 to 1.00 shows the s a m e trend as that shown in figure 16; the spoiler effectiveness i n c r e a s e s with increasing flap effectiveness. Some data w e r e obtained using other spoiler geometries on this wing. Spoiler C was s i m i l a r t o the spoilers used on a currently operational high performance general avi ation aircraft. The third spoiler studied, spoiler A, was the T-type. The data for these spoilers with flaps deflected 400 are presented in figures 18 and 19 and show the s a m e general characteristics of the data f o r spoiler B.

SUMMARY OF RESULTS

An investigation has been conducted to determine the effects of adding a full-span Fowler flap and half -span spoiler t o an advanced general aviation wing. The r e s u l t s have shown:

1. In general, the t h r e e -dimensional data concurred with two-dimensional data of the references. The regions of decreased spoiler effectiveness are limited t o spoiler deflec tions less than 100 t o 150 and are most prominent at the highest flap deflections. How ever, the general effect of the three-dimensional model was t o reduce many of the charac t e r i s t i c s measured with the two-dimensional model.
2. The spoilers generally show acceptable lateral-control characteristics except f o r some regions of low effectiveness at s m a l l spoiler deflections.

3. The spoiler effectiveness was increased when the flap deflection was increased.

4. The spoiler effectiveness w a s increased when the angle of attack w a s increased

and the flaps w e r e deflected. 5. The spoiler effectiveness w a s affected by vent-lip geometry, and the blunt vent lip gave the highest rolling moment. 6. The Fowler flaps, as expected, significantly increased maximum lift coefficient; the maximum lift coefficient was increased 96 percent for the maximum flap deflection. Langley Research Center
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Hampton, Va. 23665
May4, 1976

APPENDIX COMPUTATION OF WING-TIP HELIX ANGLE The computation of the wing-tip helix angle f r o m steady-state lateral data depends on the ability t o determine the roll-damping derivative Clp. tion f o r the wing-tip helix angle Reference 10 gives an equa

where
16

change in rolling moment p e r degree of spoiler deflection spoiler deflection in degrees ratio of spoiler chord t o wing chord correction to spoiler effectiveness because of large. deflections

6a

All these t e r m s actually reduce to the rolling moment measured on the model with a lat eral control deflected. The roll-damping derivative C may be estimated from r e f e r Z P ence 11 which uses a vortex-lattice type of theoretical prediction method, o r Clp may be estimated from the c h a r t s in reference 10. F o r this report, the method of reference 11 was used. Therefore, pb/2V, may be written as

-Pb 2vm

(C1)measured (CZP) calculated

10

REFERENCES
1. Crane, Harold L.; McGhee, Robert J.; and Kohlman, David L.: Applications of Advanced Aerodynamic Technology t o Light Aircraft. [Preprint] 730318, SOC. Automot. Eng., Apr. 1973.

2. McGhee, Robert J.; and Beasley, William D.: Low-Speed Aerodynamic C h a r a c t e r i s tics of a 17.-Percent-Thick Airfoil Section Designed for General Aviation Applica tions. NASA TN D-7428, 1973.
3. Wentz, W. H., Jr.; and Seetharam, H. C.: Development of a Fowler Flap System f o r a High P e r f o r m a n c e General Aviation Airfoil. NASA CR-2443, 1974.

4. Wentz, W. H., Jr.: Effectiveness of Spoilers on the GA(W)-1 Airfoil With a High Per formance Fowler Flap. NASA CR-2538, 1975. 5. Wenzinger, C a r l J.; a n d Rogallo, F r a n c i s M.: Wind-Tunnel Investigation of Spoiler, Deflector, and Slot Lateral-Control Devices on Wings With Full-Span Split and Slotted Flaps. NACA Rep. 706, 1941.
6. Mechtly, E. A.: T h e International System of Units - Physical Constants and Conver sion F a c t o r s (Second Revision). NASA SP-7012, '1973.

7. Braslow, Albert L.; and Knox, Eugene C.: Simplified Method f o r Determination of Critical Height of Distributed Roughness Particles f o r Boundary-Layer Transition at Mach Numbers F r o m 0 t o 5. NACA T N 4363, 1958.
8. Gillis, Clarence L.; Polhamus, Edward C.; and Gray, Joseph L., Jr.: C h a r t s f o r Determining Jet-Boundary C o r r e c t i o n s f o r Complete Models in 7 - by 10-Foot Closed Rectangular Wind Tunnels. NACA WRL-123, 1945. ( F o r m e r l y NACA ARR L5G31.)

9. Paulson, John W., Jr.: Wind-Tunnel Test of a Conventional Flap and Aileron and a Fowler Flap and Slot-Lip Aileron for a n Advanced General Aviation Wing. P a p e r 750501, SOC.Automot. Eng., Apr. 1975. 10. Perkins, Courtland D.; and Hage, Robert E.: Control. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., c.1949. Airplane P e r f o r m a n c e Stability and

11. Tulinius, J.; Clever, W.; Niemann, A.; Dunn, K.; and Gaither, B.: Theoretical Pre diction of Airplane Stability Derivatives at Subcritical Speeds. NASA CR-132681,

[ 19731.

11

'1-11111111.1

II

11111111 11111.1111111

11 11 1. 11 1

.111.111~.1111111

II

I 111 I 111111I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ~ ~ I ~ 1 II II1 1 1

TABLE I. - GENERAL -AVIATION (WHITCOMB) - 1

AIRFOIL COORDINATES
Upper s u r f a c e Lower s u r f a c e

0.00000
.00200
.00500
.01250
.02500
.03750
.05000
.07500

.10000
.12500
.15000
.17500
.20000
.25000
.30000
.35000
.40000
.45000
.50000
.55000
.57500
.60000
.62500
.65000
.67500
.70000
.72 500
.75000
.77 500
.80000
.82500
.85000
.87500
.90000
.92 500
.95000
.97500
1.00000

0.00000
.01300
.02040
.03070
.04170
.04965
.05589
.06551

.07300
.07900
.08400
.08840
.09200
.09770
.lo160
.lo400
.lo491
.lo445
.lo258
.09910
.09668
.09371
.09006
.08599
.08136
.07634
.07092
.06513
.05907
.05286
.04646
.03988
.033 15
.02639
.01961
.01287
.00609
-.00070

0.00000
.00200
.00500
.01250
.02500
.03750
.05000
.07500

.10000
.12500
.15000
.17500
.20000
.25000
.30000
.35000
.40000
.45000
.50000
.55000
.57500
.60000
.62500
.65000
.67500
.70000
.72500
.75000
.77 500
.80000
.82500
.85000
.87 500
.90000
.92500
.95000
.97 500
1.00000

0.00000
-.00930
01380
-.02050
-.02690
-.03190
-.03580
-.04210

-.

-.04700
-.05100
-.05430
-.05700
-.05930
-.06270
-.06450
-.06 520
-.06490
-.06350
-.06100
-.05700
-.05400
-.05080
-.04690
-.04280
-.03840
-.03400
-.02940
024 90
-.02040
-.01600
-.01200
-.00860

-.

-.00580

-.00360

-.00250
-.00260
-.00400
-.00800

12

TABLE 11.- THIRTY PERCENT c FOWLER F L A P COORDINATES [Leading-edge radius = O.O122c]

-~

Upper surface
Xf

Lower surface
*f
-

/"
-0.01920 .00250 .01100 .01630 .01900 .01950 .01820 .01670 .01330 .00950 .00530 .00100 -.00435

/"
-0.01920 -.02940 -.02490 -.02040 -.01600 -.01200 -.00860 -.00580 -.00360 -.00250 -.00260

0.000 .025 .050 .075

0.000 .025 .050 .07 5

.loo
.125 .150 .175 .200 .225 .2 50 .275 .300

.loo
.125 .150 .175 .200 .225 .250 .275 .300

-.00400
-.00800

13

TABLE III. - CONFIGURATIONS INVESTIGATED

_.

-pirt Soe lr ey Triangular back, spoiler B

Vent -lip geometry

-. .

Flap deflection and position,

00/0.713,
200/0.96, 400/0.96,

6f/x/E
400/1.00

Blunt Small radius Large r a d i u s Sharp Large r a d i u s Small radius Large r a d i u s Sharp Large r a d i u s

400/0.96 100/0.917, 300/0.96, 400/1.00 .400/1.00

Triangular back, spoiler B sequential deflection) Contoured back, spoiler C

40/0.96 400/0.96 400/1.00 400/0.96

(Ttypebaclt,spoiler

14

.. .. .

---. ..

Figure 1.- Stability-axis s y s t e m used in data presentation.

15

4.01 m Spoiler (left panel only)

d
1
I

C
I I I
I

b /
I I

a
I

I
I

I I

I I

I I

1.534 m 1.534 m (5.03 ft)

(Y:

(1.257 ft)

;;l
I

I
I

r - -I- r -I I II -r I
0.403 m (1.321 ft)

--r-- r--1 r I
I I
I

- ;I -:
m (1.467 ft)
0.447 u.441 Flap brackets

Fowler flap (nested) 3

-.

Figure 2.- Plan view of wing.

X/C

= 0.7

x/c

= 0.8

x/c

= 1.0

x/c

= 0
I

Spoiler

-\j

1,

(a) GA(W)-1 airfoil with Fowler flap and spoiler.

Figure 3. - Flap deflections and positions.

--

Overlap Gap

.
Overlap, percent C Gap, percent

0" 10* 20 30 40
40
:c

30.0 9.6 5.3 5.3 5.3 1.3

0 3.1 2.6 3.6 3.6 2.5

"ATLIT configurations
(b) Fowler-flap overlap and gap dimensions.

Figure 3. - Concluded.

18

x/c= 0.70

t-t
I\

I-

Hinge line

+
Leading-edge gap

i
I

Hinge
/
r

-, I

Wing

Figure 4.- Cross-section geometry of the t h r e e spoilers.

.
\

o-looc

0.01 5c

1
0.003C

4
I

\ I \

\ I

Spoiler A T-type back

0.023~

0.

23c.
Spoiler B Triangular back

0.017~

3
0.007~

Spoiler C Contoured back

19

R = 0.011~

x/c = 0.80

- L E

Blunt

- Small radius-

--

Large radius

-I

x/c = 0.839
Figure 5.- Cross-section geometry of the four vent lips.

20

' .

I
;
( .

~,

I
..

-~

Spoiler on left Donet onlv

,
..~ i

1 i

!
(a) R e a r view.

(b) F r o n t view.

L-76-191

Figure 6.- General aviation wing in Langley V/STOL tunnel test section.

21

Figure 7.- Left wing tip of general aviation wing.

L -76 - 1 9 2

cm

7 "
...
. . .

-p.J
1.
!
I

b , , deg
0 0 0 2

...

. . . . . . . .

-0
4
A 6 8
10
-'O 15
0 20 0 30

,b

j
I

. . . . .
. .

. .

cD

* -:

---t

-1 6eQ
-

I
I

... I

I
!

I-- --

+
. . . .I ....

45

" 1 .

-~

.i

I
I

j
I
--

. . . ___

I i

I 12-

._

!
~,

16

20

24

(a) Longitudinal characteristics;

a, deg 6f = 00; x/E = 0.713; blunt vent lip.

Figure 8.- Effects of flap position and deflection on spoiler B characteristics.

23

00
.4
0

I
.
I

ct

-0.04
-0.08 -0.12

.I.

...

. .--I..

. .

....

.,. .. -.---

...

0 0

II - - --I-I
I

.-,. ..

.I
I i

0.02
0.01

I --

t
0 5

c"

-0.01

- 0.02
0.02
0.01
....

0
- 0.01

-0.02

..

. . ........

-a

- . 1 ., -4

ill
1

... ...

t. .

a, deg
(b) Lateral characteristics;

6f = OO; x / E = 0.713; blunt vent lip.

Figure 8. - Continued.

24

...

..

12

16

20

24

(c) Longitudinal characteristics;

6f = 100; x/E = 0.917; large radius vent lip.

Figure 8. - Continued.

25

00 .4
0

ct

-0.04

*
...

. I.i
I

. .

-0.08
-0.12

T
- ....-

....

...

. _ I.

0.02

. . . .I. . . .

--I-

-- -

0.01

cn

O
- 0.01 - 0.02

0.02
0.01

. .

-.I..

I
~

0
- 0.01

-0.02

;
~

..

.;. i

...

.ii
i

. . . . .1

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

-.

-8

-4

-1
0

+
!

- ..

I
I

--

....

! . . . . . . .

a. deg

(d) Lateral c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s ; 6f = 100; x/E = 0.917; l a r g e radius vent lip. Figure 8. - Continued.

26

I
cm
..

I
I

I
I

i
j

I...

8,, deg
0 0
0 2

J-.

I
I

0 4
n 6
0 8
I 10
3

i
i

cD

+ .I
- .

ii

n 15
0 20

30
45

I
1
i
II

,..

..

cL

-1.-

...I. @
.. -

.. .

..I
I

I
'
'

'

I
-0.4..
-8

!
...

- I I ' I .
4

i
.

a, deg

(e) Longitudinal characteristics; 6f = 200;

x/E = 0.96; blunt vent lip.

Figure 8. - Continued.

27

00
.1
0 c2

-0.04

6,, deg
0 0 0 2

-0.a
-0.1i

0 4
A 6

n io
00
.2
0.01

0 8

n 15
0 20

0 30

C"

-0.01

-0.02
0.02 0.01

-0.01

__ __
-8
-4
4

-0.02

a
a , deg

12

16

2 0

24

(f) L a t e r a l characteristics;

6f = 20;

x / E = 0.96; blunt vent lip.

Figure 8. - Continued.

28

-. . t

I -1
I
I

I-

i
I
-8

-4

a. deg

(g) Longitudinal characteristics;

6f = 300; x/E = 0.96; l a r g e radius vent lip.

Figure 8. - Continued.

29

6,, deg
- 0

0 0 2

0 4
A 6

0 8
Ls i o 0 15 0 20

0 30
90

45

a, deg
(h) L a t e r a l characteristics;

6f = 300; x/C = 0.96; l a r g e radius vent lip.

Figure 8. - Continued.

30

a, deg

(i) Longitudinal characteristics;

6f = 400;

x / E = 0.96; blunt vent lip.

Figure 8. - Continued.

31

...........

.. r -.. ....

ki#
CI -0.04

.... -

6,, deg
-.. .... -

-0.12

!
I

....

1
-

......

j ......
I
~

.....

...... L .

....

0 0 0 2 -. 0 4 A 6 b 8 : 010
' ~

...

. .

1
...

.......

! !
................
......

i
1

t1 -1.. i

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

. . . . . . . .

-.

...........

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

I)

4
(j)Lateral characteristics;

12

i6

'

: .

a, deg
6f = 400; x / E = 0.96; blunt vent lip.

Figure 8. - Concluded.

32

.~

cm

-0.2
-0.4
1

t;lB
..

-0.6

*
I

1 .

...I

08 .
0.6
cD
.. ..
.

0 0 0 2 -0 4 n6

.... .

I'

0 8
.. . .

0.4
0.2

m
. .

%-b= I
.
..
I

i
~

-n 15
0 20 0 45

n io

0 30

2.81

. . .

!
I

..

cL
lS6i 1.2 - -.

$
.. .

.
I

!
I

-0.41.

-8

-4

iI 1

--Ii
4
a. deg

(a) Longitudinal characteristics; s m a l l radius vent lip. Figure 9.- Effects of vent-lip geometry on spoiler B c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s with 6f = 400 at x/E = 0.96.

33

00
.1
0

cr

-0.01

, deg

-0.08

0
,2 4

-0.1i

0.02

0.01

cn 0

- 0.01
- 0.02

.I.

1. -1.
.
..

... .

0.02
0.01
0

..I I
I

- 0.01
-0.02
. . I
.

-8

-4
(b) Lateral characteristics; s m a l l radius vent lip.

Figure 9. - Continued.

34

.. .

... ..

. - .

.. -.

cm

S'

deg

d +-c
....
.....

3
....
.

3 0

..

-.

%
0.21

4
. .

4
.. ~.

3 2 > 4 1 6 1 8 110 3 15 ) 20 30 45
i

.. ..

2.8 2.4

'

2.0
1.6

j.

4 3 .+-
..
/

5
. . .

.&e

.. ..

cL
1.2 0.8 0.4
...

..

. .
... .. ..

.......

0 -0.4

i
8 a. deg
...

1I

-1. j
...

I
~

. - I

.~

....

......

16

1 %. . . . . . . .
--

I. . I

-I

20

24

(c) Longitudinal characteristics; l a r g e radius vent lip. Figure 9. - Continued.

35

a, deg

(d) Lateral characteristics; l a r g e radius vent lip. Figure 9. - Concluded.

36

cm

cD

2.8
2.4

.. . . ........... ~
...

,I,,

. ....-

__-. . .

cL

a, deg

(a) Longitudinal characteristics; blunt vent lip.

Figure 10.- Effects of vent-lip geometry on spoiler B characteristics with 6f = 400 at x/E = 1.00.

37

00
.
0

c -0.01

-0.01
-0.1;
....
....

_..I.

...

0. oi
0.01

cn

O
- 0.01
- 0.02

I -.I 1 --I
.

1. . . . . . . . . . . . .

.......

0.02
0.01

0
-0.01

-0.02

., .

-4

.I - . .I
a, deg (b) Lateral characteristics; blunt vent lip. Figure 10. - Continued.

20

38

i
._

cm

-0.2 -0.4
-0.6

5 , , deg
3 0 3 2 > 4
5 6 0 8 3 10 3 15 3 20 3 30 3 45

0.8
0.6
cD

0.4

0.2 0
2.8 ............ 2.4 2.0
1.6
.......

....

1..

. I ....

!
' /

-1-

.-j

1
..

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

cL

1.2

....

..F
-801.

..I

I
I

'

j
i I
1

iI
I
. .

!
.

-1

!
!

0.8
0.4

. .

I
I

:
!

0
-0.4

I
deg

I I

1!

..

. -!
I

_f

ioFigure 10. - Continued.

24

(c) Longitudinal characteristics; l a r g e radius vent lip.

39

0.04

-0.04.

/o
I

i
1

6,, deg
0 2 4 6 0 0 0 n

-0.08: -

&-

n 8
I 10 3

3 15

3 20 3 30
3 45

-8
a, deg

(d) Lateral characteristics; l a r g e radius vent lip. Figure 10. - Continued.

40

. .

0 '

I
!

3.2/...
-0.4
l
..

1
i

.!

-0.6

.
.

0.8 . ..

I"
,.. .
1
.

0 0

0 2 3 4
A 6

0.6. - - I
I

cD

0.4

0.2 0

0 8 3 10 3 15 1 20 30 3 45

>

2.8
2.4

&+
,
.

...

2.0
1.6
cL

.I
I

SZ
t
!
,
.. .

I
I

. .

0 -0.4

- 4
a. deg

416
~

20 I

(e) Longitudinal characteristics; s h a r p vent lip.

Figure 10. - Continued.

41

I II

0.04.

! L

-0 08

-0.12

0.02

0.01

O
-0.01

I
r

. _

-1

. . ] _ _....

1....

...-1...

-8

-4

..

t i l... -i 8
a, deg

1.

16

I.. .

.I.

12

20

(f) Lateral characteristics; s h a r p vent lip.

Figure 10. - Concluded.

42

I
cm
-0.2 -0.4~ -0.6 0.8
-I

~.

...

-.

i
I

..

!
. . .
l

-1
I
I I deg
I

... . -

_-

'*

j-.
4

&
. .

I !

5'

I
\

'-

- -

-1

..

0.6 ~ -
cD

i
!

I
1

,
i

0.4' 0.2
0 '

.!

T
..-. . .
..

I??!-+@
I

+
j
..

10
1 2
> 4
16 1 8 110 3 15
)

!
i

. ..

,.

) 5

20 30

45
i

2.8

-I
.

-.

. .. .

, I

j ..
I
1

i
. .. . ..

. .

I
!

2.4
2. O

-.

. .

i!

+
I

!
~

I
I

----

..

!L

I
. .
1

cL

lm61 1.2

1I

@
.

i
I
.

...
!

j
..

I
I
I
~

08 .

I
j

Oe4

O 1 -0.41... -

..

1
I

... .

I
~..

I
I

I
!

i
I
-

I
4

i
4
6f = 40;

!I
20
24

-4

12

16

(a) Longitudinal characteristics;

x/E = 0.96; s m a l l radius vent lip.

Figure 11.- Effects of vent-lip geometry on spoiler C characteristics.

43

. .

.. ..

.-

. . .

00
.4
0

c t

-0.04
-0.08

-0.1 i

0.02
0.01

c"

0
- 0.01

- 0.02
0.02
0.01

0 - 0.01

-0.02

-_
a, deg
(b) Lateral characteristics;
6f = 400;

x/E = 0.96; s m a l l radius vent lip.

Figure 11.- Continued.

44

.
0

.. . .

!; I : !
i
I

cm

-0.2 -0.4 -0.6 0.8 0.6

cD

0.4
~

0 20
I

0.2
0

0 30 n 45

28
.

2.4
2c .
1.6
cL

1.2
0. a

04
.
0
I
I

-0.4
--

-4
a. deg

jI 20

24

(c) Longitudinal characteristics; 6f = 400; x/C = 0.96; l a r g e radius vent lip. Figure 11.- Continued.

45

00 .1
0

.. ..

ct -0.01
-0. OE
-0.1 i
.

?E
--c
9
-4

0.02
0.01

c"

-0.01
- 0.02

0.02
0.01
I

- 0.01
. .. ..
.-

d f
P P
-

-0.02

i... ! -8

4
6f = 400;

8
a, deg

12

(d) L a t e r a l characteristics;

x / E = 0.96; l a r g e radius vent lip.

Figure 11.- Continued.

46

0 1

r
-.

j
-

cm

-0.2 -0.4

-1

I '.
.

-0.6

0.2. 0

...

. -1..

. . .

/ '

..

2.8 2.4

&
.. ..

! .,.

..

..

2.0
1.6
cL

1.2 ~... . .

08 .

I
I

&
I
*

q
' I

-0.4

II

a. deg

-4

(e) Longitudinal characteristics; 6f = 40;

x/E

= 1.00;

s h a r p vent lip.

F i g u r e 11.- Continued.

47

-4
A 6

- ..

g S , deg

0 0 0 2

0 4

n 10

0 15
0 20

0 8

a, deg
(f) Lateral characteristics;

6f = 400; x/E = 1.00; sharp vent lip.

Figure 11.- Concluded.

48

cm

-0.2
-0.4 -0.6 0.8
.

. .

0.6
cD
0.4 0.2 0 2. a 2.4 2.

1.6 1.2

0.8

0.4 0
-0.4

Figure 12.- Spoiler A characteristics with bf = 40;

x/C = 0.96; l a r g e radius vent lip.

49

'.

I
I

,.
I

. .

,I

1
, ,
I

.... .. .. .
.

* .

CI -0.04
-0.08 -o.1zj

/I

g S , deg 0 0.
.

I ..
--

_.I ....

.......

0.02,-

!
I

.....

0* 011 I

........

I.-' -

. .

. -

........

1'
...

0 2
. .
.....
..

....

t-----.

0 4 A 6 0 8 n io 3 15 2 20 3 30
......

..-. .
...

__
~

....

. . .

-8

-4

8 a. deg

(b) L a t e r a l characteristics.

Figure 12. - Concluded.

50

.
I

.I,'

cm

-0.2
-0.4 -0.6
0.8

,_..

. I 1.

. .

*
. . I. . .

...!.A
IiI.
i
.. !

i ,i

. .....

0.6

0.4 0.2 0
........ ...
.I'
8 .

...

1:
. -

. I

I I

...

_j.
j

...

Vented spoiler deflection, deg c d

4 6 8 10 0 2 4

'

2.8
2.4

........ ,
........ . ,

. . . .

.....

-. .

2.0
1.6

...
.,.,

. . . . . . .

cL
1.2 ..
0.8
...
....
I..

4
. . . .

.....

. . . .
. .

0.4

0
-0.4
-

. . . . . .

.I .

..

__I

!
01.

16

24

deg

(a) Longitudinal characteristics, deflection sequence 1.

Figure 13.- Effects of sequential deflection of spoiler B elements b, c, and d with 6f = 400; x / E = 1.00; large radius vent lip.

51

.......

-. .--. -

1---

00 .1
0

-0.01

-0. OE
-0.1:

4
.....

.......

.........

.- ....
0.02
0.01

Vented spoiler deflection, deg b c d

0 6
4

-.

. .

0
4 8

-. . . . . . . . .

- - O l O
IS
...
.I...

8 10

cn

- 0.01 - 0.02
0.02
0.01

- 0.01
-0.02

1 1 -a- T
-. -

-_ . -

..........

...

...

....

-.

.......

-7.. .

- ........

_.

1.....
.

..

~-

-.

. .

1. .
1

i
.- ........

..........
.

I
_. ......
..-*

:::.
._...

- ....
.....

.......

.-_

.- .....

. * . I _ . .

. ... . _
. I

..

......

. .. . . . . ..............
, ,

....

.._. . _ I . I
.-._

... ..

_.
I

-- .- - . - .-

..- ...

.....

12

20

a, deg

(b) Lateral characteristics, deflection sequence 1.

Figure 13. - Continued.

52

-i'

-1-

............
~

Vented spoiler deflection, deg

.
.

..

.....

...

0.4

...
-.

.....

-4

' I11
. -

I .I I

12

a. deg

(c) Longitudinal characteristics, deflection sequence 2.

Figure 13. - Continued.

53

...

I
8

-0.121

I
I

I iT

__
- -

. -I

0.02
0.011

i
I
+

i!

.-

deflection, deg
b c d
0 6
6
10

-!!.-

&
i

--I -

-0.021 I 0.021
i
I
~

. .

.,

I i

-;
I

7- -

cy 0 j -0.011I
-0.021
1

0.01;I

! i 6

/*
2

:
-8
.

-4

(d) Lateral characteristics, deflection sequence 2.

Figure 13. - Concluded.

54

cm

-0.2
-0.4
-0.6

0.8
0.6
cD

0.4

0.2

0
2.8 2.4

. . . . . . .

. , ; ; - , ..,. ;

. , . . .. . . .

2. (
1.6

1
--......

Dynamic pressure

0 1.44 kPa (30 Ib/ft') 0 0.48 kPa ( 10 Ib/ft')

.....

cL
1.i
.
,

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

0. E

..

0.4 . . . . . .

0
-0.1

....

I. -a1.

........

. .

.......... 0

I1

.....

'I
a. deg

...

12

1:'

*. .

,L

. .

20

(a) Longitudinal characteristics; 6f = 30; x/E = 0.96; large radius vent lip.
Figure 14. - Effects of dynamic p r e s s u r e on vented spoiler B characteristics.

55

,--,, ,, , .

,, .

.--...--.

..-,,,

, ,,

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

.-_---. ..

--

......

.....

00 .
0

cr

-.1 00
-0. OE
-0.1;
.- .
...

+
1.
i
I i
1

#
.....
......

.i -

-.

l l
Dynamic pressure

. . . .....

I ,

.......

0 1.44 kPa (30 Ib/ff) 0 0.48 kPa ( 10 Iblft')

0.02 0.01
__
f t - 03.
..
.....

......

...

c"

O
-0.01

a
....

- 0.02
0.02
0.01

. .

. . -

... ...

....

..

0 - 0.01
-0.02
4
....

#@
F===

1
a, deg

20

(b) Lateral characteristics;

6f = 300; x/E = 0.96; large radius vent lip.

Figure 14.- Continued.

56

. . .

-....

....

cm

-0.2

' - ! - -

-0.4
-0.6 0.8

0.6
cD
0.4
Dynamic pressure

0.2 0
2.8

0 1.44 kPo (30 Ib/R') 00.48 kPa ( 10 Ib/ft')

2.4
2.0 1.6

cL 1.2
0.8

0.4

0
-0.4

(c) Longitudinal characteristics; 6f = 400;

x / E = 0.96; blunt vent lip.

Figure 14.- Continued.

57

I i I

a.
1

. . . . . .

_ ........
.-

-0.08
-0.12

- -

.-c
i
: .

.. ..

. .

..

.I
-. .

Dynamic pressure
.

. .
_-

i
.

i
~

. .~

. . . . . .

,..

0 1.44 kPa (30 I b W ) I 0.48 kPa ( 10 Ibift') J

0.02
0.011 -

c"
- 0.02

+
.........
. .

...........

.i
!

'. .

..

0.01
cy

O
- 0.01
-0.02

[-- i k&
.,.

;(-&.
I
....

;.
I

.I -8
(d) Lateral characteristics; 6f = 400;

20

x / E = 0.96; blunt vent lip.

Figure 14.- Continued.

58

. . .

-.

...

cm

-0.2 -0.4

....
3 .

.*.

......

Ti
... -,
....

...
.

....

...

IC

-0
._
....

-. 06 08 .

. -. - . .

..

. .

...
. .

. .

0 6 - ._ .
0.4
0.2
.. ..
...

-.

. . . .

A
..

Dynamic pressure
...

0
2.8 2.4 2. c
...

__
.. - .
. . . .. . . -

-.....

0 1.44 kPa (30 Ib/ft) 0 0.48 kPa ( 10 Ib/ft)

I

....

...
. . . . .

5
. . ....

. . 0 .
. .

--

-I

1.6
cl

...

0
--..

1.2

1..
I

0. E
0. I
0
-0.1
. .

k
.

/
...

...

.-

.....

a, deg

(e) Longitudinal characteristics; 6f = 40; x/E = 0.96; l a r g e radius vent lip.

Figure 14.- Continued.

59

I
- .

. _.

. _

. . -

_. .
. .

-Q QP F
_.
.

....

Q7
...

..

......
...

...........

.,..
1 '

- _. ...

- .

......

......

- ..

- .-

....

0 1.44 kPa (30 Ib/ff) 0 0.48 kPa ( 10 Ib/ff)

.. ..

....
-.

._ - ..

%=
..
....

w
.......

s '
__
. .

.... -

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

_. .

....
. .

....

...

-0-
.....

3
...

c- ..

-.

?
0
24
6f = 400; x/E = 0.96; large radius vent lip.

(f) Lateral characteristics;

Figure 14.- Continued.

60

I'

cnl

-0.21

I1

.--i I

'

--

-0.4 I

-0.6
0.8

0.6

0.4

...

Dynamic pressure
--.

0.2
0

-1

0 1.44 kPa (30 Ib/ft*) 0 0.48 kPa ( 10 Ib/ft')

2.8 2.4 2.0 1.6

cL

. .

9
.

1.2
0.8

I
..

0.4
0

-0.4
a, deg

12
6f = 400; x/E = 1.00; l a r g e r a d i u s vent lip,

(g) Longitudinal characteristics;

F i g u r e 14. - Continued.

61

-0

....

1--.I.
c"
0

. .

.. ..

::~
-

QF

...

---I

4 .._

-0.01

- 0.02

__ .

.....

=a

T-c
. .

a, deg
(h) Lateral characteristics;

I; 1
....
......

. .,.

-,

I.

...

Dynamic pressure 0 1.44 kPo (30 Ib/ff) 0 0.48 kPa ( 10 Iblft')

....

. - ..... .

...........

7
....
..
....

. .

..

.....

. . ~ ,
... .. . .

.......

........

.........

. . . . . . .

...

.......

-.., .,*
I..

........

- -. . . . .

...

....

-1

. ._

...

.-

......_
1

6f = 400; x/C = 1.00; l a r g e radius vent lip.

Figure 14. - Continued.

62

1111

i
I

-_

cm

-0.2 -0.4

-0.6
0.8

0.6

0.4

2.8 2.4

2.01.-,

1:

cL

1.6 I

1.

''

-0.4

I l l

4
a. deg

(i) Longitudinal characteristics;

6f = 40; x/E = 1.00; blunt vent lip.

Figure 14. - Continued.

63

00
.4
0

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

,
i

cz

-0.04

-0.08
-0.12
....

I
'

Dynamic pressure
-~

j_ -.

0 1.44 kPa (30 Ib/ff) 0 0.48 kPa ( 10 I b / W

0.02 0.01

cn O
-0.01

-0.02 0.02
0.01

- 0.01
-0.02

8
a, deg
(j) L a t e r a l characteristics;

12

16

20

24

6f = 40;

x / E = 1.00; blunt vent lip.

Figure 14. - Concluded.

64

0
cm

-0.5-

Oa6I
0.4

.70 .92 .96 1 .oo

.
.. .

cD
0.2

. .

0 2.5
I

2.0

1.5
cL

1 .o

0.5
I

O I

i -1

.
~~

......

-.

__

__

..

-,

-0.5 -8

-4

24

a ,deg
Figure 15. - Effects of s e v e r a l flap positions and deflections on longitudinal characteristics of wing.

65

0
.

; .
&

cnl

-0.5

..

.
.

,..

0.6 .
!

.
'

d,,deg 1.oo 40 .96 h40

X -

0.4 j cg

i
I
i .

0.2 i
i

!-- *

0:
__~_~

2.5
i'a

2.0 1.5

'

j !I

l ;!

cL
1 .o --f# . .

0.5 -
.

. .

-8

-4

- 4

8
a , deg

12

16

20

24

Figure 15. - Concluded.

66

Angle of Back, deg

1 4

Y
>

I !

0 2 4

8 1 0

45 dS, deg

(a) 6f = 00; x / E = 0.713.

Figure 16.- Effects of flap position and deflections and angle of attack on rolling moments generated by deflecting spoiler B with l a r g e radius vent lip.

67

An, 3 a attack, de(

0-4

0 2 4 6 8 1 0

20

(b) 6f =

loo;

x/E = 0.917.

F i g u r e 16. - Continued.

68

-0.14,
I

-0.12
~

i
!i

j
I

,
i

-0.10

Angle of
ittack, deg

-0.0%
C

2
I
j

-0.06

-0.04

9/
i
. '
/

1i

30
; ' 0 3

-0.0:

F!

II

1.

b
I

45

( e ) 6f

x: /

= 0.960.

F i g u r e 16. - Continued.

69

I
!

/
c'

I
'!

attack, deg
-4

1
j

lo j a a
0
.
I

lo

O 4

1 !
I

i
i ! !

i ! i

........... ...... . . .. . .I . : . ... . ' ',

.: :j: ....

I....I..'/ 11.
1.

I
i
:i !
i !

;. I :.I :{:;I ..:.I..

..... ,. .......
.

. I,
,

..

I
I

i!
j
I

I
...

.I. I -

ll

15

(d) 6f = 400;

x/E

1.00.

F i g u r e 16. - Concluded.

70

- 0 . ~ ~ i1
!
!

-0.121,

1.
I I '

I
,

-U.lO\ I
I
I

i -0.081

-0.06l

-0.04

I
I
15

-0.02

I Fi
0 Blunt

/
a
h

Jent lip

4
0. %

Small radius Large radius Large mdius Blunt

.96
.% 1.m 1.w

I I
2(

I 1

30

45

(a)

CY =

-40.

Figure 17.- Effects of vent-lip geometry and angle of attack on rolling moments generated by deflecting spoiler B with 6f = 400 and x/E = 0.96 and 1.00.
71

I l j

A /
4

+
f
r
j

I /

.
,

.
.

Vent lip

0 Blunt
El

Small radius 3 large radius 5 large radius Blunt

0.N .% .%
1.00 1.00

'

20

Figure 17. - Continued.

72

-0.14

ii

j
I

-0.12

I
I

-0.10

-0.08

-0.oc

i
i

i
j
I

Ii
i

~~~

.. . .

I.

. ... ..
.

-0.04

i
Vent lip
X -

0 Blunt
I

0.W

-0.0:

0
0

T
4

I c

E Small radius I

@ Large radius A large mdius

. % .%

1.00 1

h Blunt

.oo

1.oo

8 1 0

20

30

4s

Figure 17. - Continued.

73

Vent
'

c
X

Blunt

0 . %

Small radius

Large radius Large radius

. % -96

h Blunt
oshorp

1.oo 1.oo
1

.w

10

15

30

(d) CY = 80.

Figure 17.- Concluded.

74

I
i I

#'
i
I

I/'
! '

I
-0.04

-0.02

i
~

I
Ven

Small radius

0w .

3 large radius I
i

-96
1M)

i
4
0
4 6 8

I
!
i

1-

j 1

Figure 18.- Effects of vent-lip geometry and angle of attack on rolling moments generated by deflecting spoiler C with 6f = 400 and x/E = 0.96 and 1.00.
75

j
X -

' I

Small radius
Large radius

0 .%

i 1

. % 1.00, I /

10

20

45

6,

,deg

(b) a = Oo.

Figure 18. - Continued.

76

-0.1 4

-0.12

-0.10

-0.0
I

; i
I

-0.06'

/1
/

-0.04'

Small radius large radius

O.%l

.%

-O*O2I

iI
I l l

15

6 ,

,deg
CY

(c)

= 40.

Figure 18. - Concluded.

77

-0.14

Angle of attack, deg

-0.1 2

0-4
0
0

A 8
-0.1 0

-0.08

-0.06

-0.04

-0.02

p,deg

Figure 19.- Effect of angle of attack on rolling moments generated by deflecting spoiler A; 6f = 400 and x/E = 0.96.

78

NASA-Langley, 1976

L -10736

N A T I O N A L AERONAUTICS A N D SPACE A D M I N I S T R A T I O N WASHINGTON. D.C. 2 0 5 4 6

-O F F I C I A L BUSINESS
PENALTY

FOR PRIVATE

USE 5 3 0 0

S P E C I A L FOURTH-CLASS R A T E BOOK

POSTAGE A N D FEES P A I D N A T I O N A L AERONAUTICS A N D SPACE A D M IN [ S T R A T I O N 451

USMAIL

557 0 0 1 Cl U A 760528 SO0903DS DEPT OF THE A I R POECE A F GJEAPONS L A B O R A T O R Y

ATTW: T E C H N I C A L L I B R A R Y (SUL)
KIRTLAND A F B N f l 87117

POSTMASTER :

If Undeliverable (Section 158 Postal Mnnnnl) Do Not Return

The aeronautical and space activities of the United States shall be conducted so as to contribate . . t o the expansion of human Knowl edge of phenomena in the atmosphere and space. T h e Administration shall provide for the widest practicable and appropriate disseminution o f information concerning its activities and the results thereof. -NATIONALAERONAUTICS ND SPACE ACT OF 1958 A

NASA SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL PUBLXCATIONS

TECHNICAL REPORTS: Scientific and technical information considered important, complete, and a lasting contribution to existing knowledge. TECHNICAL TRANSLATIONS:..Information published in a foreign lahbage considered . to.perit NASA distribution in English. . . i * , SPECIAL PUBLICATIONS: Information TECHNICAL NOTES: Information. less broad . . - derived from or of value to NASA activities. in scope but nevertheless of importance: i s a Publications include f n reports of major id * contribution to existing knowledge. projects, monographs, data compilations, TECHNICAL MEMORANDUMS: handbooks, sourcebooks, and special Information receiving limited distribution bibliographies. because of preliminary data, security classifica tion, or other reasons. Also includes conference TECHNOLOGY UTILIZATION proceedings with either limited or unlimited PUBLICATIONS: Information on technology distribution. used by NASA that may be of particular CONTRACTOR REPORTS: Scientific and interest in commercial and other-non-aerospace technical information generated under a NASA applications. Publications include Tech Briefs, contract or grant and considered an important Technology Utilization Reports and contribution to existing knowledge. Technology Surveys.
,

Details on the availability of these publications may be obtained from:

SCIENTIFIC A N D TECHNICAL INFORMATION OFFICE

NATIONAL

AERONAUTICS

AND

SPACE A D M I N I S T R A T I O N

Washington, D.C. 20546