6.

1 SYMMETRICALLY DEFLECTED FLAPS AND CONn~OL DEVICES ON WING-BODY AND TAIL-BODY COMBINATIONS

6.1.1 SECTION LIFT WITH HIGH-LIFT AND CONTROL DEVICES

Conventional aerodynamic high-lift and control devices are similar in that each functions by changing the lift generated by the portion of wing ahead of and! or behind it. Although their stability-and-control and performance applications - 'He quite different, no distinction is made in this Section between the aerodynamic characteristics of these devices. The rundarnental aerodynamic characteristics of each is discussed in the appropriate Sections.

The charts of this Section include the complete section lift characteristics of the following:

High-Lift Devices

split flaps

plain flaps single-slotted flaps double-slotted flaps Fowler flaps leading-edge flaps slats

Control Devices

trailing-edge flap types spoilers

,-. In general, sufficient information is presented to permit the complete lift characteristics' of a given device to be calculated . .Iie complete lift characteristics can then be constructed as in the following sketch.

/::'0(=01 S

,.I. 8

fro m Se otion 6. I. 1. 1

ac Crom Section 4. I. 1. 4

'tmax

a

a trom Section 4. 1. 1. 1 o

SKETCH (a)

6.1.1-1

6.1.1.1 SECTION DERIV A'fIVES =t and as WITH HIGH UFT AN D CONTROL DEVICES

~"ift effectiveness is defined and used in the literature in several ways. For linear systems, the rate of change of lift with control or flap deflection at constant angle of attack is frequently used. This parameter is defined as

cp _(ace)

Ii - as a

In cases where nonlinear effects must be accounted fOL it is more customary to use lift increments for flap deflections at -onstant angle of attack. Another convention frequently used in the rate of change of zero-lift angle of attack with flap deflection is

6.1.1.l·a

(aa) _ _ (cPo)a as cp -- ali -- (cPa) ,so

._ Again, for nonlinear characteristics, increments in angle of attack at zero lift are used. Several of these definitions of lift ffectiveness are used in this Section, depending upon the particular device being discussed.

6.1.1.1·b

In the linear lift range, 0'0 can be obtained from cf 0' and vice versa, by means of equations 6.1.1.1-a and 6.1.1.1-b.

A. TRAILING-EDGE FLAPS

Trailing.edge Aaps operating in the linear lift range change the lift of the basic airfoil by changing the effective airfoil angle of attack. The means by which each type of flap accomplishes this end is discussed in the following paragraphs. Various types of flaps in common usage are illustrated in Section 6.1.1.2.

Plain Trailing-Edge Flaps

For plain, sealed trailing-edge flaps the theoretical derivative cf" is a function of flap-chord-to-wing-chord ratio and

airfoil thickness ratio. Increasing airfoil thickness increases the theoretical lift increment for a given flap deflection.

--The boundary layer for plain flapped airfoils is shed at the trailing edge of the flap. Lift increments are therefore sensitive co the conditions of the boundary layer - the thicker the boundary layer the lower the value of ce.o derived from the flap. Since boundary layers are thicker on thick airfoils than on thin airfoils, cp 6 values tend to be lower for the thick airfoils.

In general, for a given increase in airfoil thickness ratio the reduction in cf 0 due to viscous effects is greater than the increase in cPo as predicted from inviscid-flow theory. In the charts of this Section, viscous effects are accounted for by using the experimental lift-curve slope as a parameter, since cPa is influenced by viscous effects in the same manner as cf II'

Because of the sensitivity of plain flaps to the boundary layer, the flow separates over the flap surface at relatively small deflection angles. The linear range of cPIi for plain flaps is therefore limited to the range from 00 to 100 or 150 of flap deflection.

Slotted Trailing-Edge Flaps

For slotted trailing-edge flaps the airfoil boundary layer is shed at the slot lip and a new houndary layer forms over the flap surface. The lift derived from slotted flaps is therefore not affected by the boundary layer of the basic airfoil and consequently is not affected by basic airfoil geometry. Experimental data and the charts for slotted flaps support this observation.

Split Flaps

fhe deflection of split trailing-edge flaps causes a wide wake to appear behind the airfoil. This wake prevents the full increase in circulation due to flap deflection from being realized. The rate of increase of lift with flap deflection is therefore lower than that for the corresponding plain flap. The rate also decreases continuously with increasing flap deflection because the wake widens with increasing flap deflection.

6.1.1.1-1

Fowler Flaps

Many flap designs have been developed in which the instantaneous center of rotation moves rearward as the flap deflects. Examples of such flaps include Fowler flaps, many slotted flaps, and certain types of split flaps.

Additional lift benefits are derived from such flaps because of the increase in planform area due to flap translation. These benefits are partially cancelled, however, by the reduction in flap-chord-to-airfoil-chord ratio.

The effect of translation can be approximated by calculating the increase in airfoil chord as a function of flap deflection.

B. LEADING-EDGE FLAPS AND SLATS

Leading-Edge Flaps

Leading-edge flaps change the lift of an airfoil by changing the effective angle of attack in the same way that trailing·edge flaps do. Unlike trailing-edge flaps, however, a positive leading-edge-flap deflection (nose down) causes a loss in lift instead of an increase in lift. In general, the change in lift per degree of flap deflection is smaller for leading-edge flaps than for trailing-edge flaps.

Leading-edge-flap effectiveness is not affected by the airfoil boundary layer. Experimental values closely approach values derived from airfoil theory.

Leading-Edge Slats

The lift parameter cf for leading-edge slats is affected by three previously discussed factors. First, the deflection or

6

rotation of the slat causes a loss in lift similar to that of leading-edge flaps. Secondly, slat extension or translation

increases the planform area, and, thirdly, slat extension decreases the effective slat-chord-to-airfoil-chord ratio. The latter two effects are analogous to those of translating trailing-edge flaps.

c. SPOILERS

Spoilers are generally used for two reasons - for roll control when deflected asymmetrically and for high drag generation when deflected symmetrically. Only the section-lift aspects of spoilers are discussed herein.

Many types of spoilers have been developed, depending upon control power limitations, structural limitations, and aerodynamic requirements. Some of the more commonly used types are illustrated below.

c ----=:-

c

-----_..,/

C ~-----~

PLUG SPOILER

FLAP SPOILER

SLOTTED SPOILER

SKETCH (a) TYPICAL SPOILER ARRANGEMENTS

Unlike flaps, spoilers operate by causing a loss in airfoil lift - rather than an increase - by separating the flow downstream. The effective angle of attack is decreased and the lift correspondingly reduced. There are two viewpoints that can be used in explaining the operation of spoilers. One is to consider the pressure field over the airfoil and the other is to consider the effect of the spoiler on the wake pattern. These viewpoints are discussed in the following paragraphs.

For flap- and plug-type spoilers the pressure loading forward of the spoiler (difference in upper- and lower-surface

6.1.1.1-2

pressures) is reduced and the local lift is reduced accordingly. Aft of the spoiler the pressure loading is increased because of high suction pressures behind the spoiler on the upper surface. The increase in lift aft of the spoiler, however, does not offset the decrease in lift forward of the spoiler, and a total loss in lift results. These phenomena are illustrated .ypically in the accompanying sketch.

For large spoiler deflections a wide wake exists behind the spoiler, the width of which depends upon spoiler 'ieight, location, and airfoil angle of attack. The lift generated from the airfoil is related to the width and direction of the wake with respect to the free stream.

c

-

x C

( +)

--- UNDEFLECTED SPOILER

- - - SPOILER DEFLECTED

SKETCH (b) TYPICAL AIRFOIL PRESSURE DISTRIBUTION FOR PLUG-TYPE SPOILER

At subsonic and transonic speeds the wake characteristics vary nonlinearly with angle of attack and spoiler deflection. __ Therefore the corresponding lift characteristics are also nonlinear, as shown typically in the accompanying sketch. The oss in effectiveness at high angles of attack should be noted. This loss, which is particularly pronounced for thin wings, can be greatly alleviated by the use of leading-edge flaps (reference 1) or by incorporating a slot behind the spoiler, as discussed below (reference 2).

UNDEFLECTEDSPoaER

SPOILER EFFECTIVENESS

a

SKETCH (0) TYPICAL LIFT CURVES FOR PLUG-TYPE SPOILER

For small deflections of plug- and flap-type spoilers, the flow reattaches behind the spoiler and the spoiler becomes ineffective. This generally occurs for spoiler deflections less than one percent of the airfoil chord. This problem is .- discussed in detail in reference 3.

6.1.1.1-3

One commonly used variation of the flap-type spoiler is the slotted spoiler with a deflector on the lower surface (see illustration above) _ This system has several advantages. First, the air that is ducted from the underside of the airfoil relieves the upper-surface suction pressures behind the spoiler and increases the spoiler effectiveness. Secondly, the problem of flow reattachment does not occur for small spoiler deflections. Thirdly, the opposing aerodynamic loads on the spoiler and deflector can be used to achieve low actuation power requirements.

The information presented in this Section is limited to the region of zero lift, where the spoiler lift characteristics are essentially linear with angle of attack.

HANDBOOK METHOD

A. TRAILING-EDGE FLAPS

Plain Flaps

The lift due to flap deflection for plain trailing-edge flaps is given by the equation

6.1.1.1-c

where

(c['(~) t boory

is the theoretical flap lift effectiveness from figure 6.1.1.1-·7 a for a given airfoil thickness ratio and flap-chord-to-airfoil-chord ratio.

( cf Ii ) theo ry

is an empirical correction factor based on experimental data. This ratio IS given in figure 6.1.1.1-7 b .

The parameter

( era) t hr-o r y

used to read this chart is derived as follows:

is the experimental low-speed section lift-curve slope for the unflapped section from Section 4.1.1.2.

is given by equation 4.1.1.2-a of Section 4.1.1.2.

f3 =V1- M2

provides a Prandtl-Glauert Mach number correction for subcritical Mach numbers.

This method is based on Data Sheet Controls 01.01.01 of reference 4, which claims accuracy to within five percent of experimental data.

Slotted Flaps

Lift increments due to flap deflection for single slotted trailing-edge flaps are given by the equation

1 ( ilc£ )

ilce = 73 ilc'f ilc'p

6.1.1.1-d

where

ilc't

is given as a function of flap deflection and flap-chord-to-airfoil-chord ratio III figure 6.1.1.1- 8 b for flaps that have a single fixed center of rotation. For slotted flaps placed in a position (translated and rotated) to give maximum lift increments at each flap angle, figure 6.1.1.1- Sa is used. In the latter chart the chord ratio is based on the deflected-flap condition as illustrated in the chart.

cf

is a correction for increased planform area from figure 6.1.1.1- 9 . The ratio ilc'f is

6.1.1.1-4.

required in using this chart. The value cr is the lift coefficient for the unflapped airfoil at the angle of attack under consideration. This value is obtained from the subsections of Section 4.1.1.

(3 =Yl-'.\12

is the Prandtl-Clauert compressibility factor for subcritical Mach numbers.

This method is from the Data Sheet Flaps 01.01.08 of reference 4. The charts of this reference are based on an aspect ratio of 6.0 but have been corrected to infinite aspect ratio for the Handbook.

Fowler Flaps

Lift increments for Fowler flaps are obtained from the charts for slotted flaps (figures 6.1.1.1·8 and 6.1.1.1· <)

However, the charts apply only when the flap is near its fully extended position and the slot is properly developed.

Split Flaps

Section lift increments for split flaps are given by the equation

~c£ = k (~cf) /. _ "

Cf <- _ ....

6.1.1.1·e

where

(~cf)

. ' . "f / c = .~

is obtained from figure 6.1.1.1-10 a for a flap-chord-to-airfoil-chord ratio of .20.

k

corrects the above lift increment to flap ratios other than .20 and is obtained from figure 6.1.1.1-10 b

The charts are based on Data Sheet Flaps 02.01.01 of reference 4, which have been corrected from an aspect ratio of 6 to infinite aspect ratio. The charts give results that are within ten percent of experimental data.

The Prandtl-Glauert correction factor, (3, is used to account forcompressibility effects for subcritical Mach numbers.

B. LEADING-EDGE FLAPS AND SLATS

Leading-Edge Flaps

Lift increments below stall angles for leading-edge flaps are not greatly affected by the boundary layer. Experimental data approach the values derived from theory.

The lift due to flap deflection is given by

6.1.1.1 - f

where
cra
~o:
8
-
(3 = yl- M2 is the lift-curve slope of the unflapped airfoil from Section 4.1.1.2

is the theoretical change in zero-lift angle ol attack given in figure 6.1.1.1- 11 a . This parameter is presented in many references, e.g., reference 5.

is the Prandtl-Clauert correction factor for subcritical Mach numbers.

It should be noted that cf 6 values for leading-edge flaps are of opposite sign from the values for trailing-edge flaps.

6.1.1.1-5

Leading-Edge Slats Lift increments for leading-edge slats are approximated by the equation

1 c' ( 6i,t¥ )

AC£= -- c£ - B

f3 caB

e.i.t.i. g

where

is obtained from figure 6.1.1.1· 11 a and

c' and c

are defined on figure 6.1.1.1· 11 a .

is the Prandtl-Clauert correction factor for sub critical Mach number.

C. SPOILERS

Spoiler effectiveness is given in terms of change in zero-lift angle of attack, by the equation

AaB = KAa'B

6.1.1.1·h

where

Aa: is obtained from figure 6.1.1.1·11 b, which is based on data from reference 6 for plug-type spoilers.

K is a factor accounting for the effect of a slot behind the spoiler.

K = 1.0 for plug and flap spoilers

K = 1.6 for slotted spoilers where the deflector is deflected by an amount equal to spoiler deflection. This factor is valid for spoiler deflections up to ten percent of the airfoil chord but is limited to zero-lift conditions.

REFERENCES

1. Fitzpatrick, J.E., and Woods, R.L.: Low-Speed Lateral-Control Characteristics of an Unswept Wing With Hexagonal Airfoil Sections and Aspect Ratio 2.5 Equipped With Spoilers and With Sharp- and Thickened-Trailing-Edge Flap-Type Ailerons at a Reynolds number of 7.6 x 10'. NACA RM L52B15, 1952. (U)

2. Lowry, J.G_: Data on Spoiler-Type Ailerons. NACA RM L53124a, 1953. (U)

3. Newman, B.G.: The Reattachment of a Turbulent Boundary Layer Behind a Spoiler. Rep. A.64, Aero. Res. Lab, (Melbourne), October 1949.

4. Anon.: Royal Aeronautical Society Data Sheets - Aerodynamics. 1955 (U)

5. Roshko, A_: Computation of the Increment of Maximum Lift Due to Flaps. Douglas Aircraft Company Report SM 23626.1959. (U)

6. Franks. R.W.: The Application of a Simplified Lifting-Surface Theory to the Prediction of the Rolling Effectiveness of Plain Spoiler Ailerons at Subsonic Speeds. NACA RM A54H26a, 1954. (U)

6.1.1.1-6

(Ot S )theory (per rad)

PLAIN TRAILING-EDGE FLAPS

o

.4

.5

.1

.2

.3

°r/ c

FIGURE 6.1.1.1-7a THEORETICAL LIFT EFFECTIVENESS OF PLAIN TRAILING-EDGE FLAPS

1.0

1.00
.98
I""'"' .96
- .94
~ .... .92
.90
--= .... .88
-- .86
.> ~ ~.84
~ - ..i.82-
=.....--- I--- .... _.80- -
~ ~ ~ I--- ....- i..-J. 78" ,_
~ ..... 70 .. ,.... -
....-- - I--- ~ '.7-4
.> ....-- ~ """"" -- - ~.72" _-
l,..-- ~ ~ ~ I--- --- I---
_.. --- - ~.70'"
V ~ L--- ~ ~ ~
-- l,..-- L--- ~ eta
~ ~ CjahherY-1
• • .8

.6

.4

o

. 3

.1

.2

.4

.5

FIGURE 6.1. 1. 1-7b EMPIRICAL CORRECTION FOR LIFT EFFECTIVENESS OF PLAIN TRAILING-EDGE FLAPS

6.1.1.1-7

1.2
1.0
.8
6. O't
.6
.4 6.1.1.1-8

SINGLE SLOTTED TRAILING· EDGE FLAP

1.4

I I I I ( a) of; , J 4
OPTIMUM FLAP 01- .
I--- POSITION FOR V
• f--- EACH FLAP /""
DEFLECTION ,/ .3
-
V ./ V
IL_ L .2
- -
/ / L V
VI V .1
l- V V V ~
VI V .... V~
II '/ L v-
/1/ /
'1/
~ .2

o

o

10

20

60

30

40

50

FLAP DEFLECTION, Sf (deg)

1.4

(b) Of; I = .40
-
FI:~CED IHINbE c I---::':" -
L
• r----- r- POSITION Vv ~ ~
.30
~ VL V i""""
.25 1.0...
~ t- y V
/' .20
llj V / ,..... ~
/ .15
h ~ V /' .,.,..... ~
L
~ ~ V Y .10 I--
~ k-'"""
~ ~ / V / "
~ ~ V V V"
~ v:. V
~ v-
1.2

1.0

.8

.6

.4

.2

o

o

30

40

50

60

10

20

FLAP DEFLECTION, Sf (deg)

FIGURE 6.1. 1. 1-8 LIFT-COEFFICIENT INCREMENTS FOR SINGLE SLOTTED FLAPS

-

SINGLE SLOTTED TRAILING-EDGE FLAPS (CONTD)

4


i
c'/ = 1.25 --
c~ ---
-- ~ 1.20 - --
~ ~ ~ ~
~ f.--- ~ 1. 15 -- ---
-- --- .... b-----::"""
::::::: ~ -- ~ f....-- t---- ~ 1. 10 -
-- ~ --- l----
-- 1.05
~ ~ ~ -
::::::-:

I 3

2

o

o

6

7

3

4

5

2

FIGURE 6.1.1.1-9 LIFT CORRECTION FOR INCREASED AIRFOIL ARF;A DUE TO FLAP EXTENSION - SINGLE SLOTTED FLAPS

6.1.1.1-9

SPLIT TRAILING· EDGE FLAPS

2.0 ~+--+-- I I

I I _I V

-+---+--+--t/o= .302/8 V

of /0 =.2 v" 0

1.4

/
./ V
/""
V
/
/
V 1.4

1.2

1.2

1.0

K

.8

.6

o

. I

.3

.4

.2 of /0

FIGURE 6.1.1. HOb CORRECTION FACTOR

FOR CHORD RATIO OF SPLIT FlAPS

o

10 20 30 40 50

FLAP DEFLECTION, Of (deg)

60

FIGURE 6. I. 1. 1·IOa LIFT-COEFFICIENT INCREMENT FOR 2070-CHORD SPLIT FLAPS

6.1.1.1-10

!.::.a o

LEADING EDGE FLAPS AND SLATS

1.0

.4







./ V
./ V
./ V
L...- V V .8

.6

.2

o

o

. 1

.2

I c

FIGURE 6.1. 1. 1-11a LEADING-EDGE-FLAP EFFECTIVENESS - LOW SPEEDS

SPOILERS

.20

EO~ x 1
_8 =.8
0,/V·7
c=:=- __ ~'}sz> lo; ~I
/.5
~ ~
/ ~ ~
//h ~
VI W
/It rJ
I ., I
II .16

.12

I

!.::.as

(rad)

.08

.04

o

o

.04

.08

.16

.20

.12

-

c

FIGURE 6.1.1. I-lib SPOILER LIFT EFFECTIVENESS - LOW SPEEDS

6.1.1.1-11

6.1.1. 2 SECTION LIFT-CURVE-SLOPE WITH HIGH LIFT AN D CONTROL DEVICES

Trailing-Edge Flaps

Thin-airfoil theory shows that the lift-curve slope of a cambered section is the same as that of the corresponding uncambered airfoil. Experimental data verify this theoretical prediction for the angle-of-attack and flap-deflection ranges for which the flow is attached over both the wing and flap surfaces.

Flow separation on the wing or flap causes the lift-curve slope to be lower than the theoretical value. Sketch (a) shows a typical set of lift curves for trailing-edge flaps at various deflections. The approximate points at which the curves become appreciably nonlinear for a given flap deflection are shown by the arrows.

The sketch is typical of all types of trailing-edge flaps except split flaps, which have somewhat different lift characteristics. When a split flap is deflected, a negative pressure exists in the wedge-shaped region between the flap and the wing. This

SKETCH (a) TYPICAL LIFT CURVES FOR TRAILING-EDGE FLAPS

negative pressure creates a favorable pressure gradient near the wing trailing edge, which causes the boundary layer at the upper-surface trailing edge to be thinner for the flap-deflected condition than for the un deflected condition. Consequently the lift-curve slope for small split-flap deflections is larger than that of the unflapped airfoil. This effect is particularly pronounced on thick airfoils.

For flaps that translate as they deflect, the lift-curve slope is increased because of the increased effective area of the flapped section. Fowler flaps are the most commonly used flaps of this type.

Reference 1 contains a comprehensive summary of two-dimensional trailing-edge control-surface data, including data for the nonlinear angle-of-attack and flap-deflection ranges.

Leading-Edge Flaps

The lift-curve slope of an airfoil with a leading-edge flap is very nearly the same as that of the un flapped airfoil. For slats that extend forward as well as rotate, a correction must be made for the increased plan form area. Typical lift curves are shown in sketch (b).

LEADING-EDGE SLATS

LEADING-EDGE FLAPS

a

SKETCH (b) TYPICAL LIFT CURVES FOR LEADING-EDGE FLAPS AND SLATS

6.1.1.2-1

SLOTTED SPOILER

WITH OR WITHOUT LEADING-EDGE FLAP

PLUG SPOILER

a

SKETCH (e) EFFECT OF SLOT AND LEADING-EDGE FLAP ON SPOILER LIFT CURVES

Spoilers

The lift curves of airfoils with spoilers extended are extremely nonlinear, particularly at subsonic speeds. Sketch (c) shows a typical set of lift curves for an airfoil with and without plug and slotted spoilers. Leading-edge flaps in conjunction with plug spoilers tend to linearize the lift curve at high angles of attack. This effect is similar to that achieved by adding a slot and deflector behind a plug spoiler.

HANDBOOK METHOD

I. Flxed-Hinge Trailing· and Leading-Edge Flaps

For these flaps the lift-curve slope is assumed to be the same as that of the un flapped section for un separated flow conditions. The approximate flap deflections at which flow separation and appreciable lift-curve-slope losses occur with increasing flap deflection are shown in Table 6.l.1.2·A for various types of flaps. Values for both good and poor designs are shown. Flap design is very critical to airfoil section and flap geometry. The effects of these variables on maximum lift are discussed in detail in Section 6.1.1.3.

2. Translating Tr-ailing-Edge Flaps and Leading-Edge Slats

For devices whose hinge line translates with deflection the lift-curve slope is calculated by means of the equation

c'

c

(. cf)

a 0 = 0

6,.1.1.2 - a

where

( ~fa) 0 = 0 is the lift-curve slope of the un flapped section from Section 4.1.1.2

( ('fa) 0 is the lift-curve slope at flap or slat deflection 0

c is the chord of the unflapped airfoil

c' is the effective chord of the flapped airfoil at any flap deflection (see sample problem)

SAMPLE PROBLEM

c

Compute:

cra = .105 per degree (from Section 4.1.1)

~ = 1.08 (from the dimensional data of the configuration)

Given:

N A f:A 2112 airfoil section

~

= .35

6.1.1.2-2

Solution:

(l.08) (.105) = .113 (per degree)

3. Spoilers

For the purposes of the Handbook the lift-curve slope of an airfoil with a spoiler is assumed to be the same as that of the basic airfoil for the conditions a > 0 and cf < O.

TABLE 6.l.1.2·A

APPROXIMATE RANGE OF FLAP DEFLECTION FOR LINEAR LIFT CHARACTERISTICS AT ZERO ANGLE OF ATTACK

Flap Type Of (deg)
Poor Design Good Design
Plain o to 10 o to 20
.Single Slotted and Fowler o to 20 o to 30
Double Slottpd o to 30 o to 60
Split o to 30 or 45 REFERENCES

1. Sears, R.l.: Wind·Tunnel Data on the Aerodynamic Characteristics of Airplane Control Surfaces. N ACA ACR No, 3L08. 1943. I{'I

6. I. I. 2-:~

6.1.1.3 SECTION MAXIMUM LIFT WITH HIGH LIFT AN D CONTROL DEVICES

The maximum lift increments obtainable by the use of leading. and trailing-edge flaps are strongly influenced by the flow characteristics of unflapped sections near stall. The lift of unflapped sections near and at the stall is discussed in detail in Sections 4.1.1.3 and 4.1.1/1,.

An excellent discussion of the aerodynamic aspects of airfoil flaps is given in reference 1, some of the more salient points of which are summarized in the following paragraphs.

Trailing-edge flaps increase the maximum lift of a section by means of the camber effect. Theoretically, the incremental load distribution due to flap deflection reaches a peak in the region of the flap hinge line, has a smaller peak at the leading edge, and falls to zero at the trailing edge. Thus the pressure gradient on the upper surface forward of the flap is relieved, although the gradient over the flap itself is greatly increased. The flow over the flap therefore separates at moderate angles, i.e., 10 0 to 150 for plain flaps. However, the separation is contained behind the flap hinge line and does not progress forward over the wing until the flap deflections become large. Lift continues to increase with flap deflection after separation takes place over the flap, but the rate of increase is considerably less than that for the small- flap-deflection range where the flow is completely attached. Maximum lift is obtained when the separation progresses forward of the flap or the flow separates from the leading edge.

Leading-edge flaps increase the maximum lift of airfoils by lowering the high peak suction pressures near the nose and thereby delaying leading-edge separation. Nose-flap deflection has only a second-order effect on the flow near the trailing edge. Maximum lift for a given flap deflection is achieved when the angle of attack is increased tu tlie point where the pressure distribution around the nose approximates the pressure distribution of the un flapped section just before the stall. Leading-edge stall ensues as in the case of the un flapped section. This problem is treated theoretically in reference 2.

Thin airfoils stall as a result of leading-edge separation and thick airfoils as a result of trailing-edge separation (see Section 4.1.1.3). Since trailing-edge flaps affect trailing-edge separation primarily, without significantly altering the nose pressures, they are most effective on thick wings. Leading-edge flaps, on the other hand, delay leading-edge separation without significantly altering the trailing-edge flow and are therefore most effective on thin wings.

The stall angle of attack of an airfoil having a leading-edge flap is quite different from that of an airfoil having a trailingedge flap. Leading-edge flaps produce increases in lift by enabling the airfoil to reach higher angles of attack. Therefore the angle of attack at stall is considerably higher for an airfoil having a leading-edge flap than that for the unflapped airfoil. Trailing-edge flaps, on the other hand, produce increases in maximum lift by means of the camber effect and actually stall at an angle of attack below that of the unflapped airfoil. These trends are illustrated in the accompanying sketch. A consideration of these stalling angles is often a critical item in practice.

TRAILING-EDGE FLAPS

LEADING-EDGE FLAPS

BASIC WING

a

SKETCH (a) TYPICAL LIFT CURVES FOR LEADING-EDGE AND TRAILING-EDGE FLAPS

6.1.1.3-1

Specific comments concerning high-lift trailing-edge devices in common use are given in the following paragraphs. The accompanying sketch illustrates the various types of flaps. Not all of those shown are explicitly discussed,

C 7~

SINGLE-SLOTTED FLAP

C """"'~~~

SPLIT FLAP .............

c :;;=--~

FOWLER FLAP

SKETCH (b) TYPICAL TRAILING-EDGE FLAPS

Plain Flaps

The preceding discussion of trailing-edge flaps is applicable to plain flaps and no further comments are required.

Split Flaps

When a split flap is deflected, a region of negative pressure exists between the upper surface of the flap and the lower surface of the airfoil. This negative pressure creates a favorable pressure gradient over the top rear surface of the airfoil. Trailing-edge separation is thus suppressed, and final stall often occurs at the airfoil nose.

Slotted Flaps

The crucial factor in the design of a slotted flap is the slot. The slot sheds the boundary layer at the slot lip and allows a new boundary layer to develop over the flap. The slot also directs air in a direction tangential to the surface of the flap. Flow attachment can therefore be maintained to relatively large flap deflections. For instance, efficiently designed double-slotted flaps can prevent flow separation at deflections as high as 60°.

The design of slots for slotted flaps is very critical. Several rules of thumb have been developed for efficiently designing these flaps. First, the flap (and vane) and airfoil must overlap for all deflections when viewed in planform. Secondly, the jet issuing from the slot should also be directed in a direction tangential to the flap surface. Long shroud lengths often show advantages, since they have better control over the direction of the jet.

The flaps (and vanes) of a slotted flap carry considerably more lift than the corresponding plain flap with the same chord and deflection angle. These surfaces are, in reality, in tandem with the wing and derive beneficial induced-camber effects associated with tandem configurations.

Fowler Flaps

Aerodynamically, Fowler flaps function in the same way as single-slotted flaps. Additional lift benefits are obtained, however, from the increased chord due to translation of these flaps.

HANDBOOK METHOD

l. Trailing-Edge Flaps

An empirical method from reference 2 for predicting maximum lift increments for plain, split, and slotted flaps is presented in figures 6.1.1.3-6a through 6.1.1.3-7b. The maximum lift increment is given by

6.1.1.3-2

(~cRmax) = k, k2 k3 (~c£m"Jbase where

(~crm"x) base is the section maximum lift increment for 25-percent-chord flaps at the reference flap-deflection angle. from figure 6.1.1.3-6a.

is a factor accounting for flap-chord-to-airfoil-chord ratios other than .25 from figure 6.1.1.3-fb. is a factor accounting for flap deflections other than the reference values from figure 6.1.1.3-7a. is a factor accounting for flap motion as a function of flap deflection from figure 6.1.1.3-7b.

A comparison of experimental data with results based on these charts is shown in Table 6.1.1.3-A. 2. Leading-Edge Flaps

A method is developed in reference 3 for predicting the stall of thin airfoils with leading-edge flaps. The method is based on the assumption that the flapped and un flapped airfoils stall when the respective pressure distributions about the noses are the same. This method is presented in figure 6.1.1.3.7c, It should not be used for flap deflections greater than 250 or flap-chord-to-airfoil-chord ratios greater than 0.20.

6.1.1.3-3

TABLE 6.1.1.3·A LOW·SPEED SECTION MAXIMUM·LIFT INCREMENTS FOR FLAP DEFLECTION DATA SUMMARY AND SUBSTANTIATION

cfmax e
Reference Airfoil Flap Type Rxl0-6 efjc of ( ,:lcrmax) "ale. ( ,:lcRmax) t eat * Percent
(deg) (of=O) Error
4 NACA 0009 Plain 2.58 .25 10 .885 .27 .23 4.5
5 Double Wedge 5.8 .25 60 .84 .97 .89 10.7
tic = 4.230/0
6 NACA 0006 4.5 .30 50 .94 .91 .76 16.0
7 6·percent· 6.0 .20 60 .73 .84 .91 -9.6
thick circular arc
7 Hl-percent- 6.0 .20 60 .67 .75 .98 -34.3
thick circular arc
8 NACA 0009 2.76 .20 30 1.15 .56 .43 11.3
8 NACA 0009 2.39 .30 30 .975 .64 .57 7.2
8 NACA 0009 I( 2.39 .40 30 1.0 .66 .53 13.0
9 NACA 65·210 Split 6.0 .20 60 1.29 .75 .78 -2.3
10 NACA 0012 I 8.0 .20 60 1.66 .84 .69 9.0
11 NACA 1410 6.0 .20 60 1.51 .74 .82 -5.3
12 NACA 23012 3.5 .20 60 1.55 .84 .98 -9.0
13 NACA 23012 3.5 .10 60 1.55 .59 .75 -10.3
13 NACA 23021 3.5 .40 60 1.36 1.73 1.54 14.0
14 NACA 66,2·116 Single 6.0 .2505 45 1.45 1.67 1.29 26.2
a =.6 Slotted
9 NACA 65·210 2.4 .25 30 1.22 .79 .90 -9.0
9 NACA 65·210 2.4 .25 30 1.22 .79 .84 -4.1
15 NACA 23012 3.5 .30 40 1.55 1.24 1.36 -7.7
16 NACA 66,2·216 5.1 .25 45 1.46 1.67 1.42 17.1
a= .6
17 NACA 23012 3.5 .2566 30 1.52 .88 1.03 -9.9
18 NACA 23012 3.5 .40 40 1.53 1.27 1.30 -2.0
9 NACA 65·210 Double 2.4 .312 40 1.22 1.23 1.30 -5.7
9 NACA 65·210 Slotted 6 .312 40 1.29 1.23 1.33 -7.8
9 NACA 65·210 9 .312 50 1.4 1.47 1.20 19.3
Between
19 R·4,4O·318·1 3.5 .238 40 1.39 1.37 1.35 1.4
and R·4,40·313·6
Between
19 R·4,40·318·1 14 .238 40 1.55 1.37 1.31 3.9
and R·4,40·313·6
20 NACA 65,3·118 6 .309 45 1.61 1.98 1.59 25.5
a = 1.0
21 NACA: 23021 3.5 .32 50 1.35 2.30 1.86 32.6
22 NACA 23012 3.5 .30 50 1.55 1.65 1.63 1.3
23 NACA 23012 3.5 .40 40 1.55 1.82 1.91 -5.8
11 NACA 63·210 6 .25 50 1.52 1.17 1.38 -13.8
9 NACA 65·210 Fowler 2.4 .25 35 1.22 1.03 .99 3.3
9 NACA 65·210 1 9 .25 35 1.4 1.03 1.04 -0.7
12 NACA 23012 3.5 .2667 40 1.55 1.47 1.09 24.5
15 NACA 23012 3.5 .30 40 1.55 1.65 1.75 -6.5
24 NACA 23012 2.9 .40 30 1.16 1.71 1.70 0.9
24 Clark Y -2 .20 30 1.35 .84 1.16 -23.7 * based on unflapped airfoil

~I .. '\

Average Error = .:::...L...:.J. = 11.10/0 n

6.1.1.3-4

REFERENCES

1. Nonweiler, T.: Flaps, Slots, and Other High-Lift Aids. Aircraft Engineering, September 1955.

2. Anon.: Approximate Relationships for Determining Airplane Maximum Lift Coefficients. Douglas Aircraft Company Report SM 13874, 19;)0. (U)

3. Roshko, A.: Computation of the Increment of Maximum Lift Due to Flaps. Douglas Aircraft Company Report SM 23626, 1%9. (U)

4. Spearman, :'I'LL.: Wind· Tunnel Investigation of an NACA 0009 Airfoil With 0.25· and 0.50·Airfoil·Chord Plain Flaps Tested Inde· pendently and in Combination . .\IACA T.\I1517, 1948. (D)

5. Rose. L.M., and Altman, J.M.: Low-Speed Experimental Investigation of a Thin, Faired, Double-Wedge Airfoil Section With Nose and Trailing-Edge Flaps. NACA TN 1934, 1949. (n

6. Gamhucci, BJ.: Section Characteristics of the NACA 0006 Airfoil With Leading-Edge and Trailing-Edge Flaps. NACA TN 3797, 1956. (U)

7. Cahill, J.F., Underwood, W.J., Nuber, R.I., and Cheesman, G.A.: Aerodynamic Forces and Loadings on Symmetrical Circular- Arc Airfoils With Plain Leading-Edge and Plain Trailing-Edge Flaps. NACA TR 1146, 1953. (U)

8. Lockwood, V.E.: Wind-Tunnel Investigation of Control-Surface Characteristics XVII - Beveled-Trailing-Edge Flaps of 0.20, 0.30, and 0.40 Airfoil Chord of an NACA 0009 Airfoil. NACA ACR L4D12, 1944. (D)

9. Cahill, J.F.: Two-Dimensional Wind-Tunnel Investigation of Four Types of High-Lift Flap on an NACA 65-210 Airfoil Section.

NACA T.\I1191, 1947. (U)

10. Jacobs, E.N., Pinkerton, R.M., and Greenberg, H.: Tests of Related Forward-Camber Airfoils in the Variable-Density Wind Tunnel.

NACA TR 610,1937. (U)

11. Cahill, J.F., and Racisz, S.F.: Wind-Tunnel Investigation of Seven Thin NACA Airfoil Sections to Determine Optimum Double-SlottedFlap Combinations. NACA TN 1545, 1948_ (L)

12. Wenzinger, C.J., and Harris, T.A.: Wind-Tunnel Investigation of an NACA 23012 Airfoil With Various Arrangements of Slotted Flaps.

NACA TR 664, 1939_ (U)

13. Wenzinger, C.1., and Harris, T.A.: Wind-Tunnel Investigation of NACA 23012, 23021, 23030 Airfoils With Various Sizes of Split Flap . .\IACA TR 668,1939. (U)

14. Underwood, W.1., and Abbott, F.T. Jr.: Test of NACA 66, 2-116, a = 0.6 Airfoil Section Fitted With Pressure Balance and Slotted Flaps for the Wing of the XP-63 Airplane. NACA Memorandum Report For AAF, Materiel Command, May 1942. (D)

15. Lowry, .I.G.: Wind-Tunnel Investigation of an NACA 23012 Airfoil With Several Arrangements of Slotted Flaps with Extended Lips.

I\ACA TN 808, 1941. (U)

16. Holtzclaw, R.W.: Wind-Tunnel Investigation of the Effects of Spoilers on the Characteristics of a Low-Drag Airfoil Equipped With a 0.25-Cbord Slotted Flap. NACA MR A5G23, 1945. (U)

17. Rogallo, F.M.: Aerodynamic Characteristics of a Slot-Lip Aileron and Slotted Flap for Dive Brakes. NACA ACR April 1941. (U)

18. Harris, T.A.: Wind-Tunnel Investigation of an NACA 23012 Airfoil With Two Arrangements of a Wide-Chord Slotted Flap. NACA TN 715,1939. (U)

19. Cahill, J.F.: Aerodynamic Data for a Wing Section of the Republic XF-12 Airplane Equipped With a Double Slotted Flap. NACA MR L6A08a, 1946. (U)

20. Bogdanoff, S.M.: Wind-Tunnel Investigation of a Low-Drag Airfoil Section With a Double Slotted Flap. NACA ACR 3120,1943. (U)

21. Fischel, J., and Riebe, J.M.: Wind-Tunnel Investigation of an NACA 23021 Airfoil With a 0.32·Airfoil·Chord Double Slotted Flap.

NACA ARR L4J05,1944. (U)

22. Purser, P.E., Fischel, J., and Riebe, J.:"'I.: Wind-Tunnel Investigation of an NACA 23012 Airfoil With a 0.30-Airfoil-Chord Double Slotted Flap. NACA ARR 3110, 1943. (U)

-

23. Harris, T.A., and Recant, LG_: Wind-Tunnel Investigation of NACA 23012, 23021, and 23030 Airfoils Equipped With 40-Percent-Chord Double Slotted Flaps. NACA TR 723,1941. (U)

24. Wenzinger, C.1., and Anderson, W.E.: Pressure Distribution Over Airfoils With Fowler Flaps. NACA TR 620, 1938. (U)

6.1.1.3-5

TRAILING-EDGE FLAPS

2.0 ~--'--'-I-'-'~---'-I-'-I-,,--.---.--r-,-,,--~--r--r--.-~---r--r-~--~

CURVE FLAP TYPE AIRFO·IL

A

BEST 2-SLOT

( .6.cl max) base

""I'-- V/

.8 ~~ __ ~ __ L_~ __ ~-,~_L __ ~~ __ ~ __ L_~. __ J_-,~_L __ ~~ __ ~ __ L_~

12

o

2

4

6

10

20

16

14

18

8

AIRFOIL THICKNESS (~ WING CHORD)

FIGURE 6.1.1.3-6a MAXIMUM-LIFT INCREMENTS FOR 211~-CHORD FLAPS AT REFERENCE FLAP ANGLE

1.2
1.0
.8
kl
.6
.4
.2 6.1.1.3-6

o

v
~ ? ~
,.- ~ V
.....
O~I' /
\:'0,:/
"'~\ V
+.I'>~ ~
~ ..... ~ ~~
-<?Y/ / ~Y
-10" ~O
..,y /"'~
<),Y ~+
/' /y0'<;'
V V q:~
/ / /
j L V
1/ o

4

8

16

24

20

28

32

12

FLAP-CHORD (~ WING CHORD)

FIGURE 6.1. 1.3-6b FLAP CHORD CORRECTION FACTOR

1.0
.8
.6
k
2
.4 V::: ~ ~ V I-'"
./ ~
/ h- ~ V io""
~
V ~ 7/ ~
~~~
- ¢
V'---' ~",
'" ~v c °REFERENCE
b'" ,~ - I--
V' ~~ FLAP ANGLE
i7 /~
/
V .2

o

o

10

30

TRAILING-EDGE FLAPS (CONTD)

1.0

1/ V
0
:7~
~
0<:'
~
4>~
~
4,0
~: ~
~~~! NOTE:
I--~O~~~~ FOR SPLIT ,OR
PLAIN FLAP,_
c?J ~ USE k3 = 1.0
, ~
.1-- -.; ~
~V Vo~;·
ILV'lf~~
,_". "
• 20

FLAP ANGLE (deg)

.8

.6

.4

.2

o

40

.4

.6

.8

1.0

.2.

o

50

60

ACTUAL FLAP ANGLE

REFERENCE FLAP ANGLE

FIGURE 6.1.1.3-7a FLAP ANGLE CORRECTION FACTOR

.04
[,°L·max .03
(3
C~g) .02
_-.
.01 FIGURE 6.1.1.3-70

FIGURE 6.1. 1. 3-7b FLAP MOTION CORRECTION FACTOR

LEADING EDGE FLAPS

o



-~ ~
V ~
__..
./ .,./'
V
/
II o

8

20

12

16

4

FLAP CHORD (7. WING CHORD)

EFFECT OF LEADING-EDGE FL APS ON

601

max

6.1.1.3-7

6.1.2 SECTION PITCHING MOMENT WITH HIGH LIFT AND CONTROL DEVICES 6.1.2.1 SECTION DERIVATIVE cmg\UTH HIGH-LIFT AND CONTROL DEVICES

Leading. and Trailing-Edge Flaps

According to thin-airfoil theory the pitching moment due to flap deflection is given by the equation (reference 1) *

1~(1_::)8

CillO = - 2~ c. c

6.1.2.1·a

The curve defined by this equation is shown in sketch (a), compared with typical test data. Thin-airfoil theory IS seen to give fair approximations to cm6 at low values of a for leading-edge and trailing-edge flaps.

Of

c

o o+-------~--------~----------------~----~~

.2

.4

.6

.8

1.0

v

o PLAIN T.E. FLAP D SPLIT T.E. FLAP

A SINGLE-SLOTTED T.E. FLAP V DOUBLE-SLOTTED T.E. FLAP X PLAIN L.E. FLAP

-.01

-.02

SKETCH (a)

--- THEORY

Large nose-down moments are indicated for trailing-edge flaps, the maximum moments occurring for a 25-percent-chord trailing-edge flap. Small nose-down moments are indicated for leading-edge flaps.

These pitching-moment changes are caused by the change in incremental pressure loading over the airfoil surface. The theoretical incremental load due to trailing-edge-flap deflection has a peak over the flap hinge line and a peak over the airfoil leading edge (see Section 6.1.1.3). The resulting pitching-moment change is nose down. The change in load due to leading-edge flaps is such as to decrease the loading over the leading edge. The resulting pitching-moment change is also nose down. The increment~l loadings for trailing-edge flaps are illustrated in sketch (b).

EXPERIMENTAL

o

PLAIN AIRFOIL

-1.0

-

1.0

*

c -~

SKETCH (b)

-

c

for the leading-edge flap is defined here as

1 _ flap chord airfoil ohord

6.1. 2.1-1

Sketch (c) illustrates typical flap pitching-moment curves plotted as a function of flap deflection for a given ratio of flap chord to wing chord.

(CmS is negative)

DOUBLE'SLOTTED FLAP

SKETCH (0)

The following observations are made:

The linear ranges of the curves correspond to attached-flow conditions. The more efficient the flap as a lifting device, the greater the deflection range over which attached flow can be maintained. For example, the linear range is greater for double slotted flaps than for plain flaps. Split flaps have no significant linear range (see Sections 6.1.1.1 and 6.1. 1.3) ; this is the result of the wide wake caused by the split trailing edge.

The values of Cm5 are the same for plain and for split flaps at small deflections, since the moment is caused by the same amount of effective camber. However, the CIl15 value for single slotted flaps is somewhat greater than that for plain flaps because of the lift carried on the flap due to induced camber effects (see Section 6.1.1.3). Likewise the Crno value for double slotted flaps is greater than the single slotted value because of the induced camber effects on both the flap and the vane.

The value of Cmo deviates from a linear variation when the flow separates over the flap. Increases in flap deflection beyond this point continue to give increases in pitching moment - although at a reduced rate - because the flap continues to increase the lift carried by the airfoil (see Section 6.1.1.3).

Spoilers

Pitching-moment changes due to spoilers are generally smaller than those for flap-type control surfaces. For this reason they are useful on thin, swept wings where wing twist due to control deflection is a problem. Many wind-tunnel programs have therefore been conducted on swept wings, but few have been conducted on airfoil sections. Reference 20, published in 1953, contains a comprehensive bibliography of spoiler studies made up to that time.

Because of the scarcity of two-dimensional spoiler data, no generalized methods are presented in this Section for section pitching moment-due to spoiler deflection. However, Section 6.1.5.1 does contain pitching moments due to spoilers for complete wings.

HANDBOOK METHOD

Pitching-moment increments are presented in figures 6.1.2.1· 4a through 6.1.2.1-4c for split, plain, single slotted, and double slotted trailing-edge flaps, respectively. The charts are presented in terms of flap deflection and flap-chord-towing-chord ratio. The charts are limited to the linear lift range and subcritical Mach numbers.

6.1.2.1-2

Figure 6.1.2.1·5

presents the pitching-moment increment due to leading-edge-flap deflection.

These charts are based on the data from references 1 through 19.

REFERENCES

1. Cahill, J.F.: Summary of Section Data on Trailing-Edge High-Lift Devices. NACA TR 938, 1949. (U)

2. James, H.A., and Hunton, L.W.: Estimation of Incremental Pitching Moments Due to Trailing-Edge Flaps on Swept and T;iangular Wings. NACA TN 4040, 1957. (U)

3. Harris, T.A., and Recant, I.G.: Wind-Tunnel Investigation of NACA 23012, 23021, and 23030 Airfoils Equipped With 40- Peroent-Chord Double Slotted Flaps. NACA TR 723, 1941. (U)

4. Harris, T.A.: Wind-Tunnel Investigation of an NACA 23012 Airfoil With Two Arrangements of a Wide-Chord Slotted Flap.

NACA TN 715, 1939. (U)

5. Lowry, J.G.: Wind-Tunnel Investigation of an NACA 28012 Airfoil With Several Arrangements of Slotted Flaps with Extended Lips. NACA TN 808, 1941. (U)

6. Purser, P.E., Fischel, J., and Riebe, J.M.: Wind-Tunnel Investigation of an NACA 23012 Airfoil with a O.SO-Airfoil-Chord Double Slotted Flap. NACA WR L-469, 1943. (U)

7. Fisohel, J., and Riebe, J.M.: Wind_Tunnel Investigation of an NACA 23021 Airfoil with a 0.32-Airfoll-Chord Double Slotted Flap. NACA WR L-7, 1944. (U)

8. Harris, T.A., and Purser, P.E.: Wind-Tunnel Investigation of an NACA 23012 Airfoil with Two Sizes of Balanoed Split Flap.

NACA WR L-441, 1940. (U)

9. Cahill, J.F,: Two-Dimensional Wind-Tunnel Investigation of Four TYpes of High-Lift Flap on anNACA 65-210 Airfoil Section.

NACA TN 1191, 1947. (U)

lO. Jane .. , R., and Bell, A.H.I Further Experiments on an NACA 23021 Aerofoil with a 15 per cent Handley Page Slotted Flap in the Compre ssed Air Tunnel. R&M No. 2519, British A.R.C., 1954. (U)

11. Sears, R.I.: Wind-Tunnel Data on the Aerodynamlo Characteristics of Airplane Control Surfaces. NACA WR L-663, 1943. (U)

12. Bogdanoff, S.M.: Wind-Tunnel Investigation of a Low-Drag Airfoil Section with a Double Slotted Flap. NACA WR L-697, 1943. (U)

13. Cahill, J.F.: Aerodynamic Data for a Wing Section of the Republic XF-12 Airplane Equipped with a Double Slotted Flap.

NACA WR L-544, 1946. (U)

14. Gambuoc!, B.J.: Section Charaoteristics of the NACA 0006 Airfoil with Leading-Edge and Trailing-Edge Flaps. NACA TN 3797, 1956. (U)

15. Cahill, J.F., Underwood, J., Nuber, R.J., and Cheesman, G.A.: Aerodynamlo Forces and Loadings on Symmetrical CircularArc Airfoils with Plain Leading-Edge and Plain Trailing-Edge Flaps. NACA TR 1146, 1953. (U)

16. Kelly, J.A., and Hayter, N.F.: Lift and Pitching Moment at Low Speeds of the NACA 64AOI0 Airfoil Section Equipped with Various Combinations of a Le ad In g-Eld ge Slat, Leading-Edge Flap, Split Flap, and Double Slotted Flap. NACA TN 3007, 1953. (U)

17. Rose, L.M., and Altman, J.M.: Low-Speed Investigation of a Thin, Faired, Double-Wedge Airfoil Section with Nose Flaps of Various Chord. NACA TN 2018, 1950. (U)

18. Kelly, J.A.: Effects of Modltlcatlons to the Le ad i ng-Bld ge Region on the Stalling Characterlsrlcs of the NACA 631-012 Airfoil Section. NACA TN 2228, 1960. (U)

19. Nuber, R.J., and Gottlieb, S.M.: Two-Dimensional Wind-Tunnel Investigation at High Reynolds Numbers o'f an NACA 65A006 Airfoil with High-Lift Devloes. NACA RM L7K06, 1948. (UJ

20. Lowry, J.G.: Data on Spoiler-Type Ailerons. NACA RM L53!24a, 1953. (U)

6.1.2.1-3

6.1.2.1-4

FLAP DEFLECTION, Sf (degrees)

o

10

70

40

30

50

20

60

o

• •
~ (0) T I
~ SLOTTED FLAPS
"'-
~ ~ ~ of
_-
~ 0
~ ~ t;:::: , OTTED ~
~ snWLE-SL ;_-
-- ,15 -
~ ~
......_ ,20 ,--- ~
,25, ,30, ,40 -
......__
<, r-,
'.20
to
'''0
.1--- <,

DOUBLE-SLOTTED
I I I -,2

-,4

-,6

FLAP DEFLECTION, Sf (degrees)

o

30

10

20

50

40

60

70

o

.
~ ~ (b) I PLAIN FLAP
t::- t--.
~ ~ -- r--- of
~ _ - ,10
0
.....,.;;:
-- r-=::: "- ,20
1'25 r-:" -,4

FLAP DEFLECTION, Sf (degrees)

o

60

40

50

30

70

10

20

o

•
~ ~ (C) SPLIT FLAP
i=:::::-.... of
<: ~ t:-- t-- 0
I'......... ,10
,40
-..... I--- ,20
r-- ~O
-- r---
r-- -,4

FIGURE 6,1. 2,1-4 EFFECT OF TRAILING-EDGE FLAP DEFLECTION AND FLAP-CHORD

TO WING-CHORD RATIO ON SECTION INCREMENTAL PITCHING MOMENT

NOSE-DOWN FLAP DEFLECTION, Df (degrees)

o o

10

20

30

40

50

-.2

.15 ./ ~ j..--""
-r-.:::::: t---
of
o - .25
,
i
I --- -.4

FIGURE 6.1.2.1-5 EFFECT OF LEADING-EDGE FLAP DEFLECTION AND FLAP-CHORDTO-WING-CHORD RATIO ON SECTION INCREMENTAL PITCHING MOMENT

6.1.2.1-5

6.1. 2. 2 SECTION DERIVATIVE ema WITH HIGH-LIFT 'AND CONTROL DEVICES

According to thin-airfoil theory, camber such as that due to flaps does not affect the moment-curve slope of an airfoil section. Experimental data verify this prediction for the angle-of-attack and flap-deflection ranges for which the flow - is attached over the airfoil and flap surfaces. This aspect of the subject is discussed in some detail with respect to lift for various types of flaps in Section 6.1.1.2.

A typical set of data are shown in sketch (al for plain trailing-edge flaps.

(+)

r-- AP~~~EX~~A TE------j

I RANGE I

\ a = 0

8 = - 200
\
8 = 00 (+)
8 = 200


8 = 400
I
I
I
SKETCH (a) H

The approximate linear range is noted in the sketch. At angles of attack above the linear range the flow separates over the flap surface and the additional loading on the flap is lost. A pitch-up tendency results: At angles of attack below the linear range the flow separates on the underside of the airfoil, causing a forward shift in center of pressure and a nose-up moment change.

HANDBOOK METHOD

The parameter

for various flap deflections is the same as that for zero flap deflection for angles of attack near

zero. However, the linear range for this parameter becomes very short at the higher flap deflections.

REFERENCE

I. Sears, R. I.: Wind-Tunnel Data on the Aerodynamio Charaoteristios of Airplane.Control.Surfaoes. NACA ACR No. SLOB, 1945_(U)

6.1.2.2-1

6.1.2.3 SECTION PITOUNG MOMENT NEAR MAXIMUM LIFT WITH HIGH LIFT AND CONTROL DEVICES

It is shown in reference 1 that near maximum-lift conditions the pitching-moment increment due to flap deflection is a function of the corresponding lift increment and is nearly independent of flap and airfoil geometry. The summary chal;t from this reference is presented 'in this Section for estimating pitching-moment increments due to flap deflection at high angiPs of attack. The flap types covered include plain, slotted, and Fowler trailing-edge flaps and leading-edge flaps and slats, The chart is applicable only to that part of the CIlB CL curve just below the moment break.

HANDBOOK METHOD

Section pitching-moment Increments due to high-lift and control devices are obtained from figure 6.1.2.3-3. The value 6 e'l used in reading this chart is obtained from the appropriate methods of Sections 6.1.1. This chart is based on the data of references 2 through 28. The test points i"hnWn on the chart illustrate the accuracy of the method.

REFERENCES

1. Bidwell, J. M., and Cahill, J. F.: Survey of Two-Dimensional Data on Pitching-Moment Changes Near Maximum Lift Caused by Deflection of High-Lift Devices. NACA RM L9J03, 1949. (U)

2. Cahill, J. F.: Summary of Section Data on Trailing-Edge High-Lift Devices. NACA RM LBD09, 1948. (U)

3. Wen zinger, C. J., and Harris, T. A.: Wind-Tunnel Investigation of an N ACA 23012 AIrfoil With Various Arrangements of Slotted Flaps. NACA TR 664, 1939. (U)

4. Abbott,!. H., and Greenberg, H.: Tests in the Variable-Density Wind Tunnel of the NACA 23012 Airfoil with Plain and Split Flaps. NACA TR'661, 1939. (U)

5. Klein, M_ M.: Pressure Distributions and Force Tests of an NACA 65-210 Airfoil Section with a 50-Percent-Chord Flap.

NACA TN 1167, 1947. (U)

6. Wenzinger, C. J-, and Harris, T. A.: Wind-Tunnel Investigation of NACA 23012,23021, and 23030 Airfoils with Various Sizes of Split Flap. NACA TR 66B, 1939. (U)

7. Schuldenfrei, M. J.: Wind-Tunnel Investigation of an NACA 23012 Airfoil with a Handley Page Slat and Two Flap Arrangements. N ACA ARR(WR L-261),19 42. (U)

B. Harris, T. A., and Purser, P. E.: Wind-Tunnel Investigation of an NACA 23012 Airfoil with Two Sizes of Balanced Split

Flap. NACA ACR(WR L-441), 1940_ (U)

9. Lowry, J _ G.: Wind-Tunnel Investigation of an N ACA 23012 Airfoil with Several Arrangements of Slotted Fl aps with Extended Lips. NACA TN BOB, 1941. (U)

10_ Harris, T. A.: Wind-Tunnel Investigation of an N ACA 23012 Airfoil with Two Arrangements of a Wide-Chord Slotted Fl ap , NACA TN 715, 1939. (U)

11. Purser, P. E., Fischel, J., and Riebe, J. M.: Wind-Tunnel Investigation of an NACA 23012 Airfoil with a 0.30-AlrfollChord Double Slotted Flap. NACA ARR3L 10, 1943. (U)

12. Wen zinger, C. J., and Harris, T_ A.: Wind-Tunnel Investigation of "'! NACA 23021 Airfoil With Various Arrangements of Slotted Flaps. NACA TR 677, 1939. (U)

13. Duschik, F.: Wind-Tunnel Investigation of an NACA 23021 Airfoil with Two Arrangements of a 40-Percent-Chord Slotted Flap. NACA TN 728, 1939. (U)

6.1.2.3-1

14. Fischel, J., and Riebe, J. M.: Wind-Tunnel Investigation of an NACA 23021 Airfoil With a 0. 32-Airfoil-Chord Double Slotted Flap. NACA ARR L4J05, 1944. (U)

15. Holtzclaw, R. W., and Weisman, Y.: Wind-Tunnel Investigation of the Effects of Slot Shape and Flap Location on the Characteristics of a Low-Drag Airfoil Equipped with a 0.25-Chord Slotted Fl ap , N ACA MR A4L 28, 1944. (U)

16. Abbott, I. H., and Fullmer, F. F., Jr.: Wind-Tunnel Investigation of NACA 63,4-420 Airfoil with 25-Percent-Chord Slotted Flap. NACA ACR 3121, 1943. (U)

17. Gillis, C. L., and McKee, J. W.: Wind-Tunnel Investigation of an NACA 23012 Airfoil with an 18.05-percent-Chord Maxwell Slat and with Trailing-Edge Flaps. NACA MR(WR L-574), 1941. (U)

18. Lowry, J. G., and Mc Ke e , J. W.: Wind-Tunnel Investigation of an NACA 23012 Airfoil with a 30-PercentrChord Maxwell Slat and with Trailing-Edge Flaps. NACA MR(WR L-693), June 16, 1941. CU)

19. Weick, F. E., and Platt, R. C.: Wind-Tunnel Tests on Model Wing with Fowler Flap and Specially Developed Leading-Edge Slot. NACA TN 459, 1933. CU)

20. Lemme, H. G.: Force and pressure-Distribution Measurements on a Rectangular Wing with a Slotted Droop Nose and with Either Plain and Split F'Lan e in Combination or a Slotted Flap. NACA TM 1108, 1947. (U)

21. Lemme, H. A.: Force and pressure-Distribution Measurements on a Rectangul ar Wing with Double-Hinged No se. N ACA TM 1117, 1947. CU)

22. Gauvain, W. E.: Wind-Tunnel Tests of a Clark Y Wing with "Maxwell" Leading-Edge Slots. NACA TN 598, 1937. CU)

23. Fullmer, F. F., Jr.: Two-Dimensional WiD-ii-Tunnel Investigation of the NACA 64r012 Airfoil Equipped With Two Types of Leading-Edge Flap. NACA TN 1277, 1947. (U)

24. Fullmer, F. F., Jr.: Two-Dimensional Wind-Tunnel Investigation of an NACA 64-009 Airfoil Equipped with Two Types of Leading-Edge Flap. NACA TN 1624, 1948. CU)

25. Underwood, W. J., and Nuber, R. J.: Two-Dimensional Wind-Tunnel Investigation at High Reynolds Number of Two Symmetrical Circular-Arc Airfoil Sections With High-Lift Devices. NACA RM L6K22, 1947. (U)

26. Nuber, R. J., and Cheeseman, G. A.: Two-Dimensienal Wind-Tunnel Investigation of a 6-Percent-Thick Symmetrical CircularArc Airfoil Section with Leading-Edge and Trailing-Edge High-Lift Devices Deflected in Combination. NACA RM L9G20, 1949. CU)

27. Nuber, R. J., and Gottlieb, S. M.: Two-Dimensional Wind-Tunnel Investigation at High Reynolds Numbers of an N ACA 65 A006 Airfoil with High-Lift Devices. NACA RM L7K06, 1948. CU)

28. Thompson, M. J.: A Simple Method for Determining the Aerodynamic Center of an Airfoil. Jour. Aero. Sci., February 1938. CU)

6.1.2.~-2

-.2

VH + C ~ -"-~--+---+---t---t---3ttn--t---t---r------j

I '

C.A+ D

-.4 <> C LEADING-EDGE -+--+--~--tE}-=~~--+--+--t-----I

I I I

AD

o

COMBINATICNS

I I

-.6

-.8

~B+C 0

I ----+--~--~--t---r_-_t--_t~~~--t_-~

"c(i+-D 0

o

.4

2.0

2.4

1.2

1.6

.8

FIGURE 6.1.2.3-3 SECTION PITCHING-MOMENT INCREMENTS OF VARIOUS TYPES OF HIGH-LIFT DEVICES

6.1.2.3-3

6.1.3 SECTION HINGE MOMENT OF HIGH-LIFT AND CONTROL DEVICES

Hinge moments are affected by many factors, such as balance ratio, balance shape, basic airfoil characteristics, trailingedge angle, trailing-edge bluntness, gap size and geometry, tab controls aii.d trimmers, etc. Hinge moments are also nonlinear with angle of attack and flap deflection, particularly at moderate to large angles. The hinge moments of trailing-edge controls are sensitive to boundary-layer conditions and hence to Reynolds number effects. All of the above items cause the prediction of hinge moments to be very difficult. Test data on the particular configuration under consideration or one closely resembling it should always be preferred to characteristics obtained from generalized methods.

The methods presented in subsequent Sections are limited to the range of flap deflection and angles of attack for which the hinge moments are linear, i.e., those conditions for which the flow is attached over the control surface. The angles of attack and flap deflections at which the flow separates over a plain, sealed control are interrelated and depend upon the flap-chord-to-wing-chord ratio. Approximate boundaries for linear control effectiveness are presented in figure 6.1.3-2. This chart, taken from reference 1, is based on test data on an NACA 0009 airfoil.

REFERENCE

1. Ames, M. B., Jr., and Sears, R. 1.: Determination of Control-Surface Characteristics from NACA Plain-Flap and Tab Data.

NACA TR 721, 1941. (U)

6.1.3-1

6.1.3-2

Cmax (deg.)

·28

I I I 14 1
---
/ 12
/ --- -
~ /' 10
/ ..--1 -
I~ V 8
., ---
~I /; -: 6
_..,...- .-
-, if'/ ---....
1/ «>:
IV r--....
(~ ~ -... i---
tlf r-- a.,Oo
r---:.
,- ~\\\\ -. - r---
r--
\ \ ~ <,
\ r-,
, \ \.~ <, <; -«,
<, r-; --
~ <, --.... -..z -- r---
I <,
-, ---
<, '-....... - --
<, ~
--
<, - ...... _
~
---
-- ---- -24

·20

-16

-12

·8

-4

o

o

20

60

100

40

80

Cf

-0- (%)

FIGURE 6.1.3-2 APPROXIMATE MAXIMUM CONTROL-SURFACE DEFLECTIONS FOR LINEAR CONTROL CHARACTERISTICS - NACA 0009 AIRFOIL (REF. I)

6.1.3.1 SECTION HINGE MOMENT DERIVATIVE cha OF HIGH-LIFT AND CONTROL DEVICES

For the angle of attack range where the flow is attached over the control surface, the variation of hinge moment with angle of attack is linear. At some angle of attack depending upon the control deflection and airfoil and control geometry the flow separates fr0111 the flap surface. The rate of change of hinge moment with flap deflection increases beyond this point at an increased rate. The approximate angle of attack at which the flow separates from the I surface of a plain, sealed flap on an NACA 0009 airfoil is shown as a function of flap deflection angle and flap·chord-to-control.chord-ratio in figure 6.1.3-2.

Those additional parameters that restrict the linear range are large trailing-edge angles, large nose balance ratios, blunt (control) nose shapes, and relatively large airfoil thickness ratios. The linear hinge-moment range is generally smaller than the corresponding linear lift-increment range due to control deflection.

HANDBOOK METHOD

A. SUBSONIC

The method presented for'estimating the hinge moment of trailing-edge-controls due to angle of attack at low speeds is taken from reference 2. The method is based on the theories and data of references 1. 3, and 4. The method applies to the linear hinge-moment range only. The hinge-moment derivative c~" for a radius-nose. sealed, trailing-edge flap for

which the condition tan 1>1'E = _I:__ holds is given by the equation (1) is the total trailina-edee angle )

2 c ~. 1'8 ,., ,., b

6.1.3.1-a

where

() . h h . I hi deri . f . f '1 havi chE t

Cha t heory IS t e t eoretica mge-moment errvative or an- 01 savIng tari2 = -;;-.

from figure 6.1.3.1-5a.

This parameter is obtained

is the ratio of the actual to the theoretical hinge-moment derivative for radius-nose, sealed-gap. plain

trailing-edge flap. This parameter is obtained from figure 6.1.3.1·5band is a function of the quantities cl"and, (cIa) theory which are obtained from sections 4.1.1 <Uld 4.1.1.2 respectively.

For airfoils with thickness distributions such that tan ~E# : ,the hinge-moment derivative is obtained from the equation

6.1.3.1-b

where

is obtained from equation 6.1.3.1-a.

is the theoretical lift-curve slope from Section 4.1.1.2_ is the actual lift-curve' slope from Section 4.1.1.

For a beveled trailing edgecf>TEshould be taken as equal to the angle of the bevel.

Under the restriction that there is no separated flow, Ch" for a radius-nose control can be determined by the above method with an accuracy of -+-0.05.

The hinge-moment derivative for a control with nose balance is given by the equation

6.1.3.1-c

6.1.3.1-1

where

c" lIlY

is obtained from equation 6.1.3.1-b.

is obtained from figure 6_1.3.1-6a for noses of various shapes. The nose shapes corresponding to the curves in figure 6.1.3.1-6a are shown in figure 6.1.3.1-6bof Section 6.1.3.1. The balance ratio as used in figure 6.1.3.1-6 a is defined by- the equation

where c, surface.

I ( ')2 (t' 2

Balance ratio ~= I __s._ - -2·-)

'\j . c, . c,

is the chord of the balance and(~)refers to the thickness-to-chord ratio of the control .2C;[

6.1.3.1-d

For subcritical Mach numbers, the Prandtl-Glauert correction is recommended; it is applied by means of the equation

Given:

Elliptic-tlOsed control

t -=0.10

c

cr

-=0.35

c

c/>TE

tan 2 = 0.12

~=0.40

Cr

6.1.3.1-e

Sample Problem

Compute:

F or the airfoil with tan <t>;E = ~ = 0.10 (C!a) theory = 6.77 (equation 4.1.1.2-a)

cta = 6.05 (per rad) (Section 4.1.1.2)

(Ch,,) theory = -0.62 (figure 6.1.3.1-5a)

t

2c = 0.11 (for control surface)

ChU'

c---c--''-------- = 0.77 (figureti.1.3.1-5b)

(Clla) t heory

6.1.3.1-2

c\" = - (0.77) (0.62) = -0.48 (per rad)

For the control without balance

C"ha = -0.48 + 2 [6.77 -- 6.05J (0.12 - 0.10) = -0.45 (equation 6.1.3.1-b)

F or the balanced control

Balance ratio = [(.40)2 - (.11)2J1I2

= 0.385 (equation 6.1.3.1-d)

(Cha) ba l an ce = 43

" . . (figure 6.1.3.1-7 a)

C ha

(Cha)halan(e = (.43) (-0.45) = -.19 (per rad )

B. TRANSONIC

Most transonic information on control-surface hinge moments is given for three-dimensional wings.

C. SUPERSONIC

The method for determining Ch" at supersonic speeds is based on the theory of reference 8. The theory applies to airfoils with sharp leading and trailing edges, where the angles of attack and flap deflection angles are small. In addition. the flow field is assumed to be everywhere supersonic and inviscid. The chart for this method is found on page: 6.1.3.1-'7

HANDBOOK METHOD

For a symmetrical straight-sided flap with ~" <~, regardless of the airfoil section ahead of the flap, Ch" can be computed from the equation

where

6.1.3.1-£

C _+ 2

1 - 'J \'12 - 1

c,= (y+ 1)1\11-4(1\'1" -1)

~ 2(l\'1" - 1)

CPTE = trailing-edge angle in radians

For a symmetrical, circular-arc airfoil with Cr < 1 Ch,. can be computed from the equation

c 2 ' ,

6.1.3.1-g

where

eCho. is obtained from figure 6.1.3.1-7 t

c

For other airfoil sections see reference 8.

Sample Problem

Given:

Compute:

Symmetric, circular-arc airfoil

C _ 2 1

1 - Y NJ2 _ 1 57".31= 0.020

(per degree)

..!..=.06

c

eCh

__ C> = 0.0008 (figure 6.1.3.1-7) t

~=.30

c

c

M=2.0

Ch" = - 0.020 -I- (.0008) (.06) (equation 6.1.3.1-g) = - 0.01995 (per degree)

6.1.3.1-3

REFERENCES

1. An o n , : Royal Aeronautical Society Data Sheets

Aerodynamics, Number 04.01.00, 1950. (U)

2. Anon.: Royal Aeronautical Society Data Sheets - Aerodynamics, Number 04.01.02, 1956. (U)

3. Garner, H.C.: Charts for Low Speed Characteristios of Two-Dimensional Trailing Edge Flaps. British A.R.C.

Rept. 18,528, 1956. (U)

4. Woods, L. C.: The Theory of Aerofoils with Hinged Flaps in Two-Dimensional Compressible Flow. British A.R.C.

Current Paper 138, 1952. (U)

5. Sears, R. I.: Wind-Tunnel Data on the Aerodynamio Characteristios of Airplane Control Surfaces. NACA A.C.R. 3L08, 1943. (U)

6. Anon.: Royal Aeronautical Society Data Sheets - Aerodynamics, Number 04.01.03, 1949. (U)

7. Lock, C. N. H.: Examples of the Application of Busemann's Formula to Evaluate the Aerodynamic Force Coefficients on Sup o r aon i o Aerofoils. R. & M. 2101, British A.R.C., 1944. (U)

8. Staff of the Ames 1- by a-Foot Supersonio Wind-Tunnel Section: Notes and Tables for Use in the Analysis of Supersonic Flow. NACA TN 1428, 1947. (U)

6.1.3.1-4

Ch~

( Cha)theory

SUBSONIC SPEEDS

C

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

-.6

( a)

<PTE :L

TAN

2 C

o+---~--~----~--~--_.--~~--._--~--_.--~

o

.1

.2

.4

.3

.5

o

o

.3

.5

.4

.1

.2

FIGURE 6.1.3.1-5 RATE OF CHANGE OF SECTION HINGE-MOMENT COEFFICIENT WITH ANGLE OF ATTACK FOR A PLAIN FLAP

-

c

6.1.3.1 .. 5

0 tf
NACA 0009
• NACA 0015 ROUND NOSE
0 NACA 66009
0 NACA 0009 }
ELLIPTIC NOSE
- NACA 0015
D. HINGE
NACA 0009 SHARP NOSE LINE 1.0
.8
( Cha,)Balanoe .6
°h~ .4
.2
0
0 .1

.2

.3

.4

.5

BALANCE RATIO

FIGURE 6.1.3. 1-6a EFFECT OF NOSE BALANCE ON SECTION CONTROL HINGEMOMENT COEFFICIENT

HINGE

~

ROUND NOSE

HINGE

HINGE

ELLIPTIC NOSE

SHARP NOSE

FIGURE 6.1.3.1-6b CONTROL-SURFACE SECTION NOSE SHAPES SHOWN FOR A 35% BALANCE

6.1.3.1-6

.008
.007
.6 ch .006
a
c
.005
.6 °h I)
.004
0
( d~g.) .003
.002 SUPERSONIC SPEEDS

.001


-- I--
- -

---



!
of
-
c
1--.110 ,._- \--
»; 'f ---
l\ / I--
r: f..-}O
~l'{ V r: ~.~O
~ t>( --
~"- o

o

2

MACH NUMBER

3

4

FIGURE 6.1.3.1-7 THICKNESS CORRECTION FACTOR FOR HINGE-MOMENT DERIVATIVES FOR SYMMETRIC, CIRCULAR-ARC AIRFOILS

6.1.3.1-7

6.1.3.2 SECTION HINGE MOMENT DERIVATIVE ch8 OF HIGH-LIFT AND CONTROL DEVICES

For small control deflections, where the flow is attached over the control surface, the variation of hinge moment with control deflection is linear. At some deflection angle depending upon the angle of attack and airfoil and control geometry, the flow separates from the flap surface. The rate of change of hinge moment with flap deflection increases beyond this point at an increased rate, as shown in sketch (a). The approximate deflection angle at which the flow separates from the surface of a plain, sealed flap on an NACA 0009 airfoil is shown as a function of angle of attack and Hap-chord-tocontrol-chord-ratio in figure 6.1.3·2.

-20

-10

(+)

8 (deg )

20

(-)

SKETCH (a) TYPICAL CURVE OF HINGE MOMENT

Those additional parameters that restrict the linear range are large trailing-edge angles, large nose- balance ratios, blunt (control) nose shapes and relatively large airfoil thickness ratio. The effects of large nose-balance ratio and beveled trailing edges are shown typically in sketch (b) (from reference 1). The linear hinge-moment range is generally smaller than the corresponding linear lift-increment range due to control deflection.

(-)

10

8 (deg )

HINGE MOMENT WITH VERY LARGE NOSE BALANCE

BEVELED ¢TE = 400 ¢TE=200

SKETCH (b)

HINGE MOMENT WITH BEVELED TRAILING EDGE

6.1.3.2-1

HANDBOOK METHOD

A. SUBSONIC

The method presented for estimating the hinge moment due to trailing-edge-control deflection at low speeds is taken from reference 2. The method is based on the theories and data of references 3, 4, and 5,. The method applies to the linear hinge-moment range only. The hinge-moment derivative Ch~ for a radius-nose, sealed, trailing-edge flap for which

the condition

<PTE t

tan - - - holds is given by the equation «/>1E is the total trailing-edge angle, in radians) 2 c

(per rad )

6.1.3.2-a

where

is the theoretical hinge-moment derivative for airfoils having (ch6 )thoor, is obtained from figure 6.1.3.2- 6a

<PTE t

tan '2 = c

The parameter

Ch; is the ratio of the actual to the theoretical hinge-moment derivative for a radius-nose, sealed-gap,

(Ch ) plain trailing-edge flap. This parameter is obtained from figure 6.1.3.2·61- and is a function of

{j theory

the ratio cta obtained from Section 4.1.1. 2

( cia) theory

F or airfoils with thickness distributions such that

<PTE t

tan'2 =1= -Z' the hinge-moment derivative IS obtained from the

equation

6.1.3.2-b

where

Ch' 6 is obtained from equation 6.1.3.2-a

(C' ) is the theoretical lift due to flap deflection from Section 6.1.1.1

~~ theory

C16 is the actual lift due to flap deflection from Section 6.1.1.1

For a beveled trailing edge ¢1.~: should be taken as equal to the angle of the bevel.

Under the restriction that there is no separated flow, clla for a radius-nose control can be determined by the above method with an accuracy of -+- 0.05.

The hinge-mornent derivative for a control with nose balance is given by the equation

(eha) balance

_ " ((Chb)balancc)( d)

- Cll 6 " per ra

Chb

6.1.3.2-c

where

6.1.3.2-2

if, obtained from equation 6.1.3.2-b

(Ch6) b(llanre

Ch~

is obtained from figure 6.1.3.2-7 for noses of various shapes. The nose shapes corresponding to the curves in figure 6.1.3.2-7 are shown in figure 6.1.3.1- 7b . The balance ratio as used in figure

6.1.3.2- 7 is defined by the equation

I( '2

Balance ratio =~ I~)

\l Cf

6.1.3.2-d

where c, is the chord of the balance.

For sub critical Mach numbers, the PrandtI-Glauert correction is recommended; it is applied by means of the equation

6.1.3.2-e

Sample Problem

Given:

Elliptic-nose control

CPTE

tan 2" = 0.12

t -=0.10

c

~=0.40

Cr

~=0.35

c

t -=0.11 2cr

Compute:

For the airfoil with

<PTE t

tan-= - = ]0

2 c .,

(t;:ld the nr-y = 4.80 (Section 6.1.1.1.) ~16 = 0.85 (Section 6.1.1.1)

(Ctll t heo ry

cia = (4.80) (0.85) = 4.08

( Cho) theory = - 0.923

(figure 6.1.3.2- 6a

(from subsonic sample problem of Section 6.1.3.1)

(figure 6.1.3.2- 6 b )

ci/ll = (0.900) (- 0.(23) = - 0.83 (per rad)

For the actual airfoil without balance

CI/'O = ~ 0.83 + 2 (4.80 - 4,.08) (0.12 - 0.10) = ~ 0.-80 (per radian) (equation 6.1.3.2-b)

6.1.3.2-3

F or the balanced airfoil

Balance ratio = [(.40) 2 - (.11) 2)1/2 = 0.385 (equation 6.1.3.2-d)

(figure 6.1.3.2- 7

(Ch6halanee = (0.47 ) (- 0.80) = - 0.38

(per rad ]

B. TRANSONIC

Most transonic information on control-surface hinge moments is given for three-dimensional wings.

C. SUPERSONIC

The method for determining c ha at supersonic speed is based on the theory of reference 7. The theory applies to airfoils with' sharp leading and trailing edges, where the angles of attack and flap deflection angles are small. In addition, the flow field is assumed to be everywhere supersonic and inviscid.

HANDBOOK METHOD

F . I . I td d fl . h Cr 1

or a symmetnca straig it-si e ap WIt -~- < 2 '

computed from the equation

regardless of the airfoil section ahead of the flap, Cho

can be

where

2

C, = + (per rad)

~IW-l

(y --I-- I)M" - 4 (M" - 1)

C2 = 2CW -1)

chE = trailing-edge angle in radians

For a symmetrical, circular-arc airfoil with ~i < ; , Cha can be computed from the equation

6.1.3.2-f

where

c, = + --;==2== ~lW-l

(per rad)

,6,Cho tic For other airfoil sections see reference 8.

is obtained from figure 6.1.3.1- 7

6.1.3.2-4

Given:

Samp"le Problem Compute:

Symmetric, circular-arc airfoil

2

C1 = -~-;::M=2==1

0.020

t -=.06

c

= 0.0008

(figure 6.1.3.1·7)

c

~=.30

c

M=2.0

Ch6= - 0.020 + (.0008) (.06) - 0.01995 (per degree)

(equation 6.1.3.2. f)

REFERENCES

L Anon.: Royal Aeronautioal Soolety Data Sheets - Aerodynamics, Number 04.01.00, 1960. (U)

2. Anon.: Royal Aeronautioal Sooiety Data Sheets - Aerodynamics, Number 04.01.02, 1966. (U)

8. Garner, H. C.: Charts for Low Speed Characteristics of Two-Dimensional Trail ing Edge FI ap e. British A. R. C.

Rept. 18,628, 1956. (U)

4. Woods, L. C.: The Theory of Aerofolls with Hinged Flaps in Two-Dimensional Compressible Flow. British A. R. C.

Current Paper 138, 1952. (U)

5. Sears, R. I.: Wind-Tunnel Data on the Aerodynamic Charaoteristios of Airplane Control Surfaces. NACA A.C.R. aL08, 1948. (U)

6. Anon.: Royal Aeronautioal Sooiety Data Sheets - Aerodynamios, Number 04.01.03, 1949. (U)

7. Look, C. N. H.: Examples of the Applioation of Busemann's Formula to Evaluate the Aerodynamic Foroe Coefficients on Supersonio Aerofoils. R. & M. 210 I, British A. R. C., 1944. (U)

8. Staff of the Ames 1- by a-Foot Supersonic Wind-Tunnel Section: Notes and Tables for Use in the Analysis of Supersonic Flow. NACA TN 1428, 1947. (U)

6.1.3.2-5

o

.1

.5

.2

.3

.4

c

1.0

(b)

1.0

.8

.95 -c:':
--
.9 (Cia.) th
- I
.85
.8
- r---- .15 I
- --
r-- --- - ---
r--- --- .70
r--... t-...
---- ~ r-.
.65
r-,
<, r-,
i .60 eory

.6

.4

o

.1

.8

.4

.5

.2

C

FIGURE 6.1.3.2-6 RATE OF CHANGE OF HINGE-MOMENT COEFFICIENT WITH CONTROL DEFLECTION FOR A PLAIN FLAP

6.1.3.2-6

0 NACA 0009 }
• NACA 001/) ROUND NOSE
0 NACA 66009
0 NACA 0009 }
ELLIPTIC NOSE
- N ACA 0015
A NACA 0009 SHARP NOSE
1.0
.8
(Ch8) Balance .6
ch"
8 • 4
,,-
.2
0
0 • 1 .2 .3 FIGURE 6.1.3.2-7

-

HINGE LINE

.4

.5

BALANCE RATIO.

EFFECT OF NOSE BALANCE ON SECTION CONTROL HINGE-MOMENT COEFFICIENT

6.1.3.2-7

6.1.3.3 SECTION HINGE \-10MENT DERIVATIVE (Chf) 8 OF CONTROL TABS t

A deflected tab on a control surface causes pressure changes on the surfaces of the tab and control. Because of the large moment arms associated with these incremental pressures, large changes in control-surface hinge moments result.

HANDBOOK METHOD

The change in control hinge moment due to tab deflection at constant values of control deflection is given in figure 6.1.3.::1-1. This chart is based on thin-airfoil theory and the two-dimensional NACA 0009 airfoil test data from reference L

This chart is valid for tab deflections of approximately == ISO and the combinations of control deflection and angle of attack indicated in figure 6.1.3- 2 _

REFERENCE

1. Ames, M. B., Jr., and Sears, R. I.: Determination of Control-Surface Characteristics from NACA Plain Flap and Tab Data. NACA TR 721, 1941. CU)

-.024

-.016

~J -- f- - THEORETICAZ ,-
EXPERIMENTAL
(NACA 0009 AIRFOIL)-
- = .3 '" I
cf
<, I,
.2 ...... , ",
..... <,
<, <,
<, -
..... <,
" <,
<, t--.
<, <,
.1 r- ___ <, -;'> .. ,
-- " .......
- ,"-..
.3 -- ~ ,_ , I,
.................... ~~ '''-..
, '~
.::::-,
-
.2 ~ ~ t---:: ~ ',:::
, ~
V r--- t--_ ,
.1 t--- N
. -.020

1

d e g ,

-.012

-.008

o

.2

.4

.6

.8

1.0

c

FIGURE 6.1.3.3-1 EFFECT OF TAB DEFLECTION ON CONTROL SURFACE SECTION HINGE MOMENTS AT LOW SUBSONIC SPEEDS

6.1.3.3-1

6.1.4 WING LIFT WITH HIGH-LIFT AND CONTROL DEVICES

6.1.4.1 CONTROL DERIV'ATIVE CL8 OF HIGH-liFT AND CONTROL DEVICES

The method used to estimate lift due to flap deflection is designed to make maximum use of experimental airfoil section data when such data are available. This approach is taken from reference 1, which has combined the various existing methods into a simple procedure with general application. To compute wing flap incremental lift the following equation is used :

6.1.4.1·a

where

6c_p, is obtained from experimental data for the specific configuration or from Section 6.1.1.1.

Cr." is obtained from Section 4.1.3.2 for the unflapped wing.

Cl" is obtained from Section 4.1.1.2 for the un flapped section.

(ao)cL

--- is obtained from figure 6.1.4.1·2a. The parameter (ao)c used in reading this chart is obtained from Sec-

( a 0) C_g • 6 1 1 1 e

tron ....

K" is obtained from figure 6.1.4.1· 2b as illustrated in sketch (a). This factor accounts for the spanwise extent of the flap.

The lift effectiveness derivative, CL 8' can be computed by plotting t:, Cr, vs (5

and manually measuring the local slope.

1.0

L
I
J
I Kb
J
I 6"~
r
I.
b
0
2 0 1.0
7J
SKETCH (a) Note that the flap deflection angles used should be in a plane parallel to the plane of symmetry.

Equation 6.1.4.1·a is valid for conditions for which the flow is attached over the surface of the wing and flap, i.e., the linear lift range, and is applicable to leading-edge flaps and slats and plain and slotted trailing-edge flaps.

Where (ao) c s varies along the span, as in the case of a constant-chord flap on a tapered wing, an average value of (ao) c.£ may be used with good accuracy in most cases. Otherwise the effective (ao) C_t may be found by the following expression:

6.1.4.1-b

If (ao) "1 across the flap span is plotted against K" across the flap span, the area under the curve is K" [ (ao) c.tJ d I'

6.1.4.1-1

REFERENCE

1. Lowry, J. G., and Polhamus, E. C.: A Method for Predicting Lift Increment Due to Flap Deflection at Low Angles of Attack in Incompressible Flow. NACA TN 3911, 1957.

6.1.4.1-2

(ao) 1.6
CL
(ao),,,_z
1.4 1.0
.8
.6
Kb
.4
'.2
0 2.0

\ \
\
\ \ \1 (aO)
c
..Q
\ \ \
\ \ \ \
i l\ " -.
1_
\ \, " r-, r-. t-,
~\ ,,\4 <, <, ..... r---
~5" <, i'---.. r--
t---
~ ~ -: ~ -.._ r--- -- r--
~ ........... --- r-- r--- r---
8
N. f:::::: ;::::-: ;::::- -
-

-1.0 - r-. - 1.8

1.2

1.0

o

2

6

4

8

10

A

FIGURE 6.1.4.1- 2a FLAP CHORD FACTOR

~ ~ F-'"""
~ ~
O~ \.
~p
~ ~
V ~ o

.2

.6

.4

.8

1.0

FIGURE 6.1.4.1- 2b SPAN FACTOR FOR INBOARD FLAPS

6.1.4.2 WING LIFT-CURVE SLOPE WITH HIGH-LIFT AND CONTROL DEVICES

According to linear wing theory, flap deflection does not alter the wing lift-curve slope. Within the limitation that the flow does not ~eparate from the surface of the wing or flap, this prediction is verified by experimental data. For translating types of leading- or trailing-edge controls and high-lift devices the lift-curve slope is increased as a result of the additional wing area. The effects of flap deflection on the airfoil section lift-curve slope axe discussed extensively 1lI Section 6.1.1.2. The discussion and methods of that Section are directly applicable to the three-dimensional wing.

HANDBOOK METHOD

For wings with nontranslating leading- and trailing-edge flaps, the lift curve of the flapped wing is assumed to be the same as that of the unflapped wing as given in Section 4.1.3.2. This assumption is valid for the linear lift range of angles of attack and flap deflection.

For wings with translating leading- and trailing-edge flaps a correction is made to the flaps-up lift-curve-slope by means of the equation

where

is the lift curve slope of the unflapped wing.

is the lift curve slope for the flapped wing.

c'

c

is the ratio of extended chord to the chord of the unflapped wing (see Section s.i.s.n.

is the fraction of wing area affected by the device (see Section 2.2.2).

6.1.4.2-1

6.1.4.3 WING MAXIMUM UFT WITH HIGH-UFT 'AND CONTROL DEVICES

The estimation of wing maximum lift coefficient is at best approximate. The stalling characteristics of various kinds of wing often takes on an entirely different character from the stalling characteristics of airfoil sections. Stall may begin at the wing tips or may occur initially at the inboard flapped sections, depending upon the amount of sweep, taper ratio, and the difference in stall angle between the flapped and unflapped sections. Leading-edge devices can markedly a-Iter the character of the stall. Large cross-flow components on the wing at the stall make estimates based on section data inaccurate.

Tabulated data from 142 reports are presented in reference 1. Results are shown for many planforms with and without various configurations of leading- and trailing-edge flaps, fences, and slats. Values of CLlllax and a'Cl are given in tabular form. Summary data from reference 1 are shown in figures 6.1.4.3- 2 through 6.1.4.3- 4. 'max

Figure 6.1.4.3- 2 illustrates the effect of sweep on the maximum lift effectiveness of trailing-edge flaps. It can be seen that at high angles of sweep, flap deflection can actually decrease maximum lift. This results partially from the additional induced effects when flaps are deflected, causing the tips to stall. Figure 6.1.4.3- 3 shows representative effects on CLmax of two sweptback wings with varying flap-span ratios. Because of their boundary-layer-control properties, double slotted flaps are capable of producing larger CLlllax increments.

Maximum lift increments of leading-edge and trailing-edge flaps cannot, in general, be added when these devices are used in combination. A brief summary of maximum lift coefficients for swept wings is presented in figure 6.1.4.3- 4 . The following method is intended to be used as a first-order approximation of wing maximum lift coefficients when experimental data are not available.

HANDBOOK METHOD

The increment in maximum lift coefficient due to flap deflection is given by the equation

6.1.4.3-a

where

is the increment in airfoil section maximum lift coefficient due to flaps, from Section 4.1.1.4

is the fraction of the wing area ahead of the flaps (see Section 2.2.2.)

REFERENCE

I. Furlong, G. C., and McHugh, J. G.: A Summary and Analysis of the Low-Speed Longitudinal Characteristics of Swept Wings at High Reynolds Number. NACA RM L52DI6, 1952. (U)

6.1.4.3-1

( a}

NACA 23012 (perpendicular to leading-edge) A.== 1.0

A = 5.03

,-----,

.4

A = 4.36

A

A = 3.56

.2

A = 2.52

~

6c

Lmax

R = .99 X 106 to 1.98 X 106 (based on M.A.C.)

0~--------~~---------r----------9----------'----------~--------~

o

10

20

30

40

50

60

A 04 (deg.)

(b)

NACA 65A006 (parallel to plane of symmetry)

A = 4

A.= .6

.6

-.2~--------~--------.---------~--------~--------r-------~

o

10

20

30

40

50

60

FIGURE 6.1.4.3-2 TYPICAL EFFECTS OF WING SWEEP ON MAXIMUM LIFT INCREMENTS DUE TO TRAILING-EDGE FLAPS

6.1.4.3-2

1.2

.6

FIGURE 6.1.4.3-3 EFFECT OF SPANWISE FLAP EXTENT ON WING MAXIMUM LIFT INCREMENT

6.1.4.3-3

i

0 PLAIN AIRFOIL
0 LEADING-EDGE SLOT
o SLAT + SPLIT FLAP
t:. SLAT + EXTENDED SPLIT FLAP
V SLAT + DOUBLE-SLOTTED FLAP
li' SLAT + PLAIN FLAP : SECTION ORIENTATION

l.

• LEADING-EDGE DROOP

REPLACES

LEADING-EDGE FLAP

FUSELAGE ON

Open symbols for flap spans which produce satisfactory pitching-moment characteristics. Solid symbols for flap spans which produce unsatisfactory pitching-moment characteristics.

2.0r-+-------------------------------------------------------------------------------~

o~ ~~~~~ ~ ~~~~.~

AC/4 350 400 40° 45° 45° 45° 450 45° 45° 500 50° 600

A 6.0 4.0 3.9 3.4 3.5 3.5 4.0 5.1 8.0 2.9 2.9 3.5
Ie .50 .62 .62 .51 .50 .50 .60 .38 .45 .62 .62 .25
0 "" ~ 0 "" 0
AIRFOIL "" ~ III ~ III "" ~ '" ~ ""
-
~ « ~ ~ « 0 ~ 0 « 0
SECTION '" < « 0 « 0
. . « '" . Ili «
~ - III ... - ... - III .
... ... [3 - "' ... '" -e' ti ...
"" «> '0 '0 U '&> '" '" '" ""
FIGURE 6. !. 4.3-4 SUMMARY CHART OF MAXIMUM LIFT COEFFICIENT~; OBTAINED WITH
V IIcRIOIJ8 TYPES C,F TI1AILi,~G·-EDGE FLAPS 6.1.4.3-4

6.1.5 WING PITCHING MOMENT WITH HIGH-LI FT AN D CONTROL DEVICES

The following Sections give the effect of flap deflection on wing pitching-moment coefficient at subsonic, transonic, and supersonic speeds. Section data from other portions of the Handbook are used. Although the methods are developed for trailing-edge flaps, they can be applied to leading-edge flaps, slats, and spoilers, provided the proper section data are available or can be estimated. However, the methods presented are applicable to the angle-of-attack and flap-deflection ranges for which linear aerodynamic control characteristics exist. A chart showing the linear lift range for a particular airfoil is shown in Section 6.1.~. In general, the linear lift range for wings is considerably shorter than that shown in this chart, particularly for swept and low-aspect-ratio wings. For swept wings, the effects of spanwise boundary-layer flow, induced camber, and leading-edge vortices are pronounced and tend to nonlinearize the control or flap characteristics. For low-aspect-ratio wings, section characteristics are not important and, generally, the linear range is shorter than those of their section counterparts.

Leading. and trailing-edge flaps frequently have a pronounced effect upon the longitudinal stability characteristics of wings. Reference 1 gives an excellent summary of these effects. Figures 6.1.5-2a and 6.1.5-.2b are reproduced from this reference. Figure 6.1.5-2a shows the increase in stability that can be obtained from leading-edge flaps, slats, and fences. The basic curve is also shown in Section 4.1.4.3. Figure 6.1.5-2b shows the effect of spanwise extent of leading- and trailing-edge flaps on longitudinal stability for a particular wing.

REFERENCE

I. Furlong, G. C., and McHugh, J. G.: A Summary and Analysis of the Low-Speed Longitudinal Characteristics of Swept Wings at High Reynolds Number. NACA L52DI6, 1962. (U)

6.1.5-1

6

-- -.--
t ACCEPTABLE EXTENSIBLE FLAP + FENCE
- - l-
• UNACCEPTABLE EXTENSIBLE FLAP
~ (I-ACCEPTABLE I-SLAT
._ ACCEPTABLE f--SLAT AND NACELLES
~ 1 1 1 I
~ i-. I
FLAP OR
--:; ~ ~ iSLAT + FENCE
~ ~
-.-:~ • I. '\ b~
~
-~~ I~ ~
~ ~ UNSTABLE_ f---
-~~, d ~ ~
~ 0 ~ REGION
--:;~ ~ ~
~ ~/
.h<; ~ !:%.
"'/~~ n ~
4-/+,,~ ~) > '" ~~
STABLE
REGION '~ ~ ~, ~ FLAP OR SLAT
~
/~ ~ 1;.-//.
///; ~ '% %%; STABILITY Q ACCEPTABLE

DEVICE EXTENSIBLE FLAP

14

12

10

8

ASPECT RATIO

4

2

o -10

o

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

A ell (deg.)

FIGURE 6.1.5-2a LNFLUENCE OF' SEVERAL TYPES OF STALL-CONTROL DEVICES ON LONGITUDINAL STABILITY BOUNDARY FOR WINGS WITH 'A.> .4

UNSTABLE AT MAXIMUM LIFT

STABLE AT CLmax WITH UNSTABLE SHIFT OF STABLE AT CLmax WITH UNSTABLE SHIFT OF STABLE AT CLmax WITH UNSTABLE SHIFT OF

a.c.

a.c.

GREA TER THAN 0.15 cPRIOR TO CLmax LESS THAN 0.15 c PRIOR TO CLmax LESS THAN 0.05 e PRIOR TO CLmax

a.c.

tip 100---------------- ............ ~~~--~

'".;li!i,¥,\,f~fl"'!iil\!\;I::~~n:'.',;!

.................••..•..•.••.•.•••• :: .. : ..... ::.: ..... 'A. .383 ::::

'.'.' .'.' :::::::: .... ; .'.'.' ::.: -. :.:.:.:.:.:-:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.: .... :::.:.:.;;;;-:.:-::.:-:-:.:-: .'.' :,.::>

60

LEADING-EDGE FLAP SPAN

( % SEMISPAN)

20

100 tip

ra ot

root

FIGURE 6.1.5- 2b EFFECTS OF LEADING-EDGE AND TRAILING-EDGE FLAPS ON LONGITUDINAL STABILITY CHARACTERISTICS OF A SWEPTBACK WING

6.1.5-2

6.1.5.1 CONTROL DERIV'ATIVE Cms OF HIGH-LIFT AND CONTROL DEVICES A. SUBSONIC (M < 0.6)

A method is presented in reference 1 for estimating the pitching moment due to leading- and trailing-edge flap deflection. The method uses linear theory for subsonic compressible flow, sweep theory. and two-dimensional test data. The method is applicable to all types of flaps and to high flap deflection ranges) provided proper section data are used.

HANDBOOK METHOD

The method for determining the pitching-moment effectiveness requires the determination of the span loading due to flap deflection and the chord wise center-of-pressure location for stations across the span. Once these quantities are determined, the incremental pitching moment can be calculated by an integration process.

Step 1. Determine the spanwise loading coefficient, ~ , as a function of span station from figures 6.1.5.1-10a through

. . f3A A L,.." (Itan A"/I)

6.1.5.1-10) for appropriate values of --. 1~ l.l and A, where K = ~and A f3 = tarr ' - . The

K 1-" 2". {:l

following procedure is used:

a. For flaps that extend from the plane of symmetry outboard the charts are used directly for the appropriate flap span, as shown in sketch (a).

Q S

FLAP SPAN

7]i o

7]0

7] SKETCH (a)

1.0

b. For flaps that extend from the wing tip inboard the charts are used by reading the difference in ~ o values for a full-span flap and for an inboard flap extending to the inboard station of the actual flap,

as shown in sketch (b).

G

"8

ACTUAL FLAP

o

SKETCH (b)

6.1.5.1-1

c. For part-span flaps that have outboard ends inboard of the wing tip and inboard ends outboard of the plane of symmetry, the charts are used as follows: Tabulate the loading function ~ for flaps extending

from the plane of symmetry to the inboard station of the actual flap. Tabulate the loading function ~ for a flap extending from the plane of symmetry to the outboard end of the actual flap. Subtract the loadings of the above tabulations at each span station to obtain the loading of the actual flap (see sketch (c) ).

ACTUAL

G 8

o

1.0

7]

SKETCH (c)

Step 2. Determine the incremental loading as a function of span station from the equation

* 2b G

SIt.. = -c- -S- ao S

(per rad)

6.1.5.1·a

where S is the streamwise surface deflection in radians, aSis obtained from Section 6.1.1.1, and ~ is obtained from Step 1.

Step 3. Compute the chordwise center-of-pressure position as a function of span station by the procedure below. A table (page 6.1.5.1· 5 ) is used in the sample problem to facilitate the calculations.

a. The chordwise c_.p. position for flapped sections can be computed from the equation

cmf Xc•P. = 0.25 --. c"A=O

6.1.5.1-b

b. For sections adjacent to the flap ends where the distance from the end of the flap, 6'Y}, is less than 0.2, the chordwise c.p. position can be approximated from the equation

Xc•P• = 0.25 + K 6xc.p. where K is determined from figure 6.1.5.1·14aand

6xc.p = (xc.p)edge -0.25 6.l.S.1-d

of

flap

c. For sections- not influenced by flap span (6'Y} ~ .2) the theoretical chordwise c.p. position is assumed to be the quarter-chord point.

6.1.5.1-c

d. For wings with swept quarter chord, the c.p. must be referred to the quarter chord of the MAC by the equation

x c

=(7]- 7]) b~2 tanAc/4

c

+ c (x - .25)

c

*In the theory, sections of a yawed infinite wing are dealt with. See reference 1 for details of the theoretical treatment of sweep and taper.

6.1.5.1-2

where x is the -distance of the local c.p.aft of the quarter chord of the MAC

YJ is the lateral distance of the wing MAC from the body centerline in semispans

Step 4. Compute the change in pitching moment due to flap deflection by integrating across the span as follows:

6.1.5.1-e

Step 5. Compute the pitching-moment effectiveness from the equation

C 6Cmr ( dian )

In6 = __ ,per ra Ian

8

6.1.5.1-g

where 8 is measured in a plane normal to the hinge line, in radians.

The column headings used in the table (see Sample Problem) for the determination of chordwise center of pressure are defined as follows:

1 "l
2 Cr
c
3 a6
4 CIA
5 xeopob
6 AI> 7 8'

10 XC_Po

spanwise location in semi-spans b~2

flap-chord-to-wing-chord ratio

flap-effectiveness parameter (Section 6.1.1.1)

incremental section lift coefficient due to flap deflection (equation 6.1.5.1-a)

chordwise' c.p. position (basic loading) for a plain flap (figure 6.1.5.1-141)

sweepback of constant-percent chordline through center of pressure of basic loading

6.1.5.1-h

flap deflection in plane normal to constant-percent chordline through Xc.p'b

v -1 tan 8

o =tan --cos Ab

where 8 is measured in a plane parallel to the plane of symmetry

section pitching moment for ~ in Col. 2 and for 8' in Col. 7

c

6.1.5.1.-i

6.1.5.1-j

where cm6 is from Section 6.1.2.1

incremental lift coefficient referenced to basic load line

6.1.5.1-k

chordwise c.p. position from steps 3a, 3b, and 3c.

6.1.5.1-3

Given:

M = 0.19

A =6.35 A= 0.50

Sw = 567 ft2

Cr = 12.6 c= 9.8 ft. f! = .443

Airfoil: 631A0l2 (free-stream direction)

Compute:

f3=1

ct" = 6.65 (per radian) (Section 4.1.1.2)

K = 6.65 = 1.06 (page 6.1.5.1-1)

271"

f3A = 6.0

K

Sample Problem

~=0.20

c

.E..= 30 ft 2

1}i = 0.195

1}0 = 0.556

Il = 11.30 (streamwise) 8 = 13. 75 O(_l hinge line)

a/j = 0.530 (per radian) (Section 6.1.1.1)

cm/) = -O.Oll (per degree) (Section 6.1.2.1) Xc.p'b = 0.65 (figure 6.1.5.1-14b)

tan Ab = tan 4'()o - 4 (0.656~50.25) ~~ + :~~~ = 0.756 (equation 6.1.5.1/.h) Ab = 37.10

8' = 14.1 ° (equation 6.1.5.1·i) cm! = -0.15 (equation 6.1.5.1·j)

6.1.5.1-4

Computation of span wise loading using values of ~ for inboard flaps from figure 6.1.5.1- 10 (I\. f3 "" 40°)

G a6 I) (rad) c
( ~ ) ') .. = 0.556 (~)')' =0.19.5 - local chord ciA J
'l'I. s S measured 16.1.5.I-al __
( l'1 .. - ( )')' streamwiBe
0 .30 .22 .08 .105 12.60 .08
.1 .31 .21 .10 11.97 .105
.2 .32 .15 .17 11.3. . 189
.3 .32 .10 .22 10.71 .259
.4 .30 .07 .23 10.08 .287
.5 .23 .05 .18 9.45 .240
.6 .17 .04 .1.3 8.82 .186
.7 .11 .03 .08 8.19 .123
.8 .07 .02 .05 7.116 .088
.9 .05 .02 .0.) 6.98 .055
1.0 0 0 0 6.30 0 COMPUTATION OF CHORDWISE CENTER OF PRESSURE

1*

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

Cf
- etA xC'P'b l\b I)' eillf clA=O
') C a6 x
('.p .
0 - - .08 0.65 37.10 - - .126 . 250
.1 - - .105 - - .165 .439
.2 0.20 .580 .189 14.1 --0.15 .297 .755
.3 0.20 .580 .259 14.1 -0.15 .407 .619
,
.4 0.20 .530 .287 14.1 -0.15 .451 .583
.5 0.20 .580 .240 14.1 -0.15 .377 .648
.6 - - . 186 - - .292 .626
.7 ._ - .128 - - .198 .296
.8 - - .083 - - .130 .250
.9 - - .OU - - .086 .250
1.0 - - 0 - - 0, .250 *See page 6.1.5.1-:3 for the explanation of the calculation of each column.

6.1.5.1-5

CALCULATION OF c.,

CD 0 @ CD CD 0 (0
c c (7)-Tj) _b_ tan Ac/4 (Xc.p• - .25)~ x 0=0+0 cJ. A .Q)0. !:J.7)
7) c"v =
c 2c c c
0 1.333 1.286 - 1.139 0 - 1.139 - .0121
.1 1.267 1.221 - .882 .231 - .651 - .0087
.2 1.200 1.157 - .625 .584 - .041 - .0009
.3 1.133 1.093 - .368 .403 + .035 + .0010
.4 1.067 1.029 - .111 .343 .232 .0071
.5 1.000 .964 + .146 .384 .530 .0127
.6 ' .933 .900 .403 .338 .741 .0129
.7 .867 .836 .660 .038 .698 .0074
.8 .800 .771 .917 0 .917 .0061
.9 .733 .707 1.174 0 1.174 .0047
1.0 .667 .643 1.431 0 1.431 0
~= .0302
6C = -.0302 e uation 6.1.5.1-f ( q

Cmli = -.0022 per degree (equation 6.1.5.1-g)

B. TRANSONIC (0.6 < M < 1.4)

The following method for the estimation of CIllO at transonic speeds is based on a procedure similar to that of reference 3 and is developed empirically from test data of references 4 through 1.

HANDBOOK METHOD

Pitching-moment effectiveness can be determined from the equation

6.1.5.Ll

where CL/j is the lift effectiveness of the surface from Section 6.1.4.1. The quantity : is determined from the equation c

~ = _..!:_ A, [ 1 + 2,\ _ 2 c., ] + (Xep) 2 _ 025

- - tan LE 6 (1 + ,\) -C - cCP •

C C La cep C

6_1.5.1-m

where

is the roll effectiveness of the surface from Section 6.2.1.1

is the chordwise c.p. location of the incremental load due to surface deflection

XcP Cop

=(~) +K(~ -0.2)

cCP 1 c

6.1.5.1-,h

( XCP) is obtained from figure 6.1.5.1-15a ccp 1

K is obtained from figure 6.1.5.1- ISh

6.1.5.1-6

CZa c = 1 - 4 (l - A) -

cp CLa

6.1.5.1·(}

Sample Problem

Given:

Airfoil: NACA 6SA006 (free-stream direction)

c= 7.43 ft

A=4 A=0.4 b = 28 ft

~=0.30

c

M=0.9

bf = 0.43 (flap span measured normal to

b plane of symmetry)

c, = l Oft

CZa = .0011 (or obtain from Section 6.2.1.1) CLo = .016 (or obtain from Section 6.1.4.1)

Compute:

b

-:;: = 3.77 c

tan ALE = 0.807

:: = 1.35

c

ccp = 0.835 (equation 6.1.5.1~)

(XcP) = 0.87 (figure 6.1.5.1.15a) Con 1

K = -0.69 (figure 6.1.5.1· IS b )

(XCP) = 0.80 (equation 6.1.5.1'0)

C(,p

~= - (3.77) (0.807) [6(\~ - 2 (.~OI1; ) ] + (0.80) (1.35) (0.835) - 0.25 = 0.418 (equation 6.1.5.1·m)

Cmo = - (.016) (0.418) = -0.0067 (per degree) (equation 6.1.5.1.l)

C. SUPERSONIC (M > 1.4)

The procedure for estimating trailing-edge flap effectiveness at supersonic speeds is based upon the method presented in reference 8. The restrictions used in the derivation of the method are listed below,

Th!~ inboard and outboard edges of the surface are strearnwise,

2. The wing leading and trailing edges arc supersonic (swept forward of the Mach line).

6.1.5.1-7

3. The surfaces are located at the wing tip or inboard from the tip so that the outermost Mach line from the flap does not cross the tip.

4. The innermost Mach line from the flap does not cross the plane of symmetry.

5. The flap sections are straight (no airfoil curvature in region of flap) and symmetrical.

HANDBOOK METHOD

Trailing-edge-flap effectiveness can be determined from the equation

6.1.5.1-p

where

K2 = (1 - ~: <t>TE) sin Am, K3 = (1 - ~: <t>TE) cos A HL

be = flap span (both sides of wing), ft Sf = flap area (both sides of wing) , £t2

Ar = taper ratio of the flap or control surface AHL = sweep of the hinge line

Cli" = root chord of the flap or control surface, ft

Xf = distance of leading edge of control root chord behind wing axis of pitch, ft

C' m6= pitch effectiveness from one of figures 6.1.5.1-16 through 6.1.5.1-17 , according to the control-surface

planform as follows:

(a) Tapered control surfaces with outboard edge coincident with wing tip; use figure 6.5.1.1-16

(b) Tapered control surfaces with outboard edge not coincident with wing tip; use figure 6.5.1.1-17.a (c) Untapered control surfaces with outboard edge coincident with wing tip; use figure 6.5.1.1-17'b

(d) Untapered control surface with outboard edge not coincident with wing tip; use figure 6.5,1.1-1711 C'LI) = lift effectiveness fromSechon 6.1.4.1 for the particular control-surface planform.

C'16 = roll effectiveness from Section 6.2.1.1 for the particular control-surface planform.

For sweptforward wings and control surfaces with inverse taper, see reference 8 for values of C'mll' C'LIl' and C'lo· The trailing-edge correction factor for symmetrical, straight-sided controls is determined by the quantity

Co

1,- -=- <t>rE C,

where

·2

VM2 -1

(y + I)M4 - 4(M2 -1) 2(M2 - 1)2

6.UiJ-8

q,TE is the trailing-edge angle (radians)

This factor is multiplied by the CillO value computed from equation 6.1.5.1-p.

Correction factors for other than symmetrical straight-sided sections can be determined from reference 8.

The computation of pitching-moment effectiveness for leading-edge flaps and trailing-edge flaps with subsonic leading edges can be accomplished with the aid of reference 10 .

Sample Problem

Given:

Compute:

M = 1.90 A = 0.55

C1 = 1.24 C2 = 1.54 K, = 2.08 K2 = 0.479 K3 = 0.804 f3 = 1.62

AHL= 30.80

ALE = 42~.ATE = 27.7°

b = 12 ft

Ar = 0.715 br = 6.5 ft

x- = 1.77 ft S" = 46.5 ft2 Sf = 4.71 ft2 c = 4.0 ft

Of r = 0.85 ft

q,TE = 3 a ( symmetrical section, + = 0.6 )

tan AHL = 0 368

f3 -

tan f3ArE = 0.324

f3C'rno = -0.037 (figure 6.1.5.1· 17a ) f3C' 16= 0.03,6 (Section 6.2.1.1)

C'rno = -0.023

(Inboard control)

C{b= 0.045 Cio = 0.022

C 2 6.5

m6 = 2.08 3" 4

f3C' L6= 0.073

_ (0.479) 6~5 :;~ (0.002 ) _ (0.804) 1~7 ::.! (.045)

Crno = -0.0042 (per degree) (equation 6.1.5.1~

6.1.5.1-9

REFERENCES

1. James, H. A., and Hunton, L. W.: Estimation of Incremental Pitching Moments Due to Trailing-Edge Flaps on Swept and Triangular Wings. NACA TN 4040, 1957. (U)

2. DeYoung, J.: Theoretical Symmetric Span Loading Due to Flap Deflection for Wings of Arbitrary Plan Form at Subsonic Speeds. NACA TR 1071, 1952. (U)

3. Decker, J., et a.l : USAF Stability and Control Handbook. M-03671, 1956. (C) Title Unclassified

4. Smith, W. G.: Wind-Tunnel Investigation at Subsonic and Supersonic Speeds of a Model of a Tailless Fighter Airplane Employing a Low-Aspect-Ratio Sweptback Wing - Stability and Control. NACA RM A52J30, 1953. (C) Title Unclassified

5. Thompson, R. F.: Lateral-Control Investigation of Flap-Type Controls on a Wing with Quarter-Chord Line Swept Back 35°, Aspect Ratio 4, Taper Ratio 0.6, and NACA 65A006 Airfoil Section. NACA RM L9L12a, 1950. (U)

6. Vogler, R. D.: Lateral-Control Investigation of Flap-Type Controls on a Wing with Quarter-Chord Line Swept Back 45°, Aspect Ratio 4, Taper Ratio 0.6, and NACA 65A006 Airfoil Section. Transonic-Bump Method. NACA RM L9F29a, 1949. (U)

7. Hammond, A. D.: Lateral-Control Investigation of Flap-Type Controls on a Wing with Unswept Quarter-Chord Line, Aspect Ratio 4, Taper Ratio 0.6, and NACA 65A006 Airfoil Section. NACA RM L50A03, 1950. (U)

8. Go i n , K. L.: Equations and Charts for the Rapid Estimation of Hinge-Moment and E ffe ctiveness Parameters for Trailing-Edge Controls Having Leading and Trailing Edges Swept Ahead of the Mach Lines. NACA TN 2221, 1950. (U)

9. Staff of the Ames 1- by 3-Foot Supersonic Wind-Tunnel Section: Notes and Tables for Use in the Analysis of Supersonic Flow. NACA TN 1428, 1947. (U)

10. Heaslet, M. A., and Spreiter, J. R.: Reciprocity Relations in Aerodynamics. NACA TN 2700, 1952. (U)

SUBSONIC SPEEDS

( a)

1iA_ = 0 K

G 8

o

.2

.4

.6

.8

1.0

7)

FIGURE 6.1.5.1-10 SPANWISE LOAD DISTRIBUTION DUE TO FLAP DEFLECTION FOR STRAIGHT-TAPERED WINGS WITH FULL WING-CHORD FLAPS

6.1.5.1-10

f3A = 2.0

G
8 .4

(r:d)
0
0 .2 .4 .6

.8

f3A = 2.0 K

G 8

.2

.8

.6

f3A "2.0 K

o

.4

.6

.8

FIGURE 6.1.5.1"- 10 (Con't.)

1.0

t...= 0

-------- t...=.6

-- - -- t...=1.0

1.0

1.0

6.1.5.1-11

~ =6.0

(e)

Af3=OO

G .4
8
(r~d )

0
0 .2 .4 .6 .8 1.0 .8
(f)
G
---0
( r~d) .4

0
0 .2 .4 .6
'rJ A'f3=400

.8

.8

~=6.0 (g) I
A f3 = 600
K

b '1" "1
.0_
t==" -~~ '_ ~~ ~ -- :--:::~~
"7~ - .195 1::::- .556 r--- '-=- ~
. G 8

.4

o

o

.2

.6

.8

,4

FIGURE 6.1. 6.1-10 (CONTD,)

6.1.5.1-12

11.== 1.0

1.0

1.0

fJA = 10.0 K

G
.4
C~d)


0
0 .2 .4 .6 .8 1.0
T) fJA = 10.0 K

.8

(i)
A e= 400
'70 -
~ r-~~ -- r--..:.: ~
r-~ ...,_,__
T) = .195 f-. .556
--=- ~ ..... --
0 G

8 .4

o

o

.2

.6

.4

.8

j3A = 10.0

.8

(j)
A j3 = 600
T) "'10-
0 I·
=- .- .55~ ~ - ~\
-.1~ ~- ..._
-~O - G

S .4

o

o

.2

.4

.6

.8

FIGURE 6. 1.5. 1-10 (CONTD.)

A.= 0 A.= .5

A.", 1.0

1.0

1.0

6.1.5.1-13

1.0

.6

r-.. ~
<, -,
"!'-
r-,
r-,
f'........
1"--"
<, r-,
<, 1'---
t-- t-- t--- . 8

K

.4

.2

o

o

.04

.08

.12

.16

.20

DISTANCE FROM END OF FLAP,/:; T)

FIGURE 6.1.5. l-14a ESTIMATION OF SECTION CENTER-QF-PRESSURE LOCATION FOR UNFLAPPED SECTIONS NEAR END OF FLAPS

.8

r-,
I':::: ~
t--_ 0>200
<, r-,
~~O
r-. <,
<, .6

.4

.2

o

o

.2

.4

.6

.8

1.0

o

FIGURE 6. 1.5. 1-14b VARIATION OF SECTION-BASIC-LOADING CENTER OF PRESSURE WITH FLAP-CHORD RATIO

6.1.5.1-14

TRANSONIC SPEEDS

( :o.P.\

o.P.~

(FRACTION M.A.C.)

.6

1.0 MACH NUMBER

1.2

1.4

.8

K

.6

.8

1.0

MACH NUMBER

1.4

1.2

FIGURE 6.1.5.1-15 TRANSONIC CONTROL-SURFACE PITCH EFFECTIVENESS PARAMETERS

6.1.5.1-15

O'l

9'

t'


g ~ ~ ~
96'= '1H v NVJ. /
/"
-: V V
t '. ...- ~
V V V
~ ~ ,..-
/ L::::: ~ ~ V::::
~
~ 1/ -: ~
6) ~
/
/ 1 :I 7~ r;
1/ / Z '.
Ii It, = 1 :3:J.: NVJ.
I ) 9"
--- +--
V
Ot' -
- '1H V NVJ.
/"
7
t '.
V v--
Z"
-I-'
11&' .....- v:::::
~
/ y ~ ~
/
I V v
I fJ
II' = :3:J. V NV J.
. or

9'

t'

r;'

S'

o

90"

110'·

o

&0'

80"

to"

&0"

o

o

91-1'S'1'9

O'l

g'

1;'

9'

t'


fJ ~ -
Og' = '1Hy NV J. V
/'
v- - V II '.
_,. /
V V~ ~ V
/ ~ 0
~L' -. ~ ~ t-'"
I /'
I / V~ ~
V f'
/ 1:;'
I
fJ
9'= 3.1. v NV"J.
Ff
oz' - '1Hy NVJ. ~
---
-:
g'.

V ~
_,. ')
7 "
_I---"
_,....- r-7 ~
! / V
9{- V
cA Ff

:3:J. y NVJ.
I
. o-r

9 '

&'

f'

S'

dIJ. aNW H.1.W J.N:3:aIONIOO :3:a03 OBVOH.1.fiO aNIAVH

S:3:0V.dBnS '10B.1.NOO 03B3dV.1. BO.d 3AI.1. V AIB30 J.N3WOW aNIHO.1.Id ai-r '!I'l '9 aanora

o

90"

to"

ZO"

o

110'

SO"

90"

o

o

O'l

S'

9'

t'

&'


9 t '.
09' = '1Hy NVJ. ~ ~
-: ,/'
& '.
l..--- ~ i-""'"
0
-: ~
::;.....-
V V t:/ ~
J
sf ~ b7'
/ 0
I G
t' =
"r""
E
o = '1H Y NVJ.
.> ___ ,..-
/ .>
V
_~ I-
9" / 1-/
~ z>
I /
-Z')
I fJ
90" = 3.1. V NY.1.
• o-r

9'

t'

&'

g'

o

90"

to',

&0"

o

e o:

SO"

90"

(~)

110"

o

o

f3C'

mO -.08

(n~g1

SUPERSONIC SPEEDS

f3

- 1 2 o

.4

1.2

- 8

o

.8

-.4

-.04


::::---....-- ~ .911
,.....;::---;;:
a ~~ <, ~ ~\
.8
ljfj \ ~\\
/
J~ W \\\ .6
~/~ \\ .4
U \ .2
.9r TAN AHL _ 0
0 f3 -. 12

-. 16

FIGURE 6.1.li.I-17a PITCHING MOMENT DERIVATIVE FOR TAPERED AND UNTAPERED TRAILINGEDGE FLAPS HAVING OUTBOARD EDGE NOT COINCIDENT WITH WING TIP

o

2

6

8

10

4

o

, f\
~ ~ <, TAN AHL
~~ ~
<, I?
.......
<; 0
- ~ .......... .2
........... .4
t.....
....._ r-- ~ ,6
t---.8
.95 :-.;:;
-.02

-.04

-.06

FIGURE 6.1.11.1-171;> PITCHING-MOMENT DERIVATIVE FOR UNTAPERED TRAILING-EDGE CONTROL SURFACES LOCATED AT THE WING TIP

6.1.5.1-17

6.1.5.2 WING DERIVATIVE Cmrt WITH HIGH-LIFT lAND CONTROL DEVICES

According to lifting-line or lifting-surface theory, flaps, i.e., camber, do not affect the variation of pitching moment with -, angle of attack over the region where there IS no flow separation. The theory is substantiated by experiment over the 'linear angle-of-attack and flap-deflection ranges (see references 1 and 2).

HANDBOOK METHOD

The wing pitching-moment variation with angle of attack for various flap deflections is assumed to be the same as that for zero flap deflection over the linear lift range. (see Section ·6.1.3)

REFERENCES

t. Boyd, J. W., and Pfyl, F. A.: Experimental Investigation of Aerodynamioally Balanoed Trailing-Edge Control Surfaoes on an Aspeot Ratio 2 Triangular Wing at Subsonlo and Supersonic speeds. NACA RM A52L04, 1953. (C) Title Unolasslfied

2. Furia ng , G C., and MoHugh, J. G.: A Summary and Analysis of the Low-Speed Longitudinal Charaoterlstios of Swept Wings at High Reynolds Number. NACA RM L52D16, 1952. (U)

6.1.5.2-1

6.1.6 HINGE MOMENTS OF HIGH-LIFT AND CONTROL DEVICES

This Section presents approximate methods for determining hinge-moment derivatives at subsonic and supersonic speeds. At subsonic speeds the method, based on lifting-line theory, is believed to be of sufficient accuracy to be used for preliminary design work. This method is best suited for the higher-aspect-ratio wings.

The method presented for supersonic speeds has fewer limitations and is capable of handling a greater variety of planforms. The method is based on conical-flow solutions. Since hinge-moment variation with Mach number at transonic speeds becomes somewhat erratic, no method is presented for calculating transonic hinge moments. However, some trends in the transonic range can be noted from references I through 4. As the critical Mach number is passed, a shock forms on the upper surface of the airfoil and moves rearward with increasing Mach number. The airfoil pressure distribution changes from one that is approximately triangular, with a peak negative pressure forward, to one more

_--- nearly rectangular, with lower pressures at the -trailing edge. In general, this causes hinge moments to become more negative. Sketch (a) presents some typical hinge-moment-derivative variations with Mach number.

It should be noted that in the more normal or stable case, where Cha and Cho are negative at subsonic speeds, hingemoment derivatives decrease in a somewhat regular fashion through the transonic range and then increase slightly to their supersonic value. Most of the very erratic variations of Cha and ChI) occur when these values are near zero or positive at subsonic speeds. It can also be seen that in the transonic region some hinge-moment derivatives can change sign.

.04 , .04
.02 .02
Ch 8
C
0 h 0
a


-.02 -.02

-.04 -.04
.6 .8 1.0 1.2 .6 .8 1.0 1.2
M .M Sketch a

REFERENCES

1. Thompson, R. F.: Investigation of a 42.7" Sweptback Wing Model to Determine the Effects of Trailing-Edge Thickness on the Aileron Hinge-Moment and Flutter Charaoteristics at Transonic Speeds. NACA RM LIIOJ06, 19110. CU)

2. Lord, D. R., and Czarnecki, K, R.: Recent Information on Flap and Tip Controls. NACA RM LII3I 17a, 1953.

CC) Title Unclassified

3. Thompson, R. F.: Hinge-Moment, Lift, and Pitohing-Moment Characteristics of a Flap-Type Control Surface Having Var ious Hinge-Line Locations on a 4-Percent-Thick 60· Delta Wing _ Transonic Bump Method. N ACA RM LHB08, 1954. CU)

4. Hieser, G.: Transonic Investigation of the Effectiveness and Loading Characteristics of a Flap-Type Aileron With and Without Paddle Balances on an Un swept-Wing - Fuselage Model. NACA RM L56B02, 19116. CC) Title Unclassified

II. Run ck e l , J. F., and Hieser, G.: Normal-Force and Hinge-Moment Characteristics at Transonic Speeds of FlapType Ailerons at Three Spanwise Locations on a 4-Percent-Thlck Sweptback-Wlng - Body Model and PressureDistribution Measurements on an Inboard Aileron. NACA RM LIS7I23, 19117. CU)

6.1.6-1

6.1.6.1 HINGE MOMENT DERIVATIVE Cha. OF HIGH-LIFT AND ffiNTROL DEVICES

A. SUBSONIC

The hinge-moment derivative due to angle of attack can be approximated from the method of reference 1. The method is based on lifting-line theory, with additional lifting-surface corrections to account for sweep.

The effect of subcritical Mach number corrections on hinge moments appears to be small for control surfaces having trailing-edge angles less than approximately 12°. Therefore the following method, which neglects subcritical Mach number effects, is reliable over the greater portion of the subcritical Mach number range.

HANDBOOK METHOD

The hinge-moment derivative due to angle of attack can be computed from the equation

C-- AcosAe/4 ( )+l\C

h" - A + 2 cos AC/l CliO' - ha

6.1.6.1-a

where

(ChJ is the section hinge moment from Section 6.1.3.1.

is the induced camber effect from figure 6.1.6.1- 4 . It is obtained by multiplying the quantity

from the figure, by its denominator, where

(cLa}is obtained from Section 4.1.1.2

Bz = effect of control-surface and balance chord ratios from figure 6.1.6.14h .

K" = effect of control-surface span for outboard controls from figure 6.1.6.1-4c. For inboard con-

trols K" can be approximated as equal to ~o2' where Yo is the distance from the plane of symmetry to the outboard edge of the control surface.

Sample Problem

Given;

A=3.1 A = 0.55

AC/4 = 38.9

AHL = 30.8° (no control balance)

~ = 0.22 (measured perpendicular to wing quarter-chord line) c

Yi

b/2 =0.55

(Clla) = -0.0075 (per degree) (cl,,) = 0.107 (per degree)

6.1.6.1-1

Compute: 6CIt"

= 0.014 (figure 6.1.6.1·4 a ) cosAcA

B2 = 0.94 (figure 6.1.6.1:4,h) K" = 2.1 (figure 6.1.6.1·4 1',Cl" = 0.00231

C A cos A,,;., )

11" = A + 2 A (Ch" + 6 Cll"

cos c/4

(equation 6.1.6.1·a)

(3.1) (cos 38.9°) (-0.0075) + 0.00231 (3.1 + 2 cos 38.9°)

=- 0.00157 (per degree)

B. SUPERSONIC

The supersonic three-dimensional hinge moment due to angle of attack can be computed for trailing-edge control surfaces according to the method of reference 2. The method applies to tapered and un tapered coritrol surfaces, with the follow ing restrictions:

1. Leading and trailing edges are swept ahead of the Mach lines (supersonic leading edges)

2. Streamwise root and tip chords

3. Outermost Mach lines from controls do not cross the wing tip

4. Innermost Mach lines from the controls do not cross the wing root chord

For leading-edge control surfaces and for trailing-edge control surfaces with subsonic leading edges, reverse-flow techniques as shown in reference 3 can be used.

HANDBOOK METHOD

The method of computing Ch" can best be accomplished by using a tabular form, as shown on page 6.1.6.1-8. The tabular method is self-explanatory, but the value computed must be corrected for thickness effects. For a symmetrical, straight-sided control surface the corrected hinge-moment coefficient is

(CIl,,) tic = (1 - ~: CPTlJ) (Ch,,) tic = 0

6.1.6.1·b

where

2

'/ M2 - 1

(y+l)M4-4(M2-1) =14

2(M" - IF ,y.

1>TE = trailing-edge angle (radians) measured normal to the wing leading edge.

For a symmetrical biconvex airfoil the correction factor in equation 6.1.6.1·b is

2 c, (..!..)' {' }

1 - c 2 1 + 2 xn', k 1 xh' 2

- 3Cdl+k) cos (ALE-AHJJ [ ~c~- [ -(-z) ]

6.1.6.1-2

where

(-zt )'

is the maximum airfoil thickness ratio measured in a plane normal to control hinge axis

( :11)' is the chordwise location of the control hinge axis measured in a plane normal to control hinge axis.

Thickness correction factors for other sections can be computed according to the method of reference 2.

SYMBOLS USED IN COMPUTATION OF (Ch ) I -0:

ate -

, x

distance of center of loading from control hinge axis measured normal to hinge axis

TC.p.

angle of ray in conical-flow field which passes- through center of pressure

= f3 tan "c.p.

pressure coefficient (6 pi q) for three dimensional wing

two dimensional pressure coefficient

P

area of a loaded region

,

(PSL x')

refers to PSL x' as a loss of loading from two-dimensional values rather than to actual loading.

area moment of control surface about hinge axis

control surface taper ratio

aspect ratio of control surfaces

n, rf

nondimensional coo. inate used in integration of wing root and tip conical pressures. Other definitions are given in sample problem

REFERENCES

I. Toll, T. A., and Schneiter, L. E.: Approximate Relations for Hinge-Moment Parameters of Control Surfaoes on Swept Wings at Low Maoh Numbers. NACA TN 1711, 1948. (U)

2. Goin, K. L" Equations and Charts for the Rapid Estimation of Hinge-Moment and Effeotlveness Parameters for Trailing Edges Swept Ahead of the Mach Lines. N ACA TN 2221, 19110. (U)

3. Heaslet, M. A .. and Spreiter, J. R.: Reolprooity Relations in Aerodynamlos. NACA TN 2700, 1962. (U)

6.1.6,1-3

or

6Ch .02

___ ~=-a. __

C l a. B2 Ka. cos Ae!4

6.1.6.1-4

SUBSONIC SPEEDS

.04

(a) "
Cr
~ ,
C
I\~ ~ ~.2
.4
'\ ~ .6
i', I~ ~
1'- ........ I~ ~ Ch
0
Ch .... ~ ...... ~ ~
a. -
- 1--
• o

3

(c)
.:
~~
Ka. ~
./
9 V
...... KO
~ F-""'"
~ or

.01

o

o

8

10

o

.<:1

1.0

.6

.4

.8

2

4

6

A

1.6

(b)

V i""
C{ . ",. /'
-, "~ '" V
Cf .J' L ~
/>V_/.2,.; V V /'
V V / .3'- V
L
v: V V .4"'" L V
Vj V_/ V / V L V L
~ V/ V -: . 5 ...... /
J'I/ V /' ./ V L
:~ // '/ /' .6/
/'
~ V / " V
/"
( .: ./ /'
V V
/' V
1.4

1.2

1.0

.6

.4

.2

o

0 .1 .2 .8 .4 .5 .6
,
Cf
,
C FIGURE 6.1.6.1-4 CHARTS FOR INDUCED-CAMBER CORRECTIONS TO HINGE-MOMENT PARAMETERS OF FINITE-SPAN WINGS

COMPUTING PROCEDURE AND SAMPLE PROBLEM SUPERSONIC SPEEDS

MACH UNES - --

M - 1.10 ..

J - 1.3967

I

I ,

AXIS OF /

PITCH

I

.... ---3.427----~

.... -----4.000----- ...

.... ------ 5.000--------. ...

( TANALE TANAHl TANA

___ = 0.5995, 0.3990, TE

P P P

S = 23.250, C = 3.984, Af = 0.713, Sf == 2.366,

2Ma == 1.490)

0.3489,

3.250

2.000

FIGURE 6.1.6.1-6 CONFIGURATION OF SAMPLE CALCULATION OF SUPERSONIC Cha.

6.000

5.250

6.1.6.1-5

COMPUTING PROCEDURE AND SAMPLE PROBLEM (CONTD.) CASES

2 3 5

6

ROOT MACH CONE

CASE

r---__,

r-----. CASi

,

6 5 3

2

TIP MACH CONE

ROOT CASE 3 TIP CASE 3 TAPERED FLAP:

Cf 3 _ Cf 3

2M [3"; 1 + (J202) = bf r' t = 5.2159

o cf _ cf

r t UNT APERED fLAP:

2Mo (3 V 1 + (J202] = 3blf 2

r

UNTI<PERED PLAN FORMS: (J2b3f

2M

o {flAff V1 + 11202

TAPERED PLAN FORMS:

(J2b3 (0 - dl211 - .\3 I

2M f f

o 3(' - .\fI3'" + {1~02

FIGURE 6.1.6.1-6 NOTATION AND INITIAL COMPUTATIONS FOR SUPERSONIC Cha

6.1.6.1-6

M= 1.80

(J = vlr."M:-=2-"'-1 = 1.4967

9 = TANALE_ = 0.5995

(J

a TANAHl 0.3990

.(J

TANATE

d = (J = 0.3489

KI = (Jyo = 7.8577

K2 = (JYI = 2.9934

K3 = /3(~ - Yi) = 5.9868 K .. = (J(~ - Yo.) = 1.1225 Ks = (Jy,; = 41.2528

1

K = = 1.0262

6 ,8(1 - dl

1

K7= ,8(1 -01 = 1.1117 K. = (Jyl = 5.9868

K9 = ,8(~ -Yr)2 = 23.9472 1

KIO = ,8(1 + d) = 0.4953

1

KII = = 0.4776

,811 + 01

K = /3(2. -y )2 = 0.8419

12 2 0

COMPUTING PROCEDURE AND SAMPLE PROBLEM (CONTD.)

lOOT MACH LINE

\ \ \ \
~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ \\ \\
C?1 + ~ C11 ~,,0
>

ARROWS SHOW PROCEDURE FOR SUMMING PRESSURE-MOMENT AREA (PSLx)' (ENCIRCLED NUMBERS CORRESPOND TO REGIONS AS DESIGNATED IN COMPUTING FORM FOR, Cha. )

FIGURE 6.1.6.1-1 CONICAL-FLOW REGIONS USED IN CALCULATING SUPERSONIC Ch a

6.1.6.1-7

COMPUTING PROCEDURE AND 'SAMPLE PROBLEM (CONTD.)

FO»! FOR SUMMING (PSL x) I OF TRIAl«JULAR SIDMENTS or CONICAL~FLOW RHi-ION

'Charts for (5) (6)
Determining Col (6) • 0 (1) (2) r» (4)
Cols(2) Region for Cues Enter Curve !lot rallev1ng pi t cp ~ 2SL (2) x (4) x (5)
and (8) on 6.1. 6.1-6 Value of' n or r ' ~x
6. 1.6. 1-9k 1 " 5, 6 ~ - (1 - d) • 2', (1 - .'cpl _" • (1) x '5 • 0
'1 tcp r
through "":t (1 - .'cp)
x
6.1. 6.1-91 2 2",4,5,6 ...!. - (1 - .) • ,xr - . (1) x '5 • 0
" tep
1 - 2 (1 - d) • 0.6102 2c (1 ~ at ) (1) x er"6 • 15.6541
6.1.6.1-9a , 6 0.258 0.136 r c2 - "r •• 2."965 ,,0.08~
c 1 - dt
thrOU8b r cp
6. I. 6. 1-9i 1 - ~ (1 - d) • 2Cr II - atep) (1) x e~:X6'
4 " 5, 6 "r l,-.tep) 0
er
.
§ 6.1.6.1-9a '2 (1) x x;<r • 9.1865 .9.5908
" 5 4, 5. 6 1 - X; (1 - a) • 0.5502 0.245 x • 4.000
~ r
thrOU8b
0> 6.1. 6. 1-9i 1 - ~ (1 - a) •
~ 6 2, " ~, 5, 6 -x . (1) x xr~' 0
r r
6.1. 6. 1-9k 6 er 0.645 "",(,-atep) • 5.lD74 (1) x 'a • 6.1011 9.8481
1 ;;:; - (1 - d) • 1.0192 0.300 " -
r 'op
thrOU8b "'" (1 - ate!!)
x
6.1.6.1-91 8 It, 5, 6 .; - (1 - a) .O.D" 0.211 0.111 -" • - 5.9688 (1) x 'a . 4.4021 -1.2118
, cp r .
6.1.6.1-2Ie 1 " 5, 6 et 2K, (1 + .tep)"}K • (1) x '9 - 0
r, - (1 • d) • tep t
thrOU8b 21~ (1 • a':;R)
6.1.6.1-2lf 2, " It, 5, 6 xt (1) x '9 • 0
2 iL - (1 • a) • "',- tep .
~
6.1.6.1-2Ia 6 14 (1 + d) 0.26:) 0.662 2ct (1 + .teE) - "'t • - O.!r.i2 (1) x et"'o • 1.68" ~.4lo87
, 1 - --- • 0.4494 (r+dtop)
et
thrcup
6. 1. 6. 1-21d 1-~. 2et (1 + .teE) (1) x et'o •
4 " 5, 6 "'t 0
et - (, .d'OP} , •
S 6. I. 6. 1-21a Ji., 5, 6 '4 (1 + a) 0.224 (1) x xt ~ • 0.6616 O.~
5 1 - --- • 0.2862 xt '" 2.200
'" thrOU8b xt
~ 6.1.6.1-2Id ~
it 6 2, " ~J 5, 6 1 • "t • -Sot· (l)XXt~' 0
6.1.6.1-2Ie 1 6 ct 0.314 0.609 214 (1 + at:;R) (1) x Itu! -.9269 .5878
I; - (1 + d) • 1.1010 "'t - top • 2.0179
- ...... 214 (1 • ate.,) _ '" •• 2.1150
6. 1. 6. 1-211r 8 ~, 5, 6 xt 0.236 (1) x Itu! • 0.4122
r; - (1 + a) • 0.5609 0.151 icp t ~.,a25
(C ') -2 ~ L,61 -) • -.0194' (perdeg) L (6) ·1.7410
ha~!.~·;O 5T.' ~Jl -.'- .. 31. 'Jl + ,i.'
C FIGURE 6. 1.6.1- 8 COMPUTING FORM FOR SUPERSONIC Chci

6.1.6.1-8

SUPERSONIC SPEEDS (0)

1.0
.9
.8
.7
t
cp .6
.5
.4
.3
.2 ~ t-.... 1
~ ::-.... -- f-- -- -I-- -1 -- r-
I
,' -, r--.... , I
r-, ..... ~ j ~~ .
-, I
r-, ' ....... ...... r-, I I I
<, r-, ....... r-, I J
<, r-, r-, 1'-.,1 ,
"- -+---
~ .-
r-, <,
ro..... ....... , -~
..... ~ ....... a and
r-, 1 r-..... ~N
~ b ~ r---
N r-.....
I, r- ....... /0
~ t:- r-, I
I I"-ro-..
,-.95
I I ,-
I p'

! ,
-- -- . - j - . t- t--~- . -- +----
I I
- -- - ._- r-- ,
I

,
-t





-~ t-

i I r-t
! -t- i . a and d
1 -.95
I
I , +.10
._- - .. - . _J .8

.7

.6

.5

.4

.3

.2

.1 . 2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .8 .9 1.0
n
TAN ALE = 0.10
f3 FIGURE 6.1.6.1-9 LOADING DISTRIBUTIONS IN THE CONICAL-FLOW REGIONS INTERSECTING THE WING-ROOT MACH CONE

6.1.6.1-9

1.0
.9
.8
. 7
t .6
cp
.5
.4
.3
.2 .8
.7
.6
.5
p'
.4
.3
.2
.1 6.1.6.1-10

(b)

~ 1"-0...
~ ......... r-,
~ "- ....... r-,
-, ~ ....... r-,
"- ........ ..... -....... ~
I' ~ i""-- ....
" <, r-... 1'"
....._, , ........ a and d
r-, ...... t--.... ,
..... , ~ ..... r-...,+ .20
, r-... ~ ,
~ '"' r-,
........ ...... ~40
r--.. -.95 I











a and d


-.9~
+.20 1
~"- ~ - I .2

.6 .7 .8

.9 1.0

.3 .4 .5

n

TAN A LE --- =0.20

f3

FIGURE 6.1.6.1-9 (CONTD.)

1.0
.9
.8
.7
t
cp .6
.5
A
.3
.2 .8
.7
.6
p' .5
A
.3
.2
.1 (c)

~
~ ~
~ ~ ....... r-... ....
~ -, i""o ..... 1'-0 .....
-, """ ...... r--. .......
i' -, ~ r--. .....
'" '" ..... i'. i'o, .....
r-, <, ......... '" ,
a and d
<, ......... -, <, ........ I
.... , ...... r-, .... ~Irl
.3
i""- , .... <,
.....
'" ....... ......... 0
'" ..... , -040
........ I
-i95










a and d

!95

~ ~
~ !!E +.30
~ ~ --
.1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .8

.9 1.0

n

TAN ALE --";':'=0.30

j3

FIGURE 6. 1. 6. 1-9 (CONTD.)

6.1.6.1-11

(d)

1.0
. 9
. 8
.7
.6
t
cp
.5
...
.3
.2 ._ ~
~ ~ ....... .....
~ ..... "'" <, ....... .......
~ <, f"". ...... ........ ~
-, ['.. r-, r" <,
f' ...... ~ ...... r--.., <, i'o..
" " ~ ....... ..... I'. t-.....
a and d
.... , r-, r"-" <,
~ ....... r-, r--.... r-,
........... r-, ......... +.40
<, ...... ~ I'....
r--.... ........ r--... ........0
.......... i'-- -.40
r--.... I.
i95
.1

- .








a and d

-.95
- ... 0 ~
0 ~ ~
. .40
-~ ~

- I""""'
:~ ~ -
. 8

.7

.6

pi

.5

...

.3

.2

.1

.2

.3 ... .5

.6

.7

.8

.9 1.0

n

TAN ALE ---=0.40

f3

FIGURE 6.1.6.1-9 (CONTD.)

6.1.6.1-12

1.0
. 9
.8
.7
.6
t
cp
.5
.4
.3
.2 .8
.7
.6
.5
p"
.4
.3
.2
.1 ( e)

~t'-..._"
~~ r---.. ......
~ "'- r-, ... ""
-, r-, ....... r-, I"" ~
r-, '" '" ....... ....... r....
" -, ~ "-
....... '" ....... '" .......... ~
-, ....... r-.. a and d
r-, "-
["0.. .... r-, r-, "'" +.50
r-, "",,- -,
" ~ ...... t-......
......
:"-.. .... r--.. ........ 0
:"-.."'" r-, -.40
I' ~ !95







a and d
.95
-.40 ~
0 ", ~
+.50
"\ ~ ~
~ -
.- - ::lIo. ~
./ ~ ~ .- fo- ~ ~
~ ::;.. """"" ~ .- r-
_I r- .,.
r .1

.3

.9 1.0

.5

.2

.4

.6

.7

.8

n

TAN ALE ---=0.50

(3

FIGURE 6.1.6.1-9 (CONTD.)

6.1.6.1-13

( f)

1.

0",_
~ ~ i" ~ ~ ~
9 ~ ~ 1000...., i'
'- .....
, r-, ........ ~ i'" ....... .... r--.
~
8 ~ '" I"- ....... r"""-
~ ~ ~
'" ....... ...... a and d
7 r-, "'" r-... r-.....
"' '" ........ ..... .... ....... ...... ....... ..... r-,
-, ~ ........ ~ ....... r-, ........ +.60
" 1"'0 ..... ~ f"""-. ........ t.' .. O
'" ~
5 ..... , 1""""", ........
, "" r-, r--....
i"'. r-..... 0
4 "'"
........ "'" r-..... 1-.40
['0. ....... I
3 'f5
2 t cp

.2









a and d
I
.A'" -.951
.40
,_ 0 :
~ -:::: -::: :::::: ~ - +.40
" ...- - - ~ +.60
~ ~ ';.- ..- .... - .... - -
./ - ...- I..- -
~ ~ ." ~ ,..,.. ~ f-" -
~~ ~ ,..,.. ~
1 ~~ .8

.7

.6

pI .5

...

.3

°0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .8 .9 1.0
n
TAN ALE = 0.60
j3 FIGURE 6.1.6.1·9 (CONTD.l

6.1.6.1-14

( g)

1.

o!~ ....
9 ~ ~···.lO;;: r=:::: ~
~~~ ~~
, r-, ...... '" ......;; ~ !"o..
• r-, ...... ........ "' '=
" t-.....
!" '" r-, ........ ~ r-,
7 a and d
" "- ...... '" ..... -, ........ ~ r-,
-, r-, """'" ~ ...... r':: r-,
6 [".. I"-... ....... " "' ~
+.70'
....... ...... r-, ......... -t .40
5
........ 1'0.. [".. ~ r-,
r-, i'... ~"'" ..... 0
4 ......... .......
. ~ -.40
i"" ....... I.
3 ts
2 t cp

••
. 7
.6
.5
pi
.4
.3
.2





a and d

~ ::~
.,.-- -- ::: ""'"'" - - ~O
,.. "" ".,.,. -:: -- .- -- - .40,
-- ..... - -t- .701
./ ~ ~ " .- -- ~ ~ ""'"'" ~
v: »: ~ ..., " ~ I--' -
I. ~ './ " .. " ~
1 ~ V "". ",
~ ..,.... .1

.2

.3

.4 .S

.6 .7

.8 .9 1.0

n

= 0.70

f3

FIGURE 6.1.6.1-9 (CONTD.)

6.1.6.1-15

(h)

t cp

.O~_
~,.....t::::t--.""""r-t--t- ..... I
.9 ~"- ""' .... ,..... ,.....", I"""'- ~ a and d
p.....
~ r-, ..... r-, r-.... "" ~ to.... ~ '"
.8 I' "'" f" ..... ..... t-... I+'·n
100... ~ r-...
" r-, r-.... .... t-... r-... I
- 10...
.r " ....... ~ ~ '" T
"" ...... 10...
~ f'.,. r-, ..... ,..... l+j60
.6
1""0 r-, ..... r-, ...... r-.... 1+'·-
100..
r-... ...... r-, ....... .......
. 5 ..... ....... ........
"'- ~ ""
....... ....... "" .... 10
... ........ I' -: .. 0
.....
..... r-... I~~
.3
.2
.8
.7
.6
.5
...
pi
.3
.2
.1


a and d

.95
... 0
~ '"""'" - ~ - - I, ~O
, i""'" ~ ~ i-' ..-- - ~ ,,_. ~ ~ .... ~ j_ .40
L-- ~.60
~ 1....,..00 "". ~ ." ~ ..-- .... ...- ~ - ::.:.;;; -.;.
- ,,_. +.80
V"..., tI" ~ ~ ....- l.,...ooo i-' ". 1.."..000 ,_. ~
v. (/ ~ ~ ~ -- ~ ~
ji(/ ./ ~ ~ ~ ....
_.
~r/ V ~ io"""
'iV ~ .1 .2

.3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .8 .9 1.0

n

TAN '"'"LE ---=0.80

j3

FIGURE 6.1.6.1-9 (CONTD.)

6.1.6.1-16

1.0
. 9
••
.7
.6
t .5
qt
.A
.3
.2 ••
.7
.6
.5
'" .A
.3
.2
.1
0
0 (i)

~~
a and d
~~r---~r-. ...... -'_'_~ r-- ..... ....
I'" r-, ~ ~ 1""-0 ~ - """"" r-... - ,.._. t--.. I
.... .9~
" e- ..... r-, f""ooo '" '" '" r""'- r...
....
"- ..... ~ f". '" .... ~ ~ ,...... .80
" 100.
~ f'., I' "'" ~ 100.. 1""'-00 "-
~ ..... ~ r-, r"- 100.. ....... ~ J
i' r- ~ r--. 1'0 ~ .6~
r-, f'.. r--. r-..... ... 0
1'10.. ~ i'-
r-, r--.. r--. 0
...... r--.... r-,
..... ~ .... -.40
..... , T
t5
I I
a and d
I .95
lJt.: -.40
0
.40
~ ...... ~ ~ ::. ~ - - ~ - - i.- .60
~ ~ """'" ~ ~ ~ ~ '""" ...... ...- .ad
- ~
./ ~ ~ ;II'" ~ i"'" ~ "'""" .-- - ,.,.,. I
_. -
JY V ~ """'" ~ ~ I....- ~ .... "... ...... .90
1/ / ~ v: i,...o'" io""" ". ~ :....,.... ~ ~
'/ / ~ ". ~ ..... ~ ~
,J [/ .J ~ 1,..0- I--""
'f/ I;' L,.,.o """'"
10" "'" 10'
1'...,.- ~
fJ .1 .2

.6 .7 .8 .9 1.0

.3 .A .5

n TAN ALE

_ ___.:= = 0.90

f3

FIGURE 6.1.6.1-9 (CONTD.)

6.1.6.1-17

1.0
.9
.8
. 7
t .6
cp
.5
.~
.3
.2 pi .~

6.1.6.1-18

~~E~t'r--~
- ~ t- r- ~ r- .9~
~
~ " r-, r-- to... I"""- ""'" f""ii """" - ~ .90
10... .....
~ I"' ""'" r-..... ..... ~ - '" roo.;; I'roo..
10...
f' r-, I' "- i""o- I'roo.. ...... " ..... .80
"'" .... I" i"""- "- ...... "- " ....
r-, ro... i"""- ~ r-.... I"""- .60
I' ...... "" I" ""'- ..... t--... a and d
'" ........ 1'0... ~ .... ...... ~O
I'" """ "" .... ~ ....
~ ~ r-, 0
~ ~
..... ~ -i~O
~ -.95 .8

T 1
a and d

II -.95
.. .~O
.40 0
i.---' i-"" ..- - c- - - - - .60
~ ".,. ~ ~ ""'" ~ ~ - .... ,
i--" - -- .80
,/ :/ ./ ~ ~ """ i.---' ", - ..- ;;;;;;0 I
IV / ,/ i,..oo- .",. ,,- ", t- ~ .- .9~
III V ./ I'" " ,... ".,. """" L..,..ooo ",
-- .95
'1/ 1/ ~~ ~ .",. L,...oo ~ jo'"
~ --
I / ~ ".,. ""'" ", ~
-
I) ./ ~ ~ L..,...oo ".,.
rtf V l/ '" ~
--
1/ V ~ 10'
fj ,/ ~
'f) _/ ....
'I
.7

.6

.5

.3

.2

. 1

o

o .1 .2

.3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .8 .9 1.0

n

TAN ALE ----=::.:: = 0.95

j3

FIGURE 6.1.6.1-9 (CONTD.)

1.0
. 9
.8
.7
.6
t
cp
.5
.4
.3
.2
.1
.8
.7
__ c
.6
.5
pi
. 4
.3
.2
.1 c·-

(k)

r""o- """-
r--- ....
~ ~
roo:: ~
...... r.::::: ~ TAN ALE
----
i""'"" ~ ~ f3
.95
~ .10 T~ cl~LIE

f3

.9~
- (.- 10- .9d
~ ....
1/10' ~ ~ Ii""
-
V .,. ~ i .8~1
J L.,...- V" 1..- ......
!/ ~ I- .70
I j l.,...oo' ~ - ~ I-" - 1.6f
I ./ ~ .... ~I.oo-'
I / ~ "'"'"' I- .50
i,..o-' ~ I
j ~ " ~ I-""'" - ~ .40
- ~ I
I '~ ~ ~ ~ - .30
I
ro~ ~ .20
-
~ .1 ? o

o .1 .2

.3

.4 .5

.6 .7

.8

.9 1.0

r'

r' = 0 TO 1.0

FIGURE 6.1.6.1-9 (CONTD.)

6.1.6.1-19

1.0
.9
.8
.7
.6
t
cp
.5
.4
.3
.2
.1
.8
.7
.6
.5
p'
.4
.3
.2
.1 6.1.6.1-20

(I)








~
,
~
~
""" ~
"~
~ s,
r;:::: ~ TAN ALE
- F=:::::: ~ f3
1.95
"""'II 10
. I TAN ALE

f3
.95
_,. ~ i"""" 9b

. I
~ i"'"" I
~
.8,
i.-- -
V .70
~ ,_. 6J
~
'_l
.,.. ,..... .50
L.,.ooo
,..,.,.. ,_. I
.40
I
~ .30
- .20
- .10
I o 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0

r'

r' = 1.0 TO 10.0

FIGURE 6.1. 6.1-9 (CONTD.)

1.0
.9
.8
.7
t .6
tp
0 .5
.4
.3
.2 .8
.7
.6
.5
pI
.4
. 3
.2
.1 ( a)

~~::::: ..... """,-I'-r---"_ I
r-- - - .._ ...... "" -'.951
!'-....
..... ;;:::: ~ r--.... ..... r---"" r-. ....... ....... ...... I
....... ~ i'oo... ~ i"'" r--.. I"""-- to-... ....... -.90
r-, ....... ~ I'-- -..... t"--,. 1
'" ....... ~ <, j'-.... f"' -.80
I'- ..... r-, r- ....., I
""-
r-, I ........ ""'- ....... ~ ....... 1
....... '" r-, r-, ...... -.60
r-, ..... , " ~ 1
..... , ~ .... -.40
....... ....... -.20
...... o I I

a and d
I





a and d
0
V ~ -.20
.- ~ t::- V" ~ -.40
"""" I"" ~ ~ """ .60
- 1"..00- _,.
I---" r;.. ~ - ~ I-""" I-" ~ -.80
..
".. ~ ;, i.,.ooo' ~ - ~ ..... ~t' I
~ ::;... t::. ~ ~ ,.,.... -~ ~ I"" ~ .90
1
~ ~ ;..- ~ - ...- ".- I""" ~ ~ V -.95
- -
__,~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - -"""" ~ ~
- .._
~ .- ...- '=- - .1

.2

.9 1.0

.3

.5

.6

.8

.4

.7

n

T_A_N__,A,.=L.=_E = 0

f3

FIGURE 6.1.6.1-21 LOADING DISTRIBUTIONS IN THE CONICAL-FLOW REGIONS INTERSECTING THE WING-TIP MACH CONE

6.1.6.1-21

t c~

6.1.6.1-22

(b)

.:~~~~~
i"'"'" ""'" ~ - I"- - r--. r-..
~ ~ ~ r-... - I" r-;;; ~ r-.. 1-, ,!:J
""'-
I, e- r- ~ ..... I'. 1"""'0 ~ 1"'000, ~ r- 1- ;90
..
r-, ~ r"o t'--. r-... ....... ""
.7 """ ...... "- r--.... r-, ~ I' I-',SO
I'. 1'0. ~ ...... r-, "" ""
1'0. .... r-..... r-... """ r-, a and c
h..
r-, """ .... r-, r-, I" 1-'.60
'" " r-, "'" "- I'
~
.... r"- I" r-, ...... .:.4(
....
""",,- ~ 1'''' 1-~2C
... I'. e-
0
.3 "" .2(
.2

p'








.20
t- ~ 0
~ ~ ~ .20
,..... .40
~ 10" ...... ~ ~ ~ -.60
...... 10'"
~ ~ ~ ,.... ~ I t--
j....- c- ~ -- a and d
~ ~ ~ ~ 10" ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ -jSO
--
~ ~ ~ ,.,.... :.- 1"....00 _. _. ,.,.... :,.... ~ -.90
_,
::::::: ~ t::::- ~ ,.,.... - - ~ - ~ ~ -.95
~ -
'i ~ ::;;..- ,.,.... ~ _.. """" i"'"" ~ ,.,....
~ - - I.-
~ ~ i"'""
~ .S

.7

.6

.5

...

.3

.2

.3 ... .5 .6

.7 ,S .9 1.0

.2

n

TAN ~LE

j3 = 0.20

FIGURE 6.1.6.1'21 (CONTO.)

( c)

t qt

.o~~.....:~ r--. ..... Iooo.
- -.. - .......
.9--;\"'I;~~ ..... _ ...... ........ - ...... '-, ".5
,~ ............. .....
...", ~ e- ....... ........ I""- ....... ....... "" "- - ~O
... ~ .......:: r-, "" r-.. ........... ......
....
"' i"" ......... ..... ~ ~ '""" -, -,
.r ...." ~ t'o. ..... r-, '"' ~ ....... :80
"
r-, ........ ..... r-.... f"., ............. <,
.... ~ a and d
"'" r-, r-, , r-, "' '~n
r-, ....... ~ ..... ........ ....... po.,. r-,
f"., , .......... r-, "" 1-:40
r-, ....... ~ r-, " ,I?n
......... "" r-, , 10 f
r-, ........ . 2e
~.5Cl

.. p'



...

. ,

.~
-:1?'
.- -~ /:
- ", ,_. 10--' ~ ~ '-:20
.4 -
"" """"" -: - ~ r- ~ ~ -i~~
- - a and d
~ ~ ~ :::.. 10--' I""'" ~ ~ -i6O
- ....-
.- ~ ':.- ~ ~ :;:.. ",..,. """. ",..,. ~ ~ -:80
~ ~ ~ -=- ...-:: ~ ~ ,."". ". ",..,. __. ~ I" ..
- -
.:.~~~ ~~~-~ 10- io-'" ~ .".
- ft
~~:::..""'" ~-~- - '""""'" ~ ..-
-
. _I-'"
00 ..
.. .. .6 .7 . 8 ... 1.0 n

TAN ALE

0.50

j3

FIGURE 6.1. 6.1-21 (CONTD.)

6.1.6.1-23

6.1.6.1-24

t cp

(d)

.C t!I
r--
~ ~ r-.. - F- r-- l""- t-- - fiO;;; t--....
.9 """ "- io-
ss ~ ~ r-, ...... r--.. r-- r- ,..... 1- ~5
too.. '- r-,
~ ~ ~ ~ t"--- i"""'- I'-.. r""'" r-, r'\ 90
~
~ ~ ~ r-, r-.... i"o r-.... ~
.7 r-; ~ ~ " ...... r-, r-, r-.... r--.. ~ .;80
r-, t" r-; r-, r-, ..... ~ r-, ...... ""
....... " ~ r- r-, '" f""" r-, a and d, - ~
100... .....
. 6 I'-.... r-, r-, r" I'.. I'-.... , '60
"'- I-
r-, I' l' ......... I'.. -......... ['..
.5 ....... r-, r-, r-, -......... I'-.... " 1-:"0
100...
r-, r-, :""-- :""-- " r-, r-, ,.:20
'" r-, '" t" t-, ro.;;;
r-.... ..... ~ ~ t:~g
.3 r-, ........ I:$~I'

." p'


.8

.7



.5
_, ~ ...: ~ ~ ~5
1..,...00 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - ~.65
... 0
L."..oo ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ "" ~.20
,,_, r;... ~ ~ ~ ~ ':::: ~ / ~ , ~ 0
.3 .- .20 .. a and
~ ~ ~ :::;;- -- ~ t::: ;...-0 1..,...00 _." ....... 10"" .,." ......: ~::g
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .--- t:: ~ ~ ~ ,., r...,.
J'" - "" - ~-.80
:~.r~~~~~~~~~ ~ ~ ~ i." .90
.95
~_~I-I-""" 1-1-1-- ..... I..-~ ~ ~ ~ -
.1 1--1"""
~I-'"
I
.1 . .' .' . ; .6 . .9 1.0 n

TAN \ALE

j3 = 0.95

FIGURE 6.1.6.1-21 (CONTD.)