IASA

TECHNICAL REPORT

NASA TR R-474

REDICTION

OF

STATIC FOR

AERODYNAMIC SLENDER BODIES

HARACTERISTICS .LONE AND WITH

LIFTING OF

SURFACES ATTACK

O VERY

HIGH

ANGLES

eland

Howard

Jorgensen Center Calif. 94035

.mes Research toffett Field,

ITIONAL AERONAUTICSAND SPACE ADMINISTRATION WASHINGTON, D. C. SEPTEMBER1977

1.

Report

No.

2. Government

Accession

No.

3.

Recipient's

Catalog

No.

NASA
4. Title and

TR

R-474
5. Report Date

Subtitle

PREDICTION FOR SLENDER TO VERY

7. Author(s)

OF

STATIC BODIES ANGLES

AERODYNAMIC ALONE OF ATTACK*

CHARACTERISTICS LIFTING SURFACES

6.

September
Performing

1977
Code

AND WITH

Organization

HIGH

8.

Performing

Organization

Report

No.

Leland Howard
9. Performing

Jorgensen
10. Name and Address 11,

A-6968
Work Unit No.

Organization

505-06-97
Contract or Grant No,

Ames Research Moffett

Center 94035

Field, California

13. 12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address

Type

of

Report

and

Period

Covered

National

Aeronautics

and Space Administration

Technical Report
14, Sponsoring Agency Code

Washington,
15. Supplementary

D. C. 20546
Notes

"Formerly

issued as NASA TM X-73,123 with limited distribution. Reissued for unlimited distribution.

16.

Abstract

An engineering-type method is presented slender bodies of circular and noncircular semi-empirical crossflow. results term representing of revolution, free-stream of elliptic

for computing cross section

normal-force and pitching-moment coefficients for alone and with lifting surfaces. In this method, a is added to a term representing characteristics potential-theory

viscous-separation computed

crossflow

For nmqy bodies for investigated bodies

aerodynamic

are shown to agree with measured from 0 to 180 well over the of

Mach numbers cross section,

from 0.6 to 2.9. The angles of attack extend measured results are also predicted reasonably

for Moo = 2.9 and from 0 to 60 for Moo = 0.6 to 2.0. For several investigated revolution, Mach number the predictions range from 0.6 to 2.0 and at angles of attack are best for supersonic Mach numbers. from 0 to 60 . As for the bodies

For body-wing and body-wing-tail coefficients and centers are predicted

configurations with wings of aspect ratios 3 and 4, measured normal-force reasonably well at the upper test Mach number of 2.0. However, with a for CN rapidly deteriorates, although the normal-force configurations. increase in

decrease in Mach number to Moo = 0.6, the agreement centers remain in close agreement. Vapor-screen When separation at zero sideslip Mach number, section
-i7. Key

and oil-flow and vortex angle. decrease

pictures patterns

are shown

for many body, undesirable coefficients

body-wing,

and body-wing-tail

are asymmetric, ratio,

side forces are measured

for the models even of body cross

Generally,

the side-force

decrease

or vanish with the following:

in nose fineness

change from sharp to blunt nose, and flattening

(particularly
(Suggested by

the body nose).

Author(s)) 18, Distribution Statement

Words

High angle of attack Noncircular bodies Bodies of revolution Wing-body configurations Wing-body-tail configurations
19, Security Classif. (of this report}

Aerodynamic Vapor-screen technique Vortex flow

theory

Unlimited

Oil-flow technique
20. Security Cla_if. (of this

STAR Category
page)

- 02
21, No. of Pages 22. Price*

Unclassified
"For

Unclassified
sale by the National Technical Information Service, Springfield, Virginia

243
22161

$7.50

To the a giant

memory

of H. Julian

Allen,

in aerodynamic Born: 1 April 29 January

research. 1910 1977

Died.

TABLE

OF CONTENTS Page

NOTATION SUMMARY CHAPTER CHAPTER

............................. ............................. 1. INTRODUCTION 2. DERIVATION .................... OF BASIC METHOD ................. FOR COMPUTING

vi I 2

CN AND 2.1 2.2

C m CHARACTERISTICS of Revolution of Circular .....................

6 6

Bodies Bodies

and Noncircular ..................... ....................

Cross Section

Alone

and ll 14

With Lifting 2.3 Empirical 2.3.1 2.3.2 2.4

Surfaces Values

Input

Crossflow Crossflow

drag coefficient drag proportionality

................ factor ........... for Various

14 17

Formulas and Values of (Cn/Cno)sB Cross Sections ........................ 2.4.1 2.4.2 2.4.3 Formulas Formulas Values of (Cn/Cno)sB of (Cn/Cno)Newt of (Cn/Cno)sB of Crossflow APPLIED and

and (Cn/Cno)_ewt_,

18 ................ ................ (Cn/Cno)Newt .............. OF REVOLUTION at Moo = 2.9 ........ ............ Number from 26 OF ELLIPTIC 28 ...... .......... 18 19 20 21 23 23 24

2.5 CHAPTER 3.1

Relative 3.

Influence

Terms

METHOD

TO BODIES Bodies

Cone-Cylinder

and Ogive-Cylinder

3.20give-Cylinder 3.3 Predicted Subcritical CHAPTER CROSS 4.1 4.2 4. Effect

Bodies at Moo = 0.6 to 2.0 of Change in Crossflow .................. TO BODIES

Reynolds

to Supercritical APPLIED ........................ and Tests

METHOD SECTION Studied

Bodies

at Moo = 0.6 to 2.0 CN and Cm for Each with constant

.......... Body .......

28 29

Equations 4.2.1

Used to Compute for bodies Bi

Equations (bodies

a/b cross sections 31 a/b cross sections 31

and B2) ................... for body with variable

4.2.2

Equations (body B3 )

......................
111

Page

4.3 Comparison ComputedWith Measured of Normal-Force and Normal-Force-Center Characteristics............... 4.3.i

4.3.2 CHAPTER 5.

33 33 33

Bodieswith constanta/b
Body METHOD with variable APPLIED

cross sections

(bodies (body AND B3)

B1 and B2 ) . .......

a/b cross sections TO BODY-WING

BODY-WING-TAIL 35

CONFIGURATIONS 5.1 5.2 5.3 Configurations Methodology Comparison

....................... Studied and Tests at Moo = 0.6 to 2.0 ............ and .......

35 36

Used to Compute of Computed

CN and C m

with Measured

Normal-Force

Normal-Force-Center 5.3.1 5.3.2 CHAPTER 6.1 6.2 6. Body-wing

Characteristics configurations configurations OF

............... ................ ............... FLOWS OVER MODELS .....

39 39 41 43 44

Body-wing-tail VISUAL

OBSERVATION ...................... Oil-Flow technique

Models

Considered and

Vapor-Screen 6.2.1 6.2.2

Techniques

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

45 45 46

Vapor-screen Oil-flow

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

technique from from from

................... Vapor-Screen and Oil-Flow technique .......... Techniques.

6.3

Photographs 6.3.1 6.3.2

Obtained

47 48 52

Photographs Photographs EXPERIMENTAL Alone Effects Effect Effect Effect

vapor-screen oil-flow

technique

............ AT 13 = 0

CHAPTER 7.1

7.

SIDE

FORCES

ON MODELS

52 54

Bodies 7.1.1 7.1.2 7.1.3 7.1.4

........................ of nose of nose-tip of afterbody of elliptic fineness ratio and Mach number ............... .............. .............. ........... .... .......

54 54 54 55 55 55 55 56

rounding side strakes cross section

7.2

Body-Wing 7.2.1 7.2.2

and Body-Wing-Tail of adding

Configurations

Effects Effects

a wing and a wing plus tail to a body ratio and taper ratio .........

of wing aspect REMARKS

CHAPTER

8.

CONCLUDING

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

iv

Page APPENDIX AND A DERIVATION OF (Cn/Cno)_ewt__ CROSS Section SECTIONS FOR WINGED-CIRCULAR 59 to 59 Axis and Wing Planform 6O

WINGED-ELLIPTIC Cross Velocity

............. Perpendicular

Winged-Circular Crossflow Winged-Elliptic Perpendicular Winged-Elliptic Perpendicular APPENDIX CROSS APPENDIX FOR B -

with Wing Planform

.................... with Semimajor

Cross Section

to Crossflow Cross Section to Crossflow

Velocity

............... Axis and Wing Planform

with Semiminor Velocity

............... FOR WINGED-SQUARE ........... PARAMETERS

62

DERIVATION WITH

OF (Cn/Cno)_pwt.,_ ROUNDED TO COMPUTE

SECTIONS C -

CORNERS

64

FORMULAS

GEOMETRIC

TANGENT

OGIVES ......................

67 68 75

REFERENCES FIGURES

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

NOTATION

/1

body body

cross-sectional basearcalat

area x-_)

.Ih

"II) :Ir

plan form area

reference results) surface exposed specd

area

_taken

as A b

for the

comparisons

of computed

with

experimental

wetted wing of sound and

area planform area (2 panels)

/1

H'

a. t)

scmimajor axial-force crossflow drag

semiminor

axes

of elliptic

cross

section

('A

coefficient, drag coefficient

F.
qooAr of circular cylinder section, - ....... qn{A_ v )dc_

F.

( _1H

<))
('/. (" "m ('.V

d ra g coefficient, .... qoo,'t r Lift

lift coefficient,

qooAr
I)itching-lnoment llormal-fl)rce local coefficient coefficient, about - q_oA r per unit length station at xm from pitching
nose, ..........

moment

6,

qooA rX

( '1/

normal-force coefficient. coefficient,

coefficient P - Poe -.qoo Fv q ooA r

(),
('y d

pressure sidc-force

body cross

cross-section force per unit cross cross force force

diameter length along body length along along body body length length

/"

,/p

potential viscous

per unit per unit

length length

/r

vi

axial, k KI ,K2 _2 9_ A corner

normal, rounding

and side force for body cross section, apparent r -w

longitudinal body body body length

and transverse

mass coefficients

aftersection nose length

length

Mn Moo P P_ qn q_
r

Mach number free-stream pressure free-stream dynamic free-stream

component

normal

to body axis, Moo sin a

Mach number

static pressure pressure component pressure, radius normal to body axis, qoo sin 2 x

dynamic

I _ oV_oo radius

body cross-section arc radius of ogive

or corner

ra
S
s

displacement semispan time

of crossflow

t Re Re n V

ovoox
free-stream Reynolds Reynolds number number,----/a to body axis, d Re _ sin a

component

normal

body volume velocity component velocity normal to body axis, Voo sin a

v_
W

tree-stream body width

vii

reference

length

(generally results) from body body

taken

as d for the

comparisons

of computed

with

experimental
x

axial axial

distance distance

nose nose to aerodynamic normal-force center (center of

Xac

from

pressure) axial axial axial angle angle wing distance distance distance of attack of sideslip planform drag semiapex angle factor (ratio of crossflow drag for a finite-length from frona from body body body nose nose nose to centroid of body planform reference side-force area center

Xc

xDl

to pitching-moment to aerodynamic

Xsf

center

crossflow cylinder viscosity P density angle Subscripts b body cylinder Newt Newtonian body nose base

proportionality

to that coefficient

for an infinite-length of air

cylinderj

of air of roll about body longitudinal axis

theory

Hose

equivalent slender-body stagnation

circular theory

body

or cross

section

SB stag

VUl

PREDICTION FOR

OF

STATIC BODIES TO VERY Leland Ames

AERODYNAMIC ALONE HIGH Howard Research AND

CHARACTERISTICS WITH OF LIFTING ATTACK*

SLENDER

SURFACES

ANGLES Jorgensen Center

SUMMARY

An moment with

engineering-type coefficients surfaces. is added

method for slender In this

is presented bodies of circular

for

computing and noncircular term

normal-force cross

and section

pitchingalone and

lifting

method, representing

a semiempirical potential-theory

representing crossflow.

viscous-separation 111 computing Qy and

crossflow

to a term

C m for bodies crossflow. For Kaattari, For agree angles to 2.0. For ably from well several over with of and many attack

alone, bodies Pitts,

slender-body theory with thin wings and for high revolution, froin 0 to angles

is used for the term representing the potential tails, the linearized potential method of Nielsen, of attack, is used. characteristics numbers from from are 0.6 shown to 2.9. to The

modified of results

bodies extend

computed

aerodynamic Mach and

measured

for investigated

free-stream

180 for Moo = 2.9

0 to 60 for Moo = 0.6

bodies the

of elliptic bodies

cross

section,

measured range the from

results 0.6 to

are 2.0

also and

predicted at angles

reasonof attack Math

investigated

Math

number

0 to 60 . As for the

of revolution,

predictions

are best

for supersonic

numbers. For measured test Math body-wing normal-force number for of and body-wing-tail coefficients 2.0. However, deteriorates, and pictures even be 2.0 and and configurations centers are with a decrease the of with predicted in Math normal-force of body, wings of aspect number centers to ratios well 3 and 4, the reasonably at the upper

Moo = 0.6, remain

agreement agree me n t. For vapor-screen configurations. are measured These fineness decrease ratio, body

CN rapidly 0.9, oil-flow When for the models can

although angles

in close 50,

Moo=0.6, and

attack

10 , 20 , 30 , 40 , and body-wing, and undesirable ir_ Mach the side-force body-wing-tail side number,

are shown and vortex at zero significantly

for many patterns affected angle.

separation

are asymmetric, by changes

forces nose

sideshp

side

forces nose

ratio, or change nose).

bluntness, with sharp the

and

body

cross increase and

section. in Math

Generally, number, cross plus

coefficients fineness the smaller

vanish from

following: nose,

decrease section tail produce

in nose

to blunt of afterbody

flattening wings,

of body or wings

iparticularly much

Additions effects.

strakes,

or no appreciable

*Formerly

issued as NASA TM X-73,123

with limited

distribution.

Reissued

for unlimited

distribution.

CHAPTER INTRODUCTION

Over tance and

the

last several

years,

high angle-of-attack

aerodynamics

has increased vehicles, there

in impormissiles, a

because military

of the demand aircraft (both

for greater manned

maneuverability piloted).

of space shuttle Until recently

and remotely and aerodynamic for flight has been,

has been

general design

lack of analytical of most advanced

methods

data suitable

for use in the preliminary over a wide range research leading to

configurations numbers. There

to high angles of attack however, considerable

of Mach and

Reynolds

the development shapes, primarily

of methods slender

for predicting of revolution. in 1949 of bodies

the static

aerodynamic

characteristics

of simple

bodies of Allen

Prior the

to the work

(ref. 1), most were based

analytical on

procedures

for computing theory, and their

aerodynamic

characteristics

potential-flow

usefulness the static

was limited longitudinal

to very low angles of attack. forces and moments

Allen proposed of revolution based

a method inclined

for predicting to angles of

for bodies theories

attack cepts

considerably are known

higher to apply.

than

those

for which

only on potential-flow to viscous-flow

conseparasuc1-6), below

In this method,

a crossflow theory.

lift attributed This method of inclined

tion is added cessfully although about attack

to the lift predicted the

by potential

has been used quite bodies (e.g., refs.

to compute most 20 , and

aerodynamic for study

coefficients until

data available the formulas

1961 were for bodies written to apply

at angles of attack

were initially

only over about

this angle-of-

range. In 1961, Allen's concept was adapted and by Jorgensen and Treon coefficients (ref. 7) for computing for a rocket booster with cange

the

normal-force,

axial-force,

pitching-moment

throughout experiment from (ref. 0.6

the angle-of-attack was obtained to 4. The

range from 0 to 180 . Reasonable of the rocket further booster

agreement

of theory

for a test model concept was

over the Mach number Howard, the static

Allen

applied

by Saffell,

and Brooks longitudinal

8) in 1971

in a computer-programmed of low aspect-ratio for computing

method

for predicting

aerodynamic In 1958, circular

characteristics a method

missiles operating

at angles up to 180 . for bodies of nonand

the aerodynamic

characteristics

cross section

was proposed

by Jorgensen Cmo) 2

(ref. 6). In this method, are computed by Allen's

normal-force formulas

pitching-moment

coefficients

((_Vo and

for the

equivalent the from

body

of revolution body. and Then Cm/Cmo Good bodies of the

which values ratios agreement elliptic

has the of (_r determined

same and

axial

distribution

of cross-sectional body coefficients (ref.

area

as

noncircular CN/CNo

C m for the from with at apparent

noncircular mass

are computed (i.e., l'ronl by = 1

slender-body this procedure

theory). for

of theory cross section

experiment the conditions

6) was obtained investigated (a/b

to 2,_

=0 and Early in an

90 , Moo=2to4, the Allen

andc_=0 concept procedure for ('m slender formulas over the was

to 20). again applied by Jorgensen (ref. 9) to further and a!

1973,

develop

engineering-type coefficients C N and

for bodies were

computing of circular written, length,

normal-force, and noncircular for the

axial-force, cross sections

pitching-moment

= 0 to 180 . The sectional course, shape is allowed In 1973, the general

however, but

a body

whose

crossarea. of

remains to vary.

constant

body

cross-sectional

Jorgensen case of

(refs.

10 and body

11)rewrote alone area, or with is allowed

the

Q,\,

and

C m expressions where the the body

to apply cross-sectional length. For also

for

a slender

lifting

surfaces along

shape, special sented.

as well case Good of

as the

cross-sectional cones,

to vary

the pre-

winged-elliptic agreement between

simplified and

expressions experimental the method

for Q results were than

and was

C m were shown.

predicted

However, ellipMath and

experimental tic bodies

results and only

available

for comparison cones at angles

with of

limited about

to simple 20 and for these Mach

winged-elliptic from 2 to 4. Thus, were

attack

less

numbers more

it was concluded needed method. need to enlarge tails at higher

that angles

additional of attack

comparisons and lower

diverse

configurations validity there limits was

numbers

to determine In alone

for the a great with

1972-73

the

relatively

small

data and

base

for bodies Mach recent been

and

in combination This need

wings today, this

and

at subsonic,

transonic,

supersonic by some studies studies, have

numbers. introductory initiated have been

still exists into application oriented

but it has been high to oe field (e.g.,

alleviated refs.

significantly Most recent toward with and thin analysis with

investigations primarily more for aircraft

12-21). Two

missile they

aerodynamics. have been

however,

in that

directed bodies study

the determination wings (ref. 20) and of this high

of experimental with recently wings and

aerodynamic a tail data (ref. both

characteristics 21). for There slender is still

for slender need alone for

of much wings

obtained

bodies

and

for bodies

at very

angles attack.As previouslymentioned,the Jorgensen ethodshouldbe further comof m paredwith experiment. lso, there A
forces with and yawing These stall/spin wings, of the and moments unwanted which side is an urgent have forces have wings present and been and been need shown yawing for continued to develop moments, on study for models which noses of unwanted at high probably bodies side

a values lead to

/3 = 0 .

undesirable bodies with In view objectives: 1. (refs. circular 2. bodies 3. tic cross 4. thin

characteristics, bodies with the

measured refs.

alone,

alone,

a tail (e.g., was

12-21). to accomplish the following

foregoing,

study

initiated

Review ) for

and

extend

the

derivation and with

of

Jorgensen's

engineering-type characteristics

method of slender

9-11

computing

the normal-force alone for and

pitching-moment lifting surfaces.

and noncircular Assess the

bodies method

thin the

predicting

aerodynamic

characteristics

of

missile-like

of revolution. Assess section. Assess alone the and and method for predicting with the a tail. of the vortex flow fields over models of aerodynamic characteristics of bodies with the method for predicting the aerodynamic characteristics of bodies of ellip-

wings 5.

in combination discuss visual with data

Present alone and

observations wings.

bodies 6. forces

in combination and discuss

Present and yawing

pertaining with (5) flow and

to the

origin

and

alleviation

of undesirable

side

moments with of

associated objectives

high a flight (6),

at j3 = 0 . study is limited in scope with foundation modeling This is not bodies must techniques to say that to an and be

Ill connection experimental body-wing acquired that can at be study

the present and side

the

vortex It is firmly

fields

forces

associated

combinations. this time

believed further

that

a larger experimental of flow-field design not studies. been applied

to aid with

in the

development

applied

confidence modeling

in preliminary techniques have flow the

important techniques revolution. the the length leeward

semiempirical have been

already and plane there

studied.

Most

of these bodies of

based

on

an

impulsive that

analogy crossflow

to slender uniformly made

In this analogy, of an inclined flow field

it is assumed body at the rate

is swept is an analogy

down between in

Voo cos o_. Then wake behind

and

the

developing

an impulsively

started

cylinder

crossflow.

This analogy

was initially

suggested

by Allen and

Perkins

(ref. 2) and applied

by

Kelly (ref. 22). The impulsive Wardlaw crossflow for flow ment flow analogy probably has been used most elegantly studies in recent studies by

(refs. 23 and 24).

In one

of his latest a large number pointed-nose but even

(ref. 24), he simulated on the potential

the viscous solution agreebe

plane by superimposing about a cylinder.

of point vortices bodies, the latest

For some observations,

he has shown Wardlaw

qualitative

with

experimental

method

still must

considered

to be in an early exploratory to model also have the crossflow been made

phase.

Others

have used the impulsive-flow

analogy

and attempted Attempts Stokes equations

field (e.g., refs. 25-32). to solve these the crossflow studies of attack. field problem applied with the Navieronly to bodies to become at

(refs. 33 and 34), but and moderate

have been Computer

supersonic prohibitive

speeds

to low angles

times appear

for most practical of many

cases, and turbulence

modeling

is not yet demonstrated. flow fields around is required

Because bodies before

deficiencies

in the understanding further

of the physical experimental modeling.

and wings at very high angles of attack, much reliability can be realized

investigation

from further

analytic

CHAPTER2 DERIVATION OF BASICMETHODFOR COMPUTING CN

CHARACTERISTICS AND C m

Here normal-force tion more

we

first

review

the

derivation

of

some

basic

equations for slender

for computing bodies

the

and pitching-moment high angles CN and cross section values of attack

coefficients, (section that

CN and C m,

of revoluto obtain and

to very general

2.1). Then can be used

we extend for slender (section

the derivation bodies

C m equations alone

of circular

noncircular ical input tion 2.3, circular the

and with thin lifting surfaces drag coefficient to obtain in section for circular input

2.2). Necessary are presented coefficients 2.5, we briefly terms

empirin secfor nondiscuss

of crossflow

cylinders

and

theoretical

formulas are presented

local normal-force in section crossflow

configurations influence to compute

2.4. Finally, and viscous

relative

of derived

potential-flow

used in the basic

equations

both C V and Cm as a function 2.1

of angle of attack.

Bodies of Revolution a heuristic of revolution concept inclined for predicting to angles the static longi-

In 1949, H. J. Allen (ref. 1 ) proposed tudinal forces and moments those for bodies theories

of attack concepts separation

considerare known is added lift, Allen

ably higher to apply. to the

than

for which

based only on potential-flow to viscous theory. crossflow

In this concept, lift

a crossflow

lift attributed

crossflow

predicted equation

by potential-flow derived

For the potential-flow

used the slender-body From fineness-ratio) the body the

in 1923 by Max Munk for airship Munk (ref. 35) showed per unit length that,

hulls (ref. 35). for slender (highalong

momentum bodies,

consideration,

the potential-flow

cross force

fp at any station

is given by ]p = (K2 - K1 )qoo sin 2o_ dA

where is the apparent

A is the cross-sectional angle of attack; and

area of the body Kz and KI

at any axial distance the

x from the nose apex: ot and longitudinal by that

are, respectively, From calculations ratios,

transverse

mass coefficients

for the body.

of K 2 and Kj made initially Munk (ref. 35) has shown

H. Lamb

(ref. 36_ for ellipsoids

of various

fineness

K z - K_ is approximately value of unity for the factor

unity

for high fineness

ratios.

It has been customary

to assume

K2 - K1, and it is assumed that the section

in this formulation. cross forcefp at small angles of attack of the body consideration, and the equa-

G. N. Ward (ref. 37) has shown acts at an angle midway to the free-stream between velocity

the normal (i.e.,

to the axis of revolution or/2). With this

normal

at an angle

tion (2.1) is multiplied potential practical unity. Now consider tion. lift becomes consequence

by cos (o_/2) to determine small in comparison whether

the normal-force

distribution.

At high c_, the

with the viscous

crossflow

lift, and it is of little or replaced with

this low o_multiplier

[cos (o_/2)] is retained

the derivation

of the crossflow of revolution

lift attributed

to viscous

crossflow

separa-

Allen (ref. 1), for a body as an element

of high fineness long circular

ratio,

first treated

each circular

cross section

of an infinitely

cylinder

of the same cross-sectional due to viscosity is given by (2.2)

area. With this assumption,

the local cross force

per unit length

pv,?
fv = 2rCd n where r is the body radius at any station 2 Vn is the velocity crossflow x from the nose apex;

normal

to

the longitudinal drag both coefficient

axis; p is the mass density; based on qn' diameter,

and Cdn is the steady-state and unit length at station normal of

(or normal) of

x. Cdn is a function to the cylinder

the Mach number

and Reynolds

number

components

longitu-

dinal axis. Hence, for a body

at angle of attack,

Cdn is a function - Moo sin a

Vn
Mn a

(2.3)

and Re n = Re sin o_ where Vn = Voo sin o_ (2.5) (2.4)

Here Moo, Re, number,

and

Voo are free-stream the speed of sound

values,

respectively, by a.

of Mach

number,

Reynolds

and velocity;

is denoted

For this study, cylinder. crossflow development analogy, inclined from the Other with

Cdn is taken (e.g.,

as the steady-state refs. 22-32) body have

crossflow assumed

drag coefficient that

for a circular of the to the

researchers distance

the development is analogous

along

an inclined

of uniform impulsively is swept

diameter

with time of the flow on a cylinder that the crossflow plane

set in motion down

from rest. In this the length of an

it is assumed body

uniformly is assumed, value about

at the rate

Vo, cos o_. When this analogy then increases to a maximum to the steady-state flow, experiments is reached assumption flow there almost

the value of Cdn starts 25 percent higher than

zero (at zero time), steady-state (a) from that value,

then

decreases

value for laminar conducted at the start

flow (see, e.g., (ref. 27) Thus, give is not

sketch indicate

ref. 27). For turbulent condition

by Sarpkaya

the steady-state flow, both However,

of the motion. assumption

for turbulent the same

the steady-state for laminar

and the impulsive-flow is a difference,

result.

but this difference

studied

in this report. 1.6

1.2

Cd n

.8 / Circular cylinder Impulsively started from rest (laminar flow)

.4

8
S/r

12
= Vnt/r -

16
(x/r) tan e

20

24

28

Sketch Because less than stream. that Equation of spillage for an flow around infinitely long

(a) length cylinder, cylinder factor the value of Cdn is in the r/, which same free

the ends of a finite (truly

two-dimensional) by a proportionality for an infinite to diameter

(2.2) should length unity

be multiplied to that length

is the ratio r/,

of Cdn for a finite which approaches

cylinder

length approaches

cylinder. infinity,

This factor

as the cylinder later).

is given from that the 9./d of

experimental

results

(discussed

In the practical

use of 7?, it is assumed

the cylinder is the sameas that for the body of revolutionbeing considered. is also It assumedhat the net-forceeffect of the front andrearendflowsis approximately same t the for both configurations. Thus,equation(2.2) is modifiedto give
fv = 2rlrCdnqoo where 1 oVoo2 _ 1 1 _ qn qoo = -_ 2 p Vn2 sin 2 ot sin 2 o_ Following solution Allen (ref. 1), the potential-flow solution of Munk and the viscous along the body (2.7) sin2 o_ (2.6)

crossflow of revoluto the free-

are combined

to determine

the cross-force

distribution acting

tion. With the potential stream direction

cross force per unit length

at 0(2 from the normal acting normal

and the viscous cross force per unit length

to the longitudinal

axis, the total cross force per unit length normal

O{

to the longitudinal

axis is given by

f = fp cos _ + fv
or

(2.8)

f qoo From cients for equation bodies (2.9),

sin 2a cos ot dA 2 _ + 2rlCdn

(sin2 a)r and pitching-moment the normal force

(2.9) coeffigiven by

the equations can

for the normal-force derived. defined With

of revolution

be easily

Fn =f
o

f dx and the normal-force

coefficient

by C N = (Fn/qooAr),

we obtain

Ar

dx +

Ar

r dx

(2.10)

Likewise,

with the pitching-moment

coefficient

defined

by

fo _ f(x m - x)dx Cm = pitching moment q ooAr X we obtain dA Cm = sin 2O_ArXCOS (a/2) ; Oo (x m - x)dx 2rlCdn sin 2 a 2 F(Xm _ x)dx (2.11) 9 q_ArX

A,X

whereA r

is the reference

area: X is the reference

length: _ is the body reference of revolution center.

length;

and x m is the

axial distance General obtained from

from the nose to the pitching-moment integrated equations expressions (2.10) for bodies

at o_= 0 to 180 can be in sketch (b), Jorgensen coef-

and (2.11). equations

For the sign convention for the normal-force

(ref. 9) has written ficients: Ab CN=

the following

and pitching-moment

Arr sin 2_'

o_' Ap cos T + rlCdn Arr

0 sin2-a' _<a_< 180

(2.12)

Cm =

V-

Ab(_ - Xm! _-rX]

sin 2a'

a' cos-y + ca,

Ap

(x m-

Xc)

sin 2 a'

0 _< a _< 90 and

(2.13)

Cm = -

-AT

sin 2c_' cos

-_- + r_Cdn At-

sin z or';

90 _<a_< where distance ando/= A b is the body from base area; Ap is the planform area; V is the body

180

(2.14)

volume;

x c is the

the nose apex

to the centroid .

of planform

area; and a' = ot for 0_< o__< 90

180 -afor90

_<a_<180

90 < a < 180

Sketch 10

(b)

The axial distance

from the nose apex to the aerodynamic

force center

is then given by

Xac = When lift and drag coefficients expressions: C L = CNcosaare desired,

CNN they

X may be obtained at all a values

(2.15) from

the conversion

CA sina

(2.16)

CD = CNsina+ Generally, prediction it can be shown that for values to obtain that,

CA cosa

(2.17) from a = 0 and 180 precise values of CL and CD. estimates, the axial-force

of oe well removed reasonably for rough by 0 _<c_<90 accurate

of CA is not necessary

Jorgensen coefficients

(ref. 9) has suggested bodies

engineering

for slender

can be approximated cos 2 a"

CA _CAo_=OO and CA _ CAot=lS0O Here cos 2 a is merely pressure along tangent

(2.18)

cos 2 a ;

90 _< o__< 180 in the axial direction method is also outlined for often

(2.19) to the dynamic in reference used conical 9, and

the ratio of the dynamic direction.

pressure

in the free-stream

A more precise

with procedures

for determining

CAo_=0o and CAa = 18

ogive noses and flat bases. 2.2 Bodies of Circular Alone and Noncircular Cross Section

and With Lifting alone

Surfaces surfaces where the cross-sectional used for a body terms of

For the general shape can vary along

case of a body the body

or with lifting procedures and viscous

length,

similar

to those

revolution tions (2.10)

are assumed.

Both

the potential

separation

crossflow

in equa-

and (2.11 ) for CN and Cm are generalized crossflow term is generalized

further. the value inside the integral coefficient per unit length Cn

The potential by the ratio

by multiplying

(Cn/Cno)sB

- the ratio of the local normal-force shape to the similar coefficient

for the desired

cross-sectional

Cno for the equivalent

circular

11

shapehavingthe samecross-sectional area.The necessaryatioscan be determined r from apparentmass coefficients(slender-bodyheory) for manycross-sectional t shapes. 1958, In this procedure wasfirst shown(ref. 6) to havemerit in predicting experimental CN
results for slender bodies of various because cross sections at supersonic experimental speeds data, up to about was not 20 . However, at that crossflow of very limited further and Cm

and angles of attack evaluation

possible

time. terms in equations (2.10) and (2.11) are further generalized by

The viscous multiplying

the values

within

the integrals

by (Cn/C n ) . Here the local ratio of C n to o Newt impact theory. Cdn remains as circular cylinder section. and for positive dA/dx

Cno at each x station the crossflow With values,

is assumed

to be given by Newtonian

drag coefficient (2.10)

for the equivalent and (2.11)

equations

generalized

as discussed,

CN = sin 2_ cos (o_/2) Ar

dA _

dx

+ 2r_Cdn sin 2 _i_(_nno)N Ar and

r dx wt

(2.20)

Cm = sin 2or cos (ot/2)/_(C____o)co ArX

_LP " " JI..I

dA dx

(Xm - x)dx

2rlCdn sin 2 o_ f_ Ar X

(C--_---/

r(x m - x )dx

(2.21 )

.1o \ "O/Net w
(from slender-body the dA/dx values theory) are zero are not applicable or negative, be used. and

In equations as written procedures adaptation considered

(2.20) for

and (2.21),

the first terms sections suggested where

winged-body to those method 5.

similar of this in chapter

in reference body-wing

38 probably and

should

Further is

for

use with

body-wing-tail

configurations

In the second tion for formulating

term of equations the ratio

(2.20)

and (2.21 ), there

is some experimental and multiplying for the equivalent numbers,

justificait by the circular Jorgensen

(Cn/Cno)

from Newtonian

theory

available cross

experimental Cdn.

or theoretical For subcritical

crossflow crossflow 12

drag coefficient Mach and

section

Reynolds

(ref.

I 1)

has

shown

that

Cn/Cno with

values those sections also Newtonian the from'

from

Newtonian two-dimensional rounded be theory expected by

theory tests corners. at high

agree (refs.

reasonably 39-43)

well of

(but

somewhat cross shown crossflow The most sections in

fortuitously) and square

elliptic are

cross agreement where

with can

Jorgensen's supersonic should Mach be

comparisons and most regime for hypersonic applicable. and

table Mach doubtful

I. Good numbers

definition

regimes number following experimental

include

transonic (These

crossflow regimes are

number further

the

supercritical cross sections Where

Reynolds in the reliable

regime. section.) crossflow

discussed

circular

drag

data

exist

for

a desired

noncircular

cross

section, sections CA (Cn/C _'n if the be great

these can n

data, be

of

course,

can in

be

used.

Then (2.20)

the

values and a circular the of

of (2.21)

Cdn in

for

the

particular of only. the Of of Cdn

cross product course, must and a

substituted , where noncircular the input Cd n

equations written

lieu

) o Newt of the

as now cross

is for varies

cross body

section

shape

section in the be

along term for

length, (2.20)

values and

substituted deal of

within empirical

integral data

second necessary

equations

(2.21),

may

some

configurations.

TABLE

1.VARIOUS THEORIES NUMBERS

Cdn

AND CROSS AND

Cn/Cno SECTIONS MEASURED

VALUES AT AT

FOR a=

TWO-DIMENSIONAL 90 AS COMPUTED MACH

CYLINDERS BY AND NEWTONIAN REYNOLDS

OF

SUBCRITICAL

NOD. NEWT. THEORY NEWTONIAN THEORY CROSS SECTION FORCpstog. 1.8 Cdn Cn/Cno I I I I 1.00 Cdn 1.20 I I I I Cn/Cno 1.00 Udn

MEASURED REE

Cn/Cno]

,0
a/b- 2 i I_ 0 a/b.2

1.33

I I 1.20 I t.O0 1 l I I I 0.70 0.35 ) 0.41 I 0.15 I I 1 1.89 I I I t.51

39

r-kw k,0.0 .33 Ff-_k -0.02 1.97 I .26 l_wl Ik,O.O8 1.89 LL..__._J k,0.24 1.68 II 1.14 k-0.50 1.331 1.00
I NOTE-" ALL CROSS COin'S IN TABLE NOT ARE BASED

0.94110.50 0.59 I 0.22 I I 1.651 1.75 I I 2.00 t 1.33

0.8511 0.53 i I I 1.49 I I I 1.80 I 1.78 1.70 1.51 1.20

ON d.

0.50 0.22

1.75

I.G0

1.33 1.33 1.26 1.14 1.00

OF

2.05

! ' I
I WIDTH

2.00 I .48 1.65 .22 1.12 1.85 1.20 l 1.00

I

40,41 I 40 I I I 41,42 I I I 40 41

I 43
I
I

43 39

SECTION,

EQUIVALENT

13

2.3 Empirical 2.3.1 Crossflow the previous section, drag coefficientvalues

Input

Values CN and C m for the equations Cdn are needed normal number derived in

To compute drag

of crossflow circular

coefficient placed Mach

for an "infinite As prenumber at angle relations,

length" viously

or truly mentioned,

two-dimensional

cylinder the

to an airstream. and Reynolds

Cdn is a function to the cylinder

of both

components of attack introduced Mach

normal

longitudinal

axis, and hence

for a configuration simple

it is a function previously and Ren,

of M n = Moo sin o_ and Re n = Re sin or. In these (2.3) and (2.4), M n is commonly For circular

as equations the plots

called

the crossflow necessary

number

crossflow have

Reynolds been prepared

number.

cylinders,

"state-of-the-knowledge" Re n (figs. 1-3). Figure prepared 1 shows the

for the variation

of Cdn with M n and

the variation data

of Cdn with

M n over

the M n range data

from 0 to 8. It was obtained recently by

from

of references

44 through Transonic

49 and from Wind Tunnel. and

John M. Macha are the theoretical Because numbers,

in the Ames variations

2- by 2-Foot predicted

Also shown

for reference theories. Mach

from

Newtonian values

modified

Newtonian

of the close agreement it is not surprising to predict

of the Newtonian

with experiment Newtonian

at the higher theories

that computer

programs

utilizing

have been Mach the

used successfully numbers variation

space-shuttle-booster

results

in wind tunnels

at hypersonic

(see, e.g., ref. 50). Except

for the transonic in figure

range, where data are very limited, 1. ! represent

of Cdn with M n is well documented range, the black

In the transonic recently from

symbols

in figure

values Of Cdn obtained diameters s. Many (i.9 values to of

pressure-distribution Reynolds

tests of circular numbers from about

cylinders

of various

5.1 cm) at crossflow Cdn were initially on the general cylinders increase

1.3XI0 s to 4.9X10 distributions Wind Tunnel.

computed in the Ames

from

the extensive

pressure

measured Because

by Macha there was a

2- by 2-Foot

Transonic

in Cdn with decrease

in cylinder

diameter

d (but

not Ren)

for M n values

from about

0.9 to 1.2. plots of Cdn vs. d were constructed, the curves of Cdn, values the models to d = 0. The black that and should the wind come symbols closest

and values of Cdn were obtained in figure 1 represent data these extrapfor no interferrocket

by extrapolating olated ence values between

to representing data agree

tunnel.

These

well with the

14

flight-testresultsobtainedin 1953 by Welsh(ref. 49), but theseor similar-sized models shouldbe testedfurther in a largertransonicwind tunnel. As shownin figure1, there is a critical crossflowReynoldsnumbereffect that can drasticallylower the values of
the crossflow Cdn decreases Figure Reynolds number Cdn at M n below Re n exceeds about 0.5. For M n less than about 0.5, if

the critical

value of about

2 l0 s , the value of 2 and 3. 0.4. It has been

considerably.

This variation

is shown

in greater

detail in figures about

2 gives the variation

of Cdn with Re n for M n less than

well documented boundary-layer Re n = 2X10 s. boundary-layer 90 , where about position nolds

over the last 60 years flow At and aboutRe separation

(e.g., refs. 39, 43, 45, 51 ) that Cdn = 1.2 tor laminar just before there the critical Reynolds (e.g., number of of about laminar 80 or of

n = 5X10 s the front

is evidence

refs. 52-54) position

flow around the flow separates, a laminar

of the cylinder transition, bubble.

to an angular and reattaches

of about

undergoes separation location

at an angular

position

110 to form downstream

Then the turbulent 130).

flow separates increase

at some in Rey-

(an angular

of about

With a further

number

into the supercritical flow moves upstream

regime, of the

the bubble location

decreases

in size until the transition separation, and the bubble Cdn increases Reynolds and

to turbulent disappears gradually, number there The

of laminar about 5

(ref. 54). From at least regime

the low Cdn value between in Re n up to about recently

0.15 The

and 0.30,

for an increase

10 6

supercritical

has only been

investigated

in any detail and trend

(refs. 43 and 52-54),

is still considerable shading data. Cincotta,

uncertainty the

in the magnitude approximate

of Cdn with Re n and M n. in Cdn based on

in figure 2 indicates

spread

or uncertainty

known

Jones, circular

and Walker

(ref. 54) probably flow.

have made the most gas to obtain

detailed

study

of

cylinders that

in supercritical there is an effect their

With the use of freon

high Re n, they 3 (taken to and

have shown

of M n on the variation for M n - 0.25

of Cdn with Re n. Figure to 0.50. The reader

from ref. 54) summarizes reference visual-flow For noncircular tions (2.20) 54 for their studies. noncircular instead

Cdn results

is referred

interpretation

of these

Cdn results based on pressure-distribution

bodies, of circular

as mentioned cross sections data

in section

2.2,

experimental

values

of Cdn for to equa-

can be used with slight modification not available for crossflow

and (2.21). These

are generally

Mach numbers

15

abovecritical.However, somedataareavailable subcriticalcrossflow for Machnumbers, nd a thesedatashouldbe usedif the crossflowReynolds numberRe n
(the Re n where Cdn drops rather drastically with a slight increase exceeds in Ren). the critical value

In table 2 some

TABLE Re n

2.-

REFERENCES BE

FROM

WHICH FOR

EXPERIMENTAL CROSS

VALUES SECTIONS

OF Cdn AND

VS

CAN

OBTAINED

VARIOUS

FLOW

DIRECTIONS
References

Cross

se(hnr,

rind

liow

Olrechons

Relerences

, ,nss

sechnns

ond

flow

O_rect,ors

_ k_

I* :

13_*!,

167

333,

500

-----

4 4 gb: _L indse_ I i) _ F ilip_es

_r

L_

I..... 0
i .
I"_

5w

#-h
: ' [ 1 [i r;se
' "

Tr 4''

! [ _iii _ : tr I

aS (Po ho_ Js:

,5,,

----_

, _

Z2'4

C'
i 1 Ii CIC _ _:;oa L

F Io' - _

flor, rder

;I

;_

t 3,,

,: Debony Sorensen

_, )

'

16

references various

are listed cross sections

from

which

experimental

values of Cdn versus Re n can be obtained It should be noted that most experimental by w/d, where

for

and flow directions. width

values d is the

of Cdn are based diameter 2.3.2

on cross-sectional circular

w and must

be multiplied

of the equivalent Crossflow

cross section. factorfactor, In the equations used to compute CN drag drag

drag proportionality drag proportionality cylinder

and Crn, 77is the crossflow coefficient coefficients knowledge) Values plotted plotted, slightly

that is, the ratio of the crossflow cylinder. Cylinder

for a finite-length from which values

to that

for an infinite-length

of 7/ can be determined Mach numbers

have been measured (refs. 56 and 57). Mach numbers of 7/for

(to the author's

only at very low subsonic of 77for circular cylinders

at very low crossflow

(from

ref. 56) are are also are only

as a function

of length/diameter

ratio in figure 4. Values ratio.

flat plates

but as a function less than values those

of plate length/width cylinders.

The values for the flat plates

for the circular

Thus, varying

it is likely that figure 4 can be used from circular to flat. However, these

to estimate

of r/ for many cross sections

values may be acceptable An indication by computing From equation

only for very low crossflow

Mach numbers. Mach number M n can be obtained bodies of revolution.

of the variation of r/ from

of 77 with crossflow high-or CN data

values (2.1 2),

(ref. 16) for slender

CN - sin 2a cos (or/2) (Ab/Ar) 71Cdn = (Ap/Ar)sin 2 _ (2.22)

For two bodies

of fineness

ratio

10 and 12 (sketched

in fig. 5), the variation (2.22)

ofrlCdn

with M n (for M n = 0.4 to 1.6) has been computed data bodies rtCdn plotted from for values of o_ from about

from equation

with the use of C N results for the two of

45 to 60 . As shown

in figure 5, the

agree closely.

Now with the variation

of Cdn with M n in figure

1 and the variation and

with M n in figure 5, the variation in figure 6. (The 0.4 to 1.6; the circular and symbols

of r/ with M n has been denote the computed represent

computed values values

the results

over the M n range of 77 for very low

square

diamond from

symbols

crossflow For unity,

Math most

numbers supersonic

obtained and

fig. 4) values essentially of M n, 77 probably correct from can be assumed past investigations to be (e.g.,

hypersonic as being

an assumption

indicated

17

refs.3, 6, 7, and9). The greatest ncertaintyappears be within the transonic n u to M

and here further of better research is desirable. In this study, however, figures information.

range,

5 and 6 are used in lieu

2.4

Formulas

and Values

of (Cn/Cno)sB and (2.21)

and (C"/Cno)---Newt for computing for the equivalent

for Various Cross Sections

To use equations normal-force determined. coefficients The ratios

(2.20)

CN and C m, ratios of the section circular sections (Cno) must be

(Cn) to those (Cn/Cno)sB

from slender-body

theory

are used in the first term of theory are used in the second

each equation, term.

and the ratios

(Cn/C n ) o Newt

from Newtonian

Formulas of (Cn/Cno)sB and (Cn/Cno)Newt are now presented for some of the more general cross sections encountered in missile and aircraft aerodynamics. Then, for several sample cross sections, kbrmulas values of (Cn/Cno)sB From and (Cn/C n ) O Newt slender-body to that for theory are plotted (e.g., and compared. 58-61), the

2.4.1 ratio body

of (Cn/Cno)SB-

refs.

of Cn for a winged-body cross section expressions can be

cross section determined

for the equivalent cross-sectional

(same area) circularshapes. In ref. ]1,

many

(Cn/Cno)sB (see sketches

are determined

for winged-circular

and winged-elliptic

cross sections

(c), (d), anti (e)).

,t
(c) Sketches For a winged-circular flow velocity Vn (sketch cross section (c)), (d) (c), (d), and (e) with the wing planform

,t
(e) perpendicular to the cross-

(2.23)

18

For a winged-ellipticcrosssectionwith the semimajor xisa a

pendicular to the crossflow velocity Vn (sketch (d)),

and wing planform

per-

_ __ ab B where (a kl = l
+ b) 2

(kl 2 + a 2)

(2.24)

4ol

o,
For pendicular a winged-elliptic to the crossflow

l(s

+,/s s + b z _ a 2 )
with the semiminor (e)), axis b and wing planform per-

cross section velocity

Vn (sketch

__

__

ab

(k2 2

-{-

bs )

(2.25)

B where (a + b) 2
k s : 0 2 4o 2

o2:
For an elliptic cross section

,(s+,/s2+ a2b2)
a wing (e.g., ref. 37),

without

(_no where 4_ is the angle of roll about

b cs2 )s B _ a the body velocity

_ + a- sins b axis, being 0 _'with

(2.26)

longitudinal

the semimajor

axis a perpendicular ular to the crossflow 2.4.2 expressions appendix Formulas

to the crossflow velocity

and 90 with the semiminor

axis b perpendic-

(see sketches

(d) and (e)). From Newtonian impact theory, (Cn/Cno)Newt (see

of (Cn/Cno)Newt--

also have been derived A).

for winged-circular

and winged-elliptic

cross sections

For a winged-circular flow velocity Vn (sketch

cross section (c)), we obtain,

with the wing planform from equation 19 (A10),

perpendicular

to the cross-

(2.27) For a winged-ellipticcrosssectionwith the semimajor xisa a

pendicular to the crossflow velocity Vn (sketch (d)), we obtain, and wing planform (A16), per-

from equation

(_no)Ne-

wt

2 3 V_b{[

1 -- (b2/a _ )13/2 log -b2/a2 Ib

(1

_)]

+ i - (b2/a 2) + - - 1 a 1 s } (2.28)

For

a winged-elliptic to the crossflow

cross

section

with

the

semiminor (e)), we obtain,

axis b and

wing planform (A21),

perpendicular

velocity

Vn (sketch

from equation

2 ewt From Newtonian

[(a2/b 2) -

113/2 tan-I

(a2/b 2) -

1+ - - 1 b

(2.29)

impact

theory,

an expression

for winged-square

cross sections

with rounded

for (Cn/Cno)""Ne wt also has been derived corners (sketch (f)). From equation (B15),

-s-q -w-q
where

_3

0_<k_<

0.5

(2.30)

the equivalent

diameter

(from

eq. (Bl 2)) is

d=

2wV tl-

(-4-

_r)k2

(2.31)

Sketch

(f)

2.4.3 (2.29), cross through

Values

of (Cn/Cno)sB B and with

and

(Cn/Cno)ewt were

From computed

equations

(2.23)

through

values sections 10.

of (Cn/Cno)s alone and

(Cn/Cno)ewt The results

for circular compared

and elliptic in figures 7

wings.

are plotted

and

In figure 7, the variation section without wings.

of (Cn/Cno)

with axis ratio a/b is given for an elliptic in reference 9, values of (Cn/Cno)

cross from

As previously

noted 20

slender-body theory are reasonably closeto thosefrom Newtoniantheory for manya/b

values of interest. In figure 8, the variation r is given reasonably for a winged-circular of (Cn/Cno) cross section. increase with the ratio of wing semispan For sir < 2, the values in s/r, the values s to body radius are

from both theories greatly

close, but with further

of (Cn/Cno)sB

exceed

those of (Cn/Cno)Newt. In figure 91 values of (Cn/Cno) semimajor axis a perpendicular are presented for a winged-elliptic velocity cross section with the ofa/b = 2

to the crossflow of (Cn/Cno)

Vn. For the axis ratios of semispan the results

and 3, the figure gives the variation axis a. As either increases. In figure the semiminor 10, values of (Cn/Cno) a/b or s/a increases,

with the ratio between

s to semimajor

the disagreement

from the theories

are presented to the crossflow

for a winged-elliptic velocity

cross section ofa/b

with = 2 the

axis b perpendicular of (Cn/Cno) from the two

Vn. For axis ratios agreement

and 3, the variation values computed

with s/b is given. There theories

is closer

between than

for this cross-sectional

arrangement to Vn.

for the

arrangement

where the semimajor from

axis and wing are perpendicular 9, shows The the variation of Cn/Cno

Table 3, taken rounding theory

reference sections.

of (Cn/Cno)Newt computed theory from

with

corner

k for square are reasonably

cross

values

slender-body

close to those

computed

from Newtonian

(eq. (2.30)).

TABLE 3.-

Cn/Cno

FROM SECT1ONS

NEWTONIAN WITH 0.1 1.25

THEORY

FOR

SQUARE

CROSS

ROUNDED 0.2 1.17

CORNERS 0.3 1.11 0.4 1.05 0.5 1.00

k Cn/Cno

0 1.33

0.05 1.29

Corresponding radius)

values from slender-body

theory circular

vary from cross section).

1.19 at k = 0 (no corner

to 1.00 at k = 0.5 (completely

2.5 It is interesting crossflow terms

Relative

Influence

of Crossflow

Terms of the potential and viscous (ref. 9)

to examine

briefly

the relative

influence

in the equations

for C N and C m. 21

For demonstration,

Jorgensen

comparedthe magnitudes the terms for an ogive-cylinder ody of fineness of b ratio 11 (N/d= 5) at o_ =
are presented normal force 0 to 180 and Moo = 2.9. The computed 11. For this body, the viscous values (by eqs. (2.12) term contributes to (2.14)) most of the

in figure

crossflow

at high values of o_and, of course, potential on C m. in figure as shown considerably 11 are indicative term contributes

all of the normal little

force at o_= 90 . Although

the slender-body icant influence The results

relatively

to CN at high a, it has a signif-

of those

computed contributions

for most

slender

bodies terms

(ref. 9). However, can be modified body.

in chapter

5, the relative

of the crossflow

with the addition

of thin lifting surfaces

(wings and tails) to a

22

CHAPTER3 METHODAPPLIED TO BODIESOF REVOLUTION In recentyears,therehasbeenincreased interestin the basicaerodynamics slender of bodiesof revolutionbecause emphasis n achieving of o moremaneuverability from missiles. Somedesigns thatusethrust-vector ontrolsystems rebeingconsideredor missile c a f flight at angles attackrangingfrom 0 to 180 (e.g.,refs.13, 15,and62). Wewill nowassess of the predictionmethodof chapter2 by comparing predictedwith measured longitudinalaerodynamiccoefficients various for bodiesof revolution. 3.1 Cone-Cylinder andOgive-Cylinder Bodies Moo at
We will compare by Jernell (ref. 63) predicted for a series longitudinal of three aerodynamic cone-cylinder is about coefficients and four = 2.9 with those measured bodies at

ogive-cylinder quotes 2.86),

o_= - 5 to 180 . The free-stream Reynolds number based fineness on body ratios

Mach number diameter

2.9 (Jernell

and the nose

is about

1.25X l0 s . The bodies Unitary

with various

and aftersection Figure eters required

were tested

in the NASA-Langley

Plan Wind Tunnel. parambodies with are

12 shows

the seven bodies

considered

along with values of the geometric For the cone-cylinder

to compute

the aerodynamic parameters

characteristics.

(numbers tangent

1-3), all of the geometric ogive noses (numbers obtained.

are easily computed,

but for the bodies and As/d2

4-7) the required

values of Ap/d 2 , V/d 3 , xc/d, (from ref. 9) for computing

not so easily

Some convenient

formulas C.

these param-

eters for tangent Equations chapter seven

ogives are given in appendix (2.12) to (2.15), (2.18),

and (2.19),

along with the procedure

outlined

in

2, have been used to compute bodies considered. The values

the variation of CAo_=0o

of CN, C A, C m and Xac/f_ with _ for the and CAa = 18o used in equations of turbulent was effected" of fore (2.18)

and (2.19) flow.

were computed (ref. 63) states the a range.)

in reference

9 with the assumption transition the contributions who wishes to estimate

boundary-layer by artificial trips

(Jernell

that "boundary-layer include

throughout

The values

pressure,

base presis

sure, and the turbulent referred to reference

skin friction. 9. No attempt

The reader was made

to make similar calculations effects of wind-tunnel support

interference.

23

In figures13
compared agreement with the

to

16, computed experimental

values results for

of CN, the

CA,

and bodies.

Cm as a function Generally, there

of o_ are is close

seven

of the computed

with the measured because

results,

especially formulas

in the variation used to predict

of CN and CA with a,

Cm with o_. As expected, the poorest agreement

of the approximation the predicted effects

is between to find that

and measured fineness

values of CA . ratio, nose fineness ratio, and

It is satisfying nose shape increase shows ratio-3

of afterbody

on C N and C m are predicted an increase in fineness

so well. Generally

the magnitudes results bodies,

of CN and Cm predict. all with fineness Figure 13

with the

ratio,

just as the computed for cone-cylinder the ogival and figure effect noses.

effect

of afterbody Likewise, all with

fineness figure

ratio 14 shows

finenessratio for of

conical

noses. bodies,

of afterbody Figure

ogive-cylinder nose fineness

fineness-ratio-5 bodies,

15 shows

the effect

ratio for ogive-cylinder

16 shows the minor effect ratio of 3. center

of change

in nose shape from conical In figure compared The with 17, computed measured Xac/_ , are

to ogival for a given nose fineness positions positions measured of aerodynamic from the

normal-force

(symbols)

are

(lines from

ref. 63) for the seven bodies nose tip of each body of the computed symbols in terms

at Moo = 2.9. of the body

positions,

length. values

As for the C N and C m results, is reasonably close, especially

the agreement

with the measured are used to denote the measured results.

for ot near 90 . Note that

computed

values because

only lines are given in reference method, plots of Cm versus for conciseness, precise

63 to denote

To assess the analytical CN and Xac versus in the remainder

o_may be omitted

if plots of both

o_ are included. of this study.

Hence, Because

plots of C m versus a are omitted of CA versus o_ is beyond the

prediction

scope of this study,

plots of CA versus a are also omitted.

3.20give-Cylinder As shown coefficients sonic results Mach in the previous section,

Bodies at Moo = 0.6 to 2.0 the analytical method predicts the bodies aerodynamic at a super-

reasonably number

well Ior various

cone-cylinder

and ogive-cylinder of predicting

of 2.9. We will now assess the method bodies

the CN and Xac range

for four

ogive-cylinder

at a = 0 to 60 throughout

the Mach number

from 0.6 to 2.0 (Moo = 0.6, 0.9,

!.2, and 2.0).

24

Sketches f the four bodiesconsideredreshownin figure 18.Bodies o a N

were previously Wind They Tunnel. tested Recently, by Jorgensen these and Nelson (ref. 16) in the NASA-Ames in the same tunnel

2C l

and N7 Ca

6- by 6-Foot at Moo = 0.6. attached to form

same bodies

were retested

were also retested

at Moo -- 0.6, 0.9,

1.2, and 2.0 with cylindrical long, was attached long, was attached ratios

extensions
N 2 Cl

to the aftersections. body body

Cylinder

C2, two diameters Cs, four diameters include

to body to body

N2 C1 C2, and cylinder N7C1Cs. Thus,

N7 C1 to form N_ and

the bodies ratios

nose fineness

of 2.5 and 3.5 (noses

N 2), aftersection overall fineness In figures pared

fineness ratios

of 7, 9, and

I I (aftersections

C_, C1 C2, and C_ Ca), and

of 9.5 (N7 Cl ), 10.5 (N2 C1 ), 12.5 (N2 C1 C2 ), and 13.5 (N7 Cl Cs ). values of C N and (_ - Xac)/d as a function of c_ are comcenter, diameter.

19-22, computed results forward

with the measured is measured N2C_

for the four bodies. on each body

The aerodynamic

normal-force of its body

(_ - Xac)/d, For bodies are compared CN and

from its base in terms the results

and NTC_

(figs. 19 and 20, respectively), and one can observe, For the number longer

for all Mach numbers of

on the same plots, with Moo.

at a given value of a, the variation N2C1C2 (fig. 21) and N7CICs

(_-Xac)/d the plots, results there

bodies,

(fig. 22), separate (_-

for each

Mach

are compared

on a separate with

plot.

With these values of

is less confusion

in comparing

predicted

measured

Xac)/d. Generally, the variation considered. of C N with ot is predicted At the lowest closely for each body throughout the

c_ and Moo ranges ously measured

Mach number,
N7

Moo = 0.6, the CN values previto be erroneous (fig. 20).

(ref. 16) for the shortest agree closely

body,

C1, are believed results. best

The values from the retest The numbers. more values better measure Thus, aerodynamic Generally,

with the predicted centers are predicted

normal-force for the subsonic than

for the supersonic aerodynamic

Mach are

Mach numbers, the measured

the predicted centers. For

centers

rearward

on the bodies

all Mach numbers positions probably

and low should be to

of o_, the agreement than the shown. large

of the predicted and moment

with the measured balance located

The force normal

inside expected

each body over the

was chosen

forces

and pitching

moments

high c_ range. Cm/CN) at

the accuracy

of the experimental

aerodynamic

centers

(determined

from

the low values data.

of a is somewhat

less than at the high values, and there

is more scatter

in the

25

In this study, we haveconcentrated primarily on

characteristics theoretically attack theory body for bodies exact at high angles methods of attack. have been

predicting

the

static

aerodynamic more of of

For bodies proposed.

at low angles of attack, For example,

prediction

for angles

less than

about

20 , Perkins at supersonic (e.g., the

and Jorgensen Mach term

(ref. 4) have shown can be improved

that the agreement by replacing hybrid

with experiment potential theory

numbers

slendertheory

first

in eq. (2.10)) They

with Van Dyke's

(ref. 64)

or Tsien's to the

linearized viscous

theory crossflow

(ref. 65). theory

also suggest

the use of an empirical in eq. (2.10)). distribution In this of the It is

modification modification, crossflow

(e.g., the second correlation curve

term

an experimentally along the

determined the body

for the

drag coefficient whether

length

is used when there needed in these

is laminar detailed

crossflow. methods

is questionable warranted body length

extra

computation However, method

more loading

for most

engineering

studies.

if an accurate be considered

distribution

over a

is desired,

a more detailed

should

(ref. 4).

3.3

Predicted

Effect

of Change

in Crossflow to Supercritical data

Reynolds

Number

from Subcritical At present be compared there is a general for crossflow bodies

lack of aerodynamic at supercritical Jorgensen

for which

predicted

results numbers

can and

of revolution numbers.

crossflow however, body

Reynolds has

subcritical which chosen section

Mach what

(ref. 9),

computed

results The body after-

demonstrate for study of fineness

might

be expected

for a slender

of revolution.

consists

of a tangent

ogive nose of fineness

ratio 5 with a cylindrical

ratio 6 (body (and

7 in fig. 12). Mach numbers for free-stream less than about Reynolds 0.4, the variation of CN

For free-stream and Xac/_ with

crossflow) computed

_ has been

numbers effect

of l0 s, 106, and number the

107 , and the curves are shown on both strong CN and Xac/_ influence

in figure 23. There

is a significant

of Reynolds of course,

throughout

most of the o_ range. number

These curves,

reflect

of crossflow circular

Reynolds

Re n on crossftow

drag coefficient

Cdn for

two-dimensional As shown from from

cylinders

(see fig. 2). cylinder drops considerably is a gradual as Re n increases rise as Re n increases in the magnitude

in figure 2, Cdn for a circular to 106 (supercritical),

10 s (subcritical)

and then there is much

106 to 107 (in the supercritical

range). There

more uncertainty

26

of
than

Cdn

at supercritical

Re n (such

as 106 and

10 7)

than

at subcritical

Re n (values because

less

about

2X 10 s ), and the shading data. shaded bands

in figure 2 indicates

the uncertainty

of scatter

in known

In figure 23, the uncertainty clearly in these

in the

CN and Xac/

curves for Re

10 6

reflect

the

curves resulting that

from the scatter

in the Cdn data shown curves is relatively

in figure 2. It is small compared

evident,

however,

this uncertainty

in the

with the large effect Figure body out 23(b)

of change in Reynolds

number. at Re
= 10 6

shows

the ratio of CN for the body

and

107 to CN for the through-

at the subcritical the a range: of the Similar 23(c)

Re of l0 s . With this figure the effect at o_ near 90 , the body

of Re can be studied

for example, CN developed study

at Re = 106 develops

only about of the CN is

25 percent developed.

at Re = l0 s , but at o_ < 10 , 100 percent of Xac/ with change

of the movement

in Re can be made with the

use of figures Although effects

and (d). data there are available are limited with which data to compare these predicted

no experimental of revolution,

for bodies body

for an early version some experimental an increase

of a noncircular trends (ref. 66) Reynolds

space-shuttle showing number the

(ref. 66). Jorgensen in CN with

(ref. 9) predicted results from

decrease

ot that

in crossflow

from subcritical

to supercritical.

27

CHAPTER4 METHODAPPLIEDTO BODIESOF ELLIPTIC CROSSSECTION In this chapter,we compare predictedwith measuredormal-force n andnormal-forcecentercharacteristics threebodies elliptic cross for of sectionat u = 0 to 60 andMoo 0.6 -to 2.0. First, however,we introducethe bodiesconsidered,eviewthe experimentalest r t conditions,andpresenthe equations sedto computeC V and t u
4.1 Figure 24(a) shows Bodies Studied the three bodies and Tests of elliptic C m for each body.

at Moo = 0.6 to 2.0 cross section considered here. Planform for the tests are presented in a

views of the bodies shown

as they

were oriented

(in five different previously

configurations) and the results

in figure 24(b). (ref. 18). basic circular

All of the bodies

were tested

data report The

body

B I consists aftersection

of a circular-arc of fineness

tangent-ogive ratio 7. Bodies

nose of fineness B2 and B3 have of cross-sectional fineness ratio to the

ratio 3 followed elliptic

by a cylindrical

cross sections, Hence the

and they have the same length fineness ratio

and axial distribution

area as BI.

of _/d = 10 for B1 is also the equivalent

for B2 and B3, and all bodies semiminor cross-sectional

have equal volumes.

For B2, the ratio of the semimajor along the body length.

axis (a/b = 2) is held constant

Bodies B_

and B2 were investigated (new to the investigation

in 1958 (ref. 6) only for c_ = 0 to 20 and Moo = 2 to 4. Body B3 in ref. 18) consists of the same nose in length shape as B2 but has an a/b = 2

afterbody over the

section rear three

of variable body

a/b over four body diameters (see fig. 24(a)).

and a constant

diameters mental

Photographs body.

of B3 in figure 25 enable

one to establish

a clearer

image of this more complex force and moment

Six-component study of reference

aerodynamic

coefficients

were

measured

in the in

18 for these bodies

in the Ames

6- by 6-Foot

Wind Tunnel.

However,

this chapter,

only the variation were tested the Reynolds

of C N and (_ - Xac)/d at Moo = 0.6, 0.9, numbers, based

with o_is considered.

All bodies data and used here,

1.2, 1.5, and 2.0 and ot = 0 to 58 . For the on base diameter, are 6.5X l0 s at Moo = 0.6 were tested at _ = 0

0.9 and

3.810

s at Moo = 1.2, 1.5, and 2.0. The elliptic against

bodies

(flattest

side of nose pitching

the flow) and 90 (see fig. 24(b)).

28

4.2 Equations Usedto Compute N C

For the general the length, tions (2.20) case of a slender body in which

and C m for Each Body the cross-sectional shape varies along from equa-

the normal-force and (2.21):

and pitching-moment

coefficients

can be computed

CN = sin 2or cos (or/2) Cn Ar /9_(_no)s

dA dx + 2rlCdnSin2cx Ar B _

rdx fo _ (C_o )Newt (4.])

and sin 2a cos (c_/2) Cm = ArX SB Cn dA --_ (x m - x)dx

(4.2) + 2rlCdnSin2_fo_(-C---n_)N Ar X
ewt

r(x m - x)dx

The

axial

distance

from

the

body

base to the normal-force by Cm CN + (_d Xm)

center

(see sketch

(g)) is

then given in terms

of the body

diameter (_d Xac)

(4.3)

oo
Sketch 29 (g)

<7

As previouslydiscussed, (Cn/Cno)SB equations(4.1) and(4.2)is the ratio of the in local normal-forcecoefficientfor the noncircularcrosssectionto that for the equivalent (samearea)circularcrosssectionasdetermined fromslender-body theory.Thesimilarratio is from Newtonian impacttheory.Fromequation(2.26), (Cn/Cno)Newt determined

G/'

_ a

b csZ _ + -- sin2 4_ d

(4.4)

where

4_ is the angle of roll about to the

the body

longirudinal

axis, being

0 with the semimajor axis b perpen-

axis a perpendicular dicular to the crossflow

crossflow

velocity

and 90 with the semiminor (h) and (i)).

velocity

(see sketches

Vn

_=0

Vn

(h) Sketches From velocity Newtonian theory, (2.28) for the to (h) and (i)

(i)

semimajor

axis a perpendicular

to the

crossflow

Vn, equation

redtlces

ewt

- (h2/a z 13/2 log

+ 1 - (b2/a 2)

(4.5)

For the semiminor reduces to

axis b perpendicular

to the crossflow

velocity

Vn, equation

(2.29)

Cn
ewt

= 3 'a II(a2/b_)-1]

3,2 tan-

(a 2Ib 2 ) -

(4.6)

For integration.

the

bodies The

of this investigation, equations,

equations

(4.1)

and

(4.2)

can be simplified CN and C m values

by for

simplified

which

were used to compute

30

eachbody, arepresented next. In all the C N

and Cdn from chapter 4.2.1 bodies B_ Equations and B2 2 are used. for bodies have cross with constant sections of

and Crn equations,

empirical

input values of

a/b cross sections constant a/b over

(bodies the body

BI and Bz)length. For

Both this

condition,

equations

(4.1) and (4.2) reduce

to

@
CN = (Art sin 2o_ cos _]_CNo--]S B

_Cdn _

(4.7)

and

Cm

:ocos
SB

Cm
+

['7 Z Can Ap(XmxXc)

sin2o_l(_mo)Newt

(4.8)

where

SB

Cm
(-_O)Newt = (_mo )Newt

Cn
= (%)Newt

4.2.2 midsection dA/dx

Equations length

for

body

with a/b, but

variable

a/b

cross sections body

(body

B3)-

Body 3 has a is Bj for which to

of variable

the equivalent junction.

of revolution

= 0 rearward

of the nose-cylinder

Thus, equations

(4.1) and (4.2) reduce

CN =

A(Arrsin 2_ cos 2)(C_No)

S Bnose

+ 2r_CdnSin2_ Ar

if_(%)Ne wt

r dx

(4.9)

and

31

Cm

V - Ab(_ - Xrn _ nose il-r-X-

(sin

2cxcs

2)(%)SBnos

ArX o
0

r(x m - x)dx ewt

(4.10)

where

(_NN-o-)SBnose=

(_-_mmo)SBnose

(_t_O )SBnose

and A bnos e = A b. Also,

for the

bodies

studied,

IV-Ab(_-Xm)_l

Jnse= fV-Ab(9"-Xm)l rrX

force even can be expected the body approximate intuitively to be carried term the over gives span the For

Some past zero the

potential nose shoulder force length terms

or inviscid of body the the

normal B3,

though For

slender-body 24(b)),

normal with

over past for

aftersection. nose shoulder,

B 3 at _ = 90 (fig. seem reasonable (or

increases slender-body this

and on the

it might maximum

to compute geometry.

CN

and

Cm based

span

base)

estimation,

CN =

sin 2o_ cos

C_b

Ar o ewt

rdx

(4.11)

and

Cm

- Ab(9_Ar X

x m !] (sin

2a

+ ArX ewt

r(x m - x)dx

(4.12)

32

where

Bb

(C-m_)SB b

Bb

4.3

Comparison

of Computed

With Measured

Normal-Force

and

Normal-Force-Center

Characteristics

In figures 26 pared with measured

through

28, computed

values

of C N and

(_ - Xac)/d

versus

o_ are comare made

values (from

ref. 18) for the bodies

studied.

The comparisons

for the bodies 4.3.1 reasonably bodies better previous useful sections B_

at o_ -- 0 to 60 and free-stream with constant

Mach numbers (bodies computed the

of 0.6, 0.9, 1.2, 1.5, and 2.0. Generally, there is for

Bodies good

a/b cross sections

B_ and B2)with the

agreement

in figure 26 of the of constant a/b along

measured

results

and B2 (bodies

length).

The agreement

is, however, along with method as a cross

at the supersonic successful tool in body of constant Body

Mach numbers

than at the subsonic. 3, tend

These comparisons, the prediction

comparisons aerodynamic a/b. variable

in chapter studies,

to validate

at least for bodies

with circular

and elliptic

4.3.2 predicted measured

with

a/b cross sections B3 (with

(body

B3)-a/b)

As for bodies B_ and B2, the reasonably well with the

characteristics

for body

variable

agree

results (fig. 27). However,

the prediction

of C N generally

is not as close as for bodies close, especially might at super-

Bl and B2. The prediction sonic Mach numbers.

of (_ - Xac)/d prediction

at high o_ is remarkably of (_Xac)/d,

This close

however,

be somewhat

fortuitous The erally,

since the prediction prediction

of CN is not nearly

as close. for body B3 oriented at 4) = 90 . Genthe Moo range.

of CN with o_ is least accurate

for this case, CN is underpredicted

at the lower values of _ throughout over the entire (4.9) nose

At the subsonic Note account analytically of the nose. length past

values of Moo, CN is underpredicted predictions were made

c_range studied. and (4.10), section. which do not Intuitively and

that these for any

with equations of the

potential

or inviscid inviscid true it

lift rearward

(ref. 64), some This is especially the nose,

normal for body might

force can be expected

B 3

to be generated

rearward with

at 4) = 90 because reasonable to

the span increases the

and

seem 33

estinaate

slender-body

potential-flow terms for

(4.12)). somewhat predicted When the

CN and

Cm based

on the is used,

maximum the prediction

spa_

(see eqs. (4.11)

and

maximum

span estimate

of CN wltn a Improves since the

(see fig. 28). However, values of ( - Xac)/d

the prediction

of (_ -Xac)/d

with a deteriorates, values (fig. 28).

move well forward

of the measured

34

CHAPTER5 METHODAPPLIEDTO BODY-WING AND BODY-WING-TAIL CONFIGURATIONS In this chapter,we compare predictedwith measured normal-force andnormal-forcecentercharacteristics threebody-wing for configurations andthreebody-wing-tail configurationsat
models 0_ = 0 to 60 and Moo = 0.6 to 2.0. First, however, tested, review tile experimental test conditions, and we introduce present the configuration used

the methodology

to compute

C N and C m for each model.

5.1 Configurations Many data body-wing and

Studied

and Tests at Moo = 0.6 to 2.0 model combinations have been tested, and the

body-wing-tail 20 and

are reported model BI,

in references combinations an elliptic

21. Planform

views of the model

components include

tested a basic

in the many circular body

are shown

in figure 29. These components

body

B2 with a/b = 2, five flat-plate

wings (W_ to W s ), and a

combination sidered area

horizontal

and vertical

tail T. The bodies B, and B2 are two of the bodies conAll the wings were designed into the body BI to have the same planform Based on the

in chapter

4 (see fig. 24(a)).

(16 d 2) if the wings extended wing chord and 0.50, at the body

to the axial centerline. ratios

phantom 0, 0.25,

centerline,

the taper

for wings W_, W2, and W3 were

respectively

(fig. 29(a)).

They were also 0.25 for W4 and Ws (fig. 29(b)). ratio of about 4; wings Pertinent W4, W2, and Ws planform dimen-

Wings Wl, (fig. 29(b))

W2, and has aspect

W3 (fig. 29(a)) ratios of about

had an aspect 5, 4, and

3, respectively.

sions of the exposed

parts of the wings are given in tables

in figure 29. The tail dimensions

are given in figure 29(a). The tests (refs. 20 and 21) were conducted 0.6 to 2.0. The in the Ames number, 6- by 6-Foot Wind Tunnel diameter at d,

ot = 0 to 58 and Moo = was about 4 10 s .

Reynolds

based on body

Results

from these tests (refs. 20 and 21 ) showed the aerodynamic characteristics

that changing

wing taper ratio from 0 wing aspect to achieve and ratio more three

to 0.5 changed from

very little.

Also, changing little. Thus,

3 to 5 changed in the

the aerodynamic investigation,

characteristics only three

very

conciseness body-wing-tail

present

body-wing

configurations

configurations

were considered.

35

Planformviewsof
figure 30: respectively) tions the basic

the configurations body BI

studied with

in the present

investigation

are shown

in W2,

circular

wings of aspect

ratio 3 and

4 (W s and

and the elliptic body

B2 with the wing of aspect

ratio 3 (I_'s ). These configura(configur-

(B_ Ws, B_ W2, and B2 Ws ) were also investigated

with the tail T attached

ations BI Ws T, Bl W2 T, and B2 Ws T).

5.2 From equations (2.20)

Methodology and (2.21),

Used to Compute we obtain

Qv and Cm

Ar
o

_ B

dx

(5.1)
+ 2rlCdnSin2a_o'_(_no)N Ar ewt rdx

and sin 2o_ cos (or/2)

Cm

Arx

f_
0

C_

-_ (x m - x)dx dA

ArX

_n_ r(x m - x)dx o Newt C N and the values C m values from from slender-body crossflow

(5.2)

The theory;

first

terms

represent

the

potential-flow method modified sections

the second

terms The

represent

the viscous

by Newtonian where the body

theory. dA/dx

first terms

are not applicable,

as written,

for body-wing

values

are zero or negative. methods

Also, for body-wing theory

and body-wing-tail

configurations,

more comprehensive the first-term method

from potential

are available. to CN and C m were com(ref. 38). This method,

For this study, puted referred circular from

(potential-flow) presented in NACA

contributions Report and 1307 Pitts),

the linear

to as the

N-K-P method

(for Nielsen,

Kaattari,

is restricted

to bodies of edges or

cross section trailing

with wings and tails that edges. It is further restricted 36

do not have swept-forward to small angles of attack

leading

swept-back

and small angles of

wing andtail incidence whichthe forcesarelinearwith angle.To obtain the wing-body in interference, ertainfactorsaredefinedthat arethe ratiosof the lift on the components c in combinationto
body theory, by the lift on the wing alone. These ratios are obtained theory. primarily Wing-tail by slenderinterference the

but the wing lift is obtained assuming one completely

by linear potential rolled-up vortex

is treated

per wing panel

and evaluating

tail load by strip theory. To combine must be multiplied behavior the N-K-P method by a correction to these terms with the crossflow factor (sin 2o_)/2a method, to produce the N-K-P potential a more correct terms type of

nonlinear

and to eliminate

the potential

contribution

as ot _ 90 .

With this modification,

CN = (CN)N_K_ P sin 2or + 2rlCdn sin 2 ot 2_ Ar

0

{Cn
Cn _ _O]Newt x O/Newt

r dx

(5.3)

and

Cm = (Cm)N_K_ P sin 2or + 2or

A rX

r(x m - x)dx et
0

(5.4)

Since the N-K-P method tails, a further for noncircular planform assumption bodies

is restricted be made

to bodies to estimate tails. The

of circular potential widths

cross section theory

with wings and

must

values of C N and Cm body in

with by

wings and

local

of the noncircular thus keeping of course,

are replaced

the local

diameters

of a circular

body, method,

the overall requires no

wing and tail spans such assumption

constant

(see sketch bodies.

(j)). The crossflow

for noncircular

/
BzW5T Sketch 37 (j)

Assumed for N-K-P circular method body

For
crossflow considerable 0.4

the drag

way

in which

tile

crossflow

method cylinder

is formulated

in chapter

2, values 1, there

of is

coefficient

Cdn for a circular

are used. As shown in figure

variation

of Cdn with crossflow than about 0.5,

Mach number there

M n tor values ofM n from about change in Cdn as the

to 3. Also,

for M n less number

is considerable value of about

crossflow These surely

Reynolds

Re n exceeds

the critical

210 s (figs. 2 and 3). bodies, but

variations

of Cdn with M n and Re n may or winged bodies.

be expected From

for near-circular

not for very flat bodies and plates shown

the data available,

values of Cdn for

flat bodies the ranges

do not appear

to change

nearly as appreciably

with M n and Re n over for the body-wing of theory

in figures

1 and 2 (see, e.g., refs. 41,66, that a constant

and 67). Thus,

configurations, with experiment, For coefficient table

it is likely especially

value of Cdn will give closer agreement regime. values

at a where M n is near or in the transonic configurations, Newtonian reasonable

flat-faced, can be

two-dimensional computed from

of crossflow theory (see,

drag e.g.,

or modified

Newtonian

1 and ref. 66). For circular from Newtonian

cylinders

at low subsonic Newtonian theory

and hypersonic

M n, values

of Cdn

computed experiment

or modified

also agree reasonably theory

well with the

(see fig. 1). in this study,

modified

Newtonian

is used to compute

circular-cylinder From

Cdn value that is substituted Newtonian theory,

into equations

(5.3) and (5.4).

modified

2 Cdn = _ Cpstag = 1.2 for Cp = 1.8

stag

ForM n > about wing-body

4, Cpstag_

1.8 from

perfect-gas

relations

(e.g., that

ref. 68). Cdn

In this study

for

and wing-body-tail

configurations,

it is assumed

1.2 for all values of

M n (and hence, Moo). The diameters) axial by - Xac d Cm CN (_ - Xm) d distance from the body base to the normal-force center is given (in body

(5.5)

In this study,

we present

normal-force

centers

instead

of C m values.

38

The entire method hasbeen computerprogrammed AmesResearch for Centerby NielsenEngineering Research, & Inc.,
given in reference reference 69. 69, and it combines in Fortran the standard Mountain essential View, Calif. The program is similar to those in

parts of the N-K-P and crossflow or 7600 machines.

programs

It is written

IV for the CDC 6600 input/output units

No tapes, time

drums, or disks other than for a typical

are required.

The running

case is less than 1 sec.

5.3

Comparison

of Computed Normal-Force-Center

With Measured

Normal-Force

and

Characteristics of C N and (_ - Xac)/d versus a are com-

In figures 31 through pared with measured studied. values

36, computed

values

(refs. 20 and 21 ) for some of the body-wing alone, the normal-force they

and body-wing-tail are based on

configurations body

As for the bodies area at the body wing planform

coefficients

cross-sectional

base. Of course

can be easily

converted

to the

more often

used exposed

area by dividing by Aw/A b, where Aw/A b = 15.92 with W2. The comparisons are made for the 1.5, and 2.0 and
B 2 [s

for the bodies configurations (fig. 31). For

with Ws and 16.49 for the bodies at a = 0 to about the other

60 . For configuration (B1W2, B2 Ws,

B _W s , Moo = 0.6, 0.9,

BI [4's

configurations

TI,

Bl W2 T1,

T),

Moo = 0.6 and 2.0. 5.3.1 Body-wing circular body BI configurationsLet us first ratio 3 wing by the modified look at the results in figure 31 for the the measured

with the aspect closely

W s . At Moo = 0.6 (fig. 31(a)), N-K-P potential overpredicts method method

CN values about o_ range tion

are predicted

only for a up to

10 or 15 . Then considered.

this potential-flow

method

CN for most of the higher CN, the combinaCN. predict It is to be CN reasonimpact

With even and

the potential-flow crossflow

overpredicting overpredicts should (modified

of the

potential-flow

methods

greatly

expected,

however,

that at a near 90 the combination by the crossflow in predicting are predicted

method method

ably well, since C N is given entirely theory) at c_ = 90 . Despite of the

Newtonian

the difficulty center

CN over most closely

of tile high a range, method. with meacenters are

the positions

normal-force in Mach number

by the combination of computed

With increase sured not results predicted

to M_o = 0.9, the comparisons (fig. 31(b)).

are not significantly as closely

improved

In tact, the normal-force Math

as at Moo = 0.6. Not until

the free-stream

numbers

become

39

supersonic the modified N-K-Pand combination do methodsgivereasonablestimatesf e o

CN. At Moo-modified results although appears increases are 1.5, the measured method best CN results are only underpredicted a small amount by the

N-K-P

for a up to about by the

30 or 40 (fig. 31(c)). At Moo = 2.0, the CN method throughout the a range studied, It

predicted the

combination are still should

experimental the combination

results

overpredicted improve

by this method in its ability

(fig. 31(d)).

that

method

to predict

CN as Moo

throughout

the supersonic in wing aspect

range. ratio from 3 to 4 (configuration As shown

B l W s

With increase comparisons the fact, modified

to B 1 W z), the

generally

are not changed

significantly. methods

in figure 32(a), for Moo = 0.6 (_ significantly figs. 31(a) at high or. In and 32(a)).

N-K-P and combination

still overpredict

the overprediction

for B_ W2 is greater configuration,

than for B_ W s (compare the CN results

As for the bination

lower-aspect-ratio

are predicted

best by the com-

method

as the Mach number

is increased

to Moo = 2.0 (fig. 32(b)). to elliptical with the same aspect-

When ratio-3 closely wing

the body cross section (configuration fortuitously) is increased

is changed

from circular the

B_ Ws to B2 Ws), by the modified

CN results

for Moo = 0.6 are predicted (fig. 33(a)). method As before, when

(possibly

N-K-P method

the Mach number prediction

to Moo = 2.0, the combination

still gives the best C N

throughout

the c_range (fig. 33(b)). deviation from makes the linearity in the CN curve with increasing difficult This break to formulate is attributed angle

The break of attack method separation leading down

or significant

at the subsonic for predicting

Mach numbers C throughout surface. studied

it extremely

a rational to flow

high o_ range.

over the wing upper edge sweep than those

For wings of generally here, the break

lower aspect attributed

ratio and higher to vortex break-

has been

near the wing trailing has been studied

edge of vortices rather

shed from the leading edge. Vortex by Wentz and Kohlman

breakdown

or bursting delta

extensively angles

(ref. 70) for thin They have moves this o_,

and modified that

delta

wings with sweep the position

from 45 to 85 at low speed. bursting of the trailing

observed upstream

as a increases the trailing

of vortex

vortices o_.Above

toward

edge and

crosses

the trailing bursting,

edge at a specific

a loss of lift occurs on the wing due to vortex larger from as o_ increases. several Mendenhall and Nielsen

and the effect more

becomes recently

progressively collected data

(ref. 71) have

investigators

for the o_value at which vortex

bursting

occurs

at the trailing edge

40

of delta wingstestedat low speeds. They wereunableto correlatethe data andsuggested that the factorswhich controlvortex burstingwerenot reproduced controlledbetween or the varioussetsof test data. The wingsusedin the presentinvestigation weregenerally sweptlessthan thosestudiedby WentzandKohlman(ref. 70) andMendenhail andNielsen (ref. 71). However,a 45 deltawing similarto that of lgI (fig. 29(a))wasinvestigated y b Wentzand Kohlman(ref. 70). For this wing they failed to observe vortices,but they, of course,measured lossin C L a
the interesting vortex that bursting research with increase in c_ over a particular further research value (near 20). Despite

thus far, it seems

that

into the factors

that control here indicate flow-

and flow separation desirable

is needed.

The CN versus _ data presented Mach numbers. Some

this is especially

for subsonic

initial exploratory in chapter 6.

field pictures 5.3.2 combinations with measured

from recent Body-wing-tail

vapor-screen

and oil-flow

tests are presented the results

configurations--

Now consider

for the same body-wing of computed At

but with the tail added results indicate

(figs. 34-36). trends

Generally, as for the

the comparisons body-wing

similar

configurations.

Moo = 0.6 and for the circular are underpredicted, to the elliptic 50 (fig. 36(a)). (modified body,

body B_, the CN results N-K-P method

over most of the investigated (figs. 34(a) and 35(a)). predicted

o_range

even by the modified however,

With change up to a near method

the CN results

(for B2 Ws T) are closely are predicted

At Moo = 2.0, the CN results although

best by the combination configurations

N-K-P plus crossflow),

as for the body-wing

the measured

results are still overpredicted With center the addition with

(fig. 36(b)). tail, there is generally more movement of the aerodynamic

of the

(_ - Xac/d)

ot at Moo = 0.6 (compare, which

e.g., results

for B_ Ws and B_ Ws T in 10 to 40 , is only and wing

figs. 31 (a) and 34(a)). partially wake predicted

This movement,

takes place at o_from about It may be attributed of the forebody

by the combination the tail. Further

method.

to forebody

flow over

investigation

and wing wake flow over the

tail appears From

to be desirable. the comparisons presented, it seems obvious that the methodology presented

here represents characteristics The reader those

only an initial step into the complex of body-wing and body-wing-tail

problem

of predicting

the aerodynamic

configurations

to very high angles of attack. initial approaches such as the

interested

in this field may wish to study and Nielsen (ref. 71) and Axelson

several other

of Mendenhall

(ref. 72). One should

also include

41

Polhamus uctionanalogy wings(ref. 73) andsomeof its various s for adaptations ndextena sions(e.g.,refs.71, 74, and75). Muchadditionalresearch necessary the highc_ field, is in
and this research we will show initially of the should include visual observations obtained from of the flow fields. In chapter visual study 6,

some

photographs

an exploratory

of the

flow over bodies

alone,

bodies

with a wing, and bodies

with a wing and a tail.

42

CHAPTER6 VISUAL OBSERVATION FLOWS OF OVERMODELS It is a well-established that as the angleof attack (or fact
increased and/or described attack, metrical vortex feeding geometry asymmetric above regions about of 5 or 10 some separation are flow separates formed. The from basic incidence) surface, phenomena of a model and vortices are easily is

the upper vortex

flow

by referring two vortices

to a body are shed

of revolution from the

(see sketch body,

(k)). At low to moderate and the vortex increase formation

angles of is symthe the

pointed

(e.g., formation vortex

refs. 2, 5, 6, 13, 25, and may become sheets tear, somewhat

27). With

further

in angle of attack, angle of attack,

asymmetrical.

At some higher may appear

and three

or more vortices

(depending Both

on the model symmetric and

and free-stream vortex

flow conditions are illustrated

as well as angle of attack). in sketch (k). Although

formations

generally

illuminating

Symmetric

vortex formation

Asymmetric

vortex formation Sketch 43 (k)

and breokoway

in concept,the illustrationsin sketch(k) aresomewhat simplistic, ndfurtherobservations a

of vortex formations over many bodies alone and with wings and tails at various free-stream flow conditions are desirable. the vortex formations is very useful over many and much models, the "vapor-screen than technique" the more

For observing (e.g.,

refs. 2, 6, 76, and 77) pressure-probe-survey technique considered fineness

less time-consuming

detailed

techniques to observe in chapters ratio that

(e.g., refs. 5 and 25). In this study, formations 5. In addition, over many

we have used

the vapor-screen configurations noses

the vortex 3 through attach

of the same model several ogival combinations positions, the

we have added

of different

to the body

and body-wing-tail flow separation used for many

previously "oil-flow

described. technique"

To observe (e.g.,

surface

flow and especially also has been

refs. 6, 17, and 76)

of the same

configurations. In this chapter, alone stream based and photographs with are presented a wing 0.9, and and 2.0, that show the flows over the various bodies

in combination numbers diameter. and briefly

a wing

plus tail at a = 10 to 50 . The freenumber is about which 4.3X10 s models

Mach on body

are 0.6, Before

and the Reynolds

presenting

the photographs, and oil-flow

we will specify techniques

are considered

review the vapor-screen Wind Tunnel.

used for the tests

in the Ames 6- by 6-Foot

6.1 As in the previous nose N, section cylinder chapters, strake

Models Considered are identified according to body B,

the models considered S, wing W, and

C, cylinder

tail T. For

the bodies

of elliptic investigated

cross and

(fig. 24), the roll orientation in this report where

4_ is also specified.

The configurations

the figures

the configuration Configuration B1 = NICI

dimensions Figure 24, 37 37 37 37 37

are given are listed as follows:

N2C1 N3 CI N4 Cl N 3 C 1S

44

Configuration
B 2

Figure 24 24 24 24 29 29 29 29,37 29,37 are shown before, in figure 38. shows a series of circular-arc N_, N:, and N3 have tangent fineness

_b= 0 _ -- 90 q_= 0 _ = 90 = NICIWs = NICIW2 = I(liCIW2T

B2 B3 B3 BIWs

B IW2 BIW2T

N3 Cl W2 N3C! Plan-view sketches W2 T

of these configurations has not been to the

Figure ogive ratios ratio-3.5 The noses

37, which that attach

presented cylinder

circular

C_. Noses

of 3, 3.5, and 5, respectively.

Nose N4 is formed fineness

by rounding ratio of 3.

the tip of a fineness-

ogive (such as N2 ) to give a resulting thin wings and of nose, tail shown cylinder,

in figure 29 also attach and tail are possible.

to the cylinder For this report

Cl,

so many some

combinations representative

wing,

only

combinations

are considered.

6.2 Vapor-Screen 6.2.1 Vapor-screen techniqueis added

and Oil-Flow

Techniques technique, the wind tunnel is run

In the vapor-screen to the airstream as the moist

with moist air. In fact, water For supersonic into the test section nated jected by a sheet through

as needed. through the supersonic nozzle

Mach numbers, it cools,

air expands condenses

and the moisture

to form

a fog. This fog is illumilamps and proas a

of bright

light produced window(s)

by high-intensity the stream.

mercury-vapor

the tunnel screen the the

and across

This sheet of light appears However,

uniformly model

lighted

of fog particles uniform

in the absence

of a disturbance. is disturbed,

with a

in the

stream affects

distribution

of fog particles particles.

and the model typically

disturbance appear

light scattered in the screen.

by the water

Wakes and vortices

as dark "holes"

45

For very high subsonic (Moo= 0.9) andtransonicMachnumbers, imilardark regions s mayappearat the vortex locations,but for lowersubsonic flows(Moo= 0.6) light (condensation)regionsoften appearat the vortex locations.Thereare,in fact, cases wherea light areawill appear bove left wingpanelanda darkareaabove right panel,andbothareas a a the will indicateseparated regionsand/orvortex flow. The
explained, (ref. 77). Figure by 6-Foot 39(a) shows a schematic drawing of the vapor-screen and various apparatus locations for the Ames 6are indicated. only one was six 900-W slits. The and but the reader interested in more detail physics may not always to the treatise be simply

is referred

of McGregor

Wind Tunnel. two

Two light-source

boxes

camera

In this study, required

light boxes

were used for observations at Moo = 0.9 and to reflect to a common moved 2.0.

at Moo = 0.6, but Each box

for necessary lamps (shown

illumination (BH-6)

contains collimating

mercury-vapor light boxes the boxes longitudinal on the vapor ing consistent For mounted enclosed

and mirrors connect and

the light through shaft

in fig. 39(b))

that passes over the tunnel,

can be pivoted

in tandem

so that

the light screen

can cut the model was focused

axis at the desired screen and moved

positions.

A Honeywell-Pentax

spot light meter

with the light box shown

in figure 39(b)

to aid in maintain-

illumination

for the photography. a Hasselblad rearward The 70-ram still camera base (model 500 EL/7) The camera was was

the present on the

investigation, support housing.

sting

of the model

(fig. 39(c)). mounted

in a protective 39(c) and

16-mm gun camera

shown

above the Hasselblack to minimize camera had a

blad in figure light reflection 50-ram

was not used for this study. to improve the quality (400

All models

were painted

of the photographs.

The Hasselblad

f4 (wide-angle)

lens, and TRI-X techniqueFlow

ASA) film was used. on the model surfaces at angles of attack were

6.2.20il-/7ow were visualized with The

patterns

through a mixture

use of the oil-flow of oil and titanium mixture

technique. dioxide

In this technique, (TiOz) and then

the models

covered tunnel. TiO2,

run wet in the wind 5 teaspoons good contrast Photographs of of

formula

for the

was 5 teaspoons

of SAE 30 oil and To provide a flat black.

with about

3 drops

of oleic acid added all models were

as an anticoagulant. were first painted

of the mixture the oil-flow

with the models, on the

patterns

models

taken

during

each

run with Hasselblad

cameras

46

focusedthrougha sidewindowanda specialsmallwindowat the top of the testsectionof the Ames6- by 6-FootWindTunnel. 6.3 Photographs btained O fromVapor-Screen andOil-FlowTechniques 6.3.1 Photographs
screen technique for the from vapor-screen techniquePhotographs taken with the vapor40 to 54. items base,

models

at Moo -- 0.6, 0.9, and 2.0 are shown to the other the light sheet, figures, identifies some model

in figures

Figure 40, presented that appear

as a prelude figures:

of the various support, model

in the other vortex

light shadow,

vortex

regions, N3C1 1) and

feeding

sheets,

and local shocks.

The two photographs are shown

in figure 40 are

for body (station

at a _ 30 and Moo = 2.0. Light at a more aft cylinder a photograph of the three shadow similar position

sheets (station

at the base of the nose vapor-screen 3) is also sketch in on

2). In the remaining

photographs included.

(figs. 41-54), The positions A model

of the flow field at the body flow-field stations are indicated

base (station on a model

each figure. the boxes

to that shown

in figure 40 usually

does not appear two

photographs

for Moo = 0.6.

As previously

mentioned,

at Moo = 0.6,

light-source

were used in tandem, For a body

and light came from both sides of the wind tunnel. (Bi =N_C_) rolled-up at Moo= shown 0.6 (fig. 41(a)), in sketch the simplistic flow even at

of revolution tightly

model

of the two rather there

vortices

(k) is not evident,

a < 30 . Rather to almost sheets increase vortex regions body. very

appear the

to be separation lee side but

regions do not from

from both sides of the body roll up. In fact, two narrow

that seem separation With an

coalesce

along

close together

appear

to trail back

the nose over the body

length.

in a to about regions.

40 , the separation these vortex

regions

from the nose appear

more

like the usual to the dark over the

However,

regions regions

are very light in color in contrast become asymmetric

at lower a, and these vortex Also, more than two regions

as they trail back

develop. to Moo = 0.9 and where there 2.0 (figs. 41(b) and symmetric (c)), the more (dark

With traditional holes sheets to the

increase vortex vapor

in Mach formations sheet)

number appear, from

are two rather Along both sides

vortices

in the "feed" base

shed

the body.

of the body,

separation

the vortices, of the body.

and, of course, At Moo = 2.0,

the vortices local shocks

grow with movement from the vortex

from the nose regions appear

(fig. 41(c)).

47

From observationof figures to 43, the effect of increasing 41 nosefineness ratio from 3 (nose N,
ratio, the vortex ) to 5 (nose N 3) can be studied. formation becomes asymmetric Generally, with an increase c_. Compare, in nose fineness lbr example,

at a lower

photographs

for NI C_ at 0__ 30 (fig. 41) with those as for the remaining Math number models

for N3C I at c__ 30 (fig. 43). For all vortex asymmetry flow is the worst and 7).

of these bodies, at the lowest asymmetry When 3

nose

to be discussed, (Moo = 0.6).

investigated

Asymmetric (considered

separation

vortex

are accompanied

by undesirable

side tbrces

in chapter

the

tip of a fineness-ratio-3.5 vortex pattern

nose (N2)

was rounded

to make a fineness-ratioN4C t

(N4) , a strange pattern two

developed

at Moo = 0.6 for the body symmetric vortices

at _ _ 40 the nose 2). The

and 50 . This located entire above unusual

(fig. 44(a))

consists

of two very one

from

separation appears

regions

stacked

on top of the other

(at station

pattern

to be symmetric the patterns

even up to _ _ 50 . However, are again similar to those for

at the higher
N 2C 1

Mach numbers

(Moo = 0.9 and 2.0),

(com-

pare, e.g., figs. 42 and 44). When strakes patterns ever, became were attached more 40 and the symmetrical above, there to the side of the cylinder for o_ up to about was no effect. nose, could C_ of body N 3C_, the vortex

30 (compare Apparently, the

figs. 43 and 45). Howasymmetric pattern, back on

at about with

originating the cylinder.

fineness-ratio-5

not be influenced of the vortices

by the strakes can be either during

Note that the hand of the asymmetry the pattern will switch

left or right,

and occasionally

even while it is being observed from circular (body

a test run. (body B2

When the body

cross section patterns

was changed became

BI ) to elliptic oriented

with a/b = 2), the vortex (flattest ever, side toward the

more symmetric

with the body of figures

at 4_ = 0

the flow). body

This can be seen by comparison B 2 was rolled

41 and 46. Howbecame more

when

elliptic

to _ = 90 , the vortex

patterns

asymmetric From symmetry

(see fig. 47). tests of body was influenced side B3, the body mostly of nose of elliptic cross section with variable a/b, the vortex

by the nose. As shown toward However, became the flow), the

in figure 48, when B3 was oriented vortex patterns were essentially side of (see

at 4_= 0 (flattest symmetric nose toward fig. 49).

at all test conditions. the flow), the

when B3 was rolled quite asymmetric

to 4_ = 90 (thinnest at many test conditions

patterns

48

WhenwingW s
the wings

of aspect ratio

3 was attached regions

to body

B 1,

the body above

vortex

growth

over

was retarded, These For regions

but extensive were especially distinct

of flow separation

the wing appeared

(fig. 50). and (b)).

large and diffuse formed,

for Moo = 0.6 and 0.9 (figs. 50(a) at the forward wing-body at the

Moo = 2.0,

vortices

originating

juncture base

at the leading body there

edge, on the wing upper were a pair of vortices

surface, from

and at the wing tips. Thus,

of the

the nose, a pair from

the wing-body

juncture,

a pair from the wing leading edge, and a pair from the wing tips (see fig. 50(c)). with the flow at M_ that the phenomenon = 2.0, the flow at Moo = 0.6 is very diffuse, of vortex bursting or breakdown and there is

In contrast the possibility taken

(e.g., refs. 70 and 71 ) has in chapter diffuse vortex 5) might regions. at

place at the higher in some

angles of attack.

This phenomenon pictures

(mentioned

be indicated

of the vapor-screen

by the light-colored

Such regions can be observed the higher angles of attack.

at Moo = 0.6 for both bodies The phenomenon chapters) predicted of vortex

alone and with wings, especially bursting might help explain for the bodies Math numbers.

the fact

(demonstrated

in previous

that the CN characteristics best at the supersonic for this phenomenon. to body can

alone and with The prediction

wings and tail are generally methods, of course,

do not account

When wing obtained photographs ofB_ as with

W2 of aspect wing Ws

ratio 4 was attached of aspect ratio 3. This however,

B_, similar

flow patterns by comparing

were the

be confirmed

in figures

50 and 51. Note,

that frames.

the vortices

shed from the wing tips

W2 at Moo = 2.0 lie outside With the addition of the

the photograph tail

T to configuration

B IW2, there

were

no appreciable

changes

in the flow patterns wing the W2 was

(see photographs attached to body

in figs. 51 and 52). N3C_, the nose-cylinder the vortex configuration asymmetry from that the also

When produced

greatest ogival

asymmetry nose

at Moo = 0.6 and 0.9, (compare

fineness-ratio-5 persisted 6.3.2 over the

still persisted

figs. 43 and 53). This asymmetry (see fig. 54). visual indications Photographs flow-separation

when tail T was attached Photographs surface support of the those from

to the configuration techniqueoil-flow

oil-flow the

To obtain technique technique

of the flow from this

models, from

was used. in that

technique are quite

the vapor-screen

positions (1)),

clearly defined.

As illustrated

in a schematic

of a body

crossflow

plane (sketch

49

oil ridgesform nearseparation regions, ndflow symmetryor asymmetry a canbe correlated with resultsfrom the vapor-screen technique.

Primary

vortex region

Secondary

vortex region

I_j._

Separation

"_Vn

= \./_o sin

Sketch Photographs 0.9, and specified planform are not taken with the oil-flow

(1) for some selected planform models at Moo = 0.6, at the the

technique

2.0 are shown angles

in figures

55 to 65. Both a tunnel

and side views are shown top of the test section,

of attack.

To avoid

support somewhat

at the

views were taken completely

with the camera For

off center, in comparing

so the model the oil-flow

planforms and vapor-

symmetrical. the figures

convenience

screen

photographs,

for each technique

are indexed Oil-flow figures 55 56 57 58 59 60 61

as follows: Vapor-screen figures 41 42 43 44 45 46 47

Configuration Bi N2CI N3 Cl N4C1 N3 C1S B2 B2 _b = 0 _b = 90 = NiCi

50

Oil-flow
Configuration B3 B3 4_ = 0 _ = 90 = NICIW2T figures 62 63 64 65 can make detailed observations of particular surface

Vapor-screen
figures 48 49 52 54 of the comparable interest. Generally, oil-flow and is

BIWzT

N3 C1 W2 T The reader, vapor-screen asymmetric asymmetric Again, oil-flow observe The note and of course,

photographs flow separation arrangement that the hand

for configurations from of the a model vortices

when there there

(indicated

by the oil flow),

is also screen). the to

in the flow field (indicated can be either not taken

by the vapor Thus,

of the asymmetry photographs asymmetry that were

left or right. simultaneously, vortex

because

vapor-screen

it is possible

a left-hand

separation

and a right-hand some

asymmetry

or vice versa.

observer

also should and wax-filled

be aware

local flow disturbances

in the oil flow result

from joints

screw holes in the bodies.

51

CHAPTER7
EXPERIMENTAL SIDE FORCES ON MODELS AT/3 = 0

When models even at zero sideslip angles range. of attack They result

are pitched

to high angles 12-21,78,

of attack,

side forces

can occur on the models occur at

angle (e.g., refs. about asymmetric

and 79). These side forces generally in the subsonic-transonic Mach

between from

20 to 60 and flow separation presented

number side

and vortex in chapter 6.

flow over the leeward

of the models As noted have been

as shown

in the photographs paper

in a recent

by Keener, flight from

Chapman,

and Kruse (ref. 78), some aircraft of attack, side forces and some and of the loss in moments recently are

lost due to uncontrolled might have originated

at high angles undesirable

controllability attributed

yawing

to flow separation considerably

and vortex because

asymmetry.

Research

on this phenomenon aircraft

has increased being extended

the flight envelopes range. side-force for

of modern

and missiles

into the higher present 6- by chapters the and

angle-of-attack discuss some

We will now 18-21) in the Ames

data most

obtained of the

recently

(refs.

16,

6-Foot

Wind

Tunnel chapter

model

configurations

considered alone,

in previous

(especially

6) and shown ratio,

in figure 38. For the bodies nose-tip the effect rounding, of adding

we will discuss side strakes,

effects

of nose-fineness cross section.

Mach number,

afterbody

and elliptic

Then we will consider

a wing and a wing plus tail to a body.

7.1 7.1.1 nose fineness ogive-cylinder body base, Effects ratio bodies are plotted 0.9, and of nose fineness ratio

Bodies Alone and Maeh Cy Cy numberand In figure 66, the effect center position (_Xsf)/d of for

_N/d

on side-force

coefficient Both

of revolution as a function

is shown.

and (_ - Xsf)/d , measured

from the

of angle of attack were tested

o_for o_ up to 60 . Plots are presented at Mach numbers up to M_ = 2, but decrease

for Moo = 0.6, there were

1.2. The models above about

no side forces

M_ = 1.2. The magnitudes

of the side forces

with increasing It is readily fineness-ratio-5 decrease

Mach number. apparent from figure 66 that the largest to the cylinder side forces were obtained with the

nose N 3 attached

afterbody

C1 (of fineness

ratio 7). With over most of

in nose fineness

ratio, the side forces decrease, 52

and they almost disappear

the

o_ range nose) about that

for at

the

body

with

the

fineness-ratio-3 been shown force increases 0.6 that (ref. even

nose. the 16).

For

body

N3C1 value al. (ref.

(with

the

finenessforce can

ratio-5 become shown the

Moo = 0.6,

it has of the value

maximum Keener (to is no et

of side 78) have

40 percent maximum

normal of Cy from

recently as

the number

more There and/or

the order question

of CN or greater) that in nose the side-force

Math

is decreased with (ref.

to 0.25. number these

coefficients Wardlaw of collected Note increases much also and

increase Morrison data. that above the about

decrease 79) also

in Mach support

increase from

fineness

ratio.

conclusions

their

recent

correlations

side-force 25 , they about the

centers move

seem forward

to, start onto tend side

well the

back nose

on (see, back

the e.g., onto

cylinder: fig. 66(a)). the

then

as 0_

At some Note are

higher that for well The side

a (say N 3 Cj, forward forces

45 to 55 ) they body with the

then

to move forces, the

cylinder. of Cy

largest

maximum

values

located

on the body. can be studied 67, the data (from photographs of the model in conjunction with the vapor-screen and 0.9 photographs along shown with the

in chapter vapor-screen 50 . The 3.5

6. In figure photographs vapor-screen forward (between

for N 3 C 1 at Moo = 0.6 figs. 43(a) shown base. 30 ) the and (b)) taken 67

are plotted

at o_ = 10 , 20 , 30 , 40 , and taken when So at a crossplane the long vortices as the in chapter the that body leads station become vortices 6, an surface. to asym-

in figure It

were that

diameters

is obvious side forces Of flow the

asymmetric remain

o_ = 20 and the results side

develop. course, separation

steadily

asymmetric, system a need asymmetric a theoretical procedures be of body roughly constant

forces

remain.

as shown from

asymmetric There metric In force, onset families force for

vortex

from

asymmetric model and for be

is obviously separation, lieu of

to analytically vortices, method must correlated afterbody.

instability side the

process

undesirable computing used. with They

forces. angle al. of attack 78) (or the have for onset of side that angle) the as

experimental angles of can curves a given the effect the

Keener-et nose have with fineness found Mach by two

(ref. ratio that

found

semiapex of onset a nose

angle for

of side with no The is, the A

is essentially angle is given afterbody smaller the

invariant approximately length angle at

number, times the

and, the angle

afterbody, general longer

onset of

semiapex of onset;

angle. that

increasing the

is to decrease which a side

afterbody

force

is first

encountered.

53

somewhat produced

similar

finding

is reported correlation

by Wardlaw

and

Morrison

(ref. 79). They at which

also have

(ref. 79) a rough

of data for the angle of attack with increasing

the maximum fineness

side force is observed. ratio. Keener

It tends

to decrease

Mach number

and body

et al. (ref. 78) also have made a rough at which the static side lbrce street

correlation

of data for the "upper-limit" flow becomes cylinder. from about essen-

angle of attack tially oscillatory

disappears

and the wake

like a Karman to decrease

vortex

from a two-dimensional Mach number, varying

This uppera maximum

limit 0_ also tends

with increasing

of 80 at Moo = 0.25 to a minimum 7.1.2 rounded Effect to make of nose-tip

of 50 at Moo = 0.9. When the tip of a fineness-ratio-3.5 the side forces nose (N2) was

rounding-

a fineness-ratio-3

nose (N4),

at Moo = 0.6 and 0.9 almost position are plotted against brought to be no

disappeared. o_ for bodies more better

This is shown N1Cj, NtCI,

in figure 68 where Cy and its center and N4C1. As discussed round-nosed in chapter body

6, this nose rounding however, appears

symmetry

to the flow field. The body

N4CI,

than the sharp-nosed 7.1.3 Lffect

NI C_ of the same t'ineness side strakes When strakes

ratio (9,N/d = 3). were attached to the sides of the changed. As

of afterbodv
N3C 1

cylinder shown

C_ of body

(N/d

= 5), the side forces of Cy

were not significantly somewhat,

in figure 69, the variation the same.

with a was changed

but the maximum

values of Cy were about 7.1.4 Effect on side-force BI (a circular

of elliptic

cross section

The effect

of elliptic cross section

and roll angle for body of constant side

coefficient body of

and position _/d= and 10)

is shown and body the

in figure 70. Results B2 (the equivalent body B2

are compared body

elliptic

a/b = 2) at Moo = 0.6 pitching those lot against

0.9.

With flow),

elliptic

oriented

at = 0 (flat

the free-stream when

the side-force

coefficients

are very small and close to coefficients increase

B_. However, According

B2

is rolled

to = 90 , the side-force more than twice

considerably.

to reference

18, Cy becomes in chapter

CN at a = 50 for patterns were

B 2 at = 90 and Moo = 0.(_. As shown very symmetric From found nose. that tests the

6, the separation very asymmetric cross section

and vortex

for B2 at 4_= 0 , but they became of body wake B3, the body of elliptic

for B 2 at _ = 90 . with variable a/b, it was by the

flow-field

asymmetry

and side forces

were influenced

mostly

As shown

in figure 71, when

B 3 was oriented

at _ -- 0 (flattest

side of nose pitching

54

againsthe free-stream t flow), the side-force coefficientswerevery smallandcloseto those lbr

BI (the equivalent side forces (fig. 49). of revolution, number the maximum increased. bodies, values of side-force there coefficient decreased no side body of revolution). and, However, when B3 was rolled to _ = 90 ,

undesirable asymmetric

developed,

as shown

in chapter

6, the vortex

flow was quite

As for the bodies as the forces free-stream measured

Mach

At Moo = 1.5

were essentially

on any of the elliptic

even for the worst

roll orientation

(ref. 18).

7.2 7.2.1 on side-force body Effects

Body-Wing

and Body-WingzTail

Configurations In figure 72, the effects plus tail to a the largest and or

of adding a wing and a wing plus tail to a bodyand side-force body N3C1, position of adding

coefficient The

a wing and a wing nose, produced

are shown.

which

has a fineness-ratio-5 As shown thin wing

side forces their

for the bodies remain

of revolution

tested.

in figure 72, these side forces W2 of aspect ratio 4 attached

positions

about

the same with the (Dimensions

even with the tail T added. body in fig. 37.) From from the these comparisons nose.

for the wing and tail are given in fig. 29 and for the

it can be concluded in chapter with

that the most important asymmetry cylinder that

influence appeared

comes from

the body

As mentioned nose, when

6, the vortex

fineness-ratio-5

tested

only the afterbody

C1, still persisted

when the wing and the wing plus tail were attached 7.2.2 planform of aspect Likewise, effect Effects of wing aspect ratio attd taper ratios forces

(see e.g., figs. 43, 53, and 54). ratioFor thin wings of about equal

area (fig. 29) but ratio on the

with aspect side from

of 3, 4, and 5, there for the body-wing

was essentially models tested

no effect (ref. 20). side-force to

measured ratio

a change

in taper

0 to about

0.5 resulted when

in no appreciable

(ref. 20).

The results models

were also unchanged

the tail T (fig. 29) was attached

the wing-body

(ref. 21 ).

55

CHAPTER8 CONCLUDINGREMARKS A reviewand an extensionof an engineering-type ethodhavebeenpresented m for computingthe normal-force andpitching-moment coefficients slender odiesof circular for b andnoncircular cross sectionaloneandwith lifting surfaces. this method,asemiempirical In term representing viscousseparation crossflowis addedto a term representing otentialp theory crossflow. n J
the local normal-force the equivalent body here the generalized coefficient circular equations written for CN and Cm, ratios are required of interest of

per unit length cross section.

for the cross section These ratios values

to that lbr

(same area)

are given both of these ratios

from slenderare included having

and Newtonian for winged-elliptic corners

theories. and

Formulas winged-square

and numerical cross sections,

the square

cross sections

rounded

if desired. normal-force was used with thin and for the pitching-moment term representing a tail, the coefficients potential for the bodies crossfiow. potential-flow alone,

In computing slender-body tions for the .theory bodies

In computamethod of

wings and

linearized

Nielsen, For

Kaattari, many

and Pitts was used, modified bodies of revolution, results computed

for high angles of attack. aerodynamic free-stream characteristics Mach numbers were round to

agree well with measured The angles of attack

for investigated

from 0.6 to 2.9. 0 to 60

ranged

from about

0 to 180 for Moo = 2.9 and from about with measured results

for Moo = 0.6 to 2.0. Agreement Mach numbers. For several bodies of elliptic

of predicted

was best at supersonic

cross section,

measured

results

were also predicted

reason-

ably well over the investigated for the bodies of revolution, better

Mach number the predictions in which

range from 0.6 to 2.0 and at o_= 0 to 60 . As were best for supersonic the cross-sectional it varied.
Although

Mach numbers. (a/b) remained

The con-

predictions stant

were

for a body for a body with

shape

over the length

than

in which

the prediction the predictions

technique are suffi-

probably ciently

can be improved accurate

further

research,

it is felt

that

for most preliminary and body-wing-tail

design studies. configurations with wings of aspect centers with were predicted a decrease ratio 3 and 4, reasonably number well to

For measured at the

body-wing normal-force

coefficients number

and normal-force of 2.0. However, 56

upper

test

Math

in Mach

Moo = 0.6, remained of attack

the agreement in good above agreement.

for CN rapidly

deteriorated,

although

the

normal-force

centers

At the subsonic

Mach numbers

(Moo = 0.6 and 0.9) and angles somewhat by just

10 or 20 , the measured term of the combination and oil-flow

results

were even overpredicted

the potential-flow From separated evidence

method. it was observed that the flow was completely 20 . There was some alone) and

vapor-screen

studies,

over the wings at the subsonic of vortex Mach bursting numbers. or breakdown

Mach numbers for some

for _ > about

of the models discrete vortices

(including from

bodies the bodies

at subsonic

At Moo = 2, however,

wings were observed For many body,

at the base of the models. body-wing, and body-wing-tail configurations, vapor-screen and oil-

flow photographs

were obtained that,

for Moo = 0.6, 0.9, and 2.0 and ot = 10 , 20 , 30 , 40 , and when the separation and vortex patterns were asymmetric, angle. These

50 . It has been observed undesirable side forces

could

be measured

on the models

even at zero sideslip about 20 .

side forces generally For number, cients bodies

originated the ratio, increase

when the angle of attack side forces

exceeded

alone,

can be significantly and elliptic through

affected

by changes The side-force

in Mach coeffiand

nose-fineness decrease with

nose bluntness, in Mach

cross section. the

number

subsonic-transonic

range

disappear From of fineness zero for

with increase

in Mach number

into the supersonic

range. to a circular increase of the even cylinder

tests (at 0.6 _<Moo _< 2.0) of tangent-ogive ratio 7, it has been a fineness-ratio-3 nose found that

noses connected coefficients 40 percent have reported is decreased coefficients the

the side-force of about

from about normal-force

to a maximum nose. Other

coefficient

for a fineness-ratio-5

researchers

more increases

in Cy (of the order Nose-tip with greater

of CN or greater) significantly of

as the Mach number decreased

from 0.6 to 0.25. for a circular decrease body was no fineness

rounding

the side-force However,

a sharp-nosed than that

ogive obtained

fineness

ratio 3.5.

beneficial

by merely

using a sharp-nosed blunted nose.

ogive nose of the same

ratio (fineness

ratio 3) as that for the resulting were attached

When strakes model changed. with

to the sides of the afterbody nose, the side

cylinder forces

of an ogive-cylinder not significantly

an undesirable the influence

fineness-ratio-5

were

Thus,

of the nose was dramatized.

57

Changes cross section from circular to elliptic for an ogive-cylinder ody (of in b fineness-ratio-3oseand fineness-ratio-7fterbody)producedsomeinterestingeffectson n a side-force coefficient.At all testMachnumbers to 2.0)andangles attack(0 to 60), (0.6 of the side-force coefficientsweregenerally smallor negligible the circularbody andthe for generated elliptic bodiesat _ = 0
elliptic twice bodies at 4_ = 90 , however, of normal-force undesirable (flat side pitching some values against the stream coefficient crossflow). became of attack. With the as large as From the

of side-force same

the values

coefficient side forces

at the

high angles of attack, against

standpoint

of reducing

at high angles nose pitching length.

it was always the stream

found

best to have the flattest

side of the elliptic-body over the body measured measured Math

crossflow,

even when a/b was not constant Undesirable erally about side forces

for body-wing for the bodies

and body-wing-tail alone.

models

were genthe side alone,

the same as those at subsonic and yawing than were influence

As for the bodies

alone,

forces developed the side forces ratios taper greater ratio

numbers

for c_> about

20 . Also, as for the bodies in nose fineness ratio.

moments the

increased largest these

with increase

Fineness ratio the or

3 produced observed.

side forces.

No effects

of wing aspect that

From

comparisons, nose.

it can be concluded

most

important

comes from the body

Ames

Research National

Center Aeronautics Field, and Space Administration 94035, March 18, 1977

Moffett

California

58

APPENDIXA DERIVATION OF (Cn/Cno)Newt OR WINGED-CIRCULAR F AND WINGED-ELLIPTIC CROSSSECTIONS Winged-Circular Cross Sectionwith WingPlanformPerpendicular to Crossflow Velocity For blunt configurationsof the type shown in sketch(m), it is assumedhat each t elemental particle of fluid strikes the configurationat velocity
loses This its normal to component the leads Vn and of thereupon momentum. Newtonian S
Vrl
v

Y 8

well-known

expression

for the pressure

coefficient:

(AI) Sketch (m) makes with over (based the the on to a forward-facing flow, the surface In Newtonian pressure coefficients

Cp=2sin

2 8

where

8 is the

local

angle

that

a tangent

free-stream rearward body

direction

(sketch(m)).

face are assumed

to be zero. The total section

crossflow

drag coefficient

diameter,

d = 2r) is then given by

cd= a-

2gCpdy
Cpbody dy + d Cpwing dy (A2) in sketch (m), (A3)

d _2fr 0

For a circular

section,

as shown

x 2 + y2 = r2

tan 6 .... dy cbc

x y

./5,

rl/%

Vy"
59

(A4)

and
sin 2 6-

tan _ 2
1 + tan 2 6

y2 rz (A2) to give

(A5)

Equations

(AI) and (A5) are substituted

into equation

ca=9-

-;_

dy+

_
r

2dy

(A6)

since
Cpwing From integration of equation (A6), 2 sin 2 _5 = 2 (A7)

we obtain 4

Cd=_+ where, for the equivalent circular section,

2( s-

1)

CdnThus, section the ratio of the normal-force circular

4 3 per unit length

(A9) for the winged-circular

coefficient section

to that for the equivalent

is given by

3 k'

c-25

O/Newt

_dn/New,

Winged-Elliptic

Cross Section Perpendicular

with Semimajor to Crossflow

Axis and Wing Planform Velocity

For a winged-elliptic are perpendicular in the to the derivation

cross section crossflow

where

the semimajor Vn (see sketch t as introduced

axis a and the wing planform (n)), for the the same procedure is cross

velocity

followed section.

of (Cn/Cno)New

winged-circular

Both the basic equations,

(A1) and (A2), are used again.

6O

Y
X 2

For an elliptic body,

y2

as shown

in sketch

(n),

b-- + _ 5

= 1

(All)

Vn X

tanS-dY- dx

a2 b 2 (-_)

a b

vfa2 _5-

1 (A12)

and sin 2 6L

tan2 6 1 + tan 2 6

a2

a2_y2 _y2[ 1_
(b2/a2)]

(AI3)

Sketch

(n)

With equation section crossflow

(AI3)

combined

with

equations

(AI),

(A2),

and

(A7),

we obtain

the

drag coefficient:

Cd=

-d 4

fa
O

a2 _y2[

o51- _y2(b2/a2)]
circular body

dy + --d- fa r dy 4

(AI4)

where d is the diameter

of the equivalent

and is given by (A15)

d = 2 x//a-b

Also, as for the winged-circular lent circular Thus, by 4/3, cross section by integrating

cross

section,

the crossflow

drag coefficient

for the equiva-

is given by Cdn = 4/3. equation (AI4), substituting 2x/-a-b for d, and dividing the result

we obtain

1 1 - (b 2/a s )

+ s_ a

17

(AI6)

61

since

ca

Winged-Elliptic

Cross Section Perpendicular

with Semiminor to Crossflow

Axis and Wing Planform Velocity

For where planform flow the

winged-elliptic semiminor

cross

section the wing crossVn same

v

axis b and

are

perpendicular Vn (sketch

to the (o)), the

velocity

procedure

is followed

as for the

previous

configurations. For sketch (o), an elliptic body as shown in Sketch

X 2 t, 2

(o)

--+a2

b2

=1

(A17)

tan6_ and

dy_ ax

b 2 (y)

b b__5

-1

(AI8)

sin 2 6-

tan 2 6 _ b 2 _ y2 1 + tan 2 6 b 2 _ y2[l - (a 2/b 2)] with equations (A1), (A2), and (A7), we obtain

(A19)

With

equation

(A19)

combined

Cd =
0

b 2 _ y2[1

- (a z/b 2)]

dy +
0

dy

(A20)

where

d = 2v_

is the diameter

of the equivalent circular

circular

cross section.

As before,

the cross-

flow drag coefficient Thus,

for the equivalent equation

cross section 2x/_

is given by Cdn = 4/3. for d, and dividing the result

by integrating

(A20),

substituting

by 4/3, we obtain 62

+s_b since

1} (A21)

_ew,--

ca _ew,

63

APPENDIXB DERIVATION OF (Cn/CnO)Newt ORWINGED-SQUARE ROSSSECTIONS F C WITH ROUNDEDCORNERS For winged-square cross sectionswith roundedcorners(sketch(p)), the pressure coefficient over the front face is given by (B1) a tangent with flow, the the face to a freepresare Sketch (p) l Vn -T $

r--k

Cp -- 2 sin 2 _ where 6 is the local surface angle that

forward-facing stream sure direction. coefficients

makes

In Newtonian over the

_.t_

rearward

assumed ficient

to be zero. (based

The total section

drag coef-

on width

w) is then given by

ca -- "
0

c), d,,

w o

Cpbody

dy +

2;
_w/2
W 0

Cpwing

dy

-? f(w/2)-r
0

(pjla t"

dv + "

fr

C_

t corner

dy+m
W

dy fw/_ Cpwing 2

(B2)

For a rounded

corner,
X2

as shown
+ y2 =

in sketch
r2

(p), (B3)

tan6

= _ dv ...... dx

x y

V r_,_

(B4)

and sin 2 6 tan 2 6 ! + tan 2 6 1 3,2 r2

(B5)

64

Thepressureoefficientfor the c
(B1), is

rounded

corner,

obtained

by substituting

equation

(B5) into

Cpcorne r

=(-)
2 1

_r2

(g6)

The given by

pressure

coefficients

for the front

flat portion

of the body

and for the wing are

Cp=2sin since6 =90 . Thus, with equations

2 6 =2

(B7)

(B6) and (B7) substituted

into equation

(B2), we write

dr. ca= --w (_/2)-r 4f

o

+ w

4fr(
0

1- 7

_:) dr.

+ --w

4_

dr.
2

(B8)

From

integration

of equation

(B8), we obtain

Cd= w
Now, to obtain circular cross section equivalent circular (Cn/Cno)Newt, it is necessary to find the diameter d of the equivalent which has the same area as the cross section studied. The area of the is, of course, (BI0)

cross section

and the area of the cross section

studied

is lr)] diameter (B12) (BII)

A =w 2[1 - k 2(4By equating equations (B l 0) and (Bl 1), we obtain

the equivalent
Ir)k 2

2w 1//1 - (4-

/r

With Cd from equation

(B9) based on d instead

of w, (B13)

Cd=4

(s
65

where,

for the

equivalent

circular

section, Cdn 4 3 (B14)

Thus,

from

equations

(B 12), (B 13),

and (B 14),

we obtain

(s_ o wt wt

k)

]//1-(4

rr)k 2

"

(B15)

0_<k_<0.5

66

APPENDIX FORMULAS TO COMPUTE GEOMETRIC

C FOR TANGENT OGIVES

PARAMETERS

To compute

the

aerodynamic

characteristics parameters to compute

of bodies

of revolution

having

tangent

ogive nose shapes, various geometric the planform and distance area Ap x c from is required;

must be obtained.

To compute

C N and C m, volume V

Cm, it is also necessary of planform

to obtain

the nose vertex surface

to the centroid

area. To compute

skin-

friction For formulas

drag, the wetted an ogival

area A s is needed. _N and diameter d (see sketch (q)) the following useful

nose of length (ref. 9):

have been derived

d2

--

_1_ R

sin-1

\
ra

(CI)

d3

7r

_ --d 5-

_ 1

(C2)

Sketch Xc d and

(q) N d (2/3)1R3[R 2 - (9_N/d)213/2 } -(_N/d) Ap/d 2

2 [R-

(I/2)] (C3)

d2 -

2 7rR

sin-_

(C4)

where R is the ratio of the ogival arc radius ra to base diameter d and

R-ra ld -

(_-)

2 + 4

(C5)

67

REFERENCES 1.Allen, H. Julian: Estimationof the Forces and Moments Acting on InclinedBodies of Revolution HighFineness atio.NACARMA9126,1949. of R 2. Allen, H. Julian;andPerkins, dward E W.:A Studyof Effectsof Viscosityon FlowOver SlendernclinedBodies Revolution. ACARep.1048,1951. I of N 3.Perkins,EdwardM.; and Kuehn,Donald M.: Comparison the Experimental nd of a TheoreticalDistributionsof Lift on a SlendernclinedBodyof Revolution M = 2. I at NACA TN 3715, 1956. '
4. Perkins, retical Edward W.; and Jorgensen, Distributions Leland, H.: Comparison Reynolds of Experimental Number 1956. of Some Mach Wake Vortex and Theoon an

Normal-Force

(Including

Effects)

Ogive-Cylinder 5. Jorgensen, Leland

Body at Mach Number H.; and of an Perkins,

1.98. NACA TN 3716, W.: Investigation Body at

Edward

Characteristics Rep. 6. Jorgensen,

Inclined

Ogive-Cylinder

Number

2. NACA

1371, 1958. Leland H.: Inclined 10-3-58A, H.; and Bodies of Various Cross Sections at Supersonic Speeds.

NASA MEMO 7. Jorgensen, Leland

i 958. Treon, Stuart L.: Measured Booster and Estimated From Aerodynamic 0.6 to 4 and

Characteristics

for a Model

of a Rocket

at Mach Numbers 1961. Eugene

at Angles of Attack 8. Saffell, Bernard the

From 0 to 180 . NASA TM X-580, Millard L.; and Brooks,

F., Jr.; Howard, Static

N., Jr.: Method Missile Configurations and

for

Predicting for Angles

Aerodynamic

Characteristics Rep. 3645,

of Typical

of Attack March H.:

to 180 Degrees. 1971. Prediction Bodies

Naval Ship Research

Develop-

ment Center, 9. Jorgensen,

Leland and

of Static at

Aerodynamic of Attack

Characteristics From

for

Space--

Shuttle-Like TN D-6996, 10. Jorgensen, Lifting

Other

Angles

0 to 180 . NASA

1973. H.: Estimation at c_'s From of Aerodynamics 0 to 90 . AIAA for Slender Bodies Alone and With 1973,

Leland Surfaces

J., vol. 11, no. 3, March

pp. 409-412.

68

11.Jorgensen, LelandH.: A Methodfor EstimatingStaticAerodynamic Characteristics

Slender Surfaces 12. Pick, George Bodies of Circular and Noncircular Cross Section Alone and With

for

Lifting

at Angles of Attack S.: Flow. Side Forces

from 0 to 90 . NASA TN D-7228, on Ogive-Cylinder & Rockets, R.; and Bodies at High

1973. Angles of Attack in

Transonic 13. Clark, William

J. Spacecraft John

vol. 9, no. 6, June

1972, pp. 389-390. and Inhibition

H.; Peoples, Moments

Briggs, M. Michael: Flight

Occurrence of Slender

of Large Yawing tions. 14. Coe,

During High Incidence 1972. Joseph of Pointed R.; and

Missile Configura-

AIAA Paper 72-968, L., Jr.; Chambers,

Paul

Letko,

William:

Asymmetric

Lateral-

Directional

Characteristics 1972. Nelson,

Bodies of Revolution

at High Angles of Attack.

NASA TN D-7095, 15. Fleeman, Body 1974. 16. Jorgensen, Leland E. L.; and

R. C.: Aerodynamic

Forces

and

Moments

on a Slender

With a Jet Plume for Angles of Attack

Up to 180 Degrees.

AIAA Paper 74-110,

H.; and Nelsoll,

Edgar R.: Experimental With Various

Aerodynamic

Characteristics of Attack From

for a Cylindrical

Body of Revolution

Noses at Angles

0 to 58 and Mach Numbers 17. Keener, Earl R.; and Chapman,

From 0.6 to 2.0. NASA TM X-3128, Gary T.: Onset of Aerodynamic of Attack.

1974. Side Forces AIAA Paper at Zero 74-770,

Sideslip 1974. 18. Jorgensen,

on Symmetric

Forebodies

at High Angles

Leland

H.; and Nelson,

Edgar R.: Experimental at Angles of Attack 1975.

Aerodynamic From

Characteristics

for Bodies Numbers 19. Jorgensen,

of Elliptic

Cross Section

0 to 58 and Mach

From 0.6 to 2.0. NASA TM X-3129, Leland H.: and Nelson,

Edgar R.: Experimental With Side Strakes From

Aerodynamic and Various

Characteristics Noses at Angles TM X-3130,

for a Cylindrical of Attack 1975. 20. Jorgensen, teristics Leland

Body of Revolution

from 0 to 58 and Mach Numbers

0.6 to 2.0. NASA

H.; and

Howell,

Michael

H.:

Experimental

Aerodynamic

Charac-

for Slender

Bodies With Thin Wings at Angles of Attack 1976.

From 0 to 58 and

Mach Numbers

from 0.6 to 2.0. NASA TM X-3309,

69

21. Jorgensen, for

Leland

H.;

and with 0.6

Nelson, Thin to 2.0.

Edgar Wings

R.:

Experimental at Angles

Aerodynamic of Attack From

Characteristics 0 to 58 and

Slender

Bodies from

and

Tail

Mach 22. Kelly, for vol. 23. Wardlaw, vol. 24. Wardlaw, at High 25. Thomson, the

Numbers The Based

NASA

TM X-3310, Force, Drag,

1976. alld Pitching of Attack. Moment Coefficients Sci.,

H. R.: Blunt 21, no.

Estimation Bodies 1954, of

of Normal Revolution pp. 549-555.

at Large

Angles

J. Aeronaut.

8_ Aug.

Andrew 12, no.

B., Jr.:

Prediction pp.

of Yawing 1142-1144. Model Paper

Force

at High

Angle

of Attack.

A|AA

J.,

8, Aug.

1974,

Andrew Angle

B., Jr.: oI" Attack.

Multivortex AIAA

of Asymmetric 1975. Position,

Shedding

on Slender

Bodies

75-123, Spacing,

K. D.: and Wake of

Morrison,

D. F.:

The Bodies

and

Strength J. Fluid

of Vortices Mech.,

in

Slender pp. 751-783. The

Cylindrical

at Large

Incidence.

vol. 50,

pt. 4, 1971, 26. Thomson, Force K. and

D.:

Estimation Moment

of

Viscous

Normal

Force,

Pitching

Moment,

Side

Yawing

on Bodies

of Revolution 782, 1972. Bodies

at Incidences

Up to 90 . Austra-

lian Weapons 27. Sarpkaya, ders. 28. Bryson, Mech., 29. Schindel, Elliptic 30. Angelucci, J. Aircraft, 31. Marshall, Using 32. Fidler, AIAA 33. Walitt, J. T.: AIAA A.

Research Separated

Est. WRE-Rep. Flow About

Lifting pp.

and

Impulsive

Flow

About

Cylin-

J., vol. 4, 11o. 3, 1966, Vortex 1959, of pp.

414-420. on Circular Cylinders and Cones. J. Appl.

E.: Symmetric vol. 26, L. H.: Dec. Effects Section.

Separation 643-648. Separation vol. 6, no. for pp. D.:

Vortex

on

the

Lift 1969,

Distribution pp. Bodies 537-542.

on

Bodies

of

Cross S. B.:

J. Aircraft,

6, June Axisymmetric

A Multivortex 12, Dec.

Method 1971, F.

at Angle

of Attack.

vol. 8, no. F.; and

959-966. Separated Wake. Vortex Flow NASA Effects Over Bodies of Revolution

Deffenbaugh, Discrete-Vorticity

an Unsteady J. E.; and Paper L.; and

Cross

CR-2414, on Missile

1974. Configurations.

Bateman. 75-209, Trulio,

M. C.: Asymmetric 1975. J. G.: A Numerical About

Method Slender

for

Computing NASA

Three-Dimensional 1971.

Viscous

Supersonic

Flow

Field

Bodies.

CR-1963,

70

34. Lubard, Attack. 35. Munk, 36. Lamb,

S. C.; and Helliwell, AIAA Paper

W. S.: Calculation 1973. Forces

of the Flow on a Cone

at High Angle of

73-636,

Max M.: The Aerodynamic Horace: The Inertia

on Airship of an Ellipsoid Oct. 1918.

Hulls. NACA Rep. Moving in Fluid.

184, 1923. British Advisory

Coefficients

Committee 37. Ward,

for Aeronautics,

R&M 623,

G. N.: Supersonic

Flow Past Slender 1949, pp. 75-97.

Pointed

Bodies.

Quar.

J. Mech.

& Appl.

Math., 38. Pitts,

vol. 2, pt. I, March C.; Nielsen,

William

Jack

N.; and Kaattari, at Subsonic,

George

E.: Lift and Center and Supersonic

of Pressure Speeds.

of Wing-Body-Tail NACA Rep. 39. Wieselberger, 40. Lindsey, 41. Delany, 1307,

Combinations 1957.

Transonic,

C.: New Data on the Laws of Fluid Resistance. of Simple Shapes. Norman

NACA TN 84, 1922. 1938. of Various

W. F.: Drag of Cylinders Noel K.; and Sorensen, 1953.

NACA Rep. 619,

E.: Low-Speed

Drag of Cylinders

Shapes. 42. Polhamus,

NACA TN 3038, Edward C.; Geller,

Edward

W.; and Grunwald, as Affected

Kalman

J.: Pressure

and Force With NASA a

Characteristics Method TR R-46, 43. Polhamus, Included 1959. Edward

of Noncircular for Determining

Cylinders

by Reynolds Arbitrary

Number Shapes.

the Potential

Flow About

C.: Effect Characteristics

of Flow

Incidence

and

Reynolds Cylinders

Number With

on Low-Speed Applications to

Aerodynamic Directional 44. Lindsey,

of Several

Noncircular

Stability

and Spinning.

NASA TR R-29, 1959. Shapes. NACA Rep. 619, Engineering. 1938. 1941.

W. F.: Drag of Cylinders Compressibility E.; and

of Simple

45. Stack, John: 46. Gowen,

Effects Perkins,

in Aeronautical Edward

NACA ACR, Cylinders 1953.

Forrest

W.: Drag of Circular

for a Wide

Range of Reynolds 47. Walter,

Numbers

and Mach Numbers. Temperature

NACA TN 2960, and Pressure Rep. 2854

L. W.; and Lange, Cylinder

A. H.: Surface

Distributions (Aeroballistic

on a Res.

Circular Rep. 48. Penland,

in Supersonic

Cross-Flow.

NAVORD

180), U. S. Naval Ord. Lab., White Oak, Md., June 5, 1953. Jim A.: Aerodynamic Characteristics of a Circular Cylinder at Math Number

6.86 and Angles of Attack

up to 90 . NACA TN 3861,

1957.

71

49.

Welsh, High 1953.

Clement Reynolds

J.: The

Drag

of Finite-Length for a Mach Number

Cylinders Range

Determined From 0.5

from to 1.3.

Flight NACA

Tests

at

Numbers

TN 2941.

50. Hamilton, sonic 51. Relf,

Richard Aerodynamic Discussion

K.:

Correlation

of

Space

Shuttle NASA

Applicable TM X-2272, of the of

Experimental 1971,

Hyper-

Characteristics of Tests 1914. the on Results the

With

Theory.

pp. 455-492. of Wires, R&M with 102,

E. F.:

of Measurements of Wires

Resistance Diameter.

Some British 52. Roshko, nolds 53. Schmidt, nolds 54. Jones, on

Additional A.C.A., Anatol: Numbers. Louis Numbers V.:

Resistance

Small

Experiments J. Fluid

on the Mech., vol. Force NASA Joseph

Flow

Past

a Circular 1961, Upon 1966.

Cylinder pp.

at Very

High

Rey-

10, pt. 3, May Measurements TM X-57,779, J.; and Walker,

345-356. Cylinder at Rey-

Fluctuating Up to 5X106. Cincotta, Oscillating

a Circular

George

W., Jr.; and

Robert at High

W.: Aerodynamic Reynolds Numbers.

Forces NASA

a Stationary 1969. Vernard

Circular

Cylinder

TR R-300, 55. Lockwood,

E.: Effects of a Family Modern 195, W.: Drag 1960. Stability 1938, Effects

of

Reynolds

Number Cylinders. in Fluid

and NASA

Flow TN

Incidence D-3932, Oxford,

on the 1967. The

Force

Characteristics 56. Goldstein, Press, 57. McKinney, Speed NASA 58. Bryson, Sydney: vol.

of Flat-Front Developments pp. 439-440.

Dynamics.

Clarendon

2, sec. Linwood

of Fineness of

Ratio

and

Reynolds and

Number

on the LowCylinders.

Crosswind TN Arthur D-540,

Characteristics

Circular

Modified-Square

E., Jr.:

Derivatives

for

a Slender

Missile Sci.,

With

Application no. 5, May

to a 1953,

Wing-Body-Vertical-Tail pp. 59. Bryson, Slender 60. Bryson, Circular 1954, pp. 297-308. Arthur Body. Arthur Body, 574-575. E., Jr.:

Configuration.

J. Aeronaut.

vol. 20,

Evaluation

of the

Inertia

Coefficients 6, June on 1954,

of the pp.

Cross

Section

of a

J. Aeronaut. E., Jr.: Vertical The

Sci., vol. Aerodynamic Tail

21, no.

424-427. Low (or High) no. 8, Wing, Aug.

Forces

a Slender Sci.,

Configuration.

J. Aeronaut.

vol. 21,

72

61. Nielsen, 1960. 62. Nelson,

Jack

N.: Missile Aerodynamics.

New York,

McGraw-Hill

Book Company,

Inc.,

R. C., and

Fleeman,

E. L.: High Angle-of-Attack & Rockets,

Aerodynamics

on a Slender 1975, pp. 12-16. at Mach Num1968.

Body with 63. Jernell,

a Jet Plume. J. Spacecraft

vol. 12, no. !, Jan.

Lloyd S.: Aerodynamic

Characteristics

of Bodies of Revolution

bers From 64. Van Dyke,

1.50 to 2.86 and Angles of Attack D.: FirstJ. Aeronaut. Supersonic and Second-Order

to 180 . NASA TM X-1658, Theory of Supersonic

Milton

Flow Past Bodies

of Revolution. 65. Tsien, Hsue-Shen:

Sci., vol. 18, no. 3, Mar. 1951, pp. 161-178. Flow Over an Inclined Body of Revolution. J. Aeronaut.

Sci., vol. 5, no. 12, Oct. 1938, pp. 480-483. 66. Jorgensen, Corner Subsonic 67. Hoerner, Leland Radius H.; and Brownson, Jack J.: Effects of Reynolds Number and Body Vehicle at

on Aerodynamic

Characteristics

of a Space 1972.

Shuttle-Type

Mach Numbers.

NASA TN D-6615,

Sighard

F.: Fluid-Dynamic New Jersey Equations,

Drag. Published 08723, 1965.

by the author,

2 King Lane, Green-

briar, Brick Town, 68. Ames Rep. Research

Staff:

Tables, and Charts

for Compressible

Flow.

NACA

1135, 1953. Michael R.; Goodwin, Programs Frederick for Calculating Configurations. K.; Dillenius, the Static Marnix F. E.; and Kline,

69. Mendenhall,

David M.: Computer Characteristics 70. Wentz,

Longitudinal

Aerodynamic

of Wing-Body-Tail

NASA CR-2474, Investigations 1968. of Symmetrical of Wing-Body-Tail

1975. Breakdown

W. H., Jr.; and Kohlman, Sharp-Edged Michael Longitudinal

D. L.: Wind Tunnel

of Vortex

on Slender 71. Mendenhall, on the

Wings. NASA CR-98737, Jack N.: Effect

R.; and Nielsen, Aerodynamic

Vortex

Shedding

Characteristics

Combinations.

NASA CR-2473, 72. Axelson, Attack. 73. Polhamus, Analogy. 74. Bradley, John

1975. of Transonic 1975. of Vortex-Lift Characteristics 1971, pp. 193-199. I. C.: Vortex-Lift Prediction for Complex by a Leading-Edge Suction Aircraft Aerodynamics to High Angles of

A.: Estimation

AIAA Paper 75-996, E. C.: Prediction J. Aircraft,

vol. 8, no. 4, April C. W.; and Bhateley,

R. G.; Smith,

Wing Planforms.

J. Aircraft,

vol. 10, no. 6, June

1973, pp. 379-381.

73

75. Lamar,J. E.: Extensionof the LeadingEdge SuctionAnalogyto Wings WithSeparated Flow Aroundthe SideEdges t Subsonic peeds. a S NASATR
76. Jorgensen, Leland H.: Elliptic Cones Alone R-428, 1974. Speeds. NACA

and With Wings at Supersonic

TN 4045, 77. McGregor,

1957 or NACA Rep. 1376, I.: The Vapor-Screen Method

1958. of Flow Visualization. J. Fluid Mech., vol. 11,

pt. 4, 1961, pp. 481-511. 78. Keener, body E. R.; Chapman, Length on Onset G. T.; and Kruse, of Asymmetric R. L.: Effects Forces 1976. Alfred M. Induced Weapons Side Forces Center, on Bodies of of Mach Number Sideslip and Afterand High

on Bodies at Zero

Angles of Attack. 79. Wardlaw, Andrew

A1AA Paper 76-66, B., Jr.; and Morrison,

Revolution

at High Angle of Attack. 75-176, 1975.

Naval Surface

White Oak, Md.,

NSWC/WOL/TR

74

co

I I
I i Go

I
|

i I
I

I
I

I
I I
E I ..... 0 cb--

it

_1 _
I

_D

o.

.E

I
!

_ Z
ro

I
|
E

bz_
o

J
#
(D

:_5 G, _

_ o o__
I I
!

(1)

..o
c,J

onoq_

I I
I I

Ii

00.

I
E
E

(3 "_Od

I I

-6_r-

13. E

j
/

oJ o
(_)

H:
o

I
o

cE
Od x_

ir
rr{1) E

O tO >,

--

- O...

_rr
0 CO

;> I

on o_

_-

LO UP 0 ' _,ua!3!jj,

od ao9 6oJp MOI;SSOJ 3

oJ

oJ

75

_V/

"_

eN

Na
_N

e g o

o '_.

> _q .__

76

1.2

(3
Mn

I0

0.25 ,50 55 .40

.8 I Crossflow coefficient, drag

Cdn

.45 5O

.4

.2

0 106

107 Crossflow Reynolds number, Ren

10 8

Figure 3.Variation of crossflow circular cylinders at supercritical 0.25 to 0.50 (from ref. 54).

drag coefficient Reynolds numbers

with and

crossflow Reynolds number for at crossflow Mach numbers from

I
c.)

'_- .8
c-

Circular cylinder; Ren = 88,000 _ _[_2.-- E3" I-'1 _Flat plate ; Ren= 68,000 to 170 000

._o.c6 . 0
0-

o o-.4

_ .2
0 ,.,__

8 Circular

12 Flat

16 cylinder plate

20

24

28 ratio

52 ratio

56

40

length-to-diameter length-to-width

Figure that

4.-

Ratio

of

cross,flow

drag cylinder

coefficient (or flat

for plate)

a finite-length (from ref. 56).

cylinder

(or

flat

plate)

to

for an infinite-length

77

Re x 10-5

?7Cd n

1.0 .4

.6

.8

1.0

1.2

1.4

Mn =Moo sin a Figure 5. Variation ol'r/ Cdt l with M H (crossllow ol revolution Math number) computed from experi-

mental

(]\, data (rcf. 16) for bodies O 1'7 COMPUTED

at high o_ i45 < oe< 60).

FROM FIGURES I AND 5

[] "7"/FROM FIGURE 4 FOR ,._/d = IO o -/7 FROM FIGURE 4 FOR ,,_/d = 12

1.0

-q

1.2

1.4

1.6

Figure 6.

Variation

ofr/ with ),f n, obtained Ir_ml experimental in figures l, 4, and 5. 78

results

/
f_

Slender-body

LJ

theor_

J Cn/Cn o

"_New

theory ,onian

(a)
0 I 2 3 e/b 4 5

(a)

Semimajor

axis

a perpendicular

to

crossflow

velocity

V n.

.6

C n/Cno

\
.4 _'_ .2 Newtonian theory ,7

Vnt

/Slender-body _ theory _" "-,_ _ _...,,..

0
2 3 o/b 4 5 6

(b)

Semiminor

axis

b perpendicular

to

crossflow

velocity

V n.

Figure

7.

Ratio to

of that

local for

normal-force the equivalent

coefficient circular

for cross

an

elliptic

cross

section

section.

79

16

"-I

//

12n

Cn ICn o

8
4 / _ /

/S,,nO;-boO,
theory 7 _J L_Newton,an theory

:5 $/r

Figure

8.-

Ratio of local normal-force coefficient for a winged-circular to that for the equivalent circular cross section.

cross section

8O

/[
Slender-body theory 12 8

CnlCn

/ /-the_

I
i

Newtonian

iS J
Vn

(o)
0 I 2 5 s/a 4 5

(a) a/b = 2 16

Slender-body 12 , theory

J
f

Cn/Cn

8/
/z
_S/."
(b) 0 I 2
d

I
Newtonian theory_

J
J ,__.. $_

Vn

$ s/a

(b) a/b = 3 Figure 9.for the velocity Ratio of local normal-force coefficient for a winged-elliptic cross section to that equivalent circular cross section; semimajor axis a perpendicular to crossflow Vn. 81

16 !::I!:!

iiii!l_iii _
iiiiiiiii

I
12

_.-s_

/
CnlCn o 8 Slender-body 4

v.t
theory,, N_ _,__

/,
theory

_Newtonian

(a)
0 I 2 3 s/b 4

(a)

a/b

16

12

Cn/Cn

/
Slender-body/ theory

theory 0 I 2 3 s/b

1
4

I
5

(b)

a/b

Figure for

1 0. the

Ratio equivalent V n.

of

local

normal-force cross

coefficient section'

for

a winged-elliptic axis b

cross

section to

to

that

circular

semiminor

perpendicular

crossflow

velocity

82

'_-- 5.5 d -_ _Z F_-- 5 d -_'tid l 4 l 1 _

I
_ 1

---d

Slender-body

potential

theory

viscous --Slender-body I I I

crossflow theory plus potential I I

0 Slender -4
Cm

body

Viscous -8

crossflow

-12

-16

16

12

CN

2O

40

60

80

I00 , deg

20

140

160

180

Figure

1 1.

('omputcd body

components at o_ 0 to

or' nortnaI-R)rce 180 and/1Ioo -

and 2.9

pitching-nlonlent (from rut'. O).

coctticicnts

tor

an ogivc-cylinder

83

z_

c o

c o

tO _D

f_

_D oJ O_ Od

Od od

Od CO

00 t_

o{
od Od

rO O0

0 0 oJ _0

Ob

O O Od

"O rO Od Od _0

uO oJ O_ rO

F_ O_ _D O O_ LO rO Od

0 0 LO LO

0 0

O O

O r_

O rO

o_

CO

0_

_I_

LO

_4

u_

t.D

CO

Od _-_ O

ro

r_

,_I-o

0_

O_

c_

_0
Oc CO

oJ

rO

LO

E
O ii

-r

T
O <_

L_

i .

VV
84

o
o

I I I
z _u

8 '_=;_

t_

E
r_

=_
e_

E_ _'_ o

8_

E
o

r,.) i
o

2, _

85

_j

"re-

-j

,j

-_

-I

"J

II

.'-_ 8
i.>,

"_

c,n

e.-.

e-,

86

L.. o

S
8

_m []

+- 8 E_

E o L)

]
c_

! I

i
i

"_ -.+_+

V
o

,.-. 0 '- .0 I

ej _-+ ,-+

87

m_

_c0

o 8 o
t_

o.

Eo

_ o

0_

oo

,,_

r _

oJ > >

o _ I

_1

o
o.. o o _-_ 0 o

._

0 I
E-

r,.

88

Compuled 01_ ._ Body i

Measured(ref 63}

F T I l''==:IZ::_/d:7
,2 I--_ _ I Xoc [ [ I Body 2 _----_--"l_--"--_q Body 3 Ltd=ll _/d=9

o
[]

----.....

-41"_'_"_------------'F_'_--I .6 -_

.... ]

,'o ,o

l-: _o _o _o _o ,oo ,_o ,_o ,_o ,BO

a,deg

(a)

Cylindrical bodies with conical noses of fineness ratio 3.

Measured(ref 63) 0 Compuled Measured (ref 63) _

Computed Body .2 5 ]./d Body 6 l/d Body 7 I_/d-LI {> :9 [] =7 0

.4 Xoc

.6

0 I
-,=z:_ [ 0 2O 40

-_-_
.2 -__h .4 Xoc .6

_/d:9 _"_'---Body Body 4 6

o
[]

.8-

.8

i.c ci

I.C 60 80 a, deg I00 120 140 160 _80

20

40

60

80 a, deg

LOO

120

140

160

180

(b) Cylindrical bodies with ogival noses of fineness ratio 5. Figure 17.Comparison

(c) Cylindrical bodies with conical and ogival noses, overall fineness ratio 9. for cylindrical

of computed with measured aerodynamic force centers bodies with conical and ogival noses; Moo = 2.9.

" N2 1 l'_osE "I" ' cY,,NOERc, 7d I I-L Roo N_c, a _/d :10.5 I
h2.sd-_
BODY NTC I

NOSE N7

1
CYLINDER C2 _-2d-_

BODY .l/d= IN2.ClCz_

I CYLINDER C3

_ODY _ N,C,C_ ._/d=13.5

Figure 18.-

i
have

Ogive-cylinder bodies for which the aerodynamic characteristics been computed and measured for 0.6 _<Moo _< 2.0. 89

az ww _- m,mrr G_W bJG. n-X W 0

............ ,-..,.,,w,,

0 x (D rr u_ ur) oo oo

I@I_

_V/ 8 _V/
0 o

o_

N
_c5
\

n-_ @g'k:l _LLI

v umr.1 _ j

,-

ro

w n 0

_. o

_t_w

_2 0 N_
z_

I
!.........................

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

L ................................

CO

uz

o
90

Z 0
L_

E_Z
Wl,l

13.

1.1.113W

A
O
,,,,,.,,,,,,,i ......

0 x _ _ td to

I .... i

E O
!

_V/

to _. do--_

o_ o

"

0
o

_o _
'_,
W _

O,_

II1

(D

.__ _

I,_

N
O

G
_. 0

a w

I--

D _ _ 0 0

I I I

" " . : : w

_'_

0
o

,2
_y.

1_
j--N p_ Z

o_

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

I....

I Pd

d
t"!

o
91

0 _)

0 _D

tj

0
0

0
, -,, _1 I !'-

_
E_ c_

_L)

o-8
0 0J 0 oJ

)
_0 o

, _z

_EV/

(3

II 8

o .,8
ov =o _. _E_ _ o_
o

_==_ __'_
0 _) oJ GO z 0
o

_y
%_.
Z_ O-x

_P

92

0
_[11

\
0

II1[

Ilrl

tIll

Ill

nlll

I Ill

II

0 ur)

0
0 _'= =

0
: _I"

I
f

:
_
_J

(3", 0

II

8
12) 5
!

o
_o

L_ r
rq
_J

.JD

Lt_ 0

J
Ill III III Illlillll

(,D

qd

E)

z (J

93

no w w __n _ 0_

oN

I
w_ >J

w-t21

_ L
r.) 0d z

o
_ 0 _ _

_7
Z _

0"

94

ar-_ w w

0 tO

gg
0
0

0 if)

C-d

C_
o

WX_

d
0
W221

r-i II

"-d

?
,.o

_z"I
J

Lr.

o_

cO

_.0

_I"

>_T,
C21"_

"_

O"rn'_t

95

_9

8_ S_
z

1PC" II_i III!llTTi

.--""_ 1 ..........................
_9

I
i

8_
0

o
IP)

"\
[

0
o

G
i

!
i [

-=i
t _t'h
I

B
i

_x

o H
z

_V/

8
i L --

s_
oV/
@
_

JII
lull Jill nit IL t 0

o_

_9

-i
_I-

I ii
Z

,'

=&

o,i

co

i.o

rO

/I

O"en'_l

r4

L_

96

0
dill IIII lit I

0
z

,_.

,, =

_5
0_{/)

@ 0

--0
_ if')

_-,,_

I
r_ crW n Z j .

LL

=0 =
Z

o/

\
r :

_n

o_,
_5
II
0

/
)
Ill Llll III

-=0

_=

0
_=
Z

\o _o
_ILI liil lill Illi Ill IlK IIII II1"

8
.0

I _q

L_

ilii

iJ]J

,,,,,,,T

0
r_ <.)

(:C)

0U

Z
rr)

O"cn'_t

97

0
ill -_TII IITI tlll]llll II11 II III [11_ w,v_

0 E E

LI.J,I

I z

8_
o __ I i , ]_
:

0 ut_

z
Z 2

4l j T_rF]
z
Z

-_I

d
0

d
II 8

eo

0
: n_ !
/

"C

_k

.__

0 _----y

'

-+_

]
;_V
u

iiii

i iii

i Ill

__

o_

, ....
Illll IIII

llln-

_ILI

IIII]

II

rn'_l

98

0
_,tll
I

iiii

BIll

Illl

Wl i

i rl

i11

ii

IL -

........

_L_ I 0

Cn

8
: :

-S

rl

-lULl ILLJ IIII IJll

li ll/i Li JilL ILl7

Z (J

99

c.A)

._ o

E V_

*-"

.,,-

0._

f'l

100

I!

b--

oi_
II

d
_II

I +.___ t-

121

if) if) I

Ii

..Q

._..E
Z 0 I-_ en >" 'n

_ >:,

o j c_

,,,
O3 O3 0 nO rY ._J 0 rY 0

_o

1"7 0 en

_')

0 r_ 0

JJ
w._

"1o 0

;3

"0 0
II N

b _.,...
%.,.

"o 7"'
> (.9 0

o I

I
"0 _r_

iZ w (.9 Z

if)

LI.

101

BI

B2 @: 90

B2 @ = 0

B3 ,/,-90

<CE(b) Planform views of configurations 24. Concluded. 102 studied. Figure

(a) Planform viewat 0 = 0.

(b) Planform viewat_ = 90.

(c) Three-quarter view. Figure25.- Photographsf aluminum o body B s .

103

0
F]

x_

...to.;
I

""

; .....

QI

p
]

4o-

--

c-

E
c-

m_ r-._.
--TT_

_ ._

"" ,5 fl

_V/ ,.u 8 _ N

C)
L i

-=

'"

c1 I o o

=
r_

"E

0
N

0
Z 0

0
L) 1

,g

LI.

]04

t_ i,I tY ,cI I.iJ

__ _x .....
__ \

L_7
0

tel 0

a la.I

.-d

D
a-

i i
--ta_, 0

II

o I

d
II

O4

8
......... 4 0

=I
_,_

U.

0 Z

105

\
I

___

0
II
!

u_

a w el

0o
W

a;
l
,

"' I.0
0

i
i

0
,-

It

,I

_0
I|

8 '. 0

"d

0
i : I_ L _1 h,, ,,, ,J,, ,H

co

0
0,.I

0 Z

if')

106

El I,I 0 bJ 0 0

"'
a. 0 (J

I
co

I _d
C_

o
LI.

-_ 7 _-_

.......

I
rJ ............... 1,11

o
cO _ _ oa 0

II
_ 0 z _ 0

107

0 I

0
I0

_
0 D 0

_ii_ _i _ii
o
\ _ 0

I j i

_ -

! ,0 _.0

oom
o

c_
....... II

_5
-q L.

o$
_ _ 0

......

_o

L_

--

O0

cO

_1"

_o

0 o
Z

108

.......I.................... I.,.
0 _o 0
0

o
c_ o I
Cq

_o

_u

109

-_

o_!i__ _
-o

_9 Z

r.

II

'rl'_
'_i'_

I
0 co _ '_ 0 _ 0
Z

110

, _ _f_ __-

'

_ _ !,n _ ___{

._

i_

_,_
%_ 8 b_
0

o
_ --o o

o
o o
0 _ 0 It') 0

_._
_:

"' /
co _

o,I

111

FI

a w nr

! ........ i r - I !

=E
a W

I
I

X
O0 O'h

_D
12)

i i
I

II I

o I

_ L
II1 !' g i< t

o
N

_4
II

l
I

i
e

8 , d, ] 0 -L_

]ic-./
'

ll,, J,,,

/i

_..,,I ....I.....................
0 _ 0 "7 0 _ 0

112

.................... ..... _ LI_ ..... _1_

J Q ILl
........

I
i.. __ _

O0 la.J

t.-

-a

...... .........
i I 1 t ! i

k__ ,.__<j.. _- _-_-- _

I

a i.l.i I,-

F----

.......

D
0 rJ

i
. I

"d o r_ I

I_

,o_ 4L __._

Oq

'

'

<

II

c
/
,,, _ , m

,) ?

8
/ ....

!
0 0 0 _ 0 _ 0

;I

113

a w
0

0
w

0 _0

-[
_I" _II !

__

o5

a w

',\

o
_v/ 8

-_v/
W o W _ i

_1

d
II _ a_

, i
I I

I
/ _

f /o
0

o o t-

_Z

'i,'

0 a. Iir

_0

_1"

o,I

0 z .)

_r_

_d

114

a ILl r_

D or) <_
U.J

,,,,i

....

i,,,,i,,,,T,,,,

,,, t

,,,,,,,

I k I
I

c_
0

o_
C_

0'_

o
....

i
I _ 0 0

-S

k ._
I_ i e
o q_ I

I I I J I
I I

/
/"

_5 8
L_

?
I

_o

o
Z

_o

115

a w n,zD or) w

=E

o _N

;ii

o
y ......
......

a w n

w_ I I
,

! /

/.
o

3\ :l
<1

o N
0

_ ,
_

0
................... I .......

.................... I
OJ 0 _0 0 Z (.) u_

I....
0

CO

116

Q W n-

::)
03 I,.I.I

i'"'!'(\............................. (,0
\. 0
IK')
v

c,J
!

I l ! I I i
U

'k
<

'6
x
Q,)

::)

"_ q.,,l
'_,

0..

I
I

2d /
o

i
/
/

(J

0
N

IN

0
Z

117

118

A-A_

--F /Re" ASPECT RATIO FOR TWO EXPOSED WING PANELS JOtNED TOGETHER I qd Or--2d I"Ct _ -

VERTICAL

TAIL,

Tv

4d of various taper ratios

(a)

Body

B1 with

aspect-ratio 4 wings and tail arrangement.

W5 ALL LINEAR DIMENSIONS W2

T
(sr)

IN TERMS OF BODY DIAM, d /-.,

W4 W2 W5 /R

5 4 3

4,761 3.784 2.910

64.36:3.972 59.03 51.33 3.500 2.964

2.622 2.900 3.295

0.715 0.800 0.924

0.273 0.276 0.280 INTO BODY

ASPECT

RATIO FOR WING EXTENDED

/R e ASPECT RATIO FOR TWO EXPOSED WING PANELS JOINED TOGETHER

4d

(b) Figure

Body 29.-

BI

with

wings

of aspect

ratio

3, 4, and

5 (W s, W 2, and models

W4). tested in

Components

for body-wing references 119

and body-wing-tail 20 and 2 l.

}"-0.3535

1.414 d

WSw3_
ALL LINEAR DIMENSIONS IN TERMS OF BODY DIAM, d " W4-_\ '

-_ yBODYT B_ _
0"
(s-r}

_\\

,e,s-r
W4 W2 W5 4.761 3.784 2.810 51.33 2.964 3.295 0.924 0.280 I

\\
%, \__

64.36 2.622 0.2731 3.972 0.7,5 59.03 2.900 0.276 3.500 0.800 1

! .

_c__
i-" ....... -_-4d Cr

(c) Body

B 2 with Figure 29.

wings

W 2 , W4, and

Ws.

Concluded.

W_l5 B,

_--J

BI_IT

Bi W2

\\\\

Figure

30.-

Planform were measured

views

of configurations 20 and 120

for which 21 and

the aerodynamic

characteristics

in references

computed

in this study.

a w 0gO ILl :E 0

$.w

.... I....!.... 'i_[ _ I....t .... ',If !1

I-w _J L_

/o
I
Ic 0

.c:
L_ L_

_
o o

Iz. oo 0o

Itl
ikl
I!
I

E
r>, -.-j

o
,

o \ i o \ _ x
'L_ C_

I
II"_I

$.,

g
I

.'4 '_

-_L_

II
Jl

-: E I
I I

la.l

I I
Z

__

"_-\_

\-

_ o

II
0 0 'O

fl

IL
F!
L9 Z Z 0 0 _.1 _ 0 _0 0 _1" Z (.3 0 oJ

o
0

3 \

I..., c_ (:L

o LP [
,...w

Lu

121

_o

......... .......... iI ..... !!_ o '.... _: _ I..... I "" ii

o _ 0_ o _ !i' I I Ii iol "o _ :: ;------J--_ J---.... ...__0_[i-l-:: _ _ _ -o

oo _ o,,_

__I

'-I

"' " '

' o__"_ _ _--_ -_

o_ x _._

!iq

,_

I i I

: ::

I _.i I tl
rr
_

_} iI \\-

_
o _
o

122

I..tJ ff0_0 I.iJ

.... I..... ii'_...... o! l \

v

g
t'_ W I-0_ I_. I i I.i. o9 ._ 0 n.," 4C

\
\

o!
uw ,

o
W

o x
_0

o_
o

\ o-_ \
0 oJ

@_z
I

li
0

\c_
I I

c_ I

=E I I I

II

\
f ...............

0 z

123

_o

,,,
I ___ J

_',
\_ \o 8 =

t
l ........

0,1

124

a LIJ rr 000 hi 0 o
i c'_

=;

o
I.i. o3

/
I f 3

1
0 u')

o, o__, __z
u.l

i
i\

! o
i

\
\
i

;>_

o
0 ><

__k___o _
--1i
i o c

II

/ o_'
"0
L

o_ o II

I I

,
,
I

8
o o

! i

'X
o

f ....

........

\
0 _0 0 _" Z 0 od 0

o I

o
._

125

II

I I

00 0 r,..)

o_

126

ILl

8
0 W r
., ....... q .................

u/
o
d I.I_ a I,i I-Q_ i Q_ ! ' 0 I_ 4i

\
,J

-I \
(

0
C'_

_.

\ \

b0

--

o
_

',D

o ,-, o _,

'

___8
I I g
_gZ
: i

\,o
\'o

,
_ o

8
o 0

i I
(

'_
-_
h (

Io
--

e_

....

! ........

0 0 (.P 0 _I" Z 0 0 O,l 0 I

CO

_0

,'T'_ z._ 0 o-

127

_o
.,,,,, .... , .... ,r, L. irl I ........

F "_

i
i\ o

,(......,f ......... _, I

",,
\

o
d +

';t
-0

o
,.-w

88S_

J
6
c

X
O0

.-x o

c_

I I

__

\\o \,,_

r-q

II

8
I.T.

)/o
\
0 cO 0 0 _1" z (.) 0 o,I

t0

128

IZI l.iJ I]: cnO l.i.l 0

j......... b....... i............. IlJi IIYI

0 ..J 1.1_ a i,i a_ oo 0

"I

.-J

o
>, "o o 0

Jil 1'3 II1 lib III tlF Illo I illo t -

I c
\ I --

_
(D

z
LLI

a.

o_O_

IX

_ \\c o \\, ,\

- , -T om-o i ff
}

g
o : 0

II

,ilo
I I
I illo I//I -

..=

\to

II

\,'\

li _
|.

_,
k

o
\

%..,

o o m o

o__
f_> (.DZ

[1' :...........I I...........

(D if') _to) _ 0 0 Z 0 0

0 I
_q

zg 0
0

129

r_ r'r"

..................... !ll ............

0 ,,_l I.L

I Ill Ill Ill Ill

...........

/
i _too u'_

,,, _

\
0

v_
00 ,-_

o_ i i_t
l|ll l_l IUI 1171 II ............... ............ t,,_l
0 0 Z o 0 0_1

c5

___

\
0

0 j

130

r'_ I.z.I r_

go
i,i 0

D LO F--

O_ !

0 _.J la_ 09 09 0 nr" +

'

I
I

E
;>.,

3 o
k U

'
....

/
X

"_

ol

\
i
_ 0 o

I.iJ

OI

-....

_-
\_
0

I
I
Z
i i

8
,_

"__
,.0 0 0

\\

'_

,_ \
\
0 u 0 0 Z 0

m_ 0 0 I

n,-> ::3 (DZ Z on

u4

.._

131

D LLI rY O0 0 LU 0 _I___Z.__ii ........... i,]........:_D _., . i

.... C

0 ._1 r._ w Io_ ' 0 rY

c c

_o_'o_

X o0

'-_

_ 8

,,4 :

I I
Z

ro

0 (.D

0 ,_" Z 0

0 OU

132

a w n.coO ILl
7_

,.2
8
0 QO

0 .d U_ a W CZ_ 0 i

o
0

r_;,

z: O_ o ) X

O_

z
W

_
_

o_
i _Dn

oa_

9,8
1.1.1

o-o

II

.= E
o II

e_ 8

:_ I

I
..... _ ...... _,_:

I
....

0
\\ _

',
i.. l

-_ _t,..,

Z I

,,,i

.......

....... !io
i ....

0
0

E
o

tO

ff_

0 i 0

I ,d

133

a LI.I n_ o_0 lad 0 _0

0 _1 LI_ O0 W n a_ ! O

0 Lcj

\
+

\
\

o X _

o c_ ,I,'
J W LI. I

8i z
b.I

\n \

(1)

0 L

\\
0 "_

I I
_m

\\
0
m

\
0 0 z 0 0 0J 0

134

CYLINDER _ _N:3d "+-

Cl 7d

NOSE

N,

I
] CI

I I

--ZN:Sd

""

CYLINDER

d
I I

__..2 d
LE ASTRAKE S

N3 o.5d _-_ _ZN:3d "-

_-BEVEL

Figure

37.-

Additional

tangent

ogive

noses

and

strake

for modification

of body

B].

B I ' NIC I

<::::5_ .......
N2CI NaCI

J
61W2 _ j

N4C_

N301$ BIW2T

B 2

_-90"

B2

_-0"

@-90"

B l

_.0"

/]
I _J Figure 38. Plan-view sketches of configurations oil-llow studies. 135 used for vapor-screen and

/
// / //

.-Z

0
._
=

E
<

r-

I,-,

"g

.o

<

/
/ / / / /

/ /

e,5

P.

136

(b)

Picture Figure

of light-box 39.137

installation

Continued.

(c)

Picture

of model Figure 39.-

and camera Concluded.

installation.

138

30

MODEL

N3 CI

\,
t

STATION

1
A
Im

7d

STATION

T 3.5d

3_
---_-d
.UGHT _SHEET
-

FEEDING , .

Mm : 2.0
Figure 40.Identification of typical items shown in vapor-screen body at Moo = 2.0. photographs taken for a

139

6 b
t_ e.t'-

e-'

0 e"

z11

C
b
II II

m-

8
[
Z 0

e-,

b
q

e_

t'_

140

oii

T J

II 8 I I

z o

Ct_

Or)

ra")

14l

tO

ozii

-6
cad,

mr,O

,--s 8 I

Z C) I.-o')

t'M

rO

I'-03

I--"
03

I--O'3

142

J
Z rO H

_7
8

-Z 0

to

0 0

.& 0 ft.,..

ro

</
o')

143

-6
"D o,1 Z is3

c5 8

.-= "_ i E

-Z 0 I--o')

od

t_

0,1

o.1 I---0") I--O3

144

t_

g O

7_ f

I
Z 0

0'_

C_d

b-o9

o3

145

0'3

o ..

.6_

63 e"

r-,

o ,.0
Z

J
Z O

I I

z_ I I

I1 8

0 0

;>
]

kt.,

t'M

ro I.-to

I-..u)

146

.6
re) z

e; ii

.=.
0

--7 r
Z 0

_'3 I I
rO

o')

t'M

rO

,d
I--tO I"03

d
tt)

147

tt_

o 0

..6
Z o 0 r,)

II 8 I I
m Z 0 I'-I--tO

I I
t'M

I I
t_

t",.l

t'M

ro

I.--o3

F-o3

I---

148

tO

e-. e", %.., 0

e-,

oz

_,
rO

,,_
0

o
,,--,

I I
-Z 0 I'-y... _

r r

I I
rO

_"

0 0 N e_

>

o_

0,1

W)

<i
[..-,0 cO aO

149

oZ

Z 0

tO

4
I-'o3 b'-" 0"3 03

150

b
tO

.-6

7"

c5
0

8
I I
-Z 0 t'-'-

I I
t'q

I I
I'O

i 4

.._

t'xl

tO

03

I'-'O3

I.--/3

151

0 to

r-.

e'-

O'J

,j-

r-r

"

,,6
0

8
-Z 0 N I)

.._

I.-I'--"

t'M
CA) 0

e-,

>. u-;

rr
t'M re')

I.--(.O

t--(.0

I.--

152

.o

-6
o_

io z Io

f
-Z 0 I-I--

J
q

I
I
to

q I---t.---

ro I..(.o

153

<--

-I I
Z 0

J $" L I

H 8

L> I

OJ

_r_

l-" co

I-0')

154

ii

Q3

I I
Z O

f I

J P

3 0

(J)

Lt_

155

II

-e.m r,-

<__ ..... _0 I 1 I I I I
-Z 0 0,,I

u
8

_
p

Od

o')

156

tt')

II

-j d
I'O Cq
,,,,a

--OFin e.-,

8 r F r

i d

I
-Z 0

I
Cd

I
LI.

0') Od

t_

U?

if)

157

ro

ii

"(D 0

,6
o

! I
-N

t 1

I I
t_

II g

II

z o e-_
c.O

e..

>
I

i'M

co

f/)

158

8
ii

8 I I I

I
z o

159

b
II

c5

I I
Z 0

I t

I I

<
C,O t-ff?

160

,o
ej

"y.

ii

0 ..Q

m IY)

II

-o.

I
-z 0

I
(',J

I
I_

I-oO

6
OJ

> I
o 0

od

0,/

<_
b-CO (D

161

-0-I0 ,,'n

&

_4

"m
0

<_i-

:i

I
Z 0

B I

i
_t

LI.

OJ

(,9

O9

C,O

162

II

-6 c_

a_

<_.i_; _:;

;i- a ca

II 8 "0

Z 0 I

163

 _9

ii

ro m

o 0 rO

Gx 0

I
m Z C) I-O_ _

1
tO

If 8

JI N

g
e-.

e.r--

cJ

rO

03

U')

03

164

0"_
II

WJ m

I
-Z 0

I
(M

I
PC)
_a

CM

03

.D

O3

165

ii

-6
(--!

<I I
m Z 0 I-_O

11-q0
I I
_

8
_L

I I
I'0

u.

0,1

_9

_O

O9

_9

166

e-'

w.'i

e-. e--.

t_

aT
0

>.-.

8
p
Z

II

_o
0'_

:
%..

o
,,..)

6
tt') CM rO

03

o3

167

to

a:T
_._z_ i :_:7

-6

-_ j I
m Z O

,:5

I I
q

I
I_

b
q

0_o

fq

rO

(13

I-'O3

t--.GO

168

_ff c:5
e-q

.6

i_

r-,

,\,J
I
-Z 0

J
t
OJ _,

:_

c5

1
N

b-

rr_

Or)

169

0 o'3

tt'M

_5
0

,.Q

II 8

I
B Z 0

I
(Xl

I
i_ q

t.t)

_3 0

I
CM t_O

t_

O)

170

8 I i I
O p--

I i

I i i

t_

CM

t.o

t/)

171

I)

-6 ,:5
c-

8 P 1 I
m

P I
t'M

r J
I1,

&
t'M I.i.

z o

oJ

o9

co)

co

172

t"

rI--tM t'c"j

"2
z) r-' ro r" r..,, cM

cff
0

II 8

..o

I
-Z 0 I'--

i
t",l

i
1_

_,
t'X,I

II

CO

e-

'3

;>
0,1 p i

CO

CO

O3

r_ 2,

173

I--

;E
ii

lO.J

8 i
-Z O

I
CY

I
,_J rO O_

lff)

(M

I,O

(.i

174

F-

z-

0,1

c5
II k._

8 I
z o

if)

175

e--

t'_

oe" Z

II 8 r r
tM Z 0

.-_ o

I J
1_ t'M

0 0

> I
tt")

t'M

O9

03

176

eJ

r','3

8 I I
-Z O M

r I
_ 'M

(M

r3

U')

.D

177

"::1"

('M

i)

-6
Z

d
el

'l
!

tO

8 I I
ro t'M

h
br)

I I
-Z 0 I-.-o3

_,
_

Od

t3

(/3

U)

178

_D

cJ

r_

6
_gJ

Z e.-,

// !

r ",,i
P
-Z 0 o,J _

II 8

>_ '_

l
0_I

I.-ff-j

0 0

e.-, t21

>
t'M

U)

179

F-

PO

a;
i

eo i

H rj i i
oJ

f i
-z c) I-

r Io f o
_o oJ

t_

@d

O3

O3

180

i-oJ

b
re)

c_
c'l

,-_
"

I I I I
Z 0 Dc)

8 lj i
c_

I I
r,_C'J

.__

i I--cO cO

181

TOP a _I0

SIDE

a _ 20

a _ 30

O__ 40

(a} Moo = 0.6. Figure 55. Oil-flow photographs for

B 1 = j\r 1('1

(body with fineness-ratio-3

nose).

182

TOP a _10

SIDE

a _ 20

a _ 30

a _40

(b) Moo = 0.9. Figure 55. Continued. 183

TOP a_ _ I0

SIDE

a ,_20

a _ 30

a _ 40

(c) 31oo = 2.0. Figure 55.Concluded. 184

TOP

(2 '_10

SIDE

O._ 20

a _ 50

a _ 40

(a) Moo = 0.6. Figure 56. Oil-tlow photographs for

N 2 C1

(body

with fineness-ratio-3.5

nose).

185

TOP

_10

SIDE

a _ 20

a _ 30

a _ 40

(b) Moo = 0.9. Figure 56.Continued.

186

TOP

a_lO

SIDE

a _20

a_30

a _ 40

(c) Figure

M_ = 2.0. 56. Concluded. 187

TOP

a _ I0 SIDE

a _ 20

a _ 30

a _ 40

(a) Moo = 0.6. Figure 57. Oil-flow ptlotographs forN3Cl (body with fineness-ratio-5 nose).

188

TOP

a _ I0 SIDE

a _ 20

a _ 30"

a _ 40

(b) Figure

Moo = 0.9. 57.Continued.

189

TOP

a -10 SIDE

a -20 =

a -30

a "40

(c) Moo = 2.0. Figure 57.Concluded.

190

TOP

a _ I0

a _ 20

at _ 30

a ,_40

(a) M_ Figure 58.Oil-flow photographs for

N4C 1

= 0.6. (body with blunt nose of fineness ratio 3).

191

TOP

a _ I0
-i

a _ 20

a m 30

a m4o

(b) Moo = 0.9. Figure 58.Continued. 192

TOP

a _I0

SIDE

a _ 20

a _30

a _ 40

(c) Moo = 2.0. Figure 58.Concluded. 193

TOP

a _,10 SIDE

a _ 20

a _ 30

a_40

(a) Moo = 0.6. Figure 59. Oil-llow photographs for ,\"3 C'_S (body with l'incn_'ss-i_ttiu-5 nose and afterbody strake).

194

TOP

cz_ I0 SIDE

C__ 20

a _ 30

Cl _ 40

(b) Moo = 0.9. Figure 59.Continued.

195

TOP

a_lO

a _ 20

a _ 50

a _ 40

(c) Moo = 2.0. Figure 59.Concluded.

196

TOP

a _I0 SIDE

a _ 20

a _ 30

a _ 40

(a) Figure 60.Oil-flow photographs

Moo = 0.6. with constant a/b cross sections).

for B 2 at _b = 0 (body

197

TOP

a_lO

SIDE

a Rs 20

a _=30

a ==40

(b)

Moo = 0.0. Continued. 198

Figure 60.

TOP

a _I0 SIDE

a _, 20

a _ 30

a _ 40

(c) Moo = 2.0. Figure 60. Concluded. 199

TOP a_ IO"

SIDE

a _ 20

a _ 30"

a _ 40"

(a) Moo = 0.6. Figure 61. Oil-flow photogr_lphs for B 2 at 4_ = 90 (body with constant a/b cross sections).

200

TOP

CZ_I0

SIDE

a _ 20

a _ 30

a _ 40

(b) Moo =0.9. Figure 61 .- Continued. 201

TOP

a _ I0

SIDE

a _20

a _ 30

a _ 40

(c_ Moo-Figure61.

2.0.

Concluded. 202

TOP

a _10

a _ 20"

a _ 30

a _ 40

(a) 31oo = 0.6. Figure 62. Oil-flow photographs for/]3

;_it q5 " 0

(body

with variable

a/b cross sections).

203

TOP

a _, IO

SIDE

a ,_ 20

a _ 30

a _40

(b) Moo = 0.9. Figure 62. 204 Continued.

TOP

a _ I0

SIDE

a _ 20

a _ 30

a _ 40

(c) Moo = 2.0. Figure 62. Concluded. 205

TOP

a _ I0

SIDE

a _ 20

a _ 30

a _ 40

(a) ,'11_ = 0.6. Figure 63. Oil-t'low ph_togr:ttflls t'or B 3 at _b = 90 (body 206 with variable a/b cross sections).

TOP

a_lO

SIDE

a _ 20

a _30

a _ 40

(b) 4Ioo = 0.9. Figure 63. Continued. 207

TOP

a s= 10
SIDE

a _ 20

a _ 30

a =40

(c) Moo = 2.0. Figure 63. Concluded. 208

TOP _ I0

SIDE

a _ 20

(a) Figure 64.Oil-flow photographs

Moo = 0.6. W2 T (body tail). with fineness-ratio-3 nose,

for B1192 T = N1C_ aspect-ratio-4 wing, 209 and

POST-RUN PRE-RUN

SAME AS OIL PATTERN

TOP

a _ 30

SIDE

POST-RUN PRERUN

SAME OIL

AS PATTERN

a _ 40

(a)

31_ Figure

= 0.6 64.-

Concluded. Continued.

210

TOP a _ I0

SIDE

a _ 20

(b) Figure

Moo = 0.9. 64. Continued.

211

-POST-RUN PRE-RUN

SAME AS OIL PATTERN

TOP a _ 30

SIDE

-POST-RUN PRE-RUN

SAME AS OIL PATTERN

a ==40

(b)

Moo = 0.9 Figure 64.-

Concluded. Continued.

212

TOP a_lO

SIDE

a _ 20

(c) Figure

M_ 64.-

= 2.0. Continued.

213

TOP

a _ 30

SIDE

POST-RUN PRE-RUN

SAME AS OIL PATTERN

a _40

(c)

Moo = 2.0 Figure 64.

Conclud_'d. Concluded.

214

TOP

a_lO

SIDE

a _ 20

(a) Figure 65. - Oil-flow photographs

Moo = 0.6. with fineness-ratio-5 nose,

for ;\'3 CI W 2 T (body wing 215 and tail).

aspect-ratio-4

-- POIT- IIIU_ PAE-IIUII OILIt_TTI_N

TOP a _ 30

SIDE

--

POSTRUN SAME AS PRE -RUN OIL PATTERN

a _ 40

(a)

Moo = 0.6 Figure 65.-

- Concluded. Continued.

216

TOP

a_lO

SIDE

a_2_

(b) Figure

Moo = 0.9. 65.Continued.

217

7 ,

POST-RUN SAME AS PRE-RUN _L PATTERN

TOP a _ 30

SIDE

POST-RUN SAME AS PRE-RUN OIL PATTERN

CZ 40 _

(b)

Moo = 0.9 Figure 65.

Concluded.

Continued.

218

TOP

(2 _I0

SIDE

a _ 20:

(c) Moo = 2.0. Figure 65. 219 Continued.

TOP a _ 30

SIDE

POST -RUN SAME AS PRE-RUN OIL PATTERN

(_ _40

(c)

Moo= Figure

2.0 65.

Concluded. Concluded.

220

z o _ Z
,_,,| .... | .... , .... , .........

0 _D

._ _

o
v

o o

1
<>

n
3 (

0 u_

0 _0
_

0 t o:

_l"

-0 X t_

_=
0 :>

[]

o o
D

I
'4

c_

4
II

<>

o <>

o
r_o

_ rn_

O II

5
(.9

N 6 _._
_ O

i
_-..... ,.,

......

!----

O o

oO

O )-

N
I

_
!

I
_.)

221

_ Z

0
,,,,,! .... i .... ! .... ! .... ! ....

[]

0
-1

,Q,

,O'

3
__ __4_L_

0
0 E] 0 13
)

x II
O

_ I
o

[]

<>

o
D

....

r_s] I
0

II 8

5
_D

r ............

,,,,

,,,,

,,,,1 .... O

1.0

oU

CO

,_-

0 >0

_1
! !

222

o-_j Z
_ Z Z

0
.... i .... | .... , .... .... 1 .... , .... i ....

) 0

.
) (D

o
CI3 'm

o
(D

_._ o _
"8

_ooo g
CD

^ i

_
1

_i

0 ou QO _ 0 '_" c_ 0
>0

c_
I I

223

kCO o z
m

I
0

_o

8
0

.......... .............. _[ I.........

<v

0
0

0 <

*.-'

0 rl

g_
_

,.
cn

.2 _
e

o o
o
.m

0
0,I "_
_ O

'_
o

..c
_

<

4_"i_ _o
_z

<
I-Or) _ m OD

0 0 o,I

'

.....

0
>-

_
I

,_"
I

LI.

224

t'M

,.9

O
,D ................................ >

O
tD

tO
O

<>

-X
tt_

-6
,'3 =
O

,,o II

,::5

,,_ =

I
O
t'M

8
,.Q

<

kl

O
! !

>.-

225

(.) Z

N_SI
.,,,,l .... ! .... i ........ i ....

I
.

im o

0
0

I.

[]
0

""

_3

0
El

II

W co o <1 W 0 0

"_,
0 o

6
0

=
c_

II

oJ a

8
o'_
0

zO_

<>

013

0
= 0

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

tO
>-

o6

226

0 Z 0

lal

13

rm ill O0 0 W D 0

X D

II

=
o

17

rn

c_ r 0 od

o6

zO_ 0

C_

rn

I,,I I
QO _ 0

227

.o
0

a
G [] u 0

0 6_

r
a W r_ e'_ 0 W 0
0

h
r
( )

c_

o
o
O_

II

6
o

I1

8
o "_ _ o .._

0
0
f'5

e._

n
.............

oJ
I

_I"
!

228

(3

E _3

C_ 17

a L.I.I n,co LI.I 0 I-1

X .k3

II

co

I
o

ii

"

_._Z

__'_
Z d

0 n

,IL_
,i !l ,ii ',j ....... ..............

o_l

co

229

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

f4P

_ ,,..,
0 _ u... _ o

u(o

0. 8 _ooo _;_ o0

_ =__ _
_.2

_ _
e, u o 0 ,_.,o

(.gZ

o,-_

o _- zl ' '

,w,l

230

0
D
v

^
0 [] "D

0 o

u_

_:

>
o

E3

E W
3O

x
kO

H
O

O_
O

r c_

=;

O
N
OE 0

OE)

n_

0
............................. O

oJ

O >..

_
I I

231

o
.,.,, .... ,,,,,i .... | .... i ....

o
017 _. ;,

e-.

t-,

(."1

"'3

F.
0
a_

.z,

m_

o _t"

G
X x,o II

o.t_

a l.d nCO W 0 0 (3

I.:J e,f7 Q _D 00

o "1_ 0 -1_ ,._

_._
o ,'.

(,-,

O4

II

_0

_.
_
._

<>(DE o

o
o

..) N 1"_ I_ I_ I_ CO

I
_I"

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

I 1 ........

0 ! I

0,1
I

.__

232

cxT_Zl
.... i .... g .... , .... , .........

I o o

,_ (Do
F O.

O
0 0

G
x

a i,I r_

@
o0 w
O

o
ro"_

II
O

I
O
A v

po

tl

oo0
!!

8
L_
,.O

o
!

o 0.... O

oa
_J'_ Iv) Iv) IV)

co

,_-

O
CP

oJ
! !

233

J7N

d
5

CONFIGURATION PLAN VIEW

MEASURED
O

N_C, ,r

5
N3CIW 2 _J

121

5
NsCIW2 T '. J

N3Cl
, ,.,

12

,,,,

.,.,

.......

..........

A
E __Qr_ _ El
O t

8 -Xsf
Q_ I

d
4

0 _

0 4

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

i ........................

I0

20

:50

40

50

60

2 Cy -2
,a ._ .,#1 l_ Qm 1<) rl ,0 E

v)
rl

(q
] E O

o 0 i_
3c _

O D_.
J

4. ................................................... .............
O IO 20 30 a, deg
(a) Moo = 0.6, Re = 4.3X10 s. Figure 72.Effects on side-force coefficient and side-force wing plus tail to a body. position of adding a wing and a

40

50

60

234

d
5

CONFIGURATION PLAN VIEW

<:
__ N_C,

MEASURED
J s.-,
,+'

Z .....

/"

<_
N3CIWz

_L]

'
I

5
N3CI_'2T I

N 3Cl

12

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

A
L

8 _. -x sf

4w j

I":1 --,

I'_

d
4

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

, ........

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

0
......... ,,,,,, ....

I0
i,,,,! .... i,,i,i,,,,!

20
.... l,,,,ll,,,l,,,,l,,,,l,,,,

30
,,,

40
.... ,,,,,,,,,i,,i,i,,,,i

50
.... ! .............

60

Cy

0 -2

_"

_ _'' a

(_

c_,_3_ o
{3 BB

_4

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

I0

20

30

40

50

6O

(:z,deg
(b) Moo = 0.9, Figure
_U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE:

Re = 4.3X10 Concluded.

s.

72.-

1977 - 735-004/28

235