The effects of static margin and rotational damping in pitch on the longitudinal stability characteristics of an airplan...

MISSING IMAGE

Material Information

Title:
The effects of static margin and rotational damping in pitch on the longitudinal stability characteristics of an airplane as determined by tests of a model in the NACA free-flight tunnel
Alternate Title:
NACA wartime reports
Physical Description:
12, 7 p. : ill. ; 28 cm.
Language:
English
Creator:
Campbell, John P
Paulson, John W
Langley Aeronautical Laboratory
United States -- National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics
Publisher:
Langley Memorial Aeronautical Laboratory
Place of Publication:
Langley Field, VA
Publication Date:

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Damping (Mechanics)   ( lcsh )
Stability of airplanes, Longitudinal   ( lcsh )
Aerodynamics -- Research   ( lcsh )
Genre:
federal government publication   ( marcgt )
bibliography   ( marcgt )
technical report   ( marcgt )
non-fiction   ( marcgt )

Notes

Summary:
Summary: The effects of static margin and rotational damping in pitch on the longitudinal stability characteristics of an airplane have been determined by flight tests of a model in the NACA free-flight tunnel. In the investigation, the rotational damping in pitch was varied over a wide range by using horizontal tails that varied in area from 0 to 24 percent of the wing area. A range of static margins from 2 to 16 percent of the mean aerodynamic chord was covered in the tests. For each test condition the model was flown and the longitudinal steadiness characteristics were noted. It was found in the investigation that longitudinal steadiness was affected to a much greater extent by changes in static margin than by changes in rotational damping. The best longitudinal steadiness was noted at large values of static margin. For all values of rotational damping, the steadiness of the model decreased as the static margin was reduced. The model was especially unsteady at low values of static margin (0.03 or less). Reduction in rotational damping had little effect on longitudinal steadiness, except that with low values of static margin (0.03 or less) the longitudinal divergences were sometimes more violent with the tailless (low rotational damping) condition.
Bibliography:
Includes bibliographic references (p. 10).
Statement of Responsibility:
by John P. Campbell and John W. Paulson.
General Note:
"Report no. L-55."
General Note:
"Originally issued June 1944 as Advance Restricted Report L4F02."
General Note:
"Report date June 1944."
General Note:
"NACA WARTIME REPORTS are reprints of papers originally issued to provide rapid distribution of advance research results to an authorized group requiring them for the war effort. They were previously held under a security status but are now unclassified. Some of these reports were not technically edited. All have been reproduced without change in order to expedite general distribution."

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Florida
Rights Management:
All applicable rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier:
aleph - 003614485
oclc - 71260705
sobekcm - AA00006286_00001
System ID:
AA00006286:00001

Full Text

SARP No. L4FO?




NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS






WAll TIMl REPORT
ORIGINALLY ISSUED
June 1944 as
Advance Restricted Report L4F02

THE EFFECTS OF STATIC MARGIN AND ROTATIONAL DAMPING IN

PITCH ON THE LONGITUDINAL STABILITY CHARACTERISTICS

OF AN AIRPLANE AS DETERMINED BY TESTS OF A MOIEL

IN THE NACA FREE-FLIGBT TUNNEL

By John P. Campbell and John W. Paulson

Langley Memorial Aeronautical Laboratory
Langley Field, Va.











WASHINGTON

NACA WARTIME REPORTS are reprints of papersoriginally issued to provide rapid distribution of
advance research results to an authorized group requiring them for the war effort. They were pre-
viously held under a security status but are now unclassified. Some of these reports were not tech-
nically edited. All have been reproduced without change in order to expedite general distribution.

L 55 DOCUMENTS DEPARTMENT
:!k": P. -





































Digitized by the Internet Archive
in 2011 with funding from
University of Florida, George A. Smathers Libraries with support from LYRASIS and the Sloan Foundation


http://www.archive.org/details/effectsofstaticm001ang




~7 2 4C7 OS



rAOA ARR No. lljF,02

I.ATIONAL ADVISORY COi'"ITT'" FOR AC OI-AUTICS


.',D'.A"C R STF. I ACTED REL PORT


THE ZIfFICTS OF STATIC IARGiT: AUiD FOTATICIIAL E'.PIIP::3 IN

F.'C.- "ITEE Ln.C-ITi'TDIjAL ST.-.BILI'Y CHAR.CTzRI.TICS

OF AA ,IRFLAET AS D:ETiLlliED DY TESTS OF A i.ioDEL

INl ThE UCA _F.. E-FLIGHT TUIil:EL

By John P. Cartrbell and John ';. Paulson





The effects of s.rti? ier.--!n &-id rotational ramping
in pitch on the lonritu.. inl s1 T iit ch.rs tterit ics of
an airpJnr.e have been .e te:.i.ne j bu' flithit tests of a
model in the ACA free-flic-t Tn te-fi ,- t in--?ta-
ticn, the rotational d1a;!n:in.- In :it :'- w< '.r.. ie l over a
wide r'o.r:J.e b U' usinf '1orij z on':-l tA. lis th~It ':-.-ier i e .ri area
from 0 tc. 21 per:.ert of thYe ".ing a.rea. A range of sta sic
margins from 2 to 16 percent of t.h *c n sr-?od':'nr:ic
chlord .,was covered in the t,-,st "r-r eaich te:-t condition
the odel a flon and the loncitL...dl.. stedines. char-
actsrist-ics vere noted.

It v.ias found in the investigation that Icnigituldinal
steadiness wrs affected to a m.ch r..:iter e:::ent b;:
chan-es in static m;argii tnaii by can-;s in rotational
dar;ning. 'he test lonc.tudif ,l C.-dinss a'v.s noted at
large. -:,.lulEs of static mar.-in. For- all valu.-s of rota-
tional LIsn.pinr, the stec'ldint t of t'ih model decreased as
the st.itic m!arpin was reducced.. T;'e model was especially
unstea'.v at low values of static ..ar'-in (0.05 or less).
Reduction in rotational dam.irin had little effect on
lon`itudir.nal steadiness, except ti;t with lov: values of
static iar.in (0.05 or less) tne longitudinal divergences
were soretino more violent vith the taillesL (low rota-
tional da.-.,ir.n ) conii ition.

Tn the applications of the model test results to
full-s-cile airplanes the Frsmall scale of the model and the
method of control make the iod.el tests conservative; that
is, th" ste.adiness of th.,e airplane Is expected to be some-
what greater than that of the i..odel for g-iven values of








2 NACA ARR No. L4F02


static margin and rotational damping in pitch. The model
test results indicate that the tailless airplane, in
spite of its low rotational damping in pitch, should have
longitudinal steadiness characteristics similar to those
of a conventional airplane with the same amount of static
margin, provided the static margin is greater than 0.05.


INTRODUCTION


Full-scale flight investigations have indicated that
static longitudinal stability and rotational damping in
pitch are two important factors affecting the longitudinal
handling characteristics of airplanes. No flight investi-
gations have been made, however, in which both of these
factors were systematically varied. Such an investigation
was considered desirable especially because of the recent
trend toward tailless airplanes, which have inherently low
damping in pitch. An investigation has therefore been
carried out in the NACA free-flight tunnel to determine
the effects of large changes in static margin and rota-
tional damping in pitch on the longitudinal stability
characteristics of airplanes. Static margin is a measure
of static longitudinal stability and is defined as the
distance between the center of gravity and the neutral
point of an airplane expressed in terms of the mean aero-
dynamic chord.

The investigation was made with a free-flying,
dynamic model. The longitudinal steadiness of the model
was observed in flights made with variations in horizontal
tail area and center-of-gravity location that gave a wide
range of values of rotational damping and static margin.
In the investigation an attempt was made to determine the
relation between the observed longitudinal stability char-
acteristics in flight and the calculated characteristics
of both the phugoid and the short-period longitudinal
oscillations.

SYB3 OLS


CL lift coefficient Li: fts
2pV S/









NACA A!:R Io. LLF02 3

S... 4it4hin- !_opent\
C pic tchi.n.-i ont c oeLific nt o nt
S .- S J

dCm
dCr rate of change of -oitci nl,-iroinent coo~ef'ic,'.ent
t 1per degree st ailiz.'g incid.cncs

it anle of incidence of horizontal tal.], ositi've
when trailing edge is acv:n, d; rr -es

Cmq rate of changee cf pitcaiin..-mo..-ent coefficient

with pitching ang.- :1 velocitE 1 t 7
C2V/


p msas densityj of air, slu.-;s pe'; cubic foot

q pitching angular vloc t:, r di.ans per second

V airspeed, fee- per seccn-i

c ,ran serodT-.amrl ch rd, ir.:1t

dC.
-- sct-;t-c ar.i, cho, ds (:: t', for pro:-e ll'cr off)
dCL

x distance from center of sravit- to '-.ni.tr-.il r'3it,
feet

S wing area, S,:IL.1re feet

kic radius of gyration about Y-a-xis, fet

b v.ing span, feet

T1/2 tim-e to damp to cne--alf amr:litude, recon

P per-iod of lon.'itv..dinal ozoillaticir, seco-Ldls

q .ang.le of pitch, dere es


AFL:AJATUS


The investigation w was ca-. rri'3d cut in th1e ,CA free-
fiilht tunnel, which is fully described in rcfer-unce 1.








NACA ARR No. L4F02


A photograph of the test section of the tunnel showing a
e~lel in flight is presented as figure 1. Force tests
made to determine the static stability characteristics
of the model were run on the free-flight-tunnel six-
component balance. (See reference 2.) A free-oscillation
apparatus similar to that described in reference 5 was
used to obtain values of Cmq.

A three-view drawing of the model used in the inves-
tigation is given in figure 2. The model was constructed
principally of balsa and was fitted with control surfaces
similar to those described in references 1 and 2. In
addition, a movable elevator was installed on the inboard
portion of the wing (fig. 2) to provide longitudinal trim
and control during flights with the horizontal tail re-
moved. Three geometrically similar horizontal tails
were used on the model. (See fig. 2 and table I.) For
the tailless condition, the horizontal tail was removed
while the vertical tail and the fuselage were retained
on the model. The center-of-gravity location of the
model was varied by shifting lead weights located in the
nose and the tail.


METH ODS

Calculations


The period and the time to damp to one-half ampli-
tude for both the short-period longitudinal oscillation
and the phugoid, or long-period longitudinal oscillation,
were computed for each tail condition for a range of
values of static margin from 0.02 to 0.16 mean aero-
dynamic chord. Values of the static longitudinal
stability derivatives used in making the calculations
were obtained from force tests of the model, and values
of the rotational damping derivative Cm were obtained
by a free-oscillation-test method similar to that de-
scribed in reference 3. All the calculations were made
for a lift coefficient of 0.5.


Flight-Testing Procedure

The model was flown with various amounts of static
margin for each value of rotational damping and a rating








NACA APR No. L4F02


of lon itudinal steadiness was assigned by- the pilot to
each condition casted. Thie moe-l option n was observed,
wvith ccnt--ols fi::ed and alco duArir. controlled ilig-t.
One as ure of stesdi:'nesss C.ss the fre.quenlc win whi ch
ele.vaior defle tions hed to be ai!plie-d -o keep tlhe nodel
flyi-: sC:oothly in the center of tL: tunnel. For very
stead:' com.nit ions, elevator control was seldom! necessary;
for i..u:stead.- conditions, iove'.cr alternate up anrd down
elevator d'eflections were rc-quiire1 ab lost continuously.
Another I,-eaRsre of steadinrzs vta t'he nmanitiude of ver-
tical mot-ons of the !"cdel in tlim- tunnel while the model
vwas l) -eirng controlled. "Lar-,& vertical dis,:lac!emen s and
rapid r.otions ,'ere the usual ind'ications of unsteadiness
and CiCw,, easily co.ntrolle.: m'.otions o.i sirall m..-r-itude
were obtained in .stcacy-flij-_ht cor:nliti.ns.

!ot iorn-icture Iecords .'ere ta'en with a cc-,iera
mounted at the side of the test -sc:t:cn of th-e t~.:.r.nel
for Core conditions to sup:le, enT. th? pilot's observa-
tion? cf steadiness. -ost of t..e.-- records jwere made of
controlled rmnod.l motions becaL'eis ela-.'ator cront-rol wa
usuall- required to keep the :r.'.del flying, in the center
of tne tunnel.

Three differences between the ..-ethod of controlling
the longitudinal motions in model flight and, in airopans
fli.it i-sho..ild be noted:

(1) The mcdel is controlled -y abrut elevator de-
flectic:ns of 20 to 5, or .-iore, which are applj.ed. for vry
short 7.riods of ti:ne; vwhereas, the airplane conltrcl can
be applied slowly and smoothly. This difference probably
makes the model fligh-its m.-re j-.ntpy tnan tlose of an air-
plane with the same values of static margin and rota-
tional rdamp:ing.

(2) For the model, abrupt elevator control is given
front a fixed neutral position and uncn release the ele-
vator returns to the neutral p3siti:n. V'ith thi's method
of co-ntrol it i ims iossitle for lon it-idinal motions of
the :-,orel to be induced b-i orci.lations of the elevator
itself as is som etimes the cass for airplanes.

(5) The model is usually controlled to .-.a intain a
constant vertical position in the tunnel rather than a
constant attitude as in the case oi an ai ?lans. 'his
method of control introduces la- ifficulties at ti-es
and causes motions that are probl well damped with
h pdr., o "el l apdwt







NACA ARR No. L4F02


controls fixed to appear lightly damped when the elevator
control is being used.


RANGE OF VARIABLES


During the investigation, the rotational damping in
pitch and the static margin were varied while the weight
of the model and the moment of inertia about the Y-axis
were held constant. The rotational damping factor Cq
was varied from -5.1 to -14.3 by use of horizontal tail
areas that ranged from 0 to 24 percent of the wing area.
(See table I.) The static margin was varied for each
tail condition by shifting the center of gravity known
distances ahead of the neutral point. The neutral points
for the different tail conditions were determined from a
dCm
consideration of the values of -- obtained in force
dCL
tests of the model. The maximum variation of static
margin for the different tail conditions was from 0.02
to 0.16.

The weight of'the model was held constant at a value
of approximately 6.1 pounds, which corresponds to a wing
loading of 2.7 pounds per square foot for the model or
to a wing loading of 27 pounds per square foot for an
airplane 10 times the size of the model. The moment of
inertia of the model for all test conditions was such
that the ratio of the pitching radius of gyration to the
wing span ky/b was 0.17. This value of ky/b is
within the range of values for conventional airplanes
and is only slightly below the average ratio obtained
from values for over a hundred airplanes.

The flight tests were made over a range of lift
coefficients from 0.4 to 0.7. The lowest lift coeffi-
cient obtainable (0.4) was established by the maximum
airspeed of the tunnel. The highest lift coefficient
(0.7) was limited by the maximum lift coefficient of the
model. Most of the flight tests were made at a lift
coefficient of approximately 0.5.









ITA..A 2R :io. L FO2


L S 'U LT S


The r- ul.ts of the ca cul-t!-r ion's t.d to dc teirmine
the t _~.e tc 'i.i:p to one-hr.lf a. p liT; lre a.-:. ti. period' of
the n -i tudina l o '- llitins r. se ntc in fi"d u ? 5
and .I. sule. ar" iv. -: fo.- e ishort-;.ri-, i 1 C S .ill. -
tiori in. J"i-ure ani fo the lor -.ri or -r tu cid
os-illat icr in Tfi...-u.e The ste .-l i ss: r tin- a.-a i n-
by the ;i. lot to di:'ferenL fl].i' ht co:-. ft s n r-n Z ar sowrP in
table II. Dar from r'c' tion-, i i:cuir, r-corl s sinvi-.in" tn i r
historic' s cf tth- vr-iasl n,:t: n : p.it,:,ir-.t rcotion of
the .c iel vdthi diff 'r rent a yiroi'-t of rot.tic al .a. :.i.r.
and sL.ati,., r.mar.in are r'c-'sc.,o in ti.'.: .- ': to 7.


DISCU:STOI7

effect of Var iaton .' tt" ic i,-r:in


iThe r tings of table 1I --O Lr Ih.- t ti-.e L 'od.lin;-- s co
the .cilel decr a sed a the s -atic ir- ir. v's.s, r-educ :ed fo:-
all values of rotatironal ranpixgi. a-_e idi l ti, 5Lc;r. iDLZ-
larly unstealy at low values of. : .ic :.~ar.lin (belov'0. .0J.).

The, mC,:iel flew. v-j.ry steal. ly th 1rre v.lues of
static arr in, and ,only oc,.scaZs Lon 1 -levatlor df-i lect ions
were r-eluir.d tc. keep t e ,mo- el f i'inn. s..ootl in' te
tunnel. Th- timetime histories a th, bC'ottoi. of ft' 'L ure- -
an t s:'ov' th;at the ve rt icsl otio si of ti.e :,ondel d.'.;in.
controlled fl ight "ith lar atti. r .ar.'in were slov,
smoot' a:nd of small rn ni r I.. .e

"ii:o- levi values of sta-t:i' n- Shov.vr, the
motions :,eca-e faster, shal."-r.:r a': va "',--, show by
the r .eor t-i.ne historic in f :- :: ad c. Table II
shores thI:t, with 0.0' s-itic r'.in, ti-'e .-.o.el -s -- ry
un stea- tI vith any a;liLmont c f otst onal d :iir. F i ht
at this c condition ve-re .'.ery j':..ni -nj _rc tende ncie
tow.var.d l.onvitudc final diveri- n ,-.'- nted. ",,t fl'.ohts
wit tni; arm:ount of st io ar--in -A,.ed in c a, she's
because of the e-:tr,-me diffic lt : r p-erienc e: b-: the
pilot in applying elevator r cc00irol at te. e:-act instant
that it vwas needed to rev-:-e': lon i.-t di in.al diver-.ence.
At ti-r.s because of iunavoi.o.ble 1.t in thLe pilot's
res- ct io ns, thi= control \is a.:3_; i : i' in, sa:h a ,.'a; as to
re .nfor ie rather lth-n to oppose tie .- r-ren t :ctionsc








NACA ARR No. LFP02


In this connection, it should be pointed out that the
pitching velocities of the small-scale models tested in
the NAlCA free-flight tunnel are more than three times as
great as the pitching velocities of the corresponding
airplanes. It is expected, therefore, that the airplane
should be easier to fly than the model with the same
amount of static margin, and it is not believed that an
airplane corresponding to the model tested would neces-
sarily exhibit poor flight characteristics similar to
those that were noted in the tests of the model with 0.02
static margin.

The results of the calculations of dynamic longitu-
dinal stability (figs. 3 and 4) show that reducing the
static margin increases the period of both the phugoid
and the short-period oscillation and reduces the damping
of the phugoid but does not affect the damping of the
short-period oscillation.

The only agreement noted between the calculations
and the flight-test results was that the period of the
short-period oscillation was approximately the same as
the period of the controlled motion of the model. Theo-
retically, the damping of the short-period oscillation
is heavy and does not vary with static margin. -It is
possible, however, that the short-period motion could be
reinforced by elevator control movements or gust dis-
turbances in such a way as to prevent it from damping
quickly. If such conditions were present, an unsteady,
lightly dLamped longitudinal motion having approximately
the same period as the short-period oscillation might
occur.


Effect of Variation of Rotational Damping

The ratings of table II show that variation of rota-
tional dampsing had very little effect on the longitudinal
steadiness of the model. Decreasing the rotational
damping had virtually no effect on the steadiness at
large values of static margin but decreased the steadi-
ness slightly at low values of static margin. The time
histories of figures 5 to 7 show that the vertical
motions of the model during controlled flight with dif-
ferent values of Cmq were roughly similar for a given
value of static margin. With low values of static margin









'.--CA :. I o. 'I 02


( .. J C. th riln-"t" in-' d ri' r nc': s '.": :' S ii-' -
ti!me- :..o-: "-ioir:t with t!:- tr "!:. E -e flo-.r CT,4) condi-
tion.

': ic 11 effeo- cf c ..H n es 'n i t.L: cti .n:-'. .i- n in.-
on t:< .- -itudinal 2"ea-Ui e:s :, : 0- f.oj. i l ic ac -0at
ta ba Icrs irpl.cire, i c .:2: ,. ;.:1'._Leei t l-- -.' r-ota-
r n a nt- "I n71-
tiC na' c'J'-,:n. In Kr -' :" u1i ': : c' : ;it ,' .1 st -
ness c -asr-E'. it : ti .t s t .: l- _' .F i-I c --Irc itio,. l
air l a :: n t .ie Esi. st ti. ..e: ic.

TI the i--nve-, ti atioL n t-,o i I.i .: tive d.: t ,ere ob-
taini ;. co,'A r in t- th e E'l P..:t f c-an.er in rot. cit nal
dal.lpi.- oni t:e e ev-t r ef. ;rti-: ncss i:'- ii ed :. m;"aiitain7
a ,i-.in ude-r. e -a conicroii bi lit:. I ,a: nctec in the
fli.'i; trTc-, ho"'eve'_ r'.a: s t.a :', i ':ntal t.il area
( nld l :.e.S i:-.e lev Stor" e ff :ti; .in ) s --C u.C'aed, iIhe
mag7ni te of te elev.Atcr. co,-to"i. reflect ion. ;e. uLet ]
to -< .. th- >olu l iKr.; si isa -toriLy in the i:unn l
did ;n t inicr .ase in i. rec t irc- ti. n to the reductioii
in ei.' to eff- -''eie .s. I- r.-; a r 3r e.O.d t at, as
t _e o .-tioa. l ia:.,i::.r in iir:-'. s e .-ed, s : .
oDC w -"ul i -,'vator control .a.: r ..i.r tI'o obtain satis-
factor f lic-hts L".:: t .e m" .. .

f C!.- f. i
Tt 1c C laticn f r .I 1. 9 -:: t rt d in
the r-, t ti, u l d .ri.. ..c.r. CC La' r : tU me -i'd
of tl .... t-..'',-d s. ?idl u ic- in J1. .Cr.-: : t'-h po -iod
of t'Te ; ,-u oid. :edlu.-:r: '.- 'i .. of Cn eIi :e te
dar. .- of t":e s'irt-o' riod o: aiu.tion -.:- 1ii ,.lu,;
of' sta ic ;,,.-.:- in a :r- ....::". e t tl r( H .i.in:- :f t i, ..l i' i .'j .
oQ cll j on for the alo- r n': 'f Efr. ... -: i .


C- CL, DI. ir- .'- -:s:..


T'-.e results of the invs-ti l-icnr. do ter-Lin-In the
effec:U- c:- lonr.itulLirnci ts .. in o vary.i.-. as.atic
rarrrin zi-.d rota ioi al d1.i. n .- e S'L'i .ized iL the fol-
lo'::in r .r.arhi s. I Che :i :l _C-1 io-ns of -.hes e r -esults
co Lth' fi l-' cale air.l sne t-,- a.l i sacl'.e oC the -n:odcl 1
and the -r ethod o cont-ol ootac,ly i.e th- e io 3l tests
conservative; tat is, the t%7finac--: of to air' lane is
e:-.: ct:- to be so:ie':-h-h t r-r'-aterr tlS-,. that of the iodel 1
for'r i.ven values of t' ztic :nar-,n anrd o-otational dcaipin:.








NACA ARR 'No. Li F02


1. The best longitudinal steadiness was noted at
large values of static margin while the least steady
conditions were obtained with very small values of static
margin (0.03 or less).

2. Changes in rotational dajrring had little effect
on longitudinal steadiness except that for low values of
static margin (0.05 or less) the longitudinal divergences
were soiretivies m-ore violent for conditions of low rota-
tional d amp ing.

,5 The model test results indicated that a tailless
airplane, in spite of its inherently low rotational
damping in pitch, should have longitudinal steadiness
characteristics similar to those of a conventional air-
plane with the same static margin, provided the static
margin is greater than 0.05.


Langley I:emorial Aeronautical Laboratory
NTational Advisory Connmittee for Aeronautics
Langley Field., Va-.




REFREF CES


1. Shortal, Joseph A., and Ostorhout, Clayton J.:
Preliminary Stability and Control Tests in the
FACA Free-Plight Wind TIunnel and Correlation with
Pull-Scale Flight Tests. 1 CA TF 3:. 810, 19i41.

2. Shortal, Joserph A., and Draper, John 7W. Free-Fljht-
munnel Investigation of the Effect of the Fuselage
Tength and th-e Aspect Ratio and Sizo of the
Vertical Tail on Lateral Stability and Control.
:ACA APR No. 3D17, 19i5.

3. .ar.pbell, John P., and T-athews, .,ard 0. : 7r :-erimental
Determination of the Yawin ,:ent Due to Yaw-in--
Contributec. by the .Ving, 7 "elage, and Vertical
Tail of a hidwing Airplane Hodel. :.CA ARR
To. 5P28, 91045.













H~.C A: c. h'i


r-HI CO I \ C J-'~C r-1 r-4

'c C ~ --' ,:., Is-- r' '.
0 0 ,--I I I I

I



1r4 .
' "2 I', I



1. I '~5 I i-


,1-l I i r_ .- .-. o

1 ',
r c" :- JI '


-- .,-- -- i. --- -- --


4- 'L


I -




-_I






I 1 -

I --- ,.- -|




i i r -I
"L -
L."


- ,---
I I "1

% I r' r.

C |
CCI


IJ~


4-J

I, '- :,.j
I -- r .

:- i-j ',.-. _Y-i L: .

I ,i- r--I
.-' -, ,-- ,L, .- *- 1 .
-
_ I- __ __. ---; .T
__ : ,^ IC


C-,
I-I










F-I



L- L-_
C-






I.-
0 G


C ,






NACA ARR No. 14F02


:"-I
E .
H
H
HA

1-







E-, Cj
'-4
1-2




f-A










~-I
r'.i
-I I








F 'I






E- I? r
r..





i-- E- H.I
r.-, l--'




L-. LI
_[--1 _i












-E-





I-,











H- A
5-,










c C:








C_



r .
F
C-,
L: f~--i


H -






Q ,
? ^


^I i +I
K-
( I I I




-A I
,_._--1-----
u +




I I I


,j






i I r
I I. -






.t 4-It --
i^^
I' i i










II'
I I. i


I Ii-
"-' -- I j
*C1 i ^ .i "+ +, ,








i -



I -






L '
-i








i ,- ,- |
2I I- .






I -" ,- i

1--' ,.
'- -.
,----








A rJ r-- ".

_. '
-


i





7 -


.- .- '- -- CL'
'"I ; I-' -
I ,- -. ,, I -'.'-

I .. -

,_I -, .



I --J I 4 -. ;. ..



l *, ': S. 4 **' *. -
i' -,




i I ,,4 'H '-
,' ~ -- : :, r. -







I ,:' .- .., -. ,- *, ->-* -
,-- ,. .. ; .






i ,, ^ -'.- 4m 't',- o
''I .' -.
I .-, -, -- ,









,';J ..', ,'-t^ ',,--
--I -4 ,








.I I




.. -' .-T -''
,7, -- j -'


i --I I
,-, -A -
,' 4- 2" '-I '


.- -





*^'
.-'- -l- 'I "., ,-










,- ,- -


I- 0I-
I_ _--
._ L'_'. 2'










I-,-1
r--L
-- rL r_

l'
.-1 o-


ci




c-I
SI











Ii









NACA ARR No. L4F02 Fig. 1
















cr

bo















C-


S,-







C 4





C. 0




0

.-I








ci
Cr.l
















































































































Ia






NACA ARR No. L4F02


Toi/ 2
Tail
Tal 2
7e-711


c a.'e


NATIONAL ADVISORY
COMMITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS.


Fy'Ure 2.-..^odeo/ .ieoe in Free f/'//r funne/
,ong./hd,',no/ 3J/ab///y /nves ft/ /or..


. Rel f .oqne


Fig. -2







Fig. 3


NACA ARR No. L4F02


-r r "":.-"'^. '^ "F^-~^^ l^-^^^^
AA1
-4-







---4-
it tB^ ^ I~i^ S~i'i i~il










--. -, I:4 -I- -LT
4-




rrr







1Hr---' '4 --~ I *t- t:-- -^T~: -'--+^ ^i -r, ^, 'w -^ tTT ~-*
--2-












F-? r**J-"^LJi- 1*h ^ ;: *ih--M-- '--f4-! i~7 t + t" n4 j + t -r "^ "^'^'^'T"
COMTE:E FOE AERONAUTICSii
H-
7


-4.












U : -S Lj ... ...
fl~gtggiS^#l-14L3^ ^













NATIONAL ADVISORY
^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ 1^: ^ ^^ ^ F^ ^ -=.- COMMITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS.
L; jT, r 7
It I .I


4-








V -li=.TiiliilFl| II |ifa
---i -V I:j
14 4 7"
SF-? ~ "* -S r ~ '* -" 4* ^-':*Tt *r' 'rf1'1"'^ :^ l"'1' 1 'J '^* 3 I "'"'P i~ a *r ^ r E ~S p r' zp



|^^ g^ ^^ ^l|^^|gti'B^ 1e41 Si itj^
^^^Hi-l -.4^'a^^'^e^ ^








NACA ARR No. L4F02


Fig. 4


1 1r Mil -1 Fr h 'il
LI





S t



,- 4-












SNATIONAL ADVISORY
COMMITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS.






I~ -iI1 I 1|
44 4j '.4i. 4iI.




































.. ... .


7






















4 -L'
SI j







NACA ARR No. L4F02


--,t
r ,





iz


rzLl
-'-F

:ra ..'-.., ...


?1:t
rT7
j ---.7 ...




.. ." .' ... "
^ "'^ "~ lI ^ ^ -t^ ^^ aS..... .~i l~ l|@ll Y






.II -. -











... -h .. .









lat '71
? : *
:7V I:-
.4-: llp lEw| -|4i:|.-l BI









ii
1& ^- "&i 1 -i-TH^ :: z-p^ 7^ ^ ^^i-iti-T;g -:;^| ;




t:^-^^|--^^ _~t L At-,gfe^^|t-F




Ell, __a
pt.-:
_;^-_^^L _^ ^^^ ^^*1*^a~i ^^ l^' fi


T~+N~i$t7ffH~:r llti tst~ I, J;4IttetC *Wt--t t*:Tht4


jft;kT I.- -I1l -4:


WIT 44= t 11


H-'F rJ4- ratiAas1rw&


K. 1.'1 tUJ1Y14W V4Th4~ V:4LmL>t 17.


NATIONAL ADVISORY
COMMITTEEE FOR AERONAUTICS
I~i m.] m; m%,- t -. it


-4- pgg-


C


F"' -- m rr t ~ r ~ cc-M-i II L-~- --Il11I I Il~l


T' TIT


r"71 P.,
rd R Vffi 71


"~~'"""~'


, .. .. m -4


r- 4 1 4m t=


Fig. 5


-4 Al .; .


~;ff~~


-js44T A4 l


'
tihWENINgfOG g








NACA ARR No. L4F02


tiSLt+^Tt t, r4 1aSi LI't 45


;1?.lf~c~l~ 7J'~~,~Aii4 I-i f-fm-5


-'1 ,-I 1 ...... ... ...
J~~fi~ Wit, 1


x1 IV IS



-;Lr .1'' jII
..........
:- :-;, -
`li
7T m! T1 '-,', i4 ,:




= I.- 14 T. _
j7
L.:IC ,-


L-j-
.. ........



h,41--Zgrmff- r- If, !


L;:t`Ii~41ffl4i-414i i F


1 Il
$4 K


--t t--


... AM- A


If~Jt-~f~" tilL 31' Ji~1 ITS, t1 rt-i


rEt -t;- Ian-tlSt;


aiiilw~ii1 wml

S1 I : aI I
L F ,
UE ~.ji^ t;^&=;:^
U| iliji ttiS ifp?


4


. tf r.-it t:


.4 uai4 TWI$4t


14-tI


H +Vt*E l ;t ti+ I i t 47 [; 1r- .-


-1 FiTfW1Ft


Fig. 6


S i :1.0- 1 M j-.


Fi$f~i~ttFF~t~t~


4 1 1 1 1
.... ...... 11 11 11 1 ... ....
If W. 1. 11 %T- I "mr


-plH+


r, -1 T ,- 4-


...........
Jfi-f I- i "l a


4-,;Ri4
tTrW T 1414'


~"


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


I"
i;l


1=14


NATIONAL ADVISORY
COMMITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS.


W4 I r N W


1 1 1 i 1 --


'"'


'"r-Sni~i^ Prifti ','l


i0n7,14-T- 11


i


t--rj-VV-


.''-H.iFtlT-E-ETa'-ffi


Edff~if


afcli:aaiitTT


EFfif--.A I I


41:44#4-ATA


~~"'"''-""`


twe


P1 I,







NACA ARR No. L4F02


I A











~-- !' | t
S- -- --- L





--I I"--; -- | 1 I S | i






NATIONAL ADVISORY 7|
COMMITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS ._. f--r.


-F-iB 11


I 1] t--^ ~I V 4 -A-e'1.;4A- -ft. j$


-14-I Jtl 44 F+rtic fltt L4~ L 201 M>M:fllI#;


IIPI Iti 4


T I4 S 7"T' I "ll I I
- -V 1-r --f_- -A- _. :-,t --;-- .F--r q T P-


a3-
:A


I- i-_-J_. .


t~ t 4-4- ~ 4-4 4-44 -4~4i ~4 I t4 4 ~ ~ b ~


F~ I-it'


f-444Z44U'I' LlI j K- e


t It t2rfa4i f I
- I Jr r-A h 'tfy m p yv -.~


L IVI JI t~t-t -4fu1~


[-' Jthf ffiJ


- 5r-


, PtT_ :- -c_ 4


F fktrtbl 4rM,*rWA~L-qit t!An,+ '~MC@#~P tAt in


.uljim n'f'- !.tt- 'Lc-'-l": r -7 13*H fi~' \\ 101"S ; L "1t01="


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


-


-, 1 1-


~~ I I r--I ( I I I f~ll~~~~l r-t-*~~~ I-~~~~fi~tf~tl~l


- i --:f -


--;V-- .1Acv a ". 1;B '- 1 ,-- :1 i_:- :-7 f


T,


_r


. -. i -: -[ --


4-`*1#


Fig. 7







UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA

3 1262 08104 969 3








Uf JV'ERSITY OF FLORIDA
DOCUMENTS DEPARTMENT
1 23 k.ARSTON SCIENCE LIBRARY
P S3OX 117011
C.A';ESVILLE, FL 32611-7011 L-A



















.'i












h'