![]() ![]() |
![]() |
UFDC Home | Search all Groups | World Studies | Federal Depository Libraries of Florida & the Caribbean | | Help |
Material Information
Subjects
Notes
Record Information
|
Full Text |
A'A ACR No. L5B10 NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS WAR 11FTIME REPORT ORIGINALLY ISSUED February 1945 as Advance Confidential Report L5B10 WIND-TUmEL TESTS OF A BLUNT-NOSE ALERON WITH LEVELED TRAILING EDGE ON AN NACA 66(215)-2a6 AFOIL WITH SEVERAL MODIFICATIONS OF AILERON NOSE AND ADJACENT AIRFOIL CONTOUR By J. D. Bird Langley Memorial Aeronautical Laboratory Langley Field, Va. NACA WASHINGTON 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 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 105 DOCUMENTS DEPARTMENT L- los 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/windtunneltestsoOClang NACA ACR No. L5B10 NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS ADVANCE CONFIDENTIAL REPORT WIND-TUNNEL TESTS OF A BLUNT-NOSE AILERON I'WITH BEVELED TRAILING EDGE ON AN NACA 66(215)-216 AIRFOIL WITH SEVERAL !MODIFICATIONS OF AILERON NOSE AND ADJACENT AIRFOIL CONTOUR By J. D. Bird SUMMARY Ailerons having a beveled trailing edge and a blunt- nose overhang of 55 percent aileron chord on an NACA 66(215)-216 airfoil have been tested in the two- dimensional-flonw test section of the Langley stability tunnel. Five configurations of the model were tested with various modifications of the aileron nose and adjacent airfoil contour to determine the effect of these modifications on the lift and aileron hinge-moment charac- teri .tics. The results indicated that making the nose of the aileron more elliptical decreased the balance of hinge moments at small aileron angles and increased the balance of hinge m: oments at large aileron angles. The lift coef- ficients, especially at large aileron angles, were increased by this modification. Flaring the airfoil contour near the aileron nose had Ln effect on the hinge moments for small aileron angles similar to the effect of making the aileron nose less blunt, whereas rounding the airfoil contour had an effect similar to making the aileron nose more blunt. Flaring the airfoil contour caused a decrease in the lift resulting from aileron deflection. The effects of airfoil- contour changes were small at large aileron angles. Comparison with other data indicated that, for small aileron angles, the increments of hinge-moment coefficient resulting from a beveled trailing edge and a blunt-nose overhang were additive. 2 CONFIDENTIAL ITACA f.CR No. L5B10 INTRODUCTION A beveled trailing edge or an overhang with an extremely blunt nose gives most of its balancing action at small aileron angles, whereas an overhang with a rounded blunt nose gives most of its balancing action at large aileron angles. A beveled aileron with a rounded blunt nose that fell within the contour of the airfoil at zero deflection might then be expected to have a high degree of balance over a large deflection range. The present investigation was made to determine the effect of the shape of the aileron nose and the adjacent airfoil contour on the hinge-moment and lift characteristics of such an aileron and to determine, by comparison with other data, whether the effects of the blunt-nose overhang and the beveled trailing edge on the aileron hinge-moment characteristics are additive, as has been assumed in some aileron correlations. SYM BOLS The coefficients and symbols used herein are defined as follows: cl airfoil section lift coefficient (L/qc) Act increment of airfoil section lift coefficient Ch aileron section hinge-moment coefficient (h/qcg2) Ach increment of aileron section hinge-moment coef- ficient 1 airfoil section lift h aileron section hinge moment c chord of airfoil ca chord of aileron behind hinge axis q dynamic pressure pV) V free-stream velocity CONFIDENTIAL NACA ACR No. L5B10 p mass densi CONFIDENTIAL ty of air angle of attack of ratio airfoil for infinite aspect aileron deflection with respect to airfoil 'a. U6 = -- 6ch ch - Ca ao 0hh c5 cl- = Scoo cl = 6- at cZ = 0.1 at 6 = 0 at ao = 0 at 6 = 00 at ao = 0 w airfoil-contour configuration in region adjacent to aileron nose n aileron-nose configuration Subscripts 1 to 4 to w and n indicate configu- rations as given in figure 1 and table I. Configuration designations are used as subscripts to identify corre- sponding lift and hinge-moment coefficients. APPARATUS AND 1/ODEL Tests were made in the two-dimensional-flow test section of the Langley stability tunnel. This section is rectangular, 6 feet high, and 2.5 feet wide. The model tested had an NACA 66(215)-216 airfoil section of 2-foot chord and completely spanned the width of the test section. Table II gives the airfoil ordinates. CONFIDENTIAL CITACt ACR o. L5BlO The aileron had a chord of 0.20c, a 0.35Ca blunt-nose balance, and a 260 beveled trailing edge. The five aileron and airfoil configurations are described in table I and figure 1. 'TEST CONDITIONS Hinge moments were measured with a spring hinge- moment balance, and lift was measured by an integrating manometer connected to orifices in the floor and ceiling of the tunnel. The hinge moments and lifts were measured for a range of aileron angles from 00 to 250 and for an angle-of-attack range from 00 to 100. The tests were made at a dynamic pressure of 250 pounds per square foot, which corresponds to a TJa9h number of 0.42 and to a test Reynolds number of 6 x 10o based on standard sea-level atmospheric conditions. All five configurations were tested with the gap at the aileron nose sealed and unsealed. Angles of attack were set within t0.10 and aileron angles, within 0.50. Hinge-moment coefficients are believed to be accurate to 0.003 and lift coef- ficients, to 0.01. The data were corrected for jet- boundary effects. The corrected values were computed as follows: ao = 1.023aOT cL = 0.965clT ch = chT + 0.00L5clT where oT, c LT, and chT are the uncorrected angle of attack in degrees, lift coefficient, and hinge-moment coefficient. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Presentation of Data The section lift and aileron section hinge-moment characteristics are given in figures 2 to 6 for the CONFI DENTIAL CONFIDENTIAL NACA ACR No. L5510 various airfoil-contour and aileron-nose configurations tested. The increments of lift and hinge-moment coef- ficients resulting from the modifications are plotted in figures 7 to 12. Some of the data and important parameters from references 1 and 2 are compared with results of the present tests in figures 15 to 18 and table III. Effect of iiodifications on Lift and Hinge-Moment Characteristics Sealed ailerons.- Figure 7(a) shows, for gap sealed, the increments ach that result from rounding the air- foil contour adjacent to the aileron nose. The curves indicate that, in general, the balance is increased for aileron angles up to approximately 10o but that, for angles greater than t10, the change in balance is Decreased to a small value at the largest positive or negative angles. These results indicate that this modi- fication gives results similar to those obtained when an aileron nose is made more blunt. The increments Ach caused by flaring the airfoil contour in the area adjacent to the aileron nose are shown in figure 8(a) for gap sealed. The flare decreases the degree of balance for aileron angles up to approxi- mately tl40, beyond which the balance is increased almost to the value for configuration w1n1. This loss in balance at small deflections is caused by the shielding effect of the flare, which gives results similar to those obtained when an aileron nose is made less blunt. The curves of figure 9(a) show, for gap sealed, the increments Ach caused by making the aileron nose more nearly elliptical. These curves indicate that this modi- fication decreases the degree of balance for aileron angles up to approximately tl00 and increases the balance for the rest of the aileron-angle range. Figure 10(a) shows, for the gap sealed, the incre- ments Acj caused by increased rounding of the airfoil contour in the area aIjacent to the aileron nose. The curves, though quite irregular, generally indicate an increase of about 4 percent in c,6 for small aileron angles. CONFIDENTIAL CONFIDENTIAL NACA ACR No. L5BIO The increments Act that result from flaring the airfoil contour in the area adjacent to the aileron nose are given in figure 11(a) for gap sealed. These curves indicate a loss of approximately 10 percent in cl6 for aileron angles up to approximately t120. For large aileron angles, the lift coefficient increases to approxi- mately the value obtained for the unmodified airfoil (configuration wlnl). Figure 12(a) shows, for gap sealed, the incre- ments Ac1 that result from making the aileron nose more nearly elliptical. These curves indicate an appreciable increase in lift coefficient for large aileron angles. This large increase occurs at positive and negative aileron angles from 120 to 240., because the aileron with the more elliptical nose stalls at larger aileron angles than the aileron with the rounded blunt nose. The sealed aileron gave an increase of about 4 percent in cL. for aileron angles up to 120. Unsealed ailerons.- The principal effect of removing the sea Tfigs. 7(b), 8(b), 9(b), 10(b), and 11(b)) is to accentuate the effects of contour modification on the values of ch and cl shown for the sealed gaps. The results given in figure 12(b), however, are an exception to this statement. General remarks.- It is believed that more nearly linear hin e-monrent characteristics could be obtained if the aileron overhang were slightly longer and more elliptical than the overhangs tested. Such a configu- ration would allow the overhang to produce more balance at large deflections for which the degree of balance due to the beveled trailing edge is reduced. With the over- hangs tested, the hinge-moment characteristics showed a definite tendency toward increased linearity as the over- hang was made more elliptical; however, the overhang was not long enough nor elliptical enough to obtain the linear hinge-moment characteristics expected. Increments Ach Caused by Beveled Trailing Edge and by Overhang For a number of correlations of aileron hinge-moment characteristics, the assumntion has been made that the CONFT DENT AL CONFIDENTIAL NACA ACR No. L5BlO increments of hinge-moment coefficient caused by different aileron balances, such as overhangs and bevels, are addi- tive when these aileron balances are used with each other. The validity of this assumption is investigated in figures 15 and 14 for the blunt-nose aileron with a beveled trailing edge. Figure 15 compares the variation of ch with 6 at ao = 00 for the cusped plain aileron (unpublished data), the plain aileron with a 260 beveled trailing edge (estimated from unpublished data), the cusped aileron with a 0.35ca blunt-nose overhang (reference 1), and the aileron with a 260 beveled trailing edge and a 0.55ca blunt-nose overhang (fig. 2(a)). All these data are for sealed 0.20c ailerons on the same airfoil and therefore should be comparable. The data for the plain aileron with the 260 beveled trailing edge were estimated from unpublished data for a cusped plain aileron and for a straight-side plain aileron on the assumption that the change in ch is a linear function of the trailing-edge angle. Figure 14(a), which was obtained from figure 13, shows that the increments Ach caused by the bevel on plain ailerons and on ailerons with blunt-nose overhang are in good agreement for aileron angles from approxi- mately -3- to 40; figure 14(b) shows that the incre- ments Ach caused by the blunt-nose overhang on cusped and on beveled ailerons also are in good agreement for this range of aileron angles. The curves show less good agreement for aileron angles outside the range from -80 to 4'. This lack of agreement at large aileron angles may be caused by the effect of the blunt nose on the air flow over the bevel. The curves of figure 14 also indicate that the 260 teveled trailing edge produced much more balance than the 0.55ca blunt-nose overhang. CDmoarison with Other Ailerons The hinge-moment and lift characteristics for the aileron having a 260 beveled trailing edge and a 0.55ca blunt-nose overhang (configuration w1nl) are compared in figures 15 to 18 with the characteristics for cusped ailerons of references 1 and 2 having a 0.55ca blunt-nose overhang and a 0.60ca internal balance, CONFI DENTAL CONFIDENTIAL DTACA ACR No. L5B10 respectively. All three ailerons had sealed gaps, had the same chord, and were on the same airfoil. Figure 15 indicates that the internally balanced aileron has a greater linear range of ch against 6 and a slope ch6 nearer zero than either of the other two ailerons. The cusped aileron with blunt-nose overhang produced the least balance. A slight positive value of ch5 is shown at ao = 00 for the beveled aileron with the blunt-nose overhang. This overbalance is counter- acted to some extent by the positive cha shown for this aileron in figure 16. The cusped aileron with internal balance and the cusped aileron with blunt-nose overhang have negative values of cha (fig. 16). The negative value of ch. would generally cause the internally balanced aileron to be overbalanced for a large range of the aileron deflec- tion (where ch6 = 0). Slightly less balance-plate chord should make it possible for this aileron to operate with- out being overbalanced. Overbalance would probably not occur with the blunt-nose aileron since it has a negative value of ch6i Figure 17 and table III indicate that, of the three ailerons considered, the cusped aileron with the blunt- nose overhang has the largest value of cL6. Both the cusped and beveled ailerons having the blunt-nose overhang stall at a lower deflection than the internally balanced aileron. The internally balanced aileron, which has no projecting nose, therefore produces higher positive and negative lifts at large deflections than the other two ailerons. As might be expected, the aileron with the beveled trailing edge produces a smaller lift than the cusped ailerons. The values of cla as given in table III and the curves of cl plotted against ao for 6 = 00 (fig. 13) indicate that the cusped aileron with blunt-nose overhang has the largest value of c, and that the aileron with the beveled trailing edge and blunt-nose overhang has the lowest value. C?'NFI DEIITIAL CONFIDENTIAL NACA ACR Ho. L5B10 CONCLUSIONS Ailerons having a 0.35-aileron-chord blunt-nose overhang and a 26 beveled trailing edge have been tested in two-dirensional flow on an NACA 66(215)-216 airfoil with several modifications of the aileron nose and adjacent airfoil contour. The results of these tests and coinparis>n with results of previous tests of cusped internally balanced and blunt-nose ailerons indicated the following conclusions: 1. Making the aileron nose more nearly elliptical decreased the balance of hinge moments at small aileron angles and increased the balance of hinge moments at large aileron angles. The lift coefficients at large angles were higher than those obtained with the more blunt nose. 2. Founding the airfoil contour adjacent to the aileron nose gen.-rally increased-the balance of hinge m.ments -and, for small aileron angles, slightly increased the value of the slope of the curve of lift coefficient against aileran angle cZg. The increase in balance was most pronounced for a range of aileron angle of 10. This modification gave results similar to those that would be obtained when an aileron nose is made more blunt. 5. Flaring the airfoil contour in the region adjacent to the aileron nose decreased the balance of hinge mort.nts for aileron angles up to approximately 14o. The value of cl, over a large part of the aileron-angle range was decreased. These results were similar to those that wD.Duld be obtained when an aileron nose is made less blunt. h. The effects of the airfoil-contour changes were small at large aileron angles. 5. Unsealing the gap at the aileron nose generally caused the effects resulting from the various modifi- cations of the aileron nose and adjacent airfoil contour to be more nrDnounced. 6. The aileron with 0.60-aileron-chord internal balance and cusped trailing edge afforded a greater degree of balance cf hinge rmoments and higher lift at large deflections than the cusped aileron with the 0.35-aileron-chord blunt-nose C ONFI DENTIAL CONFIDENTIAL :-.ACA ACR 11o. L5.I.)j overhang or the aileron with 260 beveled trailing edge and 0.35-aileron-chord blunt-nose overhang. 7. Comparison with other data jiidicated that, for small aileron angles, the increments of hinge-moment coefficient resulting from a beveled trailing edge and a blunt-nose overhang were additive. Langley Memorial Aeronautical Laboratory National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics Langley Field, Va. REFERENCES 1. Letko, %., Denaci, H. G., and Freed, C.: iind-funnel Tests of Ailerons at Various Speeds. I Ailerons of 0.20 Airfoil Chard and True Contour with 0.35 Aileron-Chord Eb,.reme Blunt Nose Balance on the NACA 66,2-216 Airfoil. NT.CI ACR 'To. 5F11, 19435. 2. Denaci, H. G., and Bird, J. D.: '"ind-Tunnel Tests of Ailerons at Various Speeds. II Ailerons of 0.20 Airfoil Chord and True Contour with 0.60 Aileron- Chord Sealed Tnteinal 2.-..ce on the i.-.Ca 66,2-216 Airfoil. NACA ACR !'). 5P38, 1945. CO' 'IDE:ITIAL CONFILEIITTAL NACA ACR No. L5B10 CONFIDENTIAL .r- 4.3 o- 0 3 o'0 a) (D 0) ;5 F4l T ?-f Cd r P- r-4 ::s r=4 ol oll 0 42 -' 0 0D 0 o 0 "-I 4+ 4-1 0 0 CON.FI DEiITIAL 0 F- o H O 0 E-H E- O) (D 0 f-I 1-1r 04 4- 0 co *oo 00 o 4 O-) 0 H i .~CA ACR N'. L5B10 TABLE IT.- ORDINATES FOR NACA 66(215)-216 AIRFOIL1 [Basic airfoil contour; stations and ordinates in percent airfoil chord] Upper surface Lover surface Station Ordinate Station Ordinate 0 0 0 0 .Lol 1.250 .599 -1.1 0 .640 1.484 .860 -1.54 1.128 1.053 1.572 -1.644 2.562 2.560 2.658 -2.182 4.8L6 .00o4 5.154 -2.972 7.540 4.L28 7.660 .580 9.838 5.140 10.162 -4.106 14.3U5 6.276 15.1 5 -4.950 19.860 7.1 6 20.1 o -5.564 24.379 7.8 25.121 -6.054 2.900 .56 0.100 -6.422 3.924 8.756 2.5.076 -6.676 .99 8.980 0o.051 -6.858 .974 9.092 45.026 -6.902 50.000 9.060 50.000 -6.854 55.025 3.875 54.975 -6.685 60.0 8 8.496 5 .952 -6.554 65.067 7.862 .955 -5.802 70.031 6.9 1 62.L19 -4.997 75.087 ..3o0 7 .915 .070 80.085 .644 7'915 -5.0 2 85.075 3.595 ,4.925 -2.0 9 90.055 2.105 49.945 -1.069 95.028 .91) 94.972 -.281 100.000 0 100.000 0 L. E. radius: 1.575. Slope of radius through L. E.: 0.094 'This airfoil is the same as NACA 66,2-216 airfoil, for which the designation has been changed since refer- ences 1 and 2 were published. NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS CONFIDENTIAL CONFIDENTIAL NACA ACR No. L5B10O CONFIDENTIAL 0., Lo 0 P C 0H 0 LO r-I Er 4 0 0 C 0 0 0 S 0 0 0 I 0 I N- -:: -. ti 0 I I oN Co 0 oO 0 0 0 O 00 * 0 0 I 1 ,4- H r-I I --0 0 o o N 0- S Elr-i 0 r- o r.-- 4H 40 0( H o O O o H 0 0 M M-- ;o CONFIDENTIAL ) r-iH 0 r-I COJ NACA ACR No. L5BO Fig. 1 00 . -- I / n S \. 1 .. .. NACA ACR No. L5B10 -30 20 -/0 0 /0 `0 30 Aileron angle 6 deg (CJ Sea/ecd gap. F/r'ure 2. Sect/an character/isftCs of b/unt-nose a//eron with bevel/e Iroiling edge A17tfoll awftour w, ; aileron nose n, . Fig. 2a NACA ACR No. L5B10 -3O -20 -/O 0 /O0 4/e/7on angle 6 deg ,,' I/nreo/ed gap . /gure' 2. Co~rf/c/uded 20 30 Fig. 2b NACA ACR No. L5B10 -30 -20 -/0 0 /0 20 30 Ai/eron ongle 1 deg (0) Jealed gap. Figure 3.- Seci/on characferiyt/cs of b/un--nose aileron wifh beve/ed trailing edge /Airfoil contour wz ; al/eron no/e n/. Fig. 3a NACA ACR NO. L5B10 30 -20 -/O 0 /0 20 30 Aileron ongle 6 deg Ib) Unse/led gap. Figure 3.- Conc/uded . Fig. 3b NACA ACR No. L5B10O R =OOZc .Sea/ LO I R R A :O UI^L p .. 1- o -2 -/O / 0 30---4- (aAileron o, ged, deg igre 4.- io hro -i.stis of bunt-ose /o, ,t 'G bove/I d trollin g edg d/rfaX col-lour wj; o?/eron nose n1 . o ..__ ->2t -/ --- -- -- ----.^ -/-0 0 0 0 - /l -ro o --/B^- d- .. - (a) _ 1 _ /'gure4.- ~ ~ ~ ~ 5e,/1 ,^oheic'iso /n-ms /eo wit :===::::::: edg. 'lr/#/ o-o; w_; ^ lro Fig. 4a NACA ACR No. L5B10 S. --- 0. 0 S.4- - o 0. ---_-- 0 ------- -30 -20 -/0 0 /0 ea JO A//eron ongle, 6 deg (b) Unseo/ed gap. Figure 4.- Concluded . Fig. 4b NACA ACR No. L5B10O -30 -0O -/0 0 /0 A//eroon ang/e ) 6 deg ZO 30 (0. Sea/ed gap. F,9ree 5.-w Section characteristics of blunt-nose al/eron with tevelea' troi/ng edqe. A,//rfo/'/ contour wy ; aileron nose nI. Fig. 5a NACA ACR No. L5BO -30 -20 -/O0 0 /0 Al/eron ang/e 6 deg (6) nseao/ed g;o FI/gure 5. Conc/lded . 20 30 Fig. 5b NACA ACR No. L5B10 Fig. 6a < flore rounded oirfoil contour 1 ,/ 1ore nearly el/bho/ nose Seal m'^ CONFIDENTIAL /.2 -.8 -20 -/0 0 /0 20 30 A ,leron ang/e, 6, de9 (a) Sea ed gap1 q .re 6.- 3ec#idn cha/racerisfics of /~unt-nose aileron with/ Deve. ,d traihng edge. /rKl// confour, n4 ; 7i/eron /7ose, nz. NACA ACR No. L5B10 MoI ,re rounded o/rfol/ confoMur M /l-ore nelry e///lola/ nose CONFIDENTIAL I\ S._/ /0.2 -r Ge I '"^^ r-nj1111111111 - -30 -20 -/0 fb) /nseo/ed op . Figure 6 Conc/luded.o 0 /0 20 A/leron o/7'e 6 dey Fig. 6b NACA ACR No. L5B10 c~z 0 < Rs Iki L1 o *N II~ Fig. 7a,b v' 1m7I "'u._a/jao_ iu/_ou./-sRy6/ u/c/P1 3 s'jo ,c/sc/a/1 NACA ACR No. L5B10 O O ! 9l- 0/ cz i ^^ ^. ^ K Fig. 8a,b NACA ACR No. L5B10O Fig. 9a,b ' ! _0 -- --N- <1- __ -- . 'N -- -4- - o/ -^, 0 VZ I *I. E-4 Z- 94I q?7 VUW~~ lUUO/^/L/~3S^ uquWg-01 I ^ ^ NACA ACR No. L5B10O Fig. 1Oa,b ^N ^'N 1 ?'3 SZ ^N I. e'~7 7 '/~4?/~2/~4/6'Oa NACA ACR No. L5B10 N N 1.~ N N 'K 'K 0' vo b S / o /' o ' ^ES^^EEEEE N. --I~N -x--1 I' I' II ,0 7 ," /i/si/_,9oj I/// 'o,/,o/2.rJ o ,/a'diV.'/, Pig. lla,b NACA ACR No. L5B10 '3 12"N '1Z ^0 0 't3 N 0', '3/ ^' N-) i. 0 fs', 10 V; I%. V 7 L' 4 /5Iddos3 ,t y// vfo/..; s- ..o .,t uour~acfy Fig. 12a,b NACA ACR No.' L5B10 Fig. 13 E- IN-44 z -t----- -|4(z. S-1 _,.. 2 , -- -- -- -- !K' ,a _? - 4 - ---^--^-7^ ------'0 * -^-^ ^/ ---- _^^ ___ ^---^/L7------. ^ 5 I7 SZ I >K "S< 1 __ __ __ *^\ i l^ l -ll--l -^ ~-1*--{ /^-|-7^-uL^ I -^~~ ~s? ^ - jt^^ __. ^ 1 -J --^? --- It, " 'N N \ ^ N -L --ii I rn i -I\L -I-- I-- 1 I yv' LID r0/9/3//90) 4t/49tt/oW-96Lu/Cf (J/q.pa9 NACA ACR No. L5B10 -I E-4 0 i-N c.) 2 I N cz~ IN. N N N N IN. N N Fig. 14a,b -< NACA ACR No. L5B10 4, oo lz Si .' o < 4% *6 Fig. 15 NACA ACR No. L5B10 Fig. 16 c-C -i- 4I / -4 __/ ____ f 2 ---/ o' . o o . ^/ '/ a - ) o- 'I.- I 4 S rJW WW~~ C-.fo!43^ NACA ACR No. L5B10 4N II O o- NI Is O 14/ uc~2dg Fig. 17 NACA ACR No. L5B10 CONFIDENTIAL 26 o 8/tt-yoos e a/'/7ron deve/ed 7. E. 0/{1nt-nose a//eron cuooea n/lernla//lly a/aln'eda 7//Perozn cuLoed K/ -eve/ecd a/i/eror; w- h / /urnt-n,-oW 0 .rusped a//7e'or w/i7' w/U4 - - o0'e overhan/y preference/ " I ATiON/IL ADV SORY /' COII ITTEE IOR AE ONAU1 CS -5 -4 -3 -2 -/ 9 / Z 3 4 5 6 7 8 3 I0 &Seci-n angof a// ac, o, d!fY CONFIDENTIAL Fgure /8. -1Va"/' a&se'rt/n //l/ coe/WJkent wi/h second ang/e of /ack 6 = o0. All ai/eIo0s sealed. .8 .7 .6 .5" .4 . oS Fig. 18 UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 3 1262 08104 995 8 UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA DOCUMENTS DEPARTiMENT 10 TARSTON SCIENCE LIBRARY 'O. BOX 117011 ESVILLE.FL 32611-7011 USA ii 'i ' |